Association of Professional Engineers

and Geoscientists of British Columbia

Quality
Management Guidelines

Documented Field Reviews

During Implementation or Construction

Questions regarding the APEGBC Quality Management Guidelines

may be directed to:

Lina Bowser
Manager, Quality Assurance Programs
Direct Tel: 604.412.4862
E-mail: oqm@[Link]

200 - 4010 Regent Street, Burnaby, BC V5C 6N2

p. 604.430.8035 | f. 604.430.8085 | 1.888.430.8035 | [Link]
Documented Field Reviews During Implementation or Construction

Table of Contents

1.0 Definitions 2
2.0 Purpose and Scope 4
3.0 Guidelines for Practice 7
3.1 What is the Purpose of a Field Review? 7
3.2 What are Field Reviews not Intended to do? 7
3.3 How Often Should Field Reviews Take Place? 8
3.4 When Should Field Reviews Occur? 9
3.5 What do Field Reviews Include? 10
3.6 Who is Permitted to Carryout Field Reviews? 10
3.7 What if the APEGBC Professional of Record is
Not Engaged for Field Reviews? 11
3.8 How Should out of Province-Engineered
and Supplied Equipment be Handled? 12
3.9 How Should Issues Found in Field Reviews
be Addressed? 12
3.10 What Field Review Records must be
Created and Kept? 13
4.0 References and Related Documents 15

1
1.0 DEFINITIONS
1.1 The following definitions are specific to this Quality Management Guideline
(QM Guideline). All references in the text to these terms are italicized.

Act
Engineers and Geoscientists Act, R.S.B.C. 1996, c. 116, as amended.

APEGBC
Association of Professional Engineers and Geoscientists of the Province of
British Columbia.

APEGBC professional(s)
Professional engineers, professional geoscientists, licensees, including limited licensees,
licensed to practice by APEGBC.

APEGBC professional of record

The professional engineer, professional geoscientist or licensee, including limited
licensee with the lowest level of direct professional responsibility for the engineering
or geoscience work and any related engineering or geoscience documents produced,
and whose seal appears on the documents; a test of “direct professional responsibility”
is the ability of that APEGBC professional to alter or revise the engineering or geoscience
content in the master documents.

Bylaws
The bylaws of the APEGBC made under the Act.

domestic projects
Engineering or geoscience projects or work located in Canada and for which an APEGBC
professional meets the registration requirements for the engineering or geoscience
regulatory body having jurisdiction.

field review
The reviews conducted at the site of the implementation or construction of the
engineering or geoscience work by an APEGBC professional or his or her subordinate
acting under his or her direct supervision, that the APEGBC professional in his or her
professional discretion considers necessary to ascertain whether the implementation
or construction of the work substantially complies in all material respects with
the engineering or geoscience concepts or intent reflected in the engineering or
geoscience documents prepared for the work.

2
Documented Field Reviews During Implementation or Construction

For example, field reviews are defined in the BC Building Code to mean those reviews of
the work
(a) at a project site of a development to which a building permit relates, and
(b) where applicable, at fabrication locations where building components are
fabricated for use at the project site

that a registered professional in his or her professional discretion considers necessary

to ascertain whether the work substantially complies in all material respects with the
plans and supporting documents prepared by the registered professional for which
the building permit is issued.

field reviewer
Unless another qualified party is selected by the client, owner or employer to carry
out field review, the field reviewer is the APEGBC professional of record, or an individual
under the direct supervision of the APEGBC professional of record, who carries out the
field review.

organization
Any firm, corporation, partnership, government agency, sole proprietor or other type of
legal entity that employs APEGBC professionals and provides products and/or services
requiring the application of professional engineering and/or professional geoscience.

record (documentation)
Any document that is evidence of engineering or geoscience-related activities, events
or transactions, or is evidence that APEGBC professionals have met their professional
and contractual obligations.

3
2.0 Purpose and Scope
2.1 APEGBC Bylaw 14 states:

(b) Members and licensees shall establish and maintain documented

quality management processes for their practices, which shall
include, as a minimum:

(3) documented field reviews by, or under the direct supervision

of, members or licensees, of their domestic projects during
implementation or construction;

2.2 Proper and appropriate field reviews are fundamental to upholding the APEGBC Code of
Ethics, which requires that all APEGBC professionals hold paramount the safety, health
and welfare of the public, the protection of the environment and promote health and
safety within the workplace.

