One of my clients thinks that preparing MEP specs is my responsibility, have never done this, curious if any of my fellow independent specwriters are providing this service. I wear too many hats as is, not looking to add an engineer’s hat now?
In my experience with writing specs for Architects, the MEP specs were always prepared by the respective engineering discipline.
Where I am now, the respective in-house engineers are marking up their own sections.
I think your clients needs to talk with his MEP consultants.
Richard, this is a new client based in Ohio, wanted to make sure this wasn’t a regional change.
As long as I have been doing specs - East Coast or West Coast, and even Illinois & Colorado - the engineers did their own specs.
The only time I ever touched MEP specs was for formatting issues. Content is above my pay grade.
Also, what is the specwriter’s responsibility when it comes to obtaining Consultant’s specifications. I have found that most consultants do not respond to my requests or demands, they tend to wait until the guy who writes the check to ask for specs, esp on projects where schedules are tough.
Tell your client, that “preparing” will mean you will coordinate with MEP engineers of record by giving them a typically specification format to follow for that particular project.
Have you coordinated with MEP on this project? If not, get in touch with them and express your concerns. What did they say to you?
Typically you will find they will do their own specifications.
Jerome,
Are you an in-house specifier?
Jerome,
Even as an in-house specifier, we don’t prepare the MEP sections, nor any other consultant where we don’t have a master for them to markup. And even if we do have a master (always structural and sometimes Landscaping) they mark it up and we edit it and they own it. MEP, its 100% theirs.
We require a review draft at about 70-75 percent printed on paper which we review as well as the final (which we take as pdf files.
As to non-delivery, evan as the internal specifier, this is not something that I do. I set the schedule for what is needed when to make various reviews and dates, but it is the Project Architect or Project Manager to get the items. I make it a point that I do not communicate directly with any consultant, it all goes through the PA or PM so they know that status at all times. There are rare points when do deal with them direct - but it is truly rare and the PA or PM always knows what is going on.
That is the way it should be for an independent at well.
William
Melissa, I am independent, no ties to any other firm, other than my own - Lazarcitec Architectural Services, Inc.
Hmmmmmmmmm Jerry…think about that again…you may want to offer this service to your clients as a cash cow…if you offer the same “quality” product I see in my experience then:
a)you don’t have to follow those nonsensical section numbers or names that are shoved down your throat in MasterFormat because none of those things make the least little bit of sense anyways
b) you don’t have to follow any pesky standards like SectionFormat / PageFormat
c) your header information doesn’t have to be consistent from one Section to the next…heck, the header information can even be different from one page to the next within a Section
c) nobody expects your numbering to actually increase in value with subsequent paragraphs
d) no concrete details are required, especially not anything that would actually stand up in a court of law or for that matter any erroneous details like REFERENCE STANDARDS, or even PART 1 - GENERAL information at all because you have your own discipline specific general requirements that lump anything you can think of (whether they apply to this project or not) and that hopefully covers all possible bases (see more on this topic in point e) )
e) you can completely ignore Division 1 because you have your very own Mechanical and Electrical General Requirements Sections in Division 15 and 16…or if you’re actually using MF2010 you just add them to a “made up” Division 20 (no word of a lie, the only project I have done using MF2010 the mechanical consultant has in his spec “Division 20 MECHANICAL WORK GENERAL” including 20 01 00 Mechanical Work General Instructions, 20 05 00 Basic Materials and Methods abd 20 07 00 Insulation). But the electrical consultant had to be much more resourceful because he didn’t have any “Reserved For Future Expansion” Divisions before his Division 26 so he used Section 26 00 00 Electrical Work General Instructions but was sure to note “This Section applies to and is an integral part of all Sections of Divisions 26, 27 and 28.”…problem solved!
f) You can wait until the 11th hour to submit your Project Manual Sections to the “Architect” or his spec writer (or independent spec consultant) so that he barely has time to co-ordinate the Table of Contents, let alone review any content before the Project is issued for Tender (I thought that’s how we like our steak??)
g) you can adopt the “that’s OK, we can pick up those little details in the addendum” and then look at the “Architect” with a blank look on your face when he points out that your M or E addendum is half the number of pages of your original Project Manual Sections like you have no idea what he is talking about.
I’m sure there are more good reasons to start writing Mechanical and Electrical specifications but they elude me right now…if I think of any more I will append them to the list!
AND FINALLY…BEFORE THE MEP PARTICIPANTS START SENDING ME HATE MAIL OR DEATH THREATS, PLEASE REFER BACK TO MY FIRST PARAGRAPH WHERE I STATED 'if you offer the same “quality” product I see in my experience then:"…I DIDN’T SAY IT WAS your SPEC I WAS REFERRING TO! TakeItEase…you’ll live longer!!
Paul, this is why I like wearing only one hat. Besides I am so busy (knock on wood) right now, I don’t have time for this nonsense. The irony is my agreement is very clear as to what my role is and my relationship with consultants, sometimes my clients don’t read the agreement carefully.
We once had a rather large hospital project in Utah where the local engineer absolutely refused to provide specifications.
Until that is, I got him on speaker phone from San Francisco and read aloud to him every word and editing note from the MasterSpec template for “Structural Steel”; asking him if I should keep each item in, delete it, or modify it per his direction.
