cre subcommittee on inspection task force on individual...

Minutes

American Petroleum Institute

CRE

Subcommittee on Inspection

Task Force on Individual Certification Programs

November 15, 2017

Dallas, Texas

ATTENDEES – MEMBERS:

R. Nichols (Chairman) Nichols Engineering Consultants

J. Britton DNV-GL

A. Cain ATS

K. Eubanks IRISNDT

G. Knight Team

J. Harville P66

G. Hatton Pro-Surve

DT Holder TUV Sud

R. Konet Valero

T. McLane Holly Frontier

N. Miller Sasol

J. Reynolds Intertek

P. Smith Consultant

K. VanLoon Provenance Consulting LLC

API Staff: A. Orphanides, H. Decker, S. Haneef

ATTENDEES – VISITORS:

1. K. Ben Andeavor 14. D. Jordan CVR Energy

2. S. Bolinger BP 15. M. Murray Mistras

3. B. Brambila PinnacleART 16. T. Pekinpaugh Holly Frontier

4. J. Brechtel Prometric 17. D. Reuter Sinclair Oil

5. J. Bui Asset Optimization 18. J. Scott Lyondell Basell

6. K. Carroll Dow Chemical 19. H. Sherman Lyondell Basell

7. M Coserta Becht Engineering 20. C. Shopoff Quest Integrity

8. S. DeVillier Trinity Briose 21. R. Slader Asset Optimization

9. B. Erickson Prometric 22. T. Stancil Pond & Company

10. M. Farris Huntsman

Corporation

23. M. Thomas Marathon Petroleum

11. M .Geisenhoff FHR 24. K. Wintz TCI

12. W. Gull/SCHTE Birwelco USA INC. 25. S. Wenner Baker CGI

13. P. Hunt Consultant 26. T. Wylie Shell

I. OPENING, INTRODUCTIONS & ROSTER

R. Nichols opened the meeting at 10:00 a.m. and circulated the sign-up sheet.

II. APPROVAL OF AGENDA

Additions to the agenda:

Old Business: Revisit discussion on number of questions on the exams

New Business: ICP Governance

Agenda approved with additions

III. APPROVAL OF MINUTES FROM THE LAST MEETING

Minutes were made available online prior to the meeting.

Minutes were approved as submitted.

IV. INDIVIDUAL CERTIFICATION STATUS REPORT

ICP Status Report was circulated and approved as submitted.

A. Orphanides: At the time of the Spring 2017 Refining Meeting, ICP had experienced a 3% drop in overall

API 510 certifications. Currently, the number of certified 510 individuals has normalized and we no longer

have the 3% drop.

In an effort to retain certified individuals, ICP hired a temporary employee to clear out outstanding

recertification applications.

There continues to be diminished interest in new certification applications.

ICP Portal has ~55,000 accounts, not all of which lead to completed applications. ICP is gathering research as

to why individuals abandon applications.

This year, ICP is continuing process improvements. As part of the efforts, ICP recently sent out a survey to all

individuals in the portal and had a 16% response rate. The pain points identified by respondents were portal

navigation, employment reference requirements and the overall application process.

In response, ICP will be updating all avenues of communication for clarity and consistency to decrease

confusions amongst applicants. ICP will also look to include a customer care area of the ICP website to

improve the information available to applicants regarding the portal and application and exam processes.

J. Harville: What kind of feedback results did you get on the supervisor verification process? Many

supervisors complain because they have to complete an empty verification form.

A. Orphanides: For new applications, verifiers must complete the verification form without the applicants’

responses. For verification of continued experience during recertification, the supervisor is provided with the

applicant’s responses.

J. Harville: Recently had a request for verification for a recertification that was blank canvas.

A. Orphanides: ICP will check the logic to confirm.

Update: Following the Fall Refining Meeting, ICP Staff checked the logic on the supervisor’s verification

request for recertification and determined that the email received by supervisors does contain the

applicant’s responses. Supervisors who experience incorrect recertification verification request should

contact ICP with the candidate’s information.

J. Harville: How does ICP handle instance when former supervisor hold verification “hostage?”

A. Orphanides: ICP Staff works with these individuals.

Q: Can applicants manage short term jobs and send references from their Portal account when they leave a

job?

A. Orphanides: ICP working on expanding the account portion of the Portal within the next year to allow

applicants to submit verification requests outside of applications.

ICP has seen an increase in misconduct at the testing locations. ICP will update the legal agreements to

specifically address misconduct and the subsequent consequence.

Q: Does ICP have a strict criterion for dealing with cheating?

A. Orphanides: There are a couple different scenarios that ICP is working on with the API Legal Department;

those suspected of cheating may be banned for a year or they are banned indefinitely.

G. Hatton: Misconduct should result in a lifetime ban.

A. Orphanides: Agreed, but we have worked out a couple of scenarios based on the situation.

V. OLD BUSINESS

1. Update on API 573

R. Nichols: A. Orphanides and I approached the Subcommittee on Heat Transfer Equipment (SCHTE) to

discuss the API 573 certification. At this time, the subcommittee does not feel that they have time to assist

the ICP Task Force to set up a certification. They would be taking it back to an online vote.

