One of the most often mentioned descriptions of the role of a coating inspector is “to observe, report, and document.” I will deal with each of these activities separately.

Let’s start with observation.

On most projects, visual inspection constitutes about 80% of all inspection activities therefore the two most important tools an inspector has at their disposal is a “calibrated eye” and “engaged brain”.

In order for the inspectors’ observations to add-value to the project, the inspector must know what to look for. The inspector’s observation must be “calibrated” through the lens of the specification and inspection and test plan specifically developed for the project.

Just looking is not observation. Rather the inspector’s “engaged brain” will be comparing what is observed to the project requirements as defined by the project documents.  

As an example, during observation the inspectors should be asking themselves questions like, “Is the contractor using approved methods and materials? “Is the contractor following the approved work sequence?” “Is the contractor using appropriate surface preparation and coating equipment?” “Do the workers appear to have sufficient knowledge and experience while performing their tasks?”

Now let’s discuss reporting

As the inspector is viewed as the Owner’s “eyes and ears” on the project, it is critical that the inspector knows, understands, and respects the reporting hierarchy outlined by the Owner.

Regrettably I have seen things go horribly wrong simply because the Owner didn’t provide a definitive reporting hierarchy. As an inspector you absolutely need to know who you are reporting to, therefore in the absence of a reporting hierarchy, ask for one in writing if necessary. After receiving it, make sure you strictly follow it, only reporting to those to whom you have been directed. Again, I have seen many serious problems arise when well-intentioned inspectors have reported to those who were not identified in the reporting hierarchy.

Verbal informal reporting should be done regularly and progressively as the project moves forward. Written formal reporting, i.e. documentation is done at pre-determined intervals throughout the project.

Informal reporting is critical as this provides the inspector an opportunity to add value to the project. Based on your qualified observations you may observe developments that you believe will lead to unnecessary costly rework. If that is the case, be pro-active and report your observations as early as possible so as to reduce the potential for unnecessary re-work. I have experienced significant frustration with inspectors who are content to observe a problem developing and not report it until the work is actually deemed non-compliant. That adds no value to the project. Be pro-active and add value by reporting your observations as early as possible, thereby avoiding unnecessary and costly rework.

Now let’s discuss documentation

As an inspector your deliverable on the project is your documentation. Therefore, it is critical that your documentation is, and timely, accurate, and crystal clear.

When preparing your documentation remember you are preparing it for someone who may have never been on-site and may not have an in-depth understanding of the work. Therefore, before you submit your documentation, proof-read it through the lens of your client. Ask yourself, “If I wasn’t on-site, would this document provide a clear picture of the work”?

You never know where your documentation will end up. While performing work as an Expert Witness for Owners that have experienced pre-mature coating failures, I have reviewed thousands of pages of inspector documentation. This has led me to the conclusion that the CIP program does not place enough emphasis on the importance of documentation. It is so disappointing for me personally to see such poor-quality documentation being submitted by individuals who carry a CIP certification.

What are the most common errors that I see?

1. Unsigned and undated reports
2. Blank spaces not crossed out or initialed
3. Fictious and/or unsubstantiated data inserted
4. No indication of pass/fail criteria
5. None or poor explanatory comments
6. Lack of documentation for rework/repairs
7. No linkage between non-conformance reports and the original inspection reports
8. None or incomplete data on the inspection instruments used i.e. serial #, calibration data
9. No reference to specified standards
10. No reference to the appropriate specification or ITP sections

Regardless of how much experience you have, it is always useful to have your inspection reports reviewed by another qualified inspector. This is particularly true if you are relatively new to the inspection process. However, even as a fully qualified and experienced inspector, I always prefer to have my reports peer-reviewed for accuracy and clarity.

As I see this as a glaring weakness, I have prepared a suite of generic inspection forms that are available for purchase on my website, www.rogersandassociates.ca. The forms can be used as is or be modified as required for a specific project.