Quality Control/Quality Assurance Program

January 2024

Lloyd Engineering, Inc.

6565 West Loop South, Suite 708
Bellaire, TX 77401
 LLOYD ENGINEERING INC.
QUALITY CONTROL/QUALITY ASSURANCE PROGRAM

TABLE OF CONTENTS

SECTION PAGE

1.0 Objective .................................................................................................................... 1

2.0 Definitions ................................................................................................................. 1

3.0 Purpose ..................................................................................................................... 1

4.0 Responsibilities ........................................................................................................ 1
4.1 Department Head............................................................................................... 1
4.2 Project Manager ................................................................................................ 2
4.3 Project Team...................................................................................................... 2
5.0 Quality Control/Quality Assurance Procedures ....................................................... 2
5.1 General Requirements ...................................................................................... 2
5.2 Quality Control Milestones ............................................................................... 3
5.3 Approval of Final Drawings .............................................................................. 6
5.4 Documentation of Quality Control Procedures ................................................ 7

APPENDICES

A Preparation and Review of Calculations

B Preparation and Review of CAD

Drawings C Project Quality Control

Checklists

QC/QA Program 2
LLOYD ENGINEERING, INC.
QUALITY CONTROL/QUALITY ASSURANCE PROGRAM

1.0 OBJECTIVE

The purpose of this plan is to provide guidelines for use in preparing project-specific quality
control/quality assurance (QC/QA) plans for each LEI project. Project-specific plans shall
identify the level and type of checking to be performed, who is responsible for the project QC and
QA, and shall establish a budget and schedule for performing QC and QA. The plan shall
include any client required quality control measures that are more stringent than these
guidelines. The overriding objective is that QC/QA shall be performed by LEI staff and shall
not be dependent on the client’s efforts to check our work product for errors, omissions, and
quality.

2.0 DEFINITIONS

QC is the detailed checking and review of project documents or work that is performed at
appropriate intervals throughout the project. QA is the systematic monitoring of the QC
function to assure that adequate resources are being allocated and that the QC plan is being
followed. The QC/QA process requires that there be documentation to demonstrate that
QC/QA has been completed.

3.0 PURPOSE

QC/QA is the process to assure that the work performed for clients meets stated requirements
and is consistent with the standard of care for the consulting engineering industry. In this
context, QC/QA means conformance with the client contract and client-specified requirements
satisfies applicable codes, regulatory requirements, and industry standard practices, and
BERGER/ABAM internal practices and standards.
Integral to the QC/QA plan is the identification of the right approach to the project, with the
client's needs and interests foremost. Tried and proven solutions are preferred over state-of-
the-art design in most cases. However, where there is direct benefit to the client, a more
elaborate, innovative, or sophisticated approach may be warranted. For the latter case, the
QC/QA plan shall reflect the greater uncertainty that these approaches represent over the
tried and proven technology.

4.0 RESPONSIBILITIES

4.1 Department Head

The department head is responsible to the firm for QA, and has the authority necessary to
assure that the deliverables are of adequate quality so that the client receives deliverables that
meet requirements. The department head approves the project QC plan developed by the
project manager and ensures that it is carried out. The department head is responsible for
performing QA audits. QA audits shall be performed on a random basis each quarter, with a
goal of 25 percent of the active projects audited. Major projects lasting several quarters
should have at least one audit prior to final delivery of the finished product.

QC/QA Program 3
Projects with a higher degree of complexity or unique, one-of-a-kind projects shall also be audited
prior to delivery.
4.2 Project Manager

The project manager is responsible for QC on individual projects. The project manager, working with
the project team, develops the QC procedures for the particular project using the guidelines
contained within this document. QC tasks should be considered one of the key tasks in the project
work plan. It should be staffed, budgeted, and scheduled accordingly. The project manager is
responsible for ensuring that all the deliverables are of adequate quality before they go out the door.
The project manager defines the QC plan and requirements for each project as part of the proposal to
the client and includes this with the opening a project account (completion of the A-sheet). The project
manager may perform the QC function on his/her project or delegate the QC function to another
qualified individual. The A-sheet shall identify the person performing the QC, as well as the budget
designated for QC. The A-sheet and project QC plan shall be maintained in the project manual or
file. Documentation of the QC activities shall also be contained in the project manual or file or
identified where available (i.e., full-size, yellow-line drawings).