Nichols invited comment from the API 573 group’s Vice Chair, John Scott (Chair, Travis Harrington, was

unable to attend the Fall Refining meeting). He reported that there was a healthy representation from

SCHTE at the 573 revision meeting earlier on Wednesday.

ICP will bring the API 573 certification proposal to the attention of other subcommittees, such as the

Subcommittee on Corrosion and Materials to assist with the certification, should it move forward.

John Scott (573 Vice Chair): As discussed in the API RP 573 meeting, the document has a long way to go

before it gets finalized and balloted. Does it make sense to pursue an API 573 certification when the

document has not been finalized? It might make more sense to write test questions on the new document

rather than the current.

A. Orphanides: The plan would be to write questions on the new edition of API RP 573.

Walter Gull (SCHTE Vice Chair): The certification was not discussed heavily in the API RP 573

meeting, there was not any voting on it and there is not any change with the way the SCHTE feels. It is still

very much split.

Walter Gull (SCHTE Vice Chair): In light of the change of governance of ICP currently being discussed,

how will the final decision be made to go forward with the certification?

A. Orphanides: Step1 of the gate process is socializing the idea and building consensus to show that the

industry supports the certification. Two or three companies need to express interest and a committee or

committees need to support the initiative. Step 2: Build a value case. Step 3: The value case is vetted and

prioritized by API. Once the value case and API approval is received, then the perspective project is put

before the SCIMI for a consensus vote. It would also be reported up to the CRE.

Q: What is the expected timing of the API 573 certification?

A. Orphanides: The API 573 certification will move forward when consensus is built. At the last ICP Task

Force meeting, a straw poll was held and the consensus was to move forward. API 573 is in the “building the

value case” phase of ICP’s onboarding process for new programs.

J. Reynolds: Those that are enthusiastic about having an API 573 certification program should build the value

case and then present it.

A. Orphanides: T. Harrington tried to facilitate the completion of the value case over the summer with a

request from others that had very little response.

J. Reynolds: The next effort is to build the value case and present it in Seattle.

Walter Gull (SCHTE Vice Chair): The SCHTE is not satisfied with the quality of inspections being

performed today and recognizes that there is a need for higher quality of inspection. Some SCHTE members

feel that API RP 573 needs to be improved before it can be used as the basis for a certification process. Some

members feel that heaters are complex and varied, with the various coils, refractory, high alloy castings, steel

and rotating equipment, and it will be difficult to certify an individual to be able to inspect all aspects of

heaters. Some early indications of an issue with a heat exchanger are not readily identified and some members

believe that the SME for the company should be involved in the inspection. The SCHTE is still discussing the

certification internally and in the spring, the SCHTE will discuss it again.

A. Orphanides: The certification program would demonstrate that the certified individual had a general

understanding of the base knowledge.

J. Harville: The value proposition needs to better define the scope of the API 573; certification should be

better defined.

2. Membership fees

A. Orphanides: ICP has been working with API’s finance department to preserve a membership discount. The

current fee structure has a variable discount rate, members get a discount between 5% or 30% depending on

the program. ICP and FOD are looking at a straight discount. Currently, nothing has changed and members’

employees received the existing discount throughout 2017.

3. Updated Inspectioneering Webinars

A. Orphanides: J. Reynolds recently completed an ICP/Inspectioneering webinar on Source Inspection. The

webinar aired on October 25, 2017. 323 people registered and 44.27% attended. Most of the interest was from

North America.

100% of attendees believed the topic was relevant.

90% of attendees believed the topic was relevant to their work.

76% of attendees believed the level of detail was just right

86% of attendees believed the speaker was knowledgeable.

86% of attendees believed the speaker was clear and professional

71% of attendees believed that the webinar provided valuable information.

View the webinar here: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fO3IBKoZvWw&t=311s

J. Reynolds: Inspectioneering is excited by the response to the webinar. They emphasized that the webinars

are worthwhile and that ICP should continue to take advantage of the available webinar space.

A. Orphanides: ICP and Inspectioneering are seeking volunteers to develop another webinar.

Some possible API 510 or 570 topics are:

The intersection of managing risk in piping and pressure vessels

Performance testing and updates in inspection methods for 510/570

Systematic methods for 510/570 inspection of piping and pressure vessels

If anyone is interested in participating in a Webinar, please contact A. Orphanides at [email protected].

As a reminder, ICP has a social media presence, please join and help grow it.

Facebook: @OfficialAPIGlobal

Twitter: @APIGlobal

Linkedin: API Global Pro

4. Number of Questions on the exams

R. Nichols: During the Spring 2017 Refining Meeting, the ICP Task Force discussed the number of questions

on the exam and J. Reynolds asked us to revisit the discussion.

The exam is 150 questions with 25 pretest, unscored, questions. Only 125 questions are graded. The 25

ungraded questions designated as “pretest questions” were added in after Prometric, ICP’s Test Administration

Partner, presented a study demonstrating that fewer questions can still sufficiently measure the knowledge of

applicants. The discussion at the Spring 2017 Refining Meeting was to increase the number of scored

questions to cover more topics.

