Planning guide · Published by Atlantis NDT

API 510, 570 or 653: clarify the asset and service you are requesting

Separate pressure-vessel, piping and storage-tank service enquiries from individual certification and NDT examination work.

Open the working brief Jump to the decision table ↓

Start with the decision you need to make

Start by identifying the equipment and the service required. API 510, API 570 and API 653 references commonly arise in pressure-vessel, piping and aboveground storage-tank programmes respectively. A request may concern programme review, an inspector’s responsibilities, specific NDT examinations or engineering assessment. Those are not interchangeable purchases. State the governing requirements, owner responsibilities and expected deliverables so the supplier can confirm the actual scope and required personnel. Candidates seeking individual certification should consult API directly.

What to check and why it matters

Use these questions to reveal missing evidence before deciding the next step.
Decision area	Evidence to prepare	Question to resolve
Pressure equipment	Provide the vessel identification, construction and service records, prior findings and whether the request relates to planned work or a repair.	Is the requested deliverable an examination report, an inspection review or an engineering assessment?
Piping circuits	Describe the circuit boundaries, material records, location references and the reason for the current examination. Identify changes since the previous campaign.	Who determines the required locations and interprets the results within the piping programme?
Storage tanks	Separate floor, shell, roof and associated work, with drawings and preparation requirements. Clarify which inspection and assessment roles are being procured.	Are cleaning, access, specialist examinations and final review separately assigned?

Illustrative example · Not a customer case study

Apply the questions to a real-world situation

Hypothetical enquiry: a buyer asks for “API inspection” but provides only a list of thickness readings required on piping. The clarified brief identifies the piping circuit, the owner’s programme, the specified examination and the person responsible for assessment. If additional inspector or engineering services are needed, they are stated separately. This gives bidders a comparable scope without implying that collecting readings satisfies the entire programme.

Prepare your working brief

Capture what is known and name the unresolved questions. You can use the worksheet without registering or sending information to Atlantis.

Asset category: Identify vessel, piping or tank and provide an anonymized asset reference.
Required service: Separate examination, inspection review, programme support and assessment.
Governing documents: List requirements and editions for the authorized reviewer to confirm.
Available records: Describe drawings, previous reports, repairs and preparation status.
Role boundaries: Assign owner, inspector, examiner and engineering responsibilities.

Create and download your brief →

When you need project-specific support

For vessel-specific requirements, review pressure vessel inspection services. Confirm the current deliverables and fit for your requirement with the Atlantis team.

For circuit-specific requirements, review API 570 piping inspection services. Confirm the current deliverables and fit for your requirement with the Atlantis team.

For tank-specific requirements, review API 653 tank inspection services. Confirm the current deliverables and fit for your requirement with the Atlantis team.

For a US enquiry, include the project state and time zone, the responsible employer or owner, and the documents governing the work. For other countries, include the relevant recognition or customer requirements. Delivery and availability are confirmed for the engagement.

Request an inspection scope review

Scope and further reading

Atlantis does not offer API training through this resource. Confirm inspection capabilities and qualifications for the particular engagement; this guide establishes no intervals or acceptance decisions.

Continue with the detailed companion guide, Separating Owner, Inspector, Examiner and Engineering-Review Handoff Records, for a related evidence-handling workflow and its source references. The planning suggestions here are original discussion aids, not approved procedures or reproductions of standards.

Browse every guide in this resource library →