Inspectioneering Journal

Identifying Common Mistakes in Inspection Interval Determination

By Chuck Provost, VP of Operations at Sentinel Integrity Solutions. This article appears in the January/February 2017 issue of Inspectioneering Journal.


This article is intended to bring light to often-overlooked gaps within our industry in regards to properly setting inspection intervals. Giving proper attention to and use of code/jurisdictional requirements, actual thickness data (outside of routine thickness data), and repair/replacement information can dramatically affect an inspection interval; in some cases leading to a facility failing to meet OSHA 1910.119 process safety management (PSM) compliance. Over the years performing Mechanical Integrity initiatives and PSM audits, we have discovered multiple gaps in regards to properly setting inspection intervals.


Whether an owner/user has elected to utilize a risk-based inspection (RBI) program, or a calendar-based program, or a combination of the two, these gaps are relevant.  Simply relying on routine nondestructive examination (NDE) data to drive an interval can lead to an asset falling into this gap. If reliable NDE data is utilized to calculate corrosion rates and determines that an asset is fit to make an anticipated unit run, that does not necessarily mean that the interval can be set in accordance with the data. Codes, procedures, recommended practices, and jurisdictional agencies normally have more stringent requirements. This is where half-life determinations are required.  If an asset has a remaining life of seven years and a run cycle of five years, it’s easy to overlook the half–life requirement, thus setting the interval for five years and scheduling repair/replacement during the next scheduled turnaround. In actuality, under the half-life interval requirement, the asset will reach its retirement date (Per Half-Life) during the unit run (i.e., in three and a half years). This obviously is not a good situation in which to find yourself.

This content is available to registered users and subscribers

Register today to unlock this article for free.

Create your free account and get access to:

  • Unlock one premium article of your choosing per month
  • Exclusive online content, videos, and downloads
  • Insightful and actionable webinars
Interested in unlimited access? VIEW OUR SUBSCRIPTION OPTIONS

Current subscribers and registered users can log in now.

Comments and Discussion

Posted by Anthony Marks on March 10, 2017
Chuck, I would expect nothing less than this... Log in or register to read the rest of this comment.

Add a Comment

Please log in or register to participate in comments and discussions.

Inspectioneering Journal

Explore over 20 years of articles written by our team of subject matter experts.

Company Directory

Find relevant products, services, and technologies.

Training Solutions

Improve your skills in key mechanical integrity subjects.

Case Studies

Learn from the experience of others in the industry.


Inspectioneering's index of mechanical integrity topics – built by you.

Industry News

Stay up-to-date with the latest inspection and asset integrity management news.


Read short articles and insights authored by industry experts.

Expert Interviews

Inspectioneering's archive of interviews with industry subject matter experts.

Event Calendar

Find upcoming conferences, training sessions, online events, and more.


Downloadable eBooks, Asset Intelligence Reports, checklists, white papers, and more.

Videos & Webinars

Watch educational and informative videos directly related to your profession.


Commonly used asset integrity management and inspection acronyms.