4.3 Project Team

Each individual on the project team is responsible for the quality of their work and should not
assume that others will find their mistakes. Checkers should assume that there are mistakes and
should be thorough in trying to find them. Every team member is responsible for understanding the
QC/QA plan for the project and should request one if it is not given to them.

5.0 QUALITY CONTROL/QUALITY ASSURANCE PROCEDURES

5.1 General Requirements

The type of work performed by LEI varies with the departments (market sectors) of the
company. In addition, projects within each department can vary significantly in both size and
complexity. Therefore, QC requirements for individual projects are expected to vary, and project-
specific QC plans are needed to address the unique situation presented by each project. However,
the QC procedures given below should be incorporated to the extent applicable into a project-specific
QC plan. Unique characteristics for a given project within a particular department should be
included in a project-specific QC plan.
Project-specific QC plans should follow the same general outline as the QC plan given below. These
QC procedures are intended for the development of plans, specifications, and cost estimates (final
design) (PS&E) projects, which represent the level of technical services with greatest risk potential to
LEI and to our clients (a constructed project). The range of projects can include the following.
1. PS&E for structural work.

2. PS&E for civil work.

3. PS&E for structural and civil work combined.

4. PS&E that includes any of the above with specialty sub consultants.

QC/QA Program 4
 5. Projects that culminate with reports or cost estimates. These may include preliminary
drawings. A special category is type, size, and location (TS&L) reports for bridge
projects.

6. Projects that involve site condition assessments, including underwater inspection.

7. Feasibility or master planning projects.

8. Concept studies.

9. Construction administration or management projects.

10. Projects requiring public involvement or permitting.

11. Design/build projects (a form of PS&E).

12. Construction engineering projects (working directly for a contractor).

5.2 Quality Control Milestones

QC should begin at the start of the project with specific reviews conducted at appropriate
intervals during the project to minimize rework and costly revisions to the project
documents. For example, the analysis approach should be verified prior to embarking on the
work. The analysis procedures/models should be checked early in the project so that a large
amount of subsequent calculation and design effort is not based upon a faulty or unnecessary
analysis. Similarly, it is of minimal benefit to do a final plan and specifications review if the
design and drawings are not complete.
The following QC milestones have been selected as the critical points during the design
process where a review of the project design is most likely to be effective.
1. Project start-up
2. Preliminary (15 percent) PS&E design review
3. Interim (60 percent) PS&E design review
4. Prefinal (100 percent) PS&E design review
5. Final PS&E review (ready for bid and construction)

Although these are representative of PS&E projects, other projects will have common elements.
For example, a project culminating in a report would likely have milestones consisting of
project start-up, prefinal submittal, and final submittal.
These milestones define a particular level of completion of the project and do not necessarily
coincide with the status of the budget for the project or the client’s required submittal
milestones. The submittal intervals should be adjusted to coincide with client-required
submittal milestones.
5.2.1 Project Start-Up
The primary QC/QA activity at project start-up is to establish the QC plan for the project
and make sure that all team members understand their roles. A project-specific QC plan
should be developed early in the project preferably before major work efforts are initiated. A
project schedule should be developed that allots time for the internal QC process, including
time to respond to and/or incorporate review comments prior to completion of submittals. A
budget for QC functions shall be identified.

QC/QA Program 5
5.2.2 Preliminary (15 Percent) PS&E Design Review

The preliminary design review should be performed by the engineer who will be stamping
the plans for the project and the QC manager (if they are different individuals), except for
constructability reviews that may be performed by others not on the project team and/or
construction experts outside of the firm.
The purpose of the preliminary design review is to determine the following.

