Shipboard repair quality inspection SOP
A shipboard repair quality inspection SOP for ship-repair yards: technician self-check, independent QA/QC inspection, conditional NDT verification, class surveyor sign-off, and customer acceptance before the record is filed and closed out.
What the shipboard repair quality inspection SOP process is
A repair reported complete by the workshop and a repair that is actually fit to return to service are two different claims, and the gap between them is where a ship-repair yard's liability lives. The chain of checks in this SOP exists because each participant catches a different class of defect and none of them can substitute for another: the technician's self-check catches gross workmanship issues fast and cheaply, but it carries an obvious interest bias toward passing your own work. Independent QA/QC brings a second, disinterested set of eyes. Non-destructive testing catches what no eye can see at all: weld-root porosity, sub-surface cracking, dimensional drift on a machined fit. Class surveyor attendance is a classification-society requirement that only attaches to specific structural or safety-critical items, not to every job. Customer acceptance is a commercial sign-off, separate from technical conformance, because a shipowner's representative can reject on fit, finish, or a punch-list item that a technical inspection would never flag. Collapse any one of these into another and you lose the specific failure mode it exists to catch.
The cost of skipping a gate shows up later, not immediately, which is exactly what makes it easy to skip under schedule pressure. A repair that goes from self-inspection straight to the customer with no independent QA/QC pass surfaces its defects after the vessel has sailed, as a warranty claim or, worse, an in-service failure. A weld that skips ultrasonic or magnetic-particle testing because 'it looked fine' can hide a defect that only shows up as a crack under sea-state loading months later, with class and insurance consequences neither the yard nor the shipowner wants to unwind after the fact. A class-relevant repair that never gets flagged for surveyor attendance risks the vessel's certificate itself. The rework loop is drawn to route every failure — a failed self-check, a failed QA/QC acceptance decision, a customer rejection — back into the same self-inspection step rather than three different ad hoc redo paths, so a defect always re-enters the same gated sequence instead of getting a shortcut back to the customer.
The People and Workload columns turn this from a checklist into a schedulable job. A technician's self-inspection and rework passes run in the range of an hour or two each; an independent QA/QC inspection and any NDT work run several hours; a class surveyor's time is booked only on the subset of jobs that actually need it, and a customer presentation is booked separately again. Read across a job history, the workload BI panel shows how many hours a repair actually consumed by role and how often it looped back through rework — the two numbers a yard needs to price the next job and to see which repair types are burning QA/QC capacity.
What this flowchart covers
In this template
- The Technician lane: "Repair work reported complete by the workshop" moves into "Technician performs self-inspection against the work order", then the decision "Self-inspection finds the work to specification?" sends a failing check to "Rework before requesting QA inspection", which loops back into the same self-inspection step rather than restarting the job from intake
- The QA/QC inspection lane: "Request QA/QC inspection" hands the job to an independent inspector for "QA/QC inspector examines the repair", followed by the decision "Repair requires measurement or NDT verification?" that separates cosmetic work from weld and structural repairs
- Verification: repairs flagged as weld or structural work run "Carry out NDT (UT/MT) and dimensional measurement" before the acceptance decision "Repair passes QA/QC acceptance criteria?"; failing that decision, or a later rejected customer presentation, calls "Raise defect and return to workshop for rework", which loops all the way back to self-inspection rather than resuming mid-flow
- Approval: "Repair requires class surveyor attendance?" branches class-relevant repairs into "Class surveyor reviews and endorses the repair" before every job, class-relevant or not, reaches "Present repair to customer for acceptance" and the decision "Customer accepts the repair?"
