[william]

Mechanical hardness testers such as Equotip (It is a Swiss make) are available but whether the readings will be accurate needs to be verified especially since the diameter is small.
Eddy Current Testing could be another option to verfiy the heat treatment. Pl. give more details about the material, type of heat treatment etc. so that better responses are obtained,

[william]

I believe there are indentation testers that are portable and in my experience they give the best results. Rebound testers and ultrasonic contact impedance testers are indirect techniques, unlike the indentation testers. So, unless you develop your own procedure and standards, converting the test results into HRB or HRC or VPN or BHN may prove to be very much error prone.

[william]

Yes you can do, but it depends. If you had selected correct frequency and you have saved the calibration tube data, then you can recalibrate as earlier.

In case, if you dont have the cal tube data, take a cal tube data at the same frequency at which you have inspected the exchanger and calibrate it. this is not technically right method but it will full-fill your requirement. We all know, that ECT is a comparative method. So, here you will get better reference.

[william]

Source strength, Source to Film Distance, Film Speed, Sensitivity desired are the main parameters that will determine the exposure time. And I am wondering why you are doubting your level II…

[william]

(I have been there many ASME Audits for Fossil and Nuclear work from the manufactuer’s side.
To answer your questions:

A) Auditor is absolutely correct.

B) VT must meet ASNT SNT TC 1A

Hydro static or Pneumatic Pressure test is not coming under leak testing. It is proof test.)