2.3 As required by the Bylaws, APEGBC professionals must meet the field review
requirements for all domestic engineering and geoscience works or projects for which
they are responsible. Refer to Section 3.6 of this QM Guideline for further information
on who is permitted to carry out field reviews.

2.4 This QM Guideline is intended to assist APEGBC professionals in establishing and

maintaining a documented process for field reviews that meets Bylaw 14(b)(3) by
addressing the following:
• purpose and extent of field reviews;
• what is included and not included in a field review;
• when field reviews should occur;
• who is qualified to conduct a field review; and
• how to carry out, document and address issues identified in field reviews.

2.5 To comply with the Bylaws, APEGBC professionals must have established, or have
access to, a documented quality management process that includes performing or
directly supervising and documenting field reviews of their domestic projects during
implementation or construction.

2.6 A documented process is one that has been thought out and reduced to writing in
suitable form. The process may be captured in a written procedure, process flowchart,
checklists, forms to record field reviews, or other documentation developed to suit the
nature of the work undertaken by APEGBC professionals.

4
Documented Field Reviews During Implementation or Construction

2.7 These obligations apply to APEGBC professionals working in their professional capacity
in all sectors when their work applies to or is used in any of the following:
•o ngoing engineering and geoscience work;
•p rojects with a defined start and finish;
• products and services requiring the application of professional engineering or
professional geoscience;
• engineering or geoscience deliverables such as reports, drawings, specifications or
other deliverables;
• implementation or use of engineering and geoscience work as may be found in a
manufacturing facility, technology company, operations or utilities work
• construction or installation of engineering or geoscience work
• implementation or construction carried out by others
• implementation or construction being carried out by the APEGBC professional’s
organization’s own forces
• engineering or geoscience work carried out for use internally by the APEGBC
professional’s organization
• engineering or geoscience work carried out for others

2.8 Terminology used across sectors may vary from terminology used in this QM Guideline.
However, the intent and obligations of APEGBC professionals acting in their professional
capacity in all sectors remain the same. Sectors may include, but are not limited to:
• aerospace • high technology • natural resources
• construction • light and heavy • operations
• consulting industry • research and
• education • manufacturing development
• government • marine engineering • utilities
• healthcare and naval architecture

2.9 The following examples may assist in illustrating how field reviews may occur and what
they may include, in a project situation and in a situation involving ongoing work:

• Example 1 - consulting: Engineering or geoscience documents are prepared by, or

under the direct supervision of, an APEGBC professional of record, the work is put out to
tender and a contractor is selected to construct the work.
º In this instance, the APEGBC professional of record or subordinate carries out
periodic field reviews to confirm that the construction conforms to the engineering
or geoscience concepts or intent reflected in the engineering or geoscience
documents prepared for the work.

5
 • Example 2 - manufacturing or technology: A process or program is engineered by
the APEGBC professional of record in a manufacturing or technology organization. The
organization implements the process or program using internal or external resources
to create an end product or end result.
º In this instance, the APEGBC professional of record or subordinate may conduct
testing, review test results, inspect operations, review quality control processes, or
carry out other actions, to confirm that the implementation meets the engineering
concepts or intent reflected in the engineering or geoscience documents prepared
for the work.

2.10 This QM Guideline is a minimum standard for APEGBC professionals. Failure to meet the
intent of this QM Guideline may be evidence of unprofessional conduct and may give
rise to disciplinary proceedings by APEGBC.

6
Documented Field Reviews During Implementation or Construction

3.0 Guidelines for Practice

3.1 What is the Purpose of a Field Review?
3.1.1 
Field reviews are periodic reviews, conducted at the site of the implementation or
construction of the engineering or geoscience work by an APEGBC professional or
his or her subordinate acting under his or her direct supervision, that the APEGBC
professional in his or her professional discretion considers necessary to ascertain
whether the implementation or construction of the work substantially complies in
all material respects with the engineering or geoscience concepts or intent reflected
in the engineering or geoscience documents prepared for the work. Field reviews
also help APEGBC professionals keep their employer, client, owner and other relevant
professionals informed about the quality of the implementation or construction work
as it pertains to compliance with the engineering or geoscience documents prepared
for the work.