- Closeout: an accepted repair is filed at "File inspection record and measurements against the job" before the chart ends at "Repair inspection closed out"; a rejected repair instead re-enters the defect loop at "Raise defect and return to workshop for rework"
When to use this template
- A vessel's mechanical, electrical or hydraulic repair is reported complete by the workshop and needs a documented, independent QA/QC check before it goes anywhere near the customer
- A weld or other structural repair needs NDT (ultrasonic or magnetic-particle testing) and dimensional measurement recorded before it can be signed off, not just a visual pass
- The classification society requires a surveyor to attend and endorse specific repair items before the vessel can retain class
- The shipowner's own representative inspects the finished repair on-site before the vessel leaves the dry dock or repair berth, and a rejection needs a defined path back into rework rather than an ad hoc redo
- The yard needs a per-job record of who touched a repair and how long each inspection stage took, to feed a workload view across technicians, QA/QC and the class desk
How it works
Match the lanes to who actually signs off in your yard
The lanes here are Technician, QA/QC, Class Surveyor and Customer because that's who has independent authority to accept or reject the work. If your yard adds a separate NDT contractor or a production manager gate, give them their own lane rather than folding them into QA/QC — the People column only tells a useful story if the lane matches the person actually doing the step.
Keep the rework loop pointed at self-inspection, not at intake
Every failure branch — the technician's own check, the QA/QC acceptance decision, and the customer's rejection — routes back to the same self-inspection step rather than back to the start row. A failed repair needs re-checking, not re-scheduling. If you add more failure points, route them the same way so a defect doesn't quietly reset the job's history.
Set the NDT threshold explicitly, don't leave it implied
The decision after QA/QC inspection exists because not every repair needs ultrasonic or magnetic-particle testing, only weld and structural work does. Name your yard's actual threshold in the branch labels so a new QA/QC hire applies the same rule a ten-year veteran would.
Make class surveyor attendance conditional, not universal
Most repairs never see a class surveyor; only the items the classification society designates as class-relevant do. Keep that as its own decision rather than a fixed step in every job, or you'll be booking — and paying for — surveyor time on jobs that never needed it.
Fill in People and Workload as you adapt this
Assign a named owner and an hours estimate to every step before you publish the template internally. The workload BI panel reads those two columns directly, and a step with no person or no hours is invisible to it, not zero.
Frequently asked questions
Why does the flow send a failed repair all the way back to self-inspection instead of straight back to QA/QC?
Because the defect was found downstream, whatever caused it likely also affected the technician's own check. Re-running self-inspection first catches anything the technician can fix in-house before requesting QA/QC time a second time, instead of using an inspector to find the same thing twice.
Does every repair need NDT?
No. Most repairs don't. Weld and structural work goes through ultrasonic or magnetic-particle testing and dimensional measurement; a cosmetic or non-structural repair goes straight to the QA/QC acceptance decision.
When does a class surveyor get involved?
Only when the repair is a class-relevant item under the vessel's classification society rules, the kind of structural or safety-critical work that affects the ship's certificate. That decision branches to bring the surveyor in only for those jobs; everything else goes straight to the customer.
What happens if the customer rejects the finished repair?
A rejection loops back into the same defect path as a failed QA/QC acceptance: it raises a defect, returns the job to the workshop for rework, and re-enters self-inspection. It doesn't create a separate, undocumented redo.
Can this template be used outside ship repair?
The lane structure, a producer, an independent quality check, conditional verification, conditional specialist sign-off, and customer acceptance, fits any shop-floor repair or manufacturing rework process with a regulator-equivalent gate. Rename the lanes and the class surveyor step becomes any specialist inspection your process actually requires.
Where this process fits
In most operations this process follows Shipyard subcontractor onboarding SOP: induction to checkout and hands off to Vessel repair handover SOP: completion review to departure.
It is one step in Ship repair.
Step 2: Dry docking and undocking SOP: block plan to refloat
Step 3: Ship repair project kickoff SOP: specification to work packages
Step 4: Shipyard subcontractor onboarding SOP: induction to checkout
A shipyard subcontractor onboarding SOP for ship repair yards: document and insurance verification, a pass/fail safety induction, access and PPE issue, a hot work or confined space permit decision, supervised work and checkout.
Step 5: Shipboard repair quality inspection SOP You are here
A shipboard repair quality inspection SOP for ship-repair yards: technician self-check, independent QA/QC inspection, conditional NDT verification, class surveyor sign-off, and customer acceptance before the record is filed and closed out.
Step 6: Vessel repair handover SOP: completion review to departure
A shipyard SOP for vessel repair completion and handover: outstanding-item review, testing and commissioning, QA documentation, customer and class inspection, punch-list closure, and undocking, with an owner and workload hours per step.