February 10 - February 14, 2014
Under what circumstances is third-party inspection justified on commercial coating work?
More items for
Bryan Zofkie of Aerco Sandblasting Co. on
March 3, 2014:
I couldn’t agree more with both Mr. Halliwell and Mr. Russell in that QA/QC is the last thing you want to short-change on a coating project. At the same time I also think there is something to be said about the contractor performing the work. If you as the owner have experience with this contractor, and know the contractor is knowledgeable and experienced with the application system as well as QA/QC procedures (much like a third-party inspector would perform), then I am not sure a third party inspector is completely necessary. On the other hand, if this is a new contractor or even a new coating product or procedure for an experienced contractor, I think at a minimum a manufacturer's representative should be involved if a third party inspector is not feasible.
M. Halliwell of Thurber Engineering Ltd. on
February 13, 2014:
I think that any time there could be significant problems (be it financial, time, or just plain challenges to getting the job done) should a coating system fail, then making use of third-party inspection can be justified. I also think Billy is "on the money." If the job could be a problem, then the Owner can pay a bit more now for a QA/QC program or potentially a lot more later if/when the job needs to be redone. I also agree that the third-party inspectors need to be held accountable for their work. If they aren't, then where's the motivation to do a good job?
Billy Russell of D&R COATING INSPECTION on
February 12, 2014:
Please sign in to submit your answer this question
I believe that third-party inspection is justified at a project’s inception to ensure compliance with the specifications, as well as with coating manufacturer’s recommendations in
order to ensure the life of the coating system. That being said, inspection firms should be held liable for their inspection reports to the owner. Bonding
should be required of inspection firms on projects. If there is a coating failure or if claims are filed, inspection firms as well as the contractor should be held accountable. Then the games will end.‘owner’ wants to be assured that he is getting what he is paying for! I use the analogy, you can pay me now, or pay me (usually much more) later. Don't save money on a project by cutting a good QA/QC program!
Current PSF Question
| Submit a PSF Question
| Full PSF Archive