A. Orphanides: About 5 years ago, a Job Analysis (JA) was completed for the API 510, API 570 and API

653. A JA should be recompleted every 5 to 7 years and ICP will be performing another one in 2018. There

were comments last Refining Meeting that there should be more questions on Welding, as well as WPS/PQR

related questions. During this process, ICP can review the possibility of adding more questions.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fO3IBKoZvWw&t=311s

mailto:[email protected]

J. Reynolds: Currently, the specialized exams (API 571, API 577 and API 580) have 70 questions. If it is

appropriate, it should be increased to 100 questions.

B. Erickson (Prometric): The Job Analysis is critical because it looks at what you and the industry thinks is

the appropriate number of questions in the domains (major subject areas).

D. Jordan: ICP just cut the time on the exams. How can ICP add more questions?

A. Orphanides: ICP can reevaluate the seat times following the Job Analysis and any determination to add

exam questions.

R. Nichols: Create a group to take a look at the number of questions offline and present a proposal in the

Spring refining meeting.

Volunteers

D. Jordan R. Nichols

J. Reynolds H. Sherman

P. Smith

The following individuals were not at the

meeting but were suggested: J. Monroe, A.

Cain and N. Dagoberg.

A. Orphanides: The last time the third-party job analysis survey was completed for API 510, API 570 and

API 653, they were completed together and Prometric is amenable to doing so again.

B. Erickson (Prometric): The first step of a JA is a task force builds the survey questions for the market

place. Once the information is returned, a group of individuals review the responses and the test

specification/content outline.

R. Nichols: The first survey on the API 653 certification, asked the participants what percentage of time the

recipient spent on each subject/domain. The survey indicated a high percentage of time spent on record

keeping, which is difficult to ask questions on.

J. Brechtel (Prometric): Survey responses that answer the question “what percentage of time is spent on each

subject” should be balanced by a corresponding question of “how important” is that task.

J. Reynolds: Record keeping also ranks high on importance. However, it is not possible to write questions on

record keeping

R. Nichols: Action item: Will follow-up with J. Monroe and A. Cain on the discussion.

VI. NEW BUSINESS

1. NDE Programs

A. Orphanides: ICP is aware of the difficulties identified by the NDE task group in the past six years:

ICP moves too slowly to adopt certification programs for new technologies

ICP’s NDE exams are not global

ICP only administers exams in one location in Houston

ICP and J. Nyholt have been working together since the Spring 2017 Refining Meeting to find ways to move

into a global market.

As of January 2018, ICP will have a process in place for requesting special sites for the NDE exams. J. Nyholt

did a beta test of the special site/traveling training and exam during summer 2017.

ICP is investigating the possibility of attending global NDE conferences and providing training and testing.

ICP is also considering how to utilize the San Jacinto university network to provide exams in other markets.

2. Code of Ethics

A. Orphanides: In 2015, members of the ICP Task Force created a Code of Ethics. It was up on the Website

until API Legal told ICP to take it down that it had not been approved.

One of the tenants of the code includes a committee that would review misconduct. API legal has noted that

such a committee would put API in a position to have to police the industry.

ICP will set up a conference call with API’s legal team with whoever is interested to determine what can and

cannot be included in the code before revising it.

Volunteers

DT. Holder P. Hunt

D. Jordan N. Miller

H. Sherman K. VanLoon

3. Policy Change: Refund for Unqualified Candidates

A. Orphanides: As discussed during the Spring 2017 Refining Meeting, ICP is undergoing process

improvement. Currently, about 11% of the applications received either have a deficiency or are unqualified (the

unhappy path). The ICP staff spends significant time assisting these 11% of applicants.

ICP is making a process improvement to the application portal (https://inspector.api.org) in an effort to

introduce a “smarter” application process. The system will review the education and employment history

information provided by the candidate against the program requirements and if insufficient information is

provided, the candidate will not be able to move forward with the application.

If an unqualified applicant gets through the “smart application,” ICP staff works with them, but they are still not

qualified API will not give the applicant a refund.

J. Reynolds: The initial qualification criteria should be revisited.

4. 570 BOK Discussion

H. Decker: There was discussion during the API 570 question review in Houston, Summer 2017, regarding

removing minimum required thickness of permanent blanks from the 570 BOK.

R. Nichols, T. Harrington, D. Jordan and R. Konet are against removing the permanent blinds from the API 570

BOK.

Decision: Keep permanent blanks in the API 570 BOK

H. Decker: Also during the Houston question review, ASME’s most recent edition of the document added

Appendix R “use of alternative ultrasonic acceptance criteria” to the ASME B31.3 document in the “excluded”

list of the 570 BOK

N. Miller: If it is an alternative method for reviewing and accepting repairs, it should be part of an inspector’s

knowledge base.

https://inspector.api.org/

R Nichols: Will review Appendix R and determine whether it should be included in the BOK and report back in

Seattle in Spring 2018.

5. Seat Times

In October 2017, ICP shortened the duration of the API exams. John Brechtel, from Prometric, will provide an

explanation of the data behind this decision.

J. Brechtel (Prometric): Prometric charges API based off the amount of time the exam is scheduled for

regardless of whether the candidate takes the whole time to complete the exam or only part of the time.