1. That all the client’s functional/architectural requirements have been included. If not,
what are the consequences with regard to the engineering. It is important to obtain
client approval of these items before start of detailed design.

2. For structural projects, that the framing plan for the structure has been completed and
that all load paths requiring analyses and design have been identified in the analysis
plan for the project. That preliminary design calculations have been prepared to
arrive at sizes of all the critical elements of the structure. For civil design projects, that
all geometric constraints have been identified, including property lines, right-of-way
lines, clearances, and elevations; all utilities accounted for, including storm
drainage, sanitary sewer, waterlines, and other underground and overhead utilities;
and site grading features defined, including erosion control. The preliminary design
calculations have been prepared to arrive at sizes of conveyance lines and major
earthwork quantities. Where other disciplines are involved, that they are coordinated
with the civil and structural elements.
3. That at least one feasible method and sequence of construction has been developed and
shown on the drawings where necessary. It is necessary to show the method and
sequence if it affects the design of the structure or civil project feature. In some
instances, it may be necessary to specify or design the critical aspects of temporary
facilities required to construct the project. It may be necessary to obtain expertise
outside of the firm to perform this review.
4. That an analysis plan has been developed, that the analysis model input has been
checked, that the model agrees with the plans and construction sequence, and is ready
to be used for design.

5. That a complete drawing list has been established for the project and that each
drawing has an engineer assigned to it who will be responsible for the design work on
that drawing and be responsible for initialing the drawings as “designed by” once the
drawing is complete.
6. That outline specifications have been prepared to identify any and all specifications
that may be required.

7. That an updated project cost estimate has been prepared and that the projected cost is
still within the client’s budget constraints. The client needs to be notified at this point
in the project if costs appear to exceed the budget and given some option for remedial
action (i.e., reduce the scope of the project or obtain additional funding).
8. Those standard details to be used have been identified and are appropriate and up-to-
date for use in the project.
5.2.3 Interim (60 Percent) PS&E Design Review

The purpose of the interim design review is to provide an opportunity to validate that the
project is on track in terms of meeting project objectives and criteria. A critical aspect to this
review is an assessment whether the level of completion of project documents is consistent
with the schedule expectations and available design budget. Although these later elements
are not quality elements, the lack of time or budget can have a significant impact on
achieving the quality requirements for the project. The following are among elements that
need to be verified.
1. Drawing organization is logical and the presentation is clear. Verify that drawings
have sufficient detail to provide a meaningful review and that they still meet project
requirements. Critical elements that require client input or confirmation, such as
phased or staged work in operating facilities, are clearly defined so that the client can
review and confirm the approach. Also, verify that the drawings between the various
disciplines are coordinated.
2. The majority of calculations should be near completion. At a minimum, calculations
should be spot checked to verify that the correct approach has been used and that the
results of the calculations are represented in the drawings. Order-of-magnitude checks
using simplified hand procedures should be performed.

3. Individual specification sections should be started for the more extensive or critical
elements of the project. Less critical sections may remain in outline form. An index of
the specification sections and assigned preparers should be identified.
4. The cost estimate has been updated to reflect the higher level of design. The cost
estimate and measurement and payment items should be coordinated.

5. Review comments from the preliminary design submittal have been included or
rationales provide if they are not included.

5.2.4 Prefinal (100 Percent) PS&E Design Review

The pre-final PS&E design review is to be performed by the project team and shall result in
the completion of the design effort. The 100 percent review shall consist of the following
activities.
1. Review of all calculations should be completed (see Appendix A for calculation review
procedures) and the calculation checker(s) should follow up on all his/her checks to
ensure that all discrepancies between the designer(s) and checker(s) have been
resolved. The calculation checker(s) should review the plans for the project to ensure
that the approved results of all design calculations have been accurately shown on the
drawings. The checking of calculations can take several forms: a complete yellow-line
check, a detailed independent calculation, or an order-of-magnitude or reasonableness
hand calculation check.
2. The design team should do a complete (sheet-by-sheet) coordination review to verify
that cross referencing of details is correct, that the interfaces between design
components are consistent, and that all sheets are presentable for submittal to and
review by the client.
3. The engineer responsible for stamping the drawings should perform a general review
of the 100 percent plans and specifications for completeness and reasonableness of the

