Naming a Level III of Record in the Permian Basin

What 'of record' means, and why the phrase matters

Under an employer-based certification scheme, the written practice must identify the Level III who exercises the employer's technical authority. That is the individual referred to as the Level III of record. The phrase is not honorary. It designates the person whose signature validates certifications, whose approval makes a procedure usable, and whose own credential must be current on every date they act.

The practical consequence is that the role is continuous. Certifications fall due on their own schedule; procedures need approval when a new job arrives, not at a quarterly review; a technician returning from a long gap in a method needs an interruption assessment before their next report. None of those can be handled by an engagement that ended two years ago, which is why shops that bought a written practice as a one-time deliverable often discover that the document is fine and the signatures behind it are not.

There is a second consequence that surfaces only in audits. When a client auditor questions why a UT procedure allows a particular calibration approach, or why a technician was certified with the experience recorded in their file, the answer has to come from someone who made the decision and can defend it technically. A quality manager reading the file aloud is not an answer.

The industrial base a Midland certification programme actually serves

Midland sits at the centre of the Permian Basin and functions as its commercial and engineering hub rather than as a heavy processing centre in its own right. Diamondback Energy and ProPetro Holding are headquartered in the city, and the operator, service company and consultancy offices concentrated here direct work across the Midland Basin to the east and the Delaware Basin to the west in the Pecos and Reeves County corridor.

The physical work that generates NDT demand is spread across that footprint. Shop fabrication of production separators, heater treaters, free-water knockouts and compressor and pump skids, much of it to ASME Section VIII Division 1. Pipe spool shops feeding gathering, transfer and plant piping. Field-erected and shop-built tank batteries to API Specification 12F and 12J. Cryogenic gas processing trains operated by the large Permian midstream companies, with the cold-box, exchanger and high-pressure piping inspection that comes with them. Produced-water gathering and disposal infrastructure that has grown into a substantial construction market of its own. And an OCTG threading and inspection sector supporting a drilling programme that never fully stops.

Two more elements shape the local picture. Roughly forty miles northeast, Big Spring hosts refinery operations whose turnaround and mechanical integrity work draws contractors out of Midland and Odessa. And Midland International Air and Space Port, which holds an FAA commercial space launch site operator licence alongside its scheduled airline service, brings aviation maintenance activity into a region otherwise dominated by oilfield codes — a small but real source of NAS 410 exposure for shops that accept the work.

Who has jurisdiction in Texas, and over what

The Railroad Commission of Texas is the state's oil and gas regulator and, for intrastate pipelines, the pipeline safety authority. It adopts the federal minimum safety standards of 49 CFR Parts 192 and 195 through its own rules in 16 Texas Administrative Code Chapter 8, which is why a Permian gathering operator sees federal-style requirements enforced by a state inspector. Interstate lines answer to PHMSA directly. The distinction decides who shows up and which enforcement path applies, and it is routinely misunderstood by contractors new to the basin.

The Texas Commission on Environmental Quality administers air authorisations and aboveground storage tank requirements, which is where tank inspection intervals and repair documentation intersect with environmental compliance rather than mechanical integrity alone. The Texas Department of Licensing and Regulation administers the state boiler programme, so shop and field work on boilers carries a jurisdictional dimension that vessel work often does not.

Sitting across the top for gas plants and larger processing facilities is OSHA's process safety management standard at 29 CFR 1910.119, whose mechanical integrity element expects inspection and testing to follow recognised and generally accepted good engineering practice and expects the people performing it to be trained for the task. That last clause is where a certification programme stops being paperwork. A PSM covered facility whose contractor cannot substantiate technician qualification has a mechanical integrity gap, not a filing gap.

The month-to-month work of the role

Procedure approval is the largest recurring item. Every method in use needs a procedure that matches the governing code — Section V for ASME construction, API 1104 for pipeline girth welds, API 570 and 653 for in-service piping and tanks, AWS D1.1 for structural — and every meaningful change to equipment, geometry, material or acceptance criteria means a revision or a new technique sheet. Approving these is a technical act with a signature attached.

Certification management runs alongside it: initial and renewal certifications, examination administration, practical grading, near-vision and colour contrast records, interruption assessments for technicians returning to a method, and evaluation of new hires whose previous employer-based certificates do not transfer. Each of these produces a record that an auditor will eventually sample.

