Specs and submittals

Why this matters

Drawings show where things go and how big they are. Specifications say what quality they must be and how they are installed. Submittals are the contractor's proof of what they actually intend to buy and build. Submittal review is one of the most frequent tasks given to early-career engineers, and it is where many mismatches (the wrong voltage motor, a weaker concrete mix, a breaker with too low an interrupting rating) are caught before they reach the site.

The core idea: specs define requirements, submittals prove compliance

How specifications are organised

In North America most building and infrastructure specifications follow the Construction Specifications Institute's MasterFormat, which groups work into numbered divisions, for example:

Each section (for example 23 21 23 for hydronic pumps) usually has three parts:

1. Part 1 General: scope, references to standards, submittal requirements, quality assurance, warranty.
2. Part 2 Products: the performance and material requirements, and acceptable manufacturers.
3. Part 3 Execution: installation, testing, start-up and cleaning.

Specifications use mandatory language ("shall") for requirements. They cite standards (ASTM, UL, NEMA, AWWA and others) rather than repeating them.

What a submittal contains

• Product data: manufacturer catalogue sheets with the selected model, options and ratings marked.
• Shop drawings: drawings made by the fabricator or contractor showing exactly how an item will be made or installed (steel connections, rebar placement, panel layouts).
• Samples: physical finishes or materials.
• Certificates and test reports: mill certificates, factory test results, listings.

The contractor reviews and stamps the submittal first, then sends it to the design team.

How an engineer reviews a submittal

1. Find the governing requirements: the spec section, the drawings and schedules, and any addenda or approved changes.
2. Build a checklist of every measurable requirement: performance, ratings, materials, dimensions, standards, options, warranty, required documents.
3. Compare line by line. Mark each item as compliant, non-compliant, or not shown.
4. Check coordination: does it fit the space, match the electrical supply, connect to the adjacent systems?
5. Write clear comments, each tied to a spec paragraph ("23 21 23, 2.2.C requires 208 V, 3-phase; submitted motor is 230 V, single-phase.").
6. Choose an action. Typical stamps are No exceptions taken, Make corrections noted, Revise and resubmit and Rejected. Wording varies by firm and contract.

The review is usually for general conformance with the design intent. It does not relieve the contractor of responsibility for dimensions, quantities, fabrication and means and methods. Firms phrase their review stamps carefully for exactly this reason: follow your firm's wording and procedure.

Worked example

The specification requires: "Pump shall deliver 30 gpm at 45 ft total dynamic head. Motor shall be 208 V, 3-phase, 60 Hz, maximum 1,800 rpm nominal speed."

The submitted data sheet shows a pump curve passing through 30 gpm at 46 ft, and a motor rated 208-230/460 V, 3-phase, 60 Hz, 3,450 rpm.

• Flow and head: compliant (the operating point meets or slightly exceeds the requirement; check it is not far off the best-efficiency point).
• Voltage and phase: compliant (208 V, 3-phase is covered by the dual-voltage rating).
• Speed: non-compliant (3,450 rpm exceeds the 1,800 rpm maximum).

Action: Revise and resubmit with the comment "Spec 2.2.C: maximum nominal speed 1,800 rpm. Submit a 1,800 rpm (4-pole) motor selection with a matching pump curve."

RFIs and substitutions

• A request for information (RFI) is the contractor's formal question about unclear or conflicting documents. Answer in writing, citing the documents; if the answer changes scope or cost, it goes through the change process.
• A substitution request proposes a product different from the specified ones. The contractor must show it is equal; the engineer is not obliged to accept it.

Common mistakes

• Reviewing only the highlighted model. Options and accessories hidden in the small print often do not comply.
• Vague comments. "Check motor" helps nobody; cite the paragraph and state the requirement.
• Approving outside your discipline. Route structural supports, electrical feeders and controls to the right reviewers.
• Redesigning in the review. The review checks compliance; design changes need a formal change.
• Missing the clock. Contracts set review periods; late reviews delay the job.

Quick recap

• Specs (MasterFormat divisions, Parts 1 to 3) define quality; submittals show what the contractor will supply.
• Review against a checklist built from the spec, drawings and addenda, and cite paragraphs in every comment.
• Choose a clear action and follow your firm's review-stamp wording and procedure.
• RFIs answer questions; substitutions must be shown to be equal.

Try it

Open the Do tab and review a short sample submittal against a spec excerpt, then choose the review action.