The Hardest Part of Inspection Isn't Finding Problems

It’s making consistent decisions when different inspectors encounter the same condition.

When most people think about inspections, they picture someone walking a project looking for things that are wrong. That’s part of the job, but it isn’t the part that separates a good inspector from a great one.

The difficult part isn’t finding damaged messenger strand. The difficult part is deciding what to do once it’s found.

That may sound like a simple decision, but it rarely is. Not every mark on a strand is a defect. Not every defect requires the same corrective action. Some conditions are purely cosmetic. Others may reduce the structural capacity of the strand or shorten the life of the network. The challenge for an inspector is determining the difference and documenting that decision in a way that can be supported later.

That’s where many inspection programs begin to break down.

Without a clearly defined process, the decision often depends on who happens to be performing the inspection. One inspector may view a damaged section of strand as acceptable because they’ve seen similar conditions remain in service for years. Another may immediately require replacement because of experiences on a previous project where a similar condition eventually failed. Neither inspector is necessarily acting in bad faith. They’re making decisions based on the knowledge and experience they’ve accumulated throughout their careers.

That inconsistency creates frustration for contractors, uncertainty for project managers, and risk for owners. If the outcome depends more on the individual inspector than on the organization’s expectations, then the organization doesn’t really have a standard. It has a collection of personal opinions that happen to be held by experienced people.

That’s one of the reasons we’ve spent so much time building the Fiber Done Right Deficiency Guide. A deficiency guide shouldn’t simply identify what is wrong. It should help inspectors think through the decision in a consistent way.

Take damaged messenger strand as an example.

It isn’t enough to tell an inspector to “look for damage.” Damage can take many forms, and each tells a different story. Broken outer wires may indicate the strand has lost structural capacity. Bird-caging often suggests the strand has been subjected to forces it wasn’t designed to withstand. Crushing or permanent deformation may point to improper handling during construction or contact with equipment. Corrosion may indicate years of environmental exposure or conditions that could continue deteriorating long after the project is accepted.

An inspector’s responsibility isn’t to guess how much strength remains in the strand or to perform an engineering analysis in the field. Their responsibility is to recognize conditions that fall outside the owner’s requirements, document those conditions objectively, collect the necessary evidence, and ensure the appropriate people have the information needed to make the right decision.

That’s why every deficiency in our guide follows the same structure.

It begins by defining exactly what the deficiency is so inspectors are evaluating the same condition. It explains why the condition matters because understanding the consequence often leads to better decisions than simply memorizing a rule. It identifies the standards that support the inspection, outlines what should be verified in the field, specifies the evidence that should be collected, classifies the severity of the condition, establishes the acceptance criteria, and defines what must occur before the deficiency can be closed.

In other words, it gives inspectors a repeatable decision-making process instead of asking them to rely solely on memory or experience.

Experience will always be one of an inspector’s greatest assets, but experience alone doesn’t create consistency across an organization. Two inspectors can each have twenty years in the field and still approach the same condition differently because their experience taught them different lessons. A well-designed inspection program doesn’t replace experience. It provides a framework that allows experienced people to evaluate conditions through the same lens.

The goal has never been to create inspectors who all think alike. The goal is to create inspectors who all follow the same decision-making process before reaching a conclusion.

That’s a very different objective.

As we’ve finished building the Fiber Done Right Inspector Program, we’ve found ourselves asking a different question than we did when we started. Instead of asking, “What deficiencies should an inspector know?” we’ve started asking, “What information does an inspector need to make a consistent decision?”

That subtle shift has influenced every document we’ve created.

Below is an example from the Fiber Done Right Deficiency Guide covering AR-011: Damaged Strand. It isn’t intended to replace engineering judgment or project-specific requirements. It’s an example of how we’ve structured every deficiency to help inspectors move beyond simply identifying problems and toward making objective, repeatable, and well-documented decisions.

AR-011. Damaged Strand

Deficiency Description

The messenger strand exhibits physical damage that may affect its structural integrity, serviceability, or ability to properly support the aerial communications facilities. Damage may include broken wires, kinks, bird-caging, corrosion, abrasion, crushing, deformation, excessive wear, impact damage, or any other condition that compromises the strand or reduces its intended performance.