After a couple hours of my voice he agreed to provide the DIV 3 and DIV 5 Sections we needed.
Jerome,
As the independent specifier, you may need to train your new client about what you do. You are right, the other consultants may not care what you say, because you don’t pay them. Schedules and deadlines need to come from the Architect.
As to writing Structural and MEP section, you might remind the Architect that their professional liability does not cover this work.
I prefer that consultants send sections in their final form, in PDF, directly to the Architect. Sometimes the computer elves garble content, especially symbols. I once received a plumbing section in MSWord where all the fraction symbols turned into pi symbols. That story usually scares the Architect into demandng PDFs.
With recalcitrant consultants, have the Architect finish the table of contents. Then you don’t need to monitor your email through the evening, waiting for the last few sections.
Paul, Jerome:
Your posts had me rolling on the floor. As the wise man said, “It’s funny because it’s true.”
I’d start telling stories about civil engineers and specifications, but that’d be kicking the guy while he’s down.
On a more serious note, I’m late to this party and most (if not all) of the good advice has already been given.
It’s hard to tell a client he/she is wrong; I prefer saying, “That turns out not to be the case.” 
Back to the humor: Dilbert and Wally are less-than-polite in what are probably my two favorite Dilbert strips of all time, but their wisdom shines through.
http://dilbert.com/strips/comic/1996-05-30/
http://dilbert.com/strips/comic/1996-05-31/
(And, when I was an in-house specifier, I had these conversations over and over again, only nicer.)
Scot, thanks for the humor, much needed today.
I agree with the “consultant sends PDFs to the Architect”. in fact, now that I’m with the Architect, the consultants send us PDFs. I’ve had the same printing elves show up – but more importantly, the architect is not the typist (or word processor ) for the consultant. these days, with almost everything submitted to the printer electronically, the only thing I do with consultant specs is roll them into the PDF and then transmit for printing.
I receive all Consultant specs in PDF, if it is in any other form I don’t accept them. Once I receive them I do not read them for content, but rather for coordination with the remainder of the specs. Most of the time the Consultant will refer to spec sections that don’t exist and end up being fuel for questions that waste time answering. As an example I just received Consultant specs for a MF04 job, but it was obvious the Engineer added zeros to the end of each section, the specs were originally from MF95. To make matters worse it was also obvious the spec sections were the firms’s masters, since the headers had “Masterspec’s” name and a 2005 publication date. (btw a national firm, 40 times my size). I’ve advised the architect and the Consultant of my concerns, so far its not keeping them up at night.
I’ve found wrong building codes cited, manufacturers that don’t exist, and even references to other jobs, it upsets me that these Consultants care little about what goes into their specifications - I know how important accuracy is, but on many jobs I seem to be alone in my dedication to issuing proper specifications. This is of course private sector work, I know this crap would not be tolerated on a government project. And I also understand time shortages, but what really stinks is that many of these consultants submit the same specifications with the same errors job after job. It blows me away when I look at previous projects and see the same errors with the same Consultant.
It seems some people never learn.
Well time to get off my soapbox, its been nice venting, cheaper than a therapist, the work goes on, welcome to South Florida architecture.
Lisa, I also give the Architect an editable TOC file to add in last minute spec sections; and I require hard copy Project Manuals be sent to us as record sets, of course nowadays we seldom get those Record Sets. We do manage to get one or two calls on every job about why we are missing a section that is in the TOC but not in the Project Manual. It also seems that no matter who authored which spec section we seem to field all the gripes regarding spec errors, the poor specwriter gets blamed for everything. I’ve grown a pretty thick skin over the years, come with the territory.
There are also specs by “consultants” of the Architect other than M-E-P, who may produce specifications to be incorporated in the Project Manual. Based on my experience, I find that I have to deal with specs produced by:
- civil engineer
- landscape architect
- structural engineer (no architectural considerations allowed, apparently)
- roofing and waterproofing consultant (including gas mitigation consultant)
- curtainwall consultant
- door hardware consultant
- signage and graphics consultant
- medical, process, materials handling and other specialized equipment consultants/delegated design contractors
- elevator/vertical transport consultant
- audio/visual equipment consultant
- telecommunications consultant
- fire protection consultant, for both fire detection and alarm system, and fire suppression systems
- security consultant, for intrusion detection and alarm systems, and spec review for security
- Owner or Construction Manager who produces Division 01 - General Requirements (Lord have mercy on us)
- Owner, Owner’s legal counsel or Construction Manager who produces Bidding & Construction Contract Documents
- other consultants who do not edit specs but provide information to be incorporated into specifications, including
’ geotechnical engineer
’ acoustical engineer
’ sustainable design (“Green”) consultant, for both administrative requirements for compliance with LEED, CHPS or “Green” building code and maybe even product selections
and last but not least, the interior architect/designer.
I’m confident that there are others. And I’m also confident that I can only format but not technically edit specifications by these consultants.
Underlying all of this is the need for the Architect or Design Professional of Record to manage and coordinate this diverse cast of players. If the Architect or Design Professional of Record is not knowledgeable about the many technologies involved in the overall design, that’s a problem that is beyond the specifications writer’s scope of services … but somehow usually gets done more-or-less.
John
Your characterization of structural engineers ignores those structural engineers who are highly attuned to architectural considerations.