The (Almost) New Age of
Submittals, or, “Lemme Fax This to You for
Approval”
Coming back from what I’ve been writing about
recently to the world of construction and engineering, I find
myself amazed at how some contractors seem to believe major
construction is not much different from a handyman building a
bar in his basement, while others who (should) know better
continue to send me unactionable submittals. I wrote of this issue
a bit, back in
February of 2005 in Volume
5, Number 2, which was entitled ‘OK, We Finished All the Pretty Pictures,
Why is it so Hard to Get the Thing
Built?’
Why indeed?
First, some explanation for those of you who are
not in the Building Design and Construction field, and thus
might have need of a formal definition of what the word
‘submittal’ means when used in the context of that field. The rest of you,
however, might also want to hang in there with me on
this. I say this because we in the
field use terms like ‘shop drawings’ and ‘catalogue cuts’ (or
simply ‘cuts’) as synonyms when they’re actually subsets of
the all-inclusive term ‘submittal.’
With the reality that a picture is probably
worth more than a
thousand words (attorneys’ use of a dialect known as
‘legalese’ in attempts to prove the contrary notwithstanding)
the package design professionals present to contractors to bid
upon, and ultimately build from comprises both graphic and
textual components, usually referred to as drawings and
specifications.
When projects become truly large and complex (think an
automobile manufacturing facility) there may be hundreds upon
hundreds of drawings and thousands upon thousands of pages of
specifications.
While the largest projects I do may require as
many as one or two dozen drawings, my specifications comprise
a single drawing sheet filled with text for each building
trade (HVAC, Electrical, and Plumbing/Sprinkler)
involved. But from the most complex of
projects to the simplest, there is a gulf that has to be
bridged between the plan for a thing and the thing itself.
The instrument which builds that bridge is the
submittal. Believe it or not, this is even the case for
turnkey design-build projects, where a single entity performs
both functions.
Specifications will call for a certain number of copies
of submittals (by the way, while the term ‘submission’ is
sometimes used, the field seems to have gravitated towards
‘submittal,’ perhaps as an attempt to narrow the meaning of
the term) for review by members of the Design and Construction
teams, prior to the purchase of any materials or the
fabrication of any systems or
structures.
Design and
Construction teams?
Yeah, well, that happens as often
a
s I get as many copies of a submittal as are asked for in
the specifications, which brings us back to the title of this
piece.
When Roebling designed and built the Brooklyn
Bridge, his
drawings were what one would today call shop drawings because
he was also fabricating the materials and components
to build it from.
When a Construction team is building from my drawings
I’ll get shop drawings of, say, ductwork (‘tin’ drawings)
which will reprise my design drawings in a form which shows
the factory duct sections which have to be joined in the field
to comprise the entire system, and which shows piping, other
utilities, and structural elements which have to be got around
to allow the installation of the
system.
It has to be this way because often obstructions
are not discoverable until pre-construction demolition reveals
them, or in the case of new work, not able to be accounted for
until other trades figure out how to route their stuff. And this coordination
is what the General Contractor is supposed to be checking before the
shop drawing ever finds its way to me and the project’s
Architect.
Would that it were so.
Not only have I almost never (in over 25
years of solo practice) received submittals with a GC’s review
stamp on them before they came to me, but of late, I’ve been
receiving faxed or e-mailed submittals, and thereby hangs the
intent of this piece.
Now I actually can almost understand that
a bidder/contractor may miss something when figuring a job,
but not knowing that ’x’ number of copies of submittals are
required doesn’t cut it.
Why multiple copies? Well, the ductwork grille and louver manufacturer needs
a copy with my stamp on it to show s/he has complied with
specifications s/he may never have seen, the Architect needs
one for her/his records to confirm the finishes are acceptable
to her/him, the construction super needs one so the folks in
the field know what grille should be installed where, I need
one for my records to confirm the performance requirements
(especially, but not only, if it’s a substitution), and
lastly, the owner needs one so s/he knows what s/he actually
bought.
We’re
already up to five copies. What if the submittal
is for a pump? The plumbing sub submits it (through the GC),
but now the electrical sub should also get a copy to
account for any special control wiring requirements
which may exist.
OK, you say to me if you’re making the
submission, why can’t I just fax you a copy for you to make as
many copies as you need?
Several reasons, the first of which is that the
damned fax is often unreadable, especially in the case of fine
print information, which is usually the most important thing on the page.
OK, you say, how about I e-mail you a high
resolution .pdf?
Well, why should you think your time is
more valuable than mine? Not only do I have to mark up half a
dozen or more copies of a submittal, but now I have to make
the copies too?
Why, you ask, don’t you just mark up the
one I sent, and
then make copies for distribution to all who need it?
Ah. . . the (almost) new age of
submittals.
Why do you suppose red (or green, or mauve, or
whatever) ink is used in marking up a submittal? That’s right! To make
it easy to see, and thus distinguish review comments from the
rest of the document.
Until a few years ago, distributing Xerox copies
of submittals was asking for trouble, but with the advent of
color copying, this becomes a possibility. This is still a cost in time and material that is
shifted to me, however.
Electronic copies and markup software may
solve this problem, but there remains one problem which has
been ignored for so long, and by so many, I really believe
most are not even aware of its existence.
We’re back to where I spoke of hoping in vain
for submittals with a GC’s review stamp already on them.
That’s only part of it. Actually, I should get
them with both a GC’s stamp and an Architect’s stamp already on
them.
What!!!
Yep.
Neither the Architect nor the GC should retain a copy
of the submittal package until it has gone “up” the chain to
me and come back “down” from me, and the vendor should not get
his/her copy until it has come back down from everybody else,
so the vendor’s copy has everybody’s comments on
it.
Just as the submittal process is my last chance
to review what I’ve called for to make sure I’ve avoided
making a mistake, the double pass (up and down the chain)
gives those with the most to coordinate, and thus the most to
lose, yet a third look at the thing before construction
dollars start flowing and steel gets cut or concrete gets
poured.
Paper is (much)
cheaper.