3.1.2 As is clear from the definition of field reviews the number and extent of field reviews
must always remain in the discretion of the APEGBC professional. Consequently, it is
contrary to the APEGBC professional’s obligations for the APEGBC professional to agree
in advance to a fixed number or extent of field reviews in their agreement with their
employer, client, owner or anyone else. It is appropriate for the APEGBC professional to
provide to their employer, client or the owner an estimate of the number of anticipated
field reviews and/or the cost per field review attendance at the site.

3.2 What are Field Reviews not Intended to do?

3.2.1 
Field reviews are not supervision of the implementation or construction work, nor are
they a guarantee that all deficient work will be identified by the APEGBC professional
or subordinate. The contractor or other party implementing or constructing the work
is responsible for supervising the work, delivering work that is in conformity with
the engineering or geoscience documents, and deciding the means and methods
for doing so. The field reviewer observes the contractor’s work to ascertain whether
the work substantially complies in all material respects with the engineering or
geoscience concepts or intent reflected in the engineering or geoscience documents
prepared for the work, and may reject nonconforming work, but leave the means and
methods for achieving what is required to the contractor or others who are tasked with
implementing or constructing the work.

3.2.2 
Field reviews are also not an inspection of the work or safety at a contractor-controlled site
or a site managed by others, nor are they a review of the relevant safety program. This
does not mean that APEGBC professionals may look the other way when they see a safety
violation or concern. APEGBC professionals have a duty to hold public safety paramount.

7
3.2.3 In any event, when an APEGBC professional becomes aware of a safety violation or
concern, he or she must advise the appropriate party in control of the site or responsible
for the site safety and, if no action is taken, the client or relevant authorities. When
actions taken fail and an APEGBC professional believes that workers or the public are in
imminent danger, he or she has a professional duty to act to stop the work. If the APEGBC
professional’s attempts to stop the dangerous work fail, the APEGBC professional should
call WorkSafeBC or a like organization for assistance and indicate the urgency of the
situation. When this level of action becomes necessary it must be documented.

3.3 How Often Should Field Reviews Take Place?

3.3.1 The timing of field reviews must be consistent with:

• what in the APEGBC professional’s discretion he or she considers necessary to ascertain
whether the implementation or construction of the work substantially complies in all
material respects with the engineering or geoscience concepts or intent reflected in
the engineering or geoscience documents prepared for the work;
• the level and nature of risk, complexity, unknown conditions and duration of the
implementation or construction;
• the standard of practice for the type and nature of work to be reviewed;
• related APEGBC practice guidelines;
• legislation, codes, standards or other regulatory requirements which may be relevant
and applicable to the nature of the field review to be carried out;
• the level of detail provided in the engineering or geoscience documentation
prepared for the project or work;
• the experience, reputation and method of selection (that is, public tender, pre-
qualified bidders or negotiated) of those implementing or constructing the work;
• the number of deficiencies found early in the project or work; and
• the experience of the APEGBC professional of record.

3.3.2 
APEGBC professionals must assess the work being carried out and the associated risks
to determine the number, extent, frequency and timing of field reviews. The number of
reviews must be consistent with the standard of practice in the profession for the specific
engineering and geoscience work. APEGBC professionals should act reasonably, but must
not acquiesce to employer, client or owner demands to conduct fewer field reviews than
the APEGBC professional believes are necessary. APEGBC professionals must not rely on the
fact that an employer, client, owner, regulatory authority or anyone else is carrying out
reviews as a reason to reduce the number of field reviews that the APEGBC professional
carries out. Educating employers, clients and owners about the purpose of field reviews,
and documenting and agreeing in advance about the nature and purpose of field reviews,
will help to avoid misunderstandings later in the project or work.

3.3.3 The number and frequency of the field reviews may need to be adjusted if more
deficiencies than expected are found early in the project or work.

