NATIONAL LABORATORY ASSOCIATION. Civil/Building Construction Laboratory Sub-Committee Meeting

Transcription

1 NATIONAL LABORATORY ASSOCIATION Civil/Building Construction Laboratory Sub-Committee Meeting Minutes of the 3 rd Meeting of the Civil/Building Construction Laboratory Sub-Committee held at the NLA offices, 1 De Havilland Crescent, Persequor Park, Pretoria, on Tuesday 16 th March 2010 at 10:00. 1 ATTENDANCE PRESENT Mr Marius Materials Testing Training College (Chair) Mr Barry Asphalt Academy Mr Otto Ueckermann Department of Public Transport Works and Roads Mr Peet Saayman Department of Water Affairs and Forestry Mr Dinny Waggiet Indlela Soils Lab Mr Con de Bruin Matrolab Group (Pty) Ltd Mr National Laboratory Association (NLA Facilitator) Mr Uli Kaempffer Roadlab (Pty) Ltd Mrs Hester Van Niekerk Roadlab (Pty) Ltd Mr Mpho Phaloane SANAS Mr Sean Strydom SANRAL Mr Chris Taljaard SNA Laboratory (Pty) Ltd Mr Jan Venter Soilco ABSENT WITH APOLOGY Mr Sydney Crocker Provincial Government Western Cape Mr Barry Duma Provincial Administration Western Cape SECRETARIAT Ms Hanlie Badenhorst NLA 2 WELCOME Mr opened the meeting and welcomed all present. Special welcome to Mpho Phaloane from SANAS. 3 AGENDA Two points were added to the agenda. 10.b Nuclear gauge calibration 12.1 Labour issues Page 1 of 5

2 4 NAME OF SUBCOMMITTEE After a discussion the committee agreed to rename the subcommittee to the MatCivils Subcommittee. 5 FEEDBACK FROM ET TASK GROUP, DISCUSSION AND DECISION Barry reported back that the layout used for the MetCert was adopted for the Materials Tester Certification. See attached document. The certification committee will consist of provincial and regional labs, as well as SANAS and SANRAL. It is important that this committee is accepted by all the groups. There will be four streams that people can get training in. Once a person has been trained, an assessment will be done and this will be moderated by the Certification committee. All CETA courses are currently under revision. The process being followed with the NLA should be aligned and accepted by CETA once CETA is back on track. The reason why the NLA initiative was started was because CETA is not getting off the ground. Only accredited providers of courses will be used to ensure that all training is at the same level. The Certification committee will approve all the paperwork. All examiners should be accredited by CETA as an assessor. When using a non-accredited assessor a CETA accredited assessor should oversee the process. It will be the responsibility of the laboratories to ensure independence to obtain an objective assessment. There is a need for a regional database of accredited assessors. There are mechanisms needed to ensure costs are reasonable and obtainable. The number of people involved is more than a There is a need for a financial model on how this will work: How to get the system set up? Model that will function in industry? How will the model function in practice? Seed money needs to come from somewhere. The SANRAL task group to contact the authorities to try and obtain funds. The original proposal needs to be refined and can then be used. Steve was requested to send the original document to the group. Barry and Steve should meet and thrash out all the finer detail on how the registration process should work to ensure it gets buy-in. Once the documentation is ready, the authorities can be contacted. Barry and Sydney should draw up a spreadsheet with all the methods to determine the NQF levels. These should be based on the complexity of the methods. Each test will be awarded a point and you will need a certain number of points per level. NQF2 Test method under supervision NQF3 Do method on your own NQF4 Do also the calculations These levels need to be kept generic so that they are applicable across the board. This can be a skills programme, a qualification or a learnership. The question on how the costs of the assessments will be covered was raised. Mpho indicated that the dti has various interventions where they support training of personnel. A number of programmes for training have been identified. The labs can apply for funding from this fund. This can be advertised in the newsletter, Mpho will give the details to Barry. SANRAL group Phaloane Page 2 of 5