QC/QA Program 7
 design. In addition, the QC manager should perform the final QC check for the project,
which shall consist of a review of the completed PS&Es and calculations. The purpose
of this review is to ensure that the plans and specifications are consistent with the
design calculation and project requirements and that they are clear, concise, and fit for
construction.
4. Review comments from the interim design submittal have been included or rationale
provide if they are not included.
5.2.5 Final PS&E Review

The final quality control check for the project shall consist of a review by the QC manager
that any comments by the client to the prefinal documents have been incorporated or a
satisfactory response why they have not been incorporated are provided.
The final PS&E review should be performed by the QC manager, or his designated
representative (Grade V engineer or higher, with a minimum of 10 years of experience). The
following is a list of specific concerns to be addressed during the final PS&E review.

1. Plan Review

Confirm that an appropriate design concept has been used and that the method of
construction is clearly defined on the plans, where appropriate. Review details for
clarity, completeness, and constructability. Perform detailed checks to assure all
geometry, critical dimensions, and elevations are correct. Check that drawing intent
and terminology are consistent with specifications.
2. Specification Review

Verify that the appropriate specification format has been used (client dependent).
Verify that all referenced standard specifications are the latest edition. Assure that all
applicable technical items have been addressed, and that any general sections required
are included. Verify completeness of bid sheet and review contracting method (i.e.,
lump sum, unit price, additive alternates, or combination of above). Perform detailed
check of technical items. Assure proprietary items are properly addressed (varies with
client). Coordinate terminology with drawings and cost estimate.
3. Cost Estimate Review

Verify that an appropriate format has been used and that all relevant data, such as
contract number and job title, is on the cost estimate forms (client dependent).
Validate cost sources. Verify quantities and unit prices, and perform a check of
extensions.
5.3 Approval of Final Drawings

All drawings shall be initialed manually by the designer, the drafter, and the QC manager
prior to being stamped by the engineer responsible for the project. Electronic initials are
acceptable if a manually initialed drawing list is provided to the CAD Department prior to
plotting the drawings.
Designed By: The engineer assigned design responsibility for the information shown on the
drawing.

QC/QA Program 8
 Drawn By: The drafter responsible for the majority of drafting on the drawing.

Checked By: The engineer responsible for checking of the analysis and calculations
associated with the information shown on the drawing or by the project engineers or lead
design engineer as appropriate for miscellaneous details.
Approved By: The QC manager or his designated representative responsible for the final
review of the final PS&E package.
5.4 Documentation of Quality Control Procedures

Documentation of QC procedures should consist of the following.

1. Documentation of the preliminary PS&E review shall consist of bound check copies of
the analysis plan for the project, outline specifications, cost estimate, and bound check
prints of the preliminary drawings.

2. Documentation of the interim PS&E review should consist of a set of checked and
initialed design calculations for the project, independent calculations, or order-of-
magnitude check. Calculations should be prepared and initialed by the checker(s) as
described in Appendix A, Preparation and Review of Calculations. All independent
calculations and check copies prepared in the process of checking should be bound
separately from the original design calculations and filed in the project files until the
project is constructed or as required by the client. Copies of review specifications
check prints, and cost estimate should also be maintained until the project is
constructed or as required by the client.
3. Documentation of the prefinal PS&E review should consist of a set of checked and
initialed design calculations for the project. Calculations should be prepared and
initialed by the checker(s) as described in Appendix A, Preparation and Review of
Calculations. All independent calculations and check copies prepared in the process of
checking should be bound separately from the original design calculations and filed in
the project files until the project is constructed or as required by the client. Copies of
review specifications check prints, and cost estimate should also be maintained until the
project is constructed or as required by the client.
4. Documentation of the final PS&E review shall consist of bound check prints of the final
drawings and a bound check copy of the project specifications and cost estimate.