8
Documented Field Reviews During Implementation or Construction

3.3.4 If the APEGBC professional determines that the number or extent of field reviews that
may be referenced in their agreement or scope of work is insufficient, the APEGBC
professional must:
1. advise the client, owner or employer about the need and rationale for more field
reviews;
2. if the client, owner or employer does not authorize additional field reviews, the
APEGBC professional must document and communicate to the client, owner or
employer the consequences of not conducting sufficient field reviews, such as:
• placing public safety at risk;
• having to notify a regulatory body;
• not being able to execute letters of assurance required by the BC Building Code; and
• not being able to seal assurance statements required by other legislation.

3.3.5 If the employer, client or owner continues to refuse to authorize additional field reviews
the APEGBC professional must notify the appropriate regulatory body and consider
removing him or herself from the project.

3.4 When Should Field Reviews Occur?

3.4.1 
Field reviews must take place at times when critical components of the work are visible
and available to be observed. Field reviews carried out after critical work is covered up
are inadequate. If critical work is covered up before a field review can occur, the APEGBC
professional must consider whether to request that the work be opened up for review.
Where uncovering or opening up the work is not feasible or practical, the APEGBC
professional must prepare a document about what was observed relevant to the
work and the performance of the contractor or those tasked with implementing the
work. The APEGBC professional must also identify and communicate in writing to the
employer, client or owner, the consequences of not seeing the work and the reasons for
not requiring the work to be uncovered or opened up.

3.4.2 
Field reviews should occur periodically to suit the nature and progress of the implementation
or construction. Some reviews may be carried out randomly and unannounced so that the
field reviewer is not observing work only when the contractor or other party implementing
the work has had the opportunity to prepare for the field review.

9
3.5 What do Field Reviews Include?

3.5.1 
Field reviews may simply involve a field reviewer visiting the site where the
implementation or construction of the engineering or geoscience work reflected
in the professional documents occurs, making observations and communicating
observations, interpretations and advice. In some instances, observations may need
to be supplemented with testing or surveying. Testing and analysis should be carried
out to recognized standards. Surveying and testing equipment must be periodically
calibrated to recognized standards and checked, where possible, before each use.
Records of use, calibration and current status should be maintained. In some sectors,
field reviews may involve reviewing quality control processes.

3.5.2 On occasion, the contractor or others implementing the work will seek advice or
direction from the field reviewer. Where this advice or direction involves engineering or
geoscience decisions, such decisions must be reviewed with the APEGBC professional
of record. Where the decisions will have an impact on the cost, quality, function or
schedule of the end product, the APEGBC professional of record must advise, and seek
approval from, the employer, client or owner before directing the contractor or others
implementing the work to make any change. The means and methods for fulfilling the
advice must always be left to the contractor or others implementing the work.

3.6 Who is Permitted to Carryout Field Reviews?

3.6.1 The requirement under Bylaw 14(b)(3) is that field reviews be carried out by an APEGBC
professional or someone suitably qualified under his or her direct supervision as
defined in the APEGBC QM Guidelines - Direct Supervision which can be found on
the APEGBC website. Where possible and appropriate, the field reviewer should be
accompanied by a representative of the owner and or the contractor or other party
responsible for the implementation or construction.

3.6.2 
APEGBC recommends the APEGBC professional of record responsible for the preparation
of the engineering and geoscience documents developed for implementation or
construction also be responsible for field reviews during implementation or construction.
This is the most common and preferred practice in industry as it is not only in the best
interests of the client, owner or employer but also best reflects the intent of the Bylaw.
The division of responsibilities for the preparation of the engineering and geoscience
documents and the carrying out of field reviews is undesirable and should be avoided.

3.6.3 
APEGBC professionals working in other jurisdictions must abide by licensing/registration
requirements in those jurisdictions.

10
Documented Field Reviews During Implementation or Construction

3.6.4 Refer to Section 3.7 of this QM Guideline when the APEGBC professional of record
responsible for the preparation of the engineering and geoscience documents
developed for implementation or construction is not engaged to do field reviews.

3.6.5 
APEGBC professionals may delegate field reviews only when the field reviews are carried
out under their direct supervision. Before doing so, APEGBC professionals must assess the:
• level, complexity and critical nature of the field review;
• requirements or recommendations set out in any related APEGBC practice guidelines, or
other standards, codes and legislation that may preclude delegation of field reviews;
•e  xperience and training of the proposed field reviewer; and
•p  roposed field reviewer’s ability to deliver the required level of quality and accuracy.