The data from the last five years of exams demonstrated that applicants cannot pass the whole exam by passing

just the closed book or just the open book section of the exam. However, individuals that did well on the closed

book portion of the exam also did well on the open book section of the exam and vis-a-versa. Either section was

a decent predictor of how the candidate was going to perform overall. Prometric put forth a very unpopular idea

during the RFP process to eliminate one of the sections and make it a four hour exam. ICP did not agree with

removing a portion of the exam.

ICP and Prometric looked at how cost savings could be achieved by looking at a more moderate approach.

ICP and Prometric broke down the sections of the exam to see where time could be reduced overall. One of

those areas included what was allotted for “pre-exam” time (includes introduction screen, the NDA, and the

tutorial), the tutorial time was 13 minutes and is now 9, with the average candidate spending less than 6 minutes

in the tutorial.

For the break, candidates were given 60 minutes and on average took 33 minutes. The lunch time has been

reduced to 45 minutes and applicants have always had the option to bring food to store in their locker.

For the closed book exam, candidates had 3 hours to complete ~100 questions. Applicants, regardless of

whether they pass or fail, were using two hours. The pass rates for all three exams are very similar between the

overall population of candidates and the fastest 95%, all of whom completed the section in just over 2/3 of the

time.

For the open book portion of the exam applicants took, on average, 3 ½ hours rather than 4 hours. Reducing the

exam time by 15 minutes would not disadvantage candidates, which has been demonstrated by the first window

of the API 570 exam and by the early results for the API 653 exam.

A. Orphanides:

The October 2017 window of the API 570 was the first administration with the shorter seat durations and the

percentage of applicants who passed did not significantly change with the shorter duration.

2017 February 742 410 332 55.2 91/92

June 848 479 369 56.5 91/92

October* 891 524 367 58.8 91/92

Only one person has contacted API to complain about the seat time and it was a complaint about cutting the

lunch time.

J Brechtel: For the single part exams (571/577, 580), applicants were given four hours, and the data shows that

the majority of candidates completed the exams in a much shorter time. For example, candidates were finishing

the API 571 certification exam in 90 minutes.. Those exams have now been reduced to 3 hours and 15 minutes.

If more questions were needed, there is room within the reduced duration to accommodate.

A. Orphanides: For clarification the 1169 duration was not touched because it’s a 3 hour exam and ACP

duration was not changed because there is insufficient data.

6. Surpass Demonstration

A. Orphanides: J. Brechtel will do a demonstration of the new test driver, Surpass, which ICP will migrate to

around June 2018.

J. Brechtel: Currently two core systems exist one for item banking, Intelitest, and the other for exam delivery,

UTD. UTD was built 15 years ago and it is reaching the end of its life span.

Prometric bought ownership stakes in BTL, and this entitled Prometric to drive how they were developing their

product that does both item banking and exam delivery. It allows Prometric to send content to market faster

because it removes the handoff between Intelitest and UTD.

Today 1/3 of candidates who test with Prometric are taking exams in Surpass. Prometric has migrated 40 of 250

clients.

It’s a cleaner, more modern, candidate experience. It’s built to have more symbols for candidates whose first

language is not English.

Features for applicants include ability to:

return to the tutorial at any time in the exam.

highlight parts of the question and highlighting will persist throughout the exam section. The

applicants can also highlight in the PDF references and it will persist through the section.

strike out an option, the equivalent of drawing a line through a wrong answer on a paper-based exam.

have the PDF and the exam question on the screen at the same time.

persistence of the pages and the zoom of all PDFs throughout the open book section.

Also to note, currently about 0.7% of candidates accidently end either the break or a section of the exam early.

Surpass requires applicants to confirm that they wish to finish the exam three times.

K. VanLoon: What about challenges?

J. Brechtel: There will be a comment button available for applicants to challenge questions as they do now.

7. Workforce of the Future

A. Orphanides: There are three trends in the workforce of the future.

1. Baby Boomers are retiring.

A Baby Boomer turns 50 every 8.5 seconds. Every day, 10,000 people turn 65 each day.

2. Millennials are entering the workforce and increasing the percentage of freelancers.

Millennials are the new majority of the workforce. 79% of millennials would consider quitting a

regular job to work for themselves. They are not used to the traditional workspace that Baby Boomers

are used to. 52% of Millennials believe that the corporate atmosphere is outdated.

34% of the workforce is freelance, 53 million Americans. By 2020, 40% of the total workforce will be

contract employees. Traditional employers are looking for more of the contract employees because

they do not have to worry about providing benefits.

3. The percentage of minorities in the workforce is also increasing.

By 2020, 40% of the workforce will be minorities.

ICP in Generations

39.29% of ICP certified individuals are part of Generation X, 39.21% of certified individuals are Millennials

and 21.29% of certified individuals belong to the Baby Boomers.

https://app.powerbi.com/groups/aa3bc894-4895-4dd8-980e-745f2340127e/reports/9f4f5bdc-f7e3-4767-ab2c-8a9ee6f04e4c/ReportSectionb2270394ceb48da4e5d1?pbi_source=PowerPoint

A. Orphanides: Food for thought. Hiring practices are changing in response to Millennials. The ICP Task

Force should consider how applicants are qualified and how is the industry recruiting and retaining Millennials.