The completion of aforementioned QC reviews should be documented by completing the

checklists shown in the attachments to this plan or other suitable checklists developed for
the project specific QC Plan. Prior to submitting documents for review, the designer will
perform a check for content, clarity, completeness, and accuracy. Following this, a set of
documents annotated as check documents should be provided to the QC manager. All review
documents should be annotated in the manner described as follows.
1. The QC manager or his/her designated reviewer should perform their review of the
applicable documents at the designated development stage.
2. The QC manager or the reviewer should mark all revisions in red and general
instructions in black. The QC manager or reviewer should sign and date the
documents and return them to the designer for back-checking.

QC/QA Program 9
 3. The designer will review the QC manager’s or reviewer’s marks on the document. The
designer should place a green check mark near each of the red-marked changes if
he/she agrees that the document will be changed.

4. If there is disagreement between the designer and reviewer regarding the marked
changes, the two should meet to discuss a resolution. If a revised solution is reached,
the original marked revisions should be crossed out and the resolved change should be
shown in red. The resolved change should be initialed in red by the reviewer and
green by the designer.
5. The revised document reflecting the agreed-to revisions should be stapled to the front
of the document containing the marks and initials.

The aforementioned procedure applies equally to any documents that are submitted to the
client (drawings, specifications, cost estimates, reports, etc.)

QA consists of verifying that the QC procedures for a given project have been followed and
documented. It is the department head’s responsibility to perform the QA function. This
should be accomplished by reviewing the QC documentation at prescribed project milestones
to ensure that QC procedures have been carried out in a timely fashion.

QA reviews should be documented by the completion of the attached or similar form to be

initialed by the department head at appropriate milestones during the project.

END OF SECTION

QC/QA Program 10
 APPENDIX A
PREPARATION AND REVIEW OF CALCULATIONS

PURPOSE AND SCOPE

To establish standardized requirements for the preparation, review, and control of manual and
computerized engineering and design calculations.

GENERAL REQUIREMENTS
Calculations should be prepared such that the analysis can be understood by an individual
competent in the subject discipline without recourse to the preparer of the calculation. Calculations,
including attachments, shall be legibly documented in a form suitable for reproduction.

ORGANIZATION AND PRESENTATION

A sequential page number and an appropriate calculation subject should identify each calculation
page. All pages shall be numbered such that the calculation may be put back together if mixed up
with other calculations.
The calculation should contain the following elements.

1. Table of Contents – optional, for use with lengthy calculations.

2. Objective – a statement of the problem or question to be resolved (required only if title of

calculation is not sufficient).

3. Method – a description of the method used in the analysis.

4. Assumptions – clearly state any assumptions.

5. Computer Models – graphics should be provided of all computer models that illustrate all
member connectivities and boundary conditions.

6. Inputs – identify inputs used and the source of the inputs.

7. References – codes, standards, other documents, and computer programs used.

8. Calculation – the analysis or computations performed. If standard designs are used, a

photocopy of the standard design should be included with appropriate notes (CRSI standard
footing designs, for example).
9. Results – the output of the calculation.

10. Attachments – material unique to the calculation that cannot be referenced in a convenient
manner or is not easily retrievable from a separate file.
If a computer program is used, identify in the reference section of the calculation the program title
and release or version number. Attachments can be numbered as part of the calculation or
numbered separately.

QC/QA Program C-11

PREPARATION AND REVIEW

Calculations should be checked by individual(s) competent in the subject discipline to ensure the
technical adequacy of the methods, assumptions, input, and results. The checker of the calculations
must have experience and technical knowledge equivalent to or greater than the originator of the
calculations unless the originator is at least a Grade IV engineer and has a minimum of five years of
experience in the design of similar structures.
All structural design calculations should be prepared and reviewed in accordance with the following
two-step procedure.

