A valve survey action plan turns each finding into a decision with an owner, a method and a date. Group the findings by failure type and consequence, choose one option per valve, and record who approved the choice and why. Keep the log with the valve records, so later surveys, warranty claims and replacement forecasts rest on written evidence.
Knowledge ยท Evidence and trials
The decision log: turning survey findings into an approved plan
A survey only creates value when each finding becomes a decision with an owner and a date.
1. What a decision log adds
A survey reports what the team observed on each valve. A plan states what will be done, by whom and at what cost. Between them sits the decision log, the record of how each finding became a choice.
The log earns its place when people or budgets change. If anyone asks why a valve was treated, not replaced, the answer is on file. The entry carries the decision, the approver and the date. Verbal agreements do not survive staff changes; written decisions do.
Keep each entry short and factual, written at the time rather than rebuilt later. Before the planning meeting, confirm the findings themselves are sound. Our guide to reading a valve survey report shows what good evidence looks like.
2. Grouping findings before choosing responses
Rank and group the findings before debating any cures. Group them by failure type, then by service, then by the consequence of failure. Common causes include dried or contaminated lubricant, damaged seal paths and worn stem packing.
Failure distributions vary between populations, but some patterns repeat. One spread comes from a risk-based valve integrity study of upstream and midstream sites, published by Valve World. It reported 61% passing, 28% seized, 6% external leakage and 5% other. In many plans, passing valves form the largest single group of findings.
Count alone should not set the order of the work. External leakage is often a small share of findings but a large share of risk. It releases process fluid outside the valve body, close to people. Rank by consequence first, then by how many valves share each problem.
3. Choosing one option per finding
Each finding should end with one chosen option and a stated reason. The realistic options on a live plant are few, and they suit different findings.
- Treat in service, injecting cleaner, lubricant or sealant through the buttonhead fittings.
- Cycle and adjust, where the valve still moves and the seats look sound.
- Monitor, retesting at an agreed interval against the survey reading.
- Refer onward for assessment, repair or replacement where damage or doubt is serious.
Injection treatment has gates that must pass before work is planned. The gates are sound fittings, a valve and service that suit injection, and a permit that allows live work. Where OEM documents exist, consult them for limits and warranty terms.
Valves built with injection points are designed for care in service. Even so, treatment in service is not universally possible. Some findings should end at the fourth option, and an honest plan says so early. For large populations, a pilot programme across a small valve set can test the approach first.
4. What the sign-off should name
Approval comes faster when the paper names its own closing test. For a passing valve, the confirming test is a seat-leak test under agreed conditions. Pressure decay across the closed valve is one common choice. Double block and bleed monitoring, or a witnessed leak test, are others.
Screening signs such as pressure rise, sound or bubbles indicate a problem but prove nothing. Write indicates in the log, then name the confirming test beside it.
API 598 and ISO 5208 remain factory references for seat leakage testing and leakage classes. They can shape the field criteria, but they are not field results.
For treatment work, the approval should set controlled amounts within equipment and fitting ratings. The crew watches the pressure response and stops on the agreed stop-work conditions. The plan should approve a bounded job, never open-ended injection.
5. Records that outlive the plan
A closed plan should leave records a future engineer can trust. For each valve, keep the survey reading, the chosen option, the treatment and the acceptance result. Keep dates, product types and the approving name, and note anything that was declined.
These records keep earning value long after the job closes. They support warranty claims, sharpen the next survey and feed replacement forecasts. Our article on turning valve service records into replacement forecasts shows the method.
During warranty periods, written care records also protect claims, as covered in warranty-period valve care. A log that no one can read years later has failed, however neat it looks today.
6. Turning the plan into work with us
An approved plan needs a crew that can execute it safely. BTR VSI runs valve surveys and clean, lubricate and seal work on live lines. Our cleaners, lubricants and sealants are made in-house, and field teams travel worldwide from India.
Send the valve details: size, class, service, symptom and fitting type, plus any survey reading. An engineer replies within 24 hours by WhatsApp or the contact form. Request the product guide through an enquiry if you need it for the approval file.
Still comparing suppliers? Our guide to choosing an online valve maintenance provider lists the checks. The decision log works the same way: evidence first, then a signed choice.
Common questions
Survey action plans questions, answered directly
What should a valve survey action plan include?
A valve list grouped by finding, one chosen option per valve, the method and acceptance test, the approver's name and the dates. It should also record anything deliberately left undone, with the reason.
How do you prioritise valve survey findings?
Rank by consequence first, then by how many valves share the problem. External leakage usually outranks its count because it releases process fluid. Passing and seized valves then follow, grouped by service criticality.
Who should approve a valve maintenance plan?
Approval sits with the authority your site rules name, usually operations or maintenance leadership with permit sign-off. The log must record who approved each decision, the date and the reason, so the plan survives staff changes.
How is a treated passing valve accepted?
By a seat-leak test under conditions agreed before the work, such as pressure decay across the closed valve or double block and bleed monitoring. Screening signs alone are not acceptance evidence; API 598 and ISO 5208 are factory references, not field results.
Have survey findings that need a plan?
Send the valve details. An engineer replies within 24 hours.
Include valve size and class, service, symptom, fitting type and any survey reading, and say if you want the guide.