A waterproofing layer is due to be covered tomorrow, but the site supervision team has identified a poorly executed connection around a drain outlet. Before work proceeds, the location, observed defect, requested correction, person responsible and required verification need to be recorded. A photograph on its own or a conversation on site does not provide that traceability. This is where the construction logbook and site supervision records complement each other.
1. Distinguish the construction logbook from other records
The construction logbook is the formal record of relevant facts and observations concerning the execution of the works, under the requirements applicable to the development. It should not be confused with an informal team diary or a complete archive of all documentation produced.
Site supervision reports, meeting minutes, inspection sheets, photographic records and written correspondence provide greater detail on matters that require it. They should be organised and cross-referenced so that information can be found without relying on participants’ memories.
Whether a logbook is mandatory, its required format, who is authorised to make entries and the procedures for making it available or submitting it should be confirmed for each case. In Madeira, the regional framework and the requirements of the relevant local authority must be checked; procedures should not be assumed to be identical across all municipalities.
2. Identify facts, locations and participants
Each entry should make it possible to understand what happened, when, where and with what consequence for the works. Where relevant, it should include:
- Date of the observation and identity of the person making the entry.
- Exact location: floor, room, grid line, elevation or building element.
- Work in progress and conditions affecting its execution.
- The observed fact, distinguished from an assumption or assessment still to be confirmed.
- Design, drawing, specification or instruction used as a reference, including its revision.
- Action requested, identified responsible party and deadline or verification stage.
“Poor workmanship” is too vague. A more useful entry would be: “In the bathroom on level 1, a discontinuity was observed in the waterproofing at the drain outlet connection; correction requested before laying the finish, followed by a further inspection.”
If an entry is made after the visit, the date of the event and the date of the entry should be distinguished. Corrections should preserve legibility and traceability without erasing the history.
3. Record inspections before work is concealed
Work that will no longer be accessible deserves particular attention: reinforcement before concreting, services before chases are closed, waterproofing before finishes are laid and drainage before backfilling.
The record should state what was actually observed, the information consulted, the checks performed and the limitations of the inspection. A partial visit should not be described as validation of the entire installation.
Where tests are carried out, the procedure, date, result and supporting document should be identified. Photographs with locations and captions are useful, particularly when they include both an overview and the relevant detail.
In Madeira, exposure to wind and rain, proximity to the sea and restricted access may justify specific records concerning material protection, product application or interruptions to the works. The conditions observed and their actual effects should be recorded, avoiding general explanations based solely on the climate.
4. Document deviations, decisions and their closure
A non-conformity is not resolved simply because it has been mentioned at a meeting. Follow-up should show the sequence: detection, notification, proposed correction, decision by the authorised party, implementation and final verification.
Design changes require particular care. It should be clear who proposed the change, why, which documents were revised and what validations or procedures are required. An instruction from the site supervision team does not replace the designer’s involvement or the applicable administrative procedures.
It is also advisable to distinguish technical findings, instructions for carrying out the work and contractual decisions. Recording additional work does not, in itself, amount to approval of its cost or an extension of time.
At closure, the evidence supporting the conclusion should be identified. Any outstanding reservations or checks should remain explicitly recorded.
5. Link reports, minutes and the document archive
Where appropriate, the construction logbook should refer to documents identified by title, date and reference. Supplementary reports should allow each issue to be linked to photographs, drawings, tests and correspondence.
A simple folder structure, controlled versions and backups reduce information loss. There should be a defined method for distributing documents and confirming receipt, without confusing receipt with agreement.
Avoid wording such as “everything compliant” where sufficient verification has not taken place. Prefer clearly scoped, objective descriptions proportionate to what was observed. Consistent records support quality control and help clarify responsibilities, but they do not replace technical attendance on site or, on their own, guarantee that the works comply with requirements.
Checklist
- Confirm the applicable requirements and relevant local authority procedures.
- Identify the date, author, location and work observed.
- Reference designs and drawings using the correct revision.
- Distinguish facts, assumptions, instructions and decisions.
- Record inspections before building elements are concealed.
- Link photographs and tests to the corresponding issues.
- Define responsible parties, deadlines and follow-up checks.
- Document changes without assuming technical or contractual approval.
- Close non-conformities with supporting evidence, retaining outstanding reservations.
- Preserve the document history, distribution records and archive.