1. Structural Analysis

a. Review the geotechnical reports and parameters, and the design criteria.

b. Develop a viable construction procedure and sequence.

c. Develop an analysis and design plan for the structure. The designer (calculation
originator) will prepare a summary of the analysis plan, design parameters, and all
underlying assumptions.

d. Set up structural and mathematical models for structural analysis taking into
consideration the structural boundary conditions, soil parameters, and loading
conditions.
e. Step (d) will be reviewed by the checker. The designer and checker shall reconcile all
differences and the resultant reconciled set of calculations will then be used for input
data for subsequent computer analysis.

f. The input data (echo), which is contained within the output data, should be checked
independently by the designer and the checker. The checker then signs off the original
set of calculations by signing each page of the originating engineer’s calculations or by
signing a cover sheet indicating approval of the entire calculation.
2. Review and Checking of Analysis Results

The results of the analysis should be checked prior to use in design. As a minimum, the
designer should check the results by manually diagramming reactions, as well as shear and
moment diagrams for a representative set of loadings to demonstrate that statics are satisfied
and that the loading, shear, and moment diagrams are close with reasonable accuracy.
The shear and moment plots should be generated using the reactions determined by the
analysis and the loadings used as input. Shear and moment values taken directly from the
analysis should then be compared to the manually prepared plots. The checker should review
and sign off on the results of the analysis check by signing each page of the originating
engineer’s calculations or by signing a cover sheet indicating approval of the entire analysis
review calculation.

DESIGN CALCULATIONS
1. If, following computer analysis, design calculations are performed by computer, and then only
one set of computer-generated design calculations, prepared by designer and reviewed by
checker

QC/QA Program C-12

 for completeness, is required. If manual design calculations are required following computer
analysis, then the checker should perform a check of the manually prepared calculations. The
checker should sign off on the results of the analysis by signing each page of the originating
engineer’s calculations or by signing a cover sheet indicating approval of the entire calculation.
2. Spreadsheets should be considered a manual calculation.

3. Independent calculations should be prepared by the checker for critical and non-typical
calculations such as strut and tie models for concrete connections. The two independently
developed designs will be jointly reviewed by the original designer and checker and the
differences reconciled. The checker then signs off the original set of manual calculations as
described above.

ANALYSIS PLAN REQUIREMENTS

Every analysis plan should consist of one to two written pages describing the approach to be used for
obtaining design forces for all components for the structure and the method of using the forces for
design computation. As a minimum, the plan should contain the following.

1. A brief description of the gravity load resisting system.

2. A brief description of the lateral load resisting system.

3. A description of the type of structural model(s) to be used to analyze for gravity and lateral
loads. The program(s) to be used for modeling should be identified.

4. A list of all structural components and the role of each as part of the gravity load resisting
system and as part of the lateral load resisting system. Both primary and secondary roles
should be identified. If more than one model is being used to design the structure, the list
should identify the model(s) from which design forces will be obtained.
5. A list of all areas of the structure that will require a strut-and-tie approach to analysis and
design.

END OF SECTION

QC/QA Program C-13

 APPENDIX B
PREPARATION AND REVIEW OF CAD DRAWINGS

PURPOSE AND SCOPE

To establish standardized requirements for the preparation, review, and control of computer
prepared design drawings.

GENERAL REQUIREMENTS
It is the responsibility of the CAD technician to ensure that quality is maintained throughout the life
of the project. To accomplish this, the project technician assigned to the project must be involved
from the beginning so that client standards are set up before any CAD work is started.

PREPARATION AND REVIEW

Once the project is underway, each technician should constantly review his/her own work. The
engineer’s sketches or “red-line markups” should be highlighted in yellow as the work is done. This
will ensure that all the changes/additions are made completely and accurately. Each plot (check
print) should be reviewed for errors by the technician before returning it to the engineer.
At each client submittal, the project CAD technician should review a complete set of drawings
before the package is sent out to the client.

END OF SECTION

QC/QA Program C-14

PROJECT QUALITY CONTROL PLAN SUMMARY CHECKLIST

Project __________________________ Project No.

