My initial comment is were you aware that their company procedure was to QC check the certificates before issue? I would expect this to be discussed at the contract review stage so all parties were aware of it. You may not have known if the analyst was not employed by the contractor – but I would also have thought the analyst should have discussed this issue with the supervisor when they arrived on site so it wasn’t a surprise upon completion of the work.
Secondly, if that is a company rule, then there should have been a QC checker available on a Sunday to allow for the certificates to be checked and issued.
Lastly, the QC checker is most likely to be checking the certificates for grammatical errors and any minor omissions e.g. equipment ID not completed or checking the written statement from Stage 2 for content etc. The reason for this QC check is most likely to try and prevent the need for re-issuing certificates so that spelling mistakes etc. are corrected before formally issuing.
It sounds like the analytical company may need to revisit their procedure for issuing certificates to account for having them QC checked i.e. have a checker available as soon as the report is “ready” this would avoid the analyst being unable to issue a report on site. Once QC checked then the analyst would request the supervisors signature for final sign off.
Personally, if I were the analyst/analyst company I would have made arrangements at my end – at the very least – to allow for the certificate for the DCU to be issued on the same day to allow it to be taken away.
Depending on what the QC check involved and who had to do it – e.g. if it were a senior manager it may cause undue delays depending on what is perceived to be checked. If it was for someone else to “sense check” or spell check a report then I believe any other 4SC analyst could check it – that could be as simple as sending that person photographs of paperwork or emailing a completed certificate to be read over and “okayed” before formally issuing, which shouldn’t take any longer than a few minutes.
Would the analyst have allowed the supervisor to photograph the paperwork/report to show what had been recorded before the QC check so at least the supervisor would have some “record” of events?