Technical Review of Inspection Reports

Submitted reports wait in inboxes with unclear ownership. Corrections happen by phone with no record, and no one can tell which reports are waiting, returned, or done.

• QA reviewers
• Technical authorities

Used by QA reviewers when a submitted report needs examination before approval.

• Submitted reports
• The request's scope and technique sheet
• Review authority for the method

• See the queue of submitted reports and start structured reviews
• Examine findings, conclusion, and result against the scope and technique
• Reject with a recorded reason and return the report for correction
• Re-review corrected reports when they are resubmitted

• A report must be Submitted before a review can start
• Rejections require a reason, recorded on the report and in the audit trail
• Both the original review and the corrected resubmission are audited

Submitted

Waiting for a reviewer.

Under Review

In active technical examination.

Rejected

Returned for correction with a recorded reason.

1. 01

   Input

   Approved scope and records arrive

2. 02

   User action

   See the queue of submitted reports and start structured reviews

3. 03

   Validation

   A report must be Submitted before a review can start

4. 04

   Output

   The module's recorded outcome

5. 05

   Next step

   Handed to Report Approval and Release

Either a precise correction request back to the technician, or a sound report advanced toward approval.

Structured inline review comments are planned; today the recorded rejection reason is the correction mechanism, so it should be precise.