WhyÂ

The messenger strand is the primary structural support for lashed fiber optic cable. Its purpose is to carry the mechanical loads imposed by the communications network while maintaining proper sag, tension, and clearances. Damage to the strand reduces its structural capacity, increases the likelihood of premature failure, and may result in excessive cable movement, sagging, or complete span failure. Even localized strand damage can propagate over time due to environmental loading, vibration, corrosion, and repeated mechanical stress.

Applicable Standards

Fiber Done Right Inspection Standards Manual

Project Specifications

Owner Construction Standards

Manufacturer Installation Requirements

National Electrical Safety Code (NESC)

Approved Construction Drawings

Contract Requirements

Typical Causes

Improper handling during installation.

Excessive pulling tension.

Kinking during strand installation.

Damage from construction equipment.

Improper tensioning procedures.

Vehicle impact.

Corrosion from long-term environmental exposure.

Abrasion against hardware or structures.

Improper storage or transportation.

Unauthorized modifications after installation.

Inspector Verification

The inspector should verify:

The messenger strand is free from visible damage.

No broken or separated strand wires are present.

The strand is free from kinks, crushing, or bird-caging.

Corrosion does not exceed owner or manufacturer acceptance limits.

The strand is properly supported throughout the span.

Damage has not occurred during lashing or cable installation.

The completed installation complies with all applicable project requirements.

Evidence Required

Inspector field notes.

Photographic documentation.

Span location documentation.

Approved construction drawings.

Daily inspection reports.

Contractor corrective action documentation.

Severity Classification

Critical

Damage to the messenger strand may reduce the structural capacity of the aerial system, create public safety hazards, and compromise the long-term reliability of the communications network. Damaged strand shall be repaired or replaced before project acceptance.

Acceptance Criteria

Messenger strand shall be free from physical damage and shall comply with the project specifications, owner construction standards, manufacturer installation requirements, approved construction drawings, the National Electrical Safety Code (NESC), and contract documents. The installed strand shall maintain its intended structural capacity and support the aerial facilities without evidence of deterioration or damage.

Required Corrective Action

The contractor shall replace or otherwise correct any damaged messenger strand in accordance with the manufacturer recommendations and approved project requirements. Repairs shall not reduce the structural integrity of the aerial system or create additional maintenance concerns. All corrective actions shall be documented in the project records.

Reinspection Required

Yes

The inspector shall verify that the damaged strand has been replaced or repaired, the completed span complies with all applicable project requirements, and no additional damage is present before recommending acceptance.

Deficiency Closure Requirements

The deficiency may be closed when:

Damaged messenger strand has been repaired or replaced.

The completed span complies with project requirements.

Supporting documentation has been updated.

Reinspection has been performed.

Manufacturer and owner requirements have been satisfied.

Any affected hardware has been inspected.

Project documentation has been finalized.

Inspector Notes

Inspectors should evaluate the entire messenger strand rather than focusing only on the area supporting the fiber cable. Damage occurring during delivery, installation, lashing, or subsequent construction activities may not always be immediately apparent. Particular attention should be given to locations near dead-ends, suspension hardware, splice sleeves, pull-off locations, and areas where equipment may have contacted the strand during construction.

Inspectors should document the type, location, and apparent extent of the damage but should not determine the remaining structural capacity of the strand. Conditions such as broken outer wires, bird-caging, severe corrosion, crushing, or permanent deformation should be documented for corrective action in accordance with the project requirements. Where the severity of the damage cannot be readily determined, the condition should be referred for evaluation by the owner or engineer before project acceptance.

Common Field Indicators

Inspectors should pay additional attention when any of the following conditions are observed:

Broken strand wires are visible.

Bird-caging or wire separation is present.

Kinks or permanent bends exist in the messenger strand.

Corrosion or rust is evident.

Abrasion where the strand contacts hardware.

Crushing or deformation from construction equipment.

Fresh damage near dead-ends or suspension hardware.

Excessive strand movement or vibration during normal conditions.

Evidence that the strand was improperly handled during installation..

Ready to Build a More Consistent Inspection Program?

Every organization wants consistent inspections, but consistency doesn’t happen by chance. It comes from clearly defined standards, repeatable decision-making, and inspectors who evaluate work through the same process.

If you’re building a new inspection program or looking to strengthen an existing one, let’s schedule a conversation. I’d be happy to learn about your organization, understand your goals, and share how we’ve helped companies build inspection systems that create long-term consistency.

Purchase Fiber Broadband Simplified Book

Developing inspectors who can verify work like this is the purpose of the Inspector Development System.

The Hardest Part of Inspection Isn’t Finding Problems