Then the work that only appears under pressure. Agency and subcontract technicians brought in for a turnaround need evaluating against your practice before they sign anything. A client's supplier quality manual arrives invoking CP-189 where your practice cites SNT-TC-1A, and someone has to assess the delta. A rejected weld becomes a commercial dispute and the data needs independent review. An auditor asks why a thickness survey used a particular velocity setting. These are the moments the role exists for.

Where Permian scheduling breaks certification programmes

The basin's demand profile is the enemy of orderly certification. Activity arrives in surges — a drilling programme accelerates, a plant turnaround lands, a pipeline spread mobilises — and the labour to meet it arrives with it, frequently through agencies, frequently holding certificates issued by employers you have never audited. The temptation to put those technicians on your reports without a documented evaluation is enormous, and it is the single most damaging shortcut available.

Churn compounds it. Technicians move between service companies inside the basin at a rate that makes annual certification cycles unrealistic; a shop can turn over a meaningful fraction of its certified population between audits. Programmes designed around a stable workforce quietly stop matching reality, and the gap shows up as certifications signed for people who left, and reports signed by people never certified.

Service conditions add a technical layer. Sour service is present in parts of the basin, which brings NACE MR0175 and ISO 15156 hardness and material requirements into shop scope — and hardness testing is a method shops routinely perform without listing it in the written practice. High-temperature service on hot lines changes ultrasonic thickness arithmetic. Neither is exotic; both are regularly outside the scope of the document that certifies the people doing the work.

What the Level III of record does not do

The role is bounded, and being explicit about the boundary protects both parties. Atlantis does not act as the API inspector of record. It does not authorise or sign in-service inspections under API 510, 570 or 653, and it does not set inspection intervals or make fitness-for-service determinations that belong to the owner-user's inspection organisation.

Atlantis is not a process safety management auditor. It does not perform PSM compliance audits under 29 CFR 1910.119, does not issue findings against a facility's PSM programme, and does not certify a mechanical integrity programme as adequate. Where a PSM facility needs its NDT inputs to be defensible, Atlantis supplies the procedures, the qualified personnel and the data review that make them so — which is a contribution to mechanical integrity, not a judgement on it.

What the role does supply is unambiguous: written practice authorship and maintenance, NDT procedure development and qualification, personnel certification within the practice, technical representation when a client or registrar audits your qualification system, and independent review of inspection data where a result is contested. Scope, methods and availability are agreed up front; quotes are provided on request through info@atlantisndt.com.

Questions to ask before naming anyone

Ask for the credential and its expiry, in the specific methods your practice covers. An ASNT Level III certificate in one method does not confer authority in another, and a practice covering five methods needs authority for five methods — whether from one individual or a documented arrangement covering the gaps.

Ask about availability in concrete terms. What is the response window for a procedure approval during a turnaround? Who acts if the named individual is unavailable for two weeks, and how is that delegation documented so it survives an audit? How many other companies name the same individual, and does that create a conflict when two clients need attention in the same week?

Ask about exit. Who owns the examination pool, the answer keys and the practical specimens? Is there a written transfer package? What happens to certifications signed under the arrangement if it ends mid-cycle? A Level III who has thought about their own succession is telling you something useful about how they run the rest of the programme.

Taking over an existing practice

Transitions are where most damage occurs, because the incoming Level III inherits liability for a system they did not build. The first step is always an evidence sample rather than a rewrite: pull a spread of personnel files and trace each certification back to training records, method-specific experience, graded examinations, characterised practical specimens and a valid signature date. That sample sorts problems into two categories — documents that need editing, and certifications that need redoing.

The second step is the procedure inventory. List every procedure in active use, check each against the code it claims to satisfy and against the equipment actually on the floor, and identify the technique sheets that exist informally in technicians' heads. In fast-moving Permian shops the informal set is usually larger than the approved set.

Only then does the document work make sense. A written practice revised before the evidence is understood tends to codify the existing gaps in cleaner language. Revised afterwards, it reflects what the shop genuinely does and what it can genuinely prove — which is the only version that survives contact with an auditor.

Request a consultation