Client ___________________________ Project Manager

For each project milestone the Project Quality Control Manager (QCM) should initial and date at the
completion of each QC requirement.
PROJECT MILESTONES

ITEM START-UP 35% 90% FINAL

QCM
EXECUTION
PLAN Date

QCM
ANALYSIS
PLAN Date

QCM QCM
ENGINEERING
CALCULATIONS Date Date

QCM QCM QCM

PLANS REVIEW
Date Date Date

QCM QCM QCM

SPECIFICATION
REVIEW Date Date Date

QCM QCM QCM

COST ESTIMATE
REVIEW Date Date Date

QC/QA Program C-15

CHECKLIST FOR QC REVIEW OF SMALL
PROJECTS

O Lloyd Engineering, Inc. Prime O Lloyd Engineering, Inc. Sub

Project _______________________________________ Project No.

Client ____________________________________ Project Manager

Prime

REVIEW ITEMS
The following items should be checked by the reviewer, after the design is essentially complete and
has been checked by the designer. [MI indicates a mandatory item.

[MI ___ Conformance of Submittal Package with Client contract

 All specified deliverables included

 Client program or criteria appropriately addressed

[MI ___ Adequacy of Work

 Design is per client’s functional and cost requirements
 Design is per applicable codes and regulations
 Concept as drawn and specified is constructible
 Calculations are clear, complete and checked
 Drawings or sketches are clear, complete and checked
 Specifications are clear, complete and checked
 Estimate is realistic, complete and checked

[MI ___ Format of Submittal Package

 Letter of transmittal and specifications prepared by Word Processing

 Drawings and estimate of professional appearance
 Drawings and specifications sealed

REMARKS

Reviewer (QC Manager or Designee) Date

QC/QA Program C-16

CHECKLIST FOR QC REVIEW OF REPORTS

0 Lloyd Engineering, Inc. Prime 0 Lloyd Engineering, Inc Sub

Project ________________________________________ Project No.

Client Reviewer

REVIEW ITEMS

For each submittal, the reviewer should check each of the listed items for conformance to project
requirements. Line out items inappropriate to job size or type. Circle items checked. Add special
items. [M] indicates a mandatory item.

CHECKLIST FOR QC REVIEW OF LARGE PROJECTS

ITEM/SUBMITTAL START-UP CONCEPT 35% 95% FINAL
[M] ___ EXECUTION PLAN
Scope 0
Schedule and Budget 0
QA Requirements 0
[M] ___ BASIS OF DESIGN
Functional Requirements 0
Codes and Regulations 0
Form of Deliverables 0
Client Concurrence 0 0
[M] ___ DRAWINGS
Criteria Addressed 0 0 0
Appropriate Concept 0 0
Geometry Defined 0 0
Interfaces Defined 0 0
Clear and Complete 0 0 0
Constructible 0 0
Detailed Check Done 0 0 0
Coordination Check Done 0 0
Seals 0
[M] ___ CALCULATIONS
Codes, Regulations Satisfied 0 0
Nonstandard Problems 0 0
Answers Reasonable 0 0
Detailed Check Done 0 0
[M] ___ SPECIFICATIONS
Client-Approved Format 0 0
Contract Type (LS, Unit) 0 0
Specific Condition/Boiler Plate 0 0
Trouble Spots 0 0
QC/QA Program C-17
 CHECKLIST FOR QC REVIEW OF LARGE PROJECTS
ITEM/SUBMITTAL START-UP CONCEPT 35% 95% FINAL
Proprietary Materials, Equipment 0 0
Construction Method 0
Clear, Complete, Fair 0
Protects Client, LEI 0
Coordinated with Drawings 0
Detailed Tech Proof Done 0
Seals 0
Client-Approved Format
[M] ___COST ESTIMATE
Estimate Type 0
Cost Sources 0 0
Quantities, Unit Prices 0 0 0
Within Client Budget 0 0 0
Extensions Checked 0 0 0 0
[M} ___ GEOTECH/ENVIRO SUB
Criteria Followed 0
Results Reasonable 0
Recommendations Incorporated 0
[M] ___MECHANICAL SUB
Criteria Followed 0
Results Reasonable 0 0 0
Drawings Coordinated 0 0 0
Specifications Coordinated 0 0 0
[M] ___ ELECTRICAL SUB
Criteria Followed 0
Results Reasonable 0 0 0
Drawings Coordinated 0 0 0
Specifications Coordinated 0 0 0
INDEPENDENT REVIEW
Drawings by
Calculations by
Specifications by
Cost estimate by