3 6 FEEDBACK FROM PT TASK GROUP, DISCUSSION AND DECISION An was sent out but the response is very slow. It will be a regional programme. The first will be a pilot round to establish costs involved. The programme will stay in a cellular process initially due to the problems with the sample size. Protocols are critical for what needs to be achieved with the different tests. Variances can be huge but still acceptable. 7 FEEDBACK FROM SANAS TASK GROUP, DISCUSSION AND DECISION Steve and Chris visited SANAS. The response from SANAS was circulated to the laboratories. It is SANAS s role to push the labs to sign the contracts. SANAS needs to identify whether the labs that haven t signed the contract are aware of the document. The generic problems were addressed. Those labs that still have problems related to the contracts should contact SANAS. SANAS will take the concerns into account during the next review of the contract. The labs would like to know whether they should reapply for accreditation in the case where the method names changed. There is a 2 year phase in period. Through the newsletter distribute the information to the labs of which methods are new, which are only a name change and which need validation. Changes were made to simplify and not complicate. Reason for the changes are to minimize variability. The engineers also need to convey this information to the clients. SANRAL to give feedback on when the new methods will be required. Sean informed the meeting that SANRAL does not specify methods, they only require that the work be done by an accredited lab. The Civils group need to give guidelines to the labs once they have received guidelines from the authorities on when the change should be implemented. The STC can also be used to discuss and recommend changes in the methods during the grace period but only a small number of labs are accredited. SANRAL group to approach the authorities. Sean and Barry to do the rollout of the new methods to inform the consulting engineers about the new standards. Strydom 8 FEEDBACK FROM SANRAL TASK GROUP, DISCUSSION AND DECISION The latest tenders contain a provisional sum for the laboratories. The requirements are that the labs need to be accredited. Tenders for the lab work need to be out before the start of the project. Consultants are manipulating the labs. Tenders for the lab work need to be separate and should be the responsibility of the contractor, with the consultant only in a supervisory role. Con to circulate the document to the committee and the labs. De Bruin 9 FEEDBACK FROM SABS TASK GROUP, DISCUSSION AND DECISION There are 2 committees, Road construction and Geotechnical testing. No feedback. 10 TECHNICAL ITEMS a. Replacement of Penny Test. The penny test is still part of THM1. There are still pennies around but it becomes more difficult to get hold of them. The suggestion was made that the labs should use unprinted five cent pieces. Chris to do correlation studies in the interim before the new standard is published. Taljaard Page 3 of 5

4 b. Nuclear Gauge Calibration There are currently traceability problems when calibrating the nuclear gauge. This will have an impact if the client insists on accredited results. Dave Wright and the CSIR is working to establish a reference block for South Africa. Once a system is available to ensure traceability it should be fine. Labs will need a license to calibrate a nuclear gauge. Mpho requested that feedback be given at the STC scheduled for May whether traceability to a national standard in stead of an international standard will be acceptable. Steve pointed out that NMISA has the responsibility for all physical standards and the CSIR need to speak to NMISA regarding traceability. The regulatory requirements when working with nuclear materials should be taken into account. The testing labs should put pressure on the calibration labs to obtain accreditation for the calibration of the nuclear gauges. The NLA to speak to dti and NMISA to resolve this issue. SANRAL is currently funding the CSIR project. Sean to speak to SANRAL to find out who the contact person is and Steve to speak to NMISA. More than a thousand instruments need to be calibrated. Strydom 11 ADDITIONAL MEMBERS TO BE CONSIDERED Derrick Coetzee of TUT was requested to sit on the sub-com on behalf of the tertiary institutions. After a discussion the committee accepted the proposal. Marius to invite Derrick to the next meeting. 12 NEW MATTERS a. Labour concerns Labs are not contractors but the new labour standards are being applied to labs. The labs do not have a bargaining council. Currently they follow the contractor. After a discussion it was decided that when the need arise, the labs will approach one of the existing unions. b. Additional members There is a need for additional members. There are regional representatives but the major role players are not here. Needs representation from the quarry labs. The person needs to be from the lab. Barry will contact them. Marius to contact Aurecon, Civilab and Soillab. 13 GENERAL Mpho informed the meeting that Marlan has resigned. Christina Leballo is the new contact person until a replacement for Marlan is found. Next meeting: Wednesday 11 August 2010, 10h00 at the NLA offices. The meeting closed at 12:45 Page 4 of 5

5 Sub Committee Responsibilities Education and Training and Registration of Materials Testers PT & ILC s SANAS Relationship SANS Test Methods SANRAL Barry Dumar(chair) Marius (chair) Con de Bruin Peet Saayman Chris Taljaard Marius Jan Venter Otto Ueckermann Dinny Waggiet Sean Strydom Sydney Crocker Sydney Crocker Barry Page 5 of 5