Define What the Inspection Must Show

Provide the symptom timeline, known cleanouts, sump or catch-basin details, prior footage and any property plans. Begin the water-source file with a date and its symptom, drainage segment and outlet; attach the available evidence before making the investigation, repair or excavation decision. The next checkpoint is “Identify which system segments are in scope.” Ask how unknown routes may be located. Keep that action beside its observation. The drainage-scope reviewer can then distinguish the intake water-source file from drainage closeout record material added during later pricing or investigation.

• Ask how unknown routes may be located.

Review known access points, inspection coverage, cleaning limits, footage location codes and unviewed drainage segments in the context of the actual property rather than as a standard allowance. Inspection footage has limited value when access point, direction, distance and skipped segments are absent from the report. Record access and restoration assumptions; then ask how unknown routes may be located. Label each drainage photograph, drawing and prior record by symptom, drainage segment and outlet and date. When an unviewed drain or below-grade condition remains, record it in the water-source file; identify the drainage-scope reviewer review or drainage closeout record document that could resolve it. Surface water at one location cannot establish the route or condition of the buried drainage system.

• Record access and restoration assumptions
• Ask how unknown routes may be located

Ask what cleaning or flushing is intended to accomplish, what camera access is possible and how incomplete visibility will be reported. Describe each symptom, system segment and outlet separately, citing its supporting drainage photograph, measurement or dated document. Keep discharge handling and property protection explicit. A finding at one symptom, drainage segment and outlet may alter the proposed investigation, repair or excavation decision; unobserved parts of the property drainage system stay outside the available evidence.

• Keep discharge handling and property protection explicit.

“Do not treat cleaning as proof of full condition” belongs on its own line in the water-source file. For the symptom, drainage segment and outlet, pair the drainage photograph evidence with any concealed or untested property drainage system limits. Record obstructions, access failures and unviewed sections. Keep discharge handling and property protection explicit. Cross-reference the drainage investigation or construction response answer to its drainage photograph; include the water-source file drawing, a product document for the drainage investigation or construction response, or a dated reply from the drainage-scope reviewer. Place the investigation or authority checkpoint before excavation advances, below-grade work is covered or an outlet assumption becomes embedded in the price.

• Record obstructions, access failures and unviewed sections
• Keep discharge handling and property protection explicit

Request labelled footage or images, a route sketch, observed conditions, limitations and recommended next evidence. Before proceeding, use findings to compare cleaning, repair and replacement paths. Give task ownership to the drainage-scope reviewer; place its checkpoint before the investigation, repair or excavation decision, then name the expected drainage closeout record. This separates current water-source file evidence from the proposed drainage investigation or construction response. Put manufacturer information and drainage-scope reviewer input in the drainage closeout record; file authority questions under the relevant property drainage system decision.

• Use findings to compare cleaning, repair and replacement paths.

Resolve “Tie observations to locations” before ranking proposals. State the baseline symptom, drainage segment and outlet, proposed drainage investigation or construction response, exclusions, quantities and written change process. Separate fact from interpretation. Use findings to compare cleaning, repair and replacement paths. Review each drainage photograph while it can still change the investigation, repair or excavation decision. Record a dated investigation, repair or excavation decision choice or assign the remaining unviewed drain or below-grade condition. Track that uncertainty in the drainage closeout record, outside the lump-sum total.

• Separate fact from interpretation
• Use findings to compare cleaning, repair and replacement paths

Finish this investigation brief as a water-source file: include its starting evidence, location map, proposed drainage investigation or construction response and unresolved limits. For “Define What the Inspection Must Show,” justify each drainage investigation or construction response inclusion and assign the next unviewed drain or below-grade condition. In the water-source file, list the approvals, product records and drainage closeout record expected. Continue with “Match the Scope to Documented Condition”, “Normalize Investigation, Excavation and Restoration”, and “Record Where and When Water Appears” for related property drainage system decisions. Use the water-source file guide links for any wider drainage investigation or construction response comparison. Attach each dated Port Coquitlam or provincial reference to the outlet, permit or system question it actually addresses.

• Name the next investigation, repair or excavation decision, responsible drainage-scope reviewer and water-source file evidence still required
• Retain dated official property drainage system sources and guide links within the drainage closeout record