In order to determine the cause and provide corrective action, welding repairs of cracks that occurred in-service should not be attempted without consultation with:

In order to determine the cause and provide corrective action, welding repairs of cracks that occurred in-service should not be attempted without consultation with:

• A. The inspector.
• B. The piping engineer.
• C. The owner.
• D. The welding supervisor.

Answer: (B)

Crack repairs in an in-service piping system must be evaluated and approved by the design authority responsible for the system’s integrity. The piping engineer is the person who understands the device’s material, design limits, service conditions, and the applicable codes, and can determine whether welding is an appropriate remedy, what repair approach to use, and what post-weld actions are required. Why this is the best choice: The piping engineer can assess root cause (fatigue, corrosion, hydrogen-assisted cracking, etc.), confirm that welding won’t compromise the vessel or system, and specify the proper welding procedure, material compatibility, post-weld heat treatment if needed, and non-destructive examination criteria. They ensure the repair meets code requirements and that the action won’t introduce new failure modes or invalidate design margins. Without this engineering oversight, a repair could be ineffective or unsafe. The inspector, while important for verification, focuses on compliance and existing conditions rather than approving the repair strategy. The owner may authorize work but does not provide the technical authorization for how to repair or what method is acceptable. The welding supervisor handles execution and workmanship but again relies on engineering approval for the corrective action.

Crack repairs in an in-service piping system must be evaluated and approved by the design authority responsible for the system’s integrity. The piping engineer is the person who understands the device’s material, design limits, service conditions, and the applicable codes, and can determine whether welding is an appropriate remedy, what repair approach to use, and what post-weld actions are required.

Why this is the best choice: The piping engineer can assess root cause (fatigue, corrosion, hydrogen-assisted cracking, etc.), confirm that welding won’t compromise the vessel or system, and specify the proper welding procedure, material compatibility, post-weld heat treatment if needed, and non-destructive examination criteria. They ensure the repair meets code requirements and that the action won’t introduce new failure modes or invalidate design margins. Without this engineering oversight, a repair could be ineffective or unsafe.

The inspector, while important for verification, focuses on compliance and existing conditions rather than approving the repair strategy. The owner may authorize work but does not provide the technical authorization for how to repair or what method is acceptable. The welding supervisor handles execution and workmanship but again relies on engineering approval for the corrective action.