Also for consideration, how does technology change how work is done in the field?

How should certification exams change in response to Millennials? How could virtual reality, augmented reality

and AI change how applicants are tested?

G. Hatton: Millennials do not know that these careers are even available. Unless a family member is in the

industry, most young people do not know that this career is available.

A. Cain: There needs to be more marketing and brand awareness.

8. Governance

A. Orphanides: A proposal to elevate the ICP Task Force to a Subcommittee level reporting directly to the

CRE. The white paper on ICP governance was circulated at the SCIMI executive meeting. ICP has been a Task

Force under SCIMI since inception. ICP has grown out of the downstream segment.

R. Nichols: The day to day activities of the Task Force will not change -- only the body the Task Force reports

to.

MEETING ADJOURED at 12:04

Next Meeting:

Spring Refining Meeting,

April 18, 2018, Seattle, Washington

https://app.powerbi.com/groups/aa3bc894-4895-4dd8-980e-745f2340127e/reports/9f4f5bdc-f7e3-4767-ab2c-8a9ee6f04e4c/ReportSectionb2270394ceb48da4e5d1?pbi_source=PowerPoint

Agenda

American Petroleum Institute

SUBCOMMITTEE ON INSPECTION

TASK FORCE ON INDIVIDUAL CERTIFICATION

10:00 am – 12:00 pm

Wednesday

November 15, 2017

Rick Nichols, Chairman

Travis Harrington, Vice Chairman

1. OPENING R. Nichols

2. APPROVAL OF AGENDA R. Nichols

3. APPROVAL OF MINUTES FROM LAST MEETING R. Nichols

4. INDIVIDUAL CERTIFICATION STATUS REPORT A. Orphanides

5. OLD BUSINESS

Online Portal Update1.

Issues at testing locations2.

Update on API 5733.

Membership fees4.

Update Inspectioneering Webinars5.

6. Exam Questions

A. Orphanides

6. NEW BUSINESS

1. NDE Programs

Code of Ethics2.

Policy Change - Refunds for Unqualified Applicants3.

570 BOK Changes4.

Discussion about including B31.3 Appendix R in a.

the “excluded” list of the 570 BOK

Discuss removing minimum required thickness of b.

permanent blanks from the 570 BOK

5. Seat Times

6. Surpass Demonstration (J. Brechtel- Prometric)

Workforce of the Future 7.

8. ICP Governance

A. Orphanides

7. FUTURE MEETINGS/NEXT MEETING DATE

Spring Refining Meeting,

April 18, 2018, Seattle, Washington

Individual Certification Programs Status Update

Breakdown as of 10/31/2017

Andri Orphanides

From the last report to this one, we notice that the deficit in circulated certificates has diminished. We had a dedicated push to ensure

that recertifications were processed and followed up on. We are back to our normal drop off rate.

0

2000

4000

6000

8000

10000

12000

14000

16000

18000

Growth of Certificates by Programs

API 510

API 570

API 653

Other

Program 12-Apr 12-Oct

13-Apr

13-Nov

14-May 14-Oct

15-Apr

15-Nov

16-May 16-Nov

17-May 17-Nov

API 510 8556 8994 9746 10221 10871 11300 12290 13424 13946 14992 14663 15304

API 570 7639 8052 8695 9116 9806 10259 10840 11767 13009 13519 13805 14125

API 653 5304 5647 5905 6162 6440 6713 6945 7374 7787 7986 7996 8050

API 936 706 784 901 964 1051 1173 1232 1326 1409 1533 1551 1649

TES 518 572 609 631 629 626 658 678 673 680 649 633

API 571 327 355 382 416 481 595 707 878 988 1147 1211 1314

API 580 419 490 565 645 778 1061 1288 1651 1844 2136 2250 2440

API 577 129 148 161 182 216 283 337 436 484 543 573 600

QUTE 241 269 286 327 339 323 343 373 385 424 385 413

QUSE

18 21 23 27 35 41 55 61 63

QUPA

43 56 62 85 111 132 175 198 242

QUSE-PA

15

SI - FE

33 129 179 294 463 732 850 989

API 1169

30 102 158 522 1357 3020

SI-RE

4 16 33 45

ACP

3 7 8

SIEE

1 1

TOTAL 23863 25335 27279 28725 30721 32547 34961 38449 41,325 44,463 45,590 48,911

ICP currently has over 29,586* inspectors in 130 countries.

*slight increase from what was reported on 11/15

Percentage Breakdown of Certified Inspectors

Note: 2017 numbers are as of Q3

There is a slight shift down from the percentage of international certificates, and Canada has shifted upwards. This is likely created by

the increase in 1169 inspectors in the region. 1169 certificates are currently focused in North America.

