Votos de um 2019 Extraordinário!
Algo que nos obriga a reflectir...
At the beginning of June 2017 BINDT (British Institute of Non-Destructive Testing) published that they have uncovered a very widespread and systemic breach of ethics and serious malpractice in the case of NDT International PTE Ltd.. "It is not possible to discriminate between legitimate certificates and invalid certificates and so all certificates will have to be withdrawn without exception", one can read in their official statement and read further: "BINDT will allow candidates up to two months to retake the full initial examination before their certification is formally withdrawn". The two month deadline was increased on 23 June to six months. BINDT published a list of names of more than 3000 names of affected PCN certifications holders. (PCN=Personnel Certification in Non-Destructive Testing)
In the following, we summarize (not endores*) the forum discussion "NDT International / BINDT". About 200 contributions have been posted by 64 people (2/3 non-members) since 16 June until 1. July and the thread received 20,000 hits. This is the biggest discussion in the history of the forum. The CEO Cameron Sinclair from BINDT participated for awhile, however, did not answer too many questions that where addressed to him. Also G. Venkataraman Director of NDT International posted information to defend the company. Unfortunately none of the NDT Societies or ICNDT, EFNDT participated in the discussion, although certification is their main mission, but we believe that they followed the discussion. The discussions were fair and in a professional manner and only in two cases the moderator had to remove an abuse. It was obvious that the majority stands contra to BINDT. The major protest was the decision to withdraw all certificates, also from the innocent, of the last 6 years issued from NDT Int. and its subsidiaries. Although BINDT revised in their official statement the re-exam period from two to six months the majority see this still as too short; especially for holders of certs from multiple methods. It was considered that if a re-examination is necessary this should be possible at the time of certification renewal time. Concerns were also expressed about the high costs of re-examination (including travel costs, break from work etc.) and why the candidates have to pay for it again, but not BINDT and NDTI the two main parties in this scandal. Also, no one can ensure that the certification gained from another AQB will be withdrawn again. NDTI offered free exams completely administered by BINDT. They are waiting for the approval from BINDT for this proposal.
One of the concerns was that BINDT is a big money making institute although they are a non-profit organization. Why expand their PCN business all over the world at all? As more remote centers are added it would seem to be more difficult to keep everything clean. It was stated that the audit fee is very high for Indian ATO/AQB owners and the same situation for African bodies where a lot could possibly close because of this issue. It appears that BINDT put too much trust in Indian organizations without understanding the culture. Also it was questioned that if the same company is ATO and AQB is there conflict of interest. All agree that this scandal is not the last one. Serious malpractice could exist in many other countries according to the view of many forum commenters. In parallel in another forum topic "NDT CERTIFICATES" someone said: "Many NDT certificates are fake. But I have to add that it depends on the country in which they were issued. .... looking at Europe and North America, I doubt very much that they are fake". Also another related forum topic from Aug 2015 "PCN certification gained by giving fake experience" received in parallel new replies. Most of the forum comments see BINDT as the guilty party rather than a victim and ask questions like: Should UKAS not take the status of Certification Body back from BINDT due to numerous major nonconformities of BINDT due to their incompetence? One comments "UKAS also will support and back BINDT. UKAS was formed to protect the interest of UK. BINDT is formed to protect the interest of UK and Europe and not Asian market. It is the mistake of Asians to promote PCN scheme".
Mais informação: https://www.ndt.net/search/docs.php3?id=21282&content=1
Algo que nos obriga a reflectir...
NDT International / BINDT - The Forum discusses the revoking of thousands of PCN certifications
At the beginning of June 2017 BINDT (British Institute of Non-Destructive Testing) published that they have uncovered a very widespread and systemic breach of ethics and serious malpractice in the case of NDT International PTE Ltd.. "It is not possible to discriminate between legitimate certificates and invalid certificates and so all certificates will have to be withdrawn without exception", one can read in their official statement and read further: "BINDT will allow candidates up to two months to retake the full initial examination before their certification is formally withdrawn". The two month deadline was increased on 23 June to six months. BINDT published a list of names of more than 3000 names of affected PCN certifications holders. (PCN=Personnel Certification in Non-Destructive Testing)
In the following, we summarize (not endores*) the forum discussion "NDT International / BINDT". About 200 contributions have been posted by 64 people (2/3 non-members) since 16 June until 1. July and the thread received 20,000 hits. This is the biggest discussion in the history of the forum. The CEO Cameron Sinclair from BINDT participated for awhile, however, did not answer too many questions that where addressed to him. Also G. Venkataraman Director of NDT International posted information to defend the company. Unfortunately none of the NDT Societies or ICNDT, EFNDT participated in the discussion, although certification is their main mission, but we believe that they followed the discussion. The discussions were fair and in a professional manner and only in two cases the moderator had to remove an abuse. It was obvious that the majority stands contra to BINDT. The major protest was the decision to withdraw all certificates, also from the innocent, of the last 6 years issued from NDT Int. and its subsidiaries. Although BINDT revised in their official statement the re-exam period from two to six months the majority see this still as too short; especially for holders of certs from multiple methods. It was considered that if a re-examination is necessary this should be possible at the time of certification renewal time. Concerns were also expressed about the high costs of re-examination (including travel costs, break from work etc.) and why the candidates have to pay for it again, but not BINDT and NDTI the two main parties in this scandal. Also, no one can ensure that the certification gained from another AQB will be withdrawn again. NDTI offered free exams completely administered by BINDT. They are waiting for the approval from BINDT for this proposal.
One of the concerns was that BINDT is a big money making institute although they are a non-profit organization. Why expand their PCN business all over the world at all? As more remote centers are added it would seem to be more difficult to keep everything clean. It was stated that the audit fee is very high for Indian ATO/AQB owners and the same situation for African bodies where a lot could possibly close because of this issue. It appears that BINDT put too much trust in Indian organizations without understanding the culture. Also it was questioned that if the same company is ATO and AQB is there conflict of interest. All agree that this scandal is not the last one. Serious malpractice could exist in many other countries according to the view of many forum commenters. In parallel in another forum topic "NDT CERTIFICATES" someone said: "Many NDT certificates are fake. But I have to add that it depends on the country in which they were issued. .... looking at Europe and North America, I doubt very much that they are fake". Also another related forum topic from Aug 2015 "PCN certification gained by giving fake experience" received in parallel new replies. Most of the forum comments see BINDT as the guilty party rather than a victim and ask questions like: Should UKAS not take the status of Certification Body back from BINDT due to numerous major nonconformities of BINDT due to their incompetence? One comments "UKAS also will support and back BINDT. UKAS was formed to protect the interest of UK. BINDT is formed to protect the interest of UK and Europe and not Asian market. It is the mistake of Asians to promote PCN scheme".
Mais informação: https://www.ndt.net/search/docs.php3?id=21282&content=1
Comentários