Meets Client Expectations

[M] Based on my review(s), I feel that START-UP was properly done and that the
CONCEPT ____ 35% ____ 95% _____ FINAL ____ (initial as each review is made) submittal meets
the project requirements is of acceptable quality.

COMMENTS

Reviewer (QC Manager) Date Signed Last Revised

QC/QA Program C-18
CHECKLIST FOR QC REVIEW OF REPORTS

Project ________________________________________ Project No.

Report Writer _______________________________ Word Processor

REVIEW ITEMS
The following items should be checked by the reviewer [M] indicates a mandatory item.

[M] ___ Conformance with Client Contract

 Scope of Work
 Definition of Report Deliverable
 Electronic Format Deliverable Required

[M] ___ Presence and Adequacy of Mandatory Report Contents

 Table of Contents
 Executive Summary
 Authorization
 Objectives
 Introduction
 Description of Work
 Results
 Conclusions and Recommendations (Professional Opinion)
 Attachments (Tables, Figures, and Drawings)

[M] ___ Adequacy of Mandatory Report Format

Complies with Publication Standard
 LEI Standard
 Client Standard
 Prepared by Word Processing
 Proofed by Writer and Word Processing
 Professional Presentation (Graphics, Figures, Calculations, etc.)
 Covers (All Required Elements Included)
 Letter of Transmittal
 Signatures and Seal (if required)
Comments

Accepted

Reviewer (QC Manager) Date

QC/QA Program C-19
PROJECT CONSTRUCTABILITY REVIEW CHECKLIST

Project ________________________________________ Project No.

Reviewer Date

Review performed on: 0 35% 0 65% 0 90% 0 100% Documents

 Yes 0 No Facility can be constructed from the drawings as shown. If No, provide
comments on missing elements or elements to be revised.
Comments:

Add supplemental sheets as required.

 Yes 0 No All details shown have been reviewed and are judged to be constructible. If
No, provide comments regarding details that should be revised.

Comments:

Add supplemental sheets as required.

 Yes 0 No Materials, tolerances, and procedures shown are available, achievable, and
reasonable in the construction industry. If No, provide comments regarding
details that should be revised.
Comments:

Add supplemental sheets as required.

Reviewed by
Signature Date

QC/QA Program C-20

INTERNAL PROJECT QUALITY AUDIT CHECKLIST

Project _______________________________________ Project No._____________________

Proe
jctManager ___________________________________________________________________

Status of Project at Time of Audit: 0 35% 0 65% 0 90% 0 100% 0 Const. Complete

Findings

 Yes 0 No Project Notebook Complete

 Yes 0 No Quality Reviews Documented

Calculations
Drawings
Specifications
Estimates

 Yes 0 No Passed Quality Audit

 Yes 0 No Quality System Discrepancy Report Prepared (if yes list

numbers) and
attach Reports.

 Yes 0 No Additional audit of this project is necessary at future quarterly audits.

Comments

By: _____________
Department Head

QC/QA Program C-21

QUALITY SYSTEM DISCREPANCY REPORT

Project ________________________________________ Project No.

Project Manager ____________________________ Discrepancy No.

______________________________________________________

Audit Date:

Chairman of Quality System Committee:

Description of Discrepancy:

Correction is required for this project:

0 Within 2 Weeks 0 In Advance of Next Quarterly Audit

Correction is Required for Future Projects:

0 In Advance of Next Quarterly Audit

Acknowledged
Signature Project Manager Date

Acknowledged that discrepancy has been corrected.

Signature Department Head Date

Lessons Learned:

QC/QA Program C-22