0.00% 10.00% 20.00% 30.00% 40.00% 50.00% 60.00% 70.00% 80.00%

2017

2016

2015

2014

2013

2012

2011

2010

2009

2008

2007

2006

Other Countries

Canada

USA

Year USA Canada Other countries

2006 5350 71.80% 949 12.70% 1155 15.50%

2007 5598 68.50% 1079 13.20% 1489 18.20%

2008 5964 66.20% 1196 13.30% 1842 20.50%

2009 6495 64.30% 1358 13.50% 2243 22.20%

2010 6846 61.60% 1468 13.20% 2807 25.20%

2011 7408 58.30% 1605 12.60% 3688 29.00%

2012 7934 54.70% 1761 12.10% 4820 33.20%

2013 8483 51.70% 1936 11.80% 5979 36.50%

2014 8984 48.90% 2165 11.80% 7221 39.30%

2015 10137 46.90% 2277 10.50% 9180 42.50%

2016 11065 44.60% 2638 10.60% 11112 44.80%

2017 13539 45.78% 3334 11.27% 12700 42.95%

Member vs. Non-Member

Demographic Breakdown of Certified Inspectors

Breakdown of Exams Administered

Within the same time period, the distribution of exams per window was as follows:

Month 2014 2015 2016 2017

January 0 795 925 688

February 0 832 906 1131

March 488 545 645 510

April 646 791 830 1594

May 826 889 911 697

June 937 949 1047 846

July 297 536 797 586

August 782 855 917 1485

September 1091 1102 998 1292

October 1064 1209 1151 0

November 632 572 1335 0

December 862 967 924 0

Total 7625 10042 11386 8829

0

200

400

600

800

1000

1200

1400

1600

1800

Distribution of Exams per Window per Year

2014

2015

2016

2017

0

500

1000

1500

2000

2500

3000

3500

4000

4500

Top 20 Countries by Exams Administered 2014 - Sept. 2017

2014

2015

2016

2017

Country Top 20 Total

USA 14305

Saudi Arabia 3497

Canada 3194

India 3088

South Korea 1833

United Arab Emirates 1452

Malaysia 1396

Singapore 1125

Egypt 852

Qatar 651

Australia 510

Thailand 489

Pakistan 485

Kuwait 441

United Kingdom 428

Ghana 415

South Africa 370

China 366

Colombia 342

Taiwan 301

Total 35540

Between 2014 and September 2017, ICP administered 37,882 exams

in 74 different countries. We have utilized 397 of the over 500

Prometric testing centers around the world.

Above is a chart that shows the top 20 countries by growth since the

introduction of computer based testing centers in 2014. As you can

see, over time, 35,540 of our exams were delivered in those top 20

countries.

Historical

Exam Performance

API 510 - Pressure Vessel Inspectors

Year Exam Administration

CANDI-DATES

PASS FAIL PASS % Pass Point

2011 June 742 392 350 52.8 108

September 440 216 224 49.1 108

December 833 445 388 53.4 109

2012 June 988 554 434 56.1 109

September 634 337 297 53.2 109

December 795 485 310 61.1 90*

2013 June 960 559 401 58.2 90

September 603 341 262 56.6 90

December 928 521 407 56.1 86

2014 May 972 530 442 54.5 85

September 1194 675 519 56.5 85/86

2015 January 875 494 281 56.5 85/86

May 1048 582 466 55.5 85/86

September 1208 743 506 61.5 85/86

2016 January 1015 626 389 61.7 85/86

May 909 541 368 59.4 87/88

September 1020 607 413 59.5 87/88

2017 January 692 438 254 63.2 87/88

May 697 416 281 69.7 87/88

September 831 532 299 64.0 87/88

API 653 - Aboveground Storage Tanks Inspectors

Year Exam administration

CANDI- DATES

PASS FAIL PASS % PASS POINT

2011 March 586 319 267 54.4 101

September 660 332 328 50.3 101

2012 March 683 383 300 56.1 105

September 691 419 272 60.6 107

2013 March 644 364 280 56.5 86

September 645 381 264 59.1 86

2014 March 462 259 203 56.1 89

July 329 197 132 60.0 89

November 540 308 232 57.0 89

2015 March 464 260 204 56.0 89

July 438 272 166 62.1 89

November 460 217 243 47.2 90/87

2016 March 493 272 221 55.2 90/87

July 449 225 224 50.1 90/87

November 540 240 300 44.4 91

2017 March 382 210 172 55.0 91

July 401 213 188 53.1 91

API 570 - Piping Inspectors

Year Exam administrati

on

CANDI-DATES


2010 June 815 428 387 52.5 107

September 351 178 173 50.7 107

December 735 375 360 51.0 110

2011 June 882 487 395 55.2 108

September 454 224 230 49.3 108

December 981 526 455 53.6 110

2012 June 1002 506 496 50.5 110

September 732 353 379 48.2 111

December 784 366 418 46.7 86*

2013 June 1078 556 522 51.6 87

September 730 349 381 47.8 87

December 941 527 414 56.0 90

2014 June 1133 554 579 48.9 90

October 1107 548 559 49.5 90

2015 February 1070 517 537 48.3. 89

June 1208 672 536 55.6 89

October 1318 759 721 57.6 89/90

2016 February 1100 599 501 54.5 89/90

June 1000 546 454 54.6 89/90

October 1180 707 473 59.9 89/90

2017 February 742 410 332 55.2 91/92

June 848 479 369 56.5 91/92

October* 891 524 367 58.8 91/92

*This is the first administration with the new reduced seat times. There has not been a change in the percentage of applicant’s

passing.