3.6.6 The APEGBC professional of record must provide direction regarding the timing, frequency
and focus of field reviews. He or she must give directions about the required effort,
reporting detail, and specific aspects of the implementation or construction activities to
be field reviewed. The APEGBC professional of record must be involved in any engineering
or geoscience decisions made during or as a result of the field review. See the APEGBC
QM Guidelines - Direct Supervision which can be found on the APEGBC website for further
guidance regarding what constitutes direct supervision of field reviews.

3.7 What if the APEGBC Professional of Record is Not Engaged for

Field Reviews?
3.7.1 The documented quality management process referenced in Section 2.6 of this QM
Guideline must include protocols to be followed when the APEGBC professional of
record responsible for the preparation of the engineering and geoscience documents
developed for implementation or construction is not engaged or required by the
client, owner or their employer to carry out field reviews during implementation or
construction of the engineering or geoscience work.

3.7.2 The protocols should address:

1. Obtaining written confirmation from the client, owner or employer about how and
by whom field review will be carried out.
2. Confirming that a qualified engineering or geoscience professional, as appropriate
to the work and registered in the governing jurisdiction where the implementation
or construction will occur, will be conducting or directly supervising the field review.
3. Advising the client, owner or employer and the professional responsible for the
field review of his or her availability to answer questions regarding the work during
implementation or construction.
4. Requesting copies of field review reports.
5. Retaining a record of any communication confirming steps 1 to 4 and the client,
owner or employer’s response.

11
3.7.3 For buildings in BC covered by the BC Building Code, the APEGBC professional
responsible for field reviews would be the Registered Professional who signs the letters
of assurance under the BC Building Code. Refer to the APEGBC Bulletin K BCBC: Letters
of Assurance in the BC Building Code and Due Diligence under the section entitled Field
Reviews and the Guide to The Letters of Assurance in the BC Building Code issued by
the BC Building and Safety Standards Branch.

3.7.4 If the client, owner or employer does not confirm that field reviews will be carried out by
a professional licensed or registered in the governing jurisdiction or a qualified party
under that professional’s direct supervision, the APEGBC professional of record must:
1. A dvise the client, owner or employer of the APEGBC professional’s obligations under
the Act and Bylaws and the consequences of the client, owner or employer not
having appropriate field reviews carried out including:
• placing public safety at risk;
• having to notify a regulatory body;
• not being able to execute required letters of assurance; and
• not being able to seal other legislated assurance statements.
2. I f the client, owner or employer continues to refuse to authorize appropriate field
review, notify the appropriate regulatory body and consider removing him or herself
from the project.

3.7.5 Although not within APEGBC’s mandate similar protocols are recommended for work
requiring field reviews outside of Canadian jurisdictions.

3.8 How Should out of Province-Engineered and Supplied

Equipment be Handled?

3.8.1 Where APEGBC professionals are specifying equipment, products or components which are
designed and manufactured or fabricated out of province for use on projects in BC, they
should begin by preparing and sealing a performance specification for the equipment.
The specifications should indicate that the manufacturer or fabricator must certify that the
equipment meets the performance specifications. This will relieve APEGBC professionals of
any requirement to carry out field reviews at the place of fabrication.

3.8.2 However, when APEGBC professionals receive such equipment, products or

components, they are responsible for checking their quality. If Occupational Health
and Safety legislation imposes any requirements such as guards and safety switches,
APEGBC professionals are responsible for checking that the equipment meets these
requirements. APEGBC professionals must also confirm that the equipment meets any
BC Safety Authority requirements. If the equipment requires services such as electrical,
gas or water feeds, APEGBC professionals are responsible for carrying out field reviews of
these services.

12
Documented Field Reviews During Implementation or Construction

3.9 How Should Issues Found in Field Reviews be Addressed?

3.9.1 When work is observed that does not substantially comply in all material respects
with the engineering or geoscience concept or intent, as reflected in the documents
that have been prepared to guide the implementation or construction, the problem
must be communicated in writing to the party responsible for the implementation
or construction. The written instructions should clearly indicate which work
is nonconforming and why. The means and methods for how to rectify any
nonconforming work must remain the responsibility of the contractor or others.