API QUTE

Year Session # Exam administration CANDI-DATES

PASS FAIL PASS %

2013 44 January 6 4 2

45 January 17 9 8

46 February 6 3 3

47 February 20 15 5

48 March 6 2 4

49 May 18 10 8

50 6 5 1

51 24 15 9

52 July 16 9 7

53 August 13 10 3

54 September 18 10 8 55.6

55 November 18 10 8 55.6

2014 56 January 15 11 4

57 March 5 0 5

58 May 19 12 7

59 July 25 11 14

60 September 18 11 7

61 November 20 13 7 65

2015 62 January 10 5 5

63 February I 8 4 4

64 February II 4 1 3

65 March 24 17 7 70.8%

66 May 27 23 4 85.2

67 July 10 7 3 70

68 August 13 10 3 76.9

69 September 6 4 2 66.7

70 October 7 5 2 71.4

71 November 17 12 5 70.6

72 December 4 1 3 25.00

2016 74 January 15 10 5 66.67

76 March 29 22 7 75.86

77 June 30 17 13 56.67

78 3 2 1 66.67

79 22 12 10 54.55

80 September 15 10 5 66.67

81 November 17 10 7 58.82

2017 82 January 16 10 6 62.50

83 March 20 12 8 60

84 16 12 4 75

85 17 11 6 64.7

86 13 8 5 61.5

July Special Session 9 9 0 100

API QUSE


CANDI-DATES

PASS FAIL PASS %

2007 pilot 3

2009 December 11 1 10 9

2010 No applications

2011 July 5 3 2 60

November 4 2 2 50

2012 March 3 1 2

June 1 0 1 0

November 1 0 1

2013 March 6 3 3

September 7 5 2

November 6 2 4 33.3

2014 January 1 1 0

July 3 2 1

September 1 1 0

2015 January 3 2 1

February I 15 1 14

64 February II - - -

65 March 9 2 7 22.2

66 May 4 3 1 75

67 July 9 3 6 33.3

68 August 2 0 2 0

69 September 4 1 3 75

71 November 4 0 4 0

72 December 2 0 2 0

2016, 74 January 9 5 4 55.56

76 March 8 1 7 12.5

77 June 10 4 6 40.00

78 7 2 5 28.57

79 15 6 9 40

80 September 6 2 4 33.33

81 November 11 8 3 72.73

2017, 82 January 6 2 4 33.33

83 March 3 1 2 33.33

84 1 0 1 0

85 0 0 0 0

86 1 0 1 0

July Special Session

8 5 3 62.5

API QUPA


CANDI-DATES

PASS FAIL PASS %

2007 pilot 3

2009 December 11 1 10 9

2010 No applications

2011 July 5 3 2 60

November 4 2 2 50

2012 March 3 1 2

June 1 0 1 0

November 1 0 1

2013 March 6 3 3

September 7 5 2

November 6 2 4 33.3

2014 January 1 1 0

July 3 2 1

September 1 1 0

2015 January 3 2 1

February I 15 1 14

64 February II - - -

65 March 9 2 7 22.2

66 May 4 3 1 75

67 July 9 3 6 33.3

68 August 2 0 2 0


71 November 4 0 4

72 December 2 0 2

2016, 74 January 9 5 4 80.00

76 March 8 1 7 71.43

77 June 13 12 1 92.31

78 3 2 1 66.67

79 18 11 7 61.11


81 November 10 8 2 80

2017, 82 January 11 11 0 100

83 March 20 15 5 75

84 19 12 7 63

85 13 10 3 76.9

86 18 13 5 72.2


9 9 0 100

API QUSE-PA


CANDI-DATES

PASS FAIL PASS %

2017 pilot 20 10 10 50

85 5 4 1 80

86 2 1 1 50


15 12 3 80

API TES – Tank Entry Supervisors

API 936 - Refractory Personnel


CANDI-DATES

PASS FAIL PASS % PASS POINT (out of 75)

2011 February 12 9 3 75 51

June 91 58 33 63.7 51

December 154 109 45 70.8 51

2012 June 117 87 30 74.4 51

December 141 102 39 72.3 51

2013 June 103 70 33 68.0 51

December 159 103 56 64.8 51

2014 April 57 34 23 59.6 51

August 144 98 46 68.0 51

December 118 78 40 66.1 51

2015 April 95 67 25 72.8 51

August 99 74 25 74.7 51

December 145 112 33 77.2 51

2016 April 89 67 22 75.3 51

August 128 88 40 68.8 51

December 134 99 35 73.9 51

2017 April 92 65 27 70.7 51

August 94 67 27 71.3 51

YEAR EXAM ADMINISTRATI

ON

CANDI-DATES

PASS FAIL PASS % PASS POINT (OUT OF 120)

2011 March 139 62 77 44.6 86

September 121 47 74 38.8 86

2012 March 108 62 46 57.4 79

September 105 67 38 63.8 79

2013 March 70 38 32 54.3 75

September 51 28 23 54.9 75

2014 March 48 24 24 50 75

July 23 10 13 43.5 75

November 68 47 21 69.1 75

2015 March 27 12 15 44.4 75

July 34 28 6 82.4 75

November 27 19 8 70.4 76/74

2016 March 19 12 7 63.2 76/74

July 22 13 9 59 76/74

November 26 19 7 73.1 76/74

2017 March 16 12 4 75 76/74

July 34 26 8 76.5 76/74

API 571 - Corrosion and Materials Professional


on

CANDI-DATES


2011 March 89 34 55 38.2 49

September 86 27 59 31.4 49

2012 March 102 28 74 27.5 49

September 127 37 90 29.1 49

2013 March 109 36 73 33.0 49

September 193 69 124 35.8 49

2014 April 159 97 62 61.0 49

August 174 74 100 42.5 49

December 251 105 146 41.8 49

2015 April 197 85 112 43.1 49

August 240 103 137 42.9 49

December 258 112 146 43.4 49

2016 April 179 78 101 43.6 49

August 191 86 105 45 49

December 223 82 141 36.8 49

2017 April 157 72 85 45.9 49

August 125 61 64 48.8 49

API 580 - Risk Based Inspection Professional


on

CANDI-DATES


2011 March 140 49 91 35.0 49

September 147 59 88 40.1 49

2012 March 200 70 130 35.0 49

September 244 90 154 39.7 49

2013 March 238 91 147 38.2 49

September 319 138 181 43.3 49

2014 April 316 168 148 53.2 49

August 300 159 141 53.0 49

December 405 192 213 47.4 49

2015 April 357 178 179 49.9 49

August 371 205 166 55.3 49

December 404 205 199 50.7 49

2016 April 301 154 147 51.1 49

August 274 88 181 32.1 49

December 317 170 147 53.6 49

2017 April 221 128 93 57.9 49

August 178 114 64 64.0 49

API 577 - Welding Inspection and Metallurgy Professional


on

CANDI-DATES


2011 March 33 19 14 57.6 49

September 29 14 15 48.3 49

2012 March 32 20 12 62.5 49

September 24 15 9 62.5 49

2013 March 38 21 17 55.2 49

September 54 36 18 66.7 49

2014 April 79 42 37 53.2 49

August 67 29 38 43.3 49

December 104 54 50 41.9 49

2015 April 93 51 42 54.8 49

August 102 55 47 53.9 49

December 91 52 39 57.1 49

2016 April 179 78 101 43.6 49

August 54 27 27 50 49

December 71 44 27 62 49

2017 April 38 21 17 55.3 49

August 48 22 26 45.8 49

API SIFE - Source Inspector Fixed Equipment


on

CANDI-DATES


2013 November 60 33 27 55 70

2014 April 61 38 23 62.3 70

August 109 58 51 53.2 70

December 86 50 36 58.1 70

2015 April 98 56 42 57.1 70

August 93 62 31 66.7 70

December 228 171 57 75 70

2016 April 173 125 48 72.2 70

August 236 154 82 65.3 70

December 170 103 67 60.6 70

2017 March 60 41 19 68.3 70

July 106 84 22 79.2 70

September (Special)

97 87 10 89.7 70

API SIRE - Source Inspector Rotating Equipment


on

CANDI-DATES


2015 December 9 4 5 44.4 70

2016 April 15 7 8 46.7 70

August 25 6 19 24 70

December 30 10 20 33.3 70

2017 March 22 7 15 31.8 70

July 31 13 18 41.9 70

API SIEE - Source Inspector Electrical Equipment


on

CANDI-DATES


2016 December 2 0 2 0.0 70

2017 March 10 1 9 10.0 70

July 7 0 7 0.0 70

API ACP - Auditor Certification

IAQ1


CANDI-DATES

PASS FAIL PASS %

2016 March 6 2 4 33.3

August 2 1 1 50.0

2017 March 2 0 2 0.0

July 2 0 2 0.0

IAQ2


CANDI-DATES

PASS FAIL PASS %

2017 March 1 1 0 100.0

AQ1


CANDI-DATES

PASS FAIL PASS %

2016 March 1 0 1 0.0

August 2 0 2 0.0

December 4 0 4 0.0

2017 March 6 0 6 0.0

July 6 1 5 16.7

LAQ1


CANDI-DATES

PASS FAIL PASS %

2016 March 1 0 1 0.0

August 1 0 1 0.0

December 2 0 2 0.0

2017 March 11 3 8 27.3

July 3 0 3 0.0

LAQ2


CANDI-DATES

PASS FAIL PASS %

2016 March 1 0 1 0.0

August 6 0 6 0.0

December 1 1 0 0.0

2017 March 1 0 1 0.0

July 1 0 1 0.0

API 1169 - Pipeline Inspector

YEAR EXAM ADMINISTRATION

CANDI-DATES


2014 November 67 35 32 52.2 68

2015 March 76 41 35 53.9 68

July 69 32 37 46.4 68

November 102 58 44 56.9 68

2016 March 135 98 37 72.6 69/70

June Special 47 46 1 97.9 69/70

July 325 266 59 81.9 69/70

November 770 632 138 82.1 69/70

2017 January 392 306 86 78.1 69/70

April 1088 861 227 79.1 70/71

August 1031 777 254 75.4 70/71

September/October 364 269 95 73.9 70/71

cre subcommittee on inspection task force on individual...

Documents