The APEGBC professional must confirm and record when the work is made to conform
to the engineering or geoscience concept or intent, as reflected in the documents that
have been prepared to guide the implementation or construction, or what alternative
strategy was employed. If the contractor, employer, client or owner does not make
the work conform the APEGBC professional must consider a written report to the
appropriate regulatory authority and must document the events and implications for
the contractor, employer, client or owner.

3.10 What Field Review Records must be Created and Kept?

3.10.1 It cannot be over-emphasized how important thorough and complete documentation
of field review reports and communications can be to APEGBC professionals. Records will
refresh memories, confirm directions given and demonstrate that the required standard
of practice has been met in field reviews. These records may also serve as evidence in
case of a dispute.

3.10.2 In some instances, the client, owner or employer may choose to have field reviews
conducted by someone other than the APEGBC professional of record. In these
circumstances, the APEGBC professional of record should develop protocols as described
in Section 3.7 and retain required records.

3.10.3 Observations made during field reviews must be recorded and retained. Using standard
forms that capture the date, time and detail of any observations helps to ensure
consistent and complete records.

3.10.4 Photographs or videos provide excellent records of what was observed, and are
particularly useful where the work being field reviewed will be buried or covered by
construction. When using photographs as records, create an audit trail by:
• c hecking the equipment, date and time settings before taking photographs;
• including a description of what was photographed along with the data, time, location
and photographer;
• s etting up appropriate downloading and storage procedures;

13
 • creating a non-editable back-up of all photographs;
• never deleting a photograph in the record set; and
• enhancing, cropping or otherwise editing photographs for clarity only, and retaining
the original unaltered photo with the edited photo.

3.10.5 Any field notebooks used in field reviews to document dates, times, observations,
surveys and actions must be retained as records.

3.10.6 All communications and directions to the contractor or others implementing the work
about observations and nonconforming work must be provided in writing at the time
of the field review, even if handwritten and followed up later with a typewritten report.
Copies must be provided to the owner and retained as a record. Care must be taken
to provide directions about what must be carried out by the contractor or others and
not use language that indicates how to rectify the nonconforming work. Again, using a
standard form will help to ensure consistent and complete records.

3.10.7 The APEGBC professional should continue to report nonconforming work until it is
rectified. He or she must confirm and record when the work is rectified as directed.

3.10.8 
Records of test results must be copied to the contractor, client or owner, and retained as a
record. Calibration results for testing and survey equipment must also be retained as a record.

3.10.9 Site meetings that discuss field reviews, observations and resolutions must be
recorded in meeting minutes, distributed to the contractor, owner and other relevant
professionals, and retained as a record.

3.10.10 All field review records must be retained with project or work documentation. For further
guidance about retaining project or work documentation, see the APEGBC QM Guidelines -
Retention of Project Documentation which can be found on the APEGBC website.

14
Documented Field Reviews During Implementation or Construction

4.0 REFERENCES AND RELATED DOCUMENTS

Brian M. Samuels and Doug R. Sanders, “Practical Law of Architecture, Engineering, and
Geoscience”, Canadian Edition, Pearson Prentice Hall

Encon Group Inc., “Practice Management – A Practical Guide to Professional Liability for
Canadian Design Professionals”, 1999

Bull, Housser & Tupper, The Capstone, Engineering and Construction Newsletter, “Field
Review Responsibilities of Design Consultants”, March 2003, reprinted in APEGBC
Innovation in June 2003

Encon Group Inc., Professional Liability Loss Control Bulletin #69, Claude Y. Mercier,
“Design Consultant’s Liability for Field Reviews – Part II”, February 1984

APEGBC Bulletin K: BCBC, Letters of Assurance in the BC Building Code and Due
Diligence, September 2010

15
notes:

16
Documented Field Reviews During Implementation or Construction

notes:

17
notes:

18
 Association of Professional Engineers
and Geoscientists of British Columbia

Quality
Management Guidelines

Documented Field Reviews

During Implementation or Construction

Questions regarding the APEGBC Quality Management Guidelines

may be directed to:

Lina Bowser
Manager, Quality Assurance Programs
Direct Tel: 604.412.4862
E-mail: oqm@[Link]

200 - 4010 Regent Street, Burnaby, BC V5C 6N2

p. 604.430.8035 | f. 604.430.8085 | 1.888.430.8035 | [Link]