I am working with a new client whose Submittal Action stamp has 6 actions, 3 of them I understand completely, these are: “No Exception Taken”, “Resubmit, and “Reject”, I am confused about the other three: “Note Markings”, “Comment Attached”, and Confirm Markings”. Isn’t “Note Markings” and “Comment Attached” the same? Would one of my peers like to educate me.
Maybe more importantly what does the contractor and his subs thinks this means.
That’s not important right now, I have to interpret what the architect wants so I can prepare the spec section. The Architect sent me his stamp so I could do that. At this point there is no Contractor to ask. The Architect is surprised I’ve never seen this language on a Submittal Review stamp.
Jerome:
It’s not your job to interpret what the architect’s action markings on their submittal stamp mean. It’s the architect’s job to explain them to you. If your architect client can’t articulate what the markings on their own stamp mean, how can they decide which marking to use, and how can they justify that to a contractor in the case of a dispute?
I agree with Dave. Ask the Architect. If they can’t articulate the meanings, you probably have other things to worry about with the client.
From a pure grammar perspective, “Note Markings” would indicate to me marks on drawings, while “Comment Attached” would indicate a separate sheet from the Architect.
Anon, its a new client, I expect all kinds of fun until the specs are issued.
Am I the only specwriter on this forum that coordinates the Architect’s actual Submittal Stamp with the Architect’s Actions delineated in the specs? Say it isn’t so?
I just define the differences between information submittals and action submittals
Jerome,
This cowboy does what you do.
I would just take a stab at defining each term and then send your definitions to the Architect for confirmation. The terms are confusing and therefore do require definition. Here is what I would assume each term means:
No Exception Taken: Submittal appears to comply with intent of Contract Documents. Architect has no exceptions to submittal.
Resubmit: Except as indicated, Submittal appears to comply with intent of Contract Documents. Architect requires revision and resubmission of submittal.
Reject: Submittal does not comply with intent of Contract Documents. Architect rejects submittal.
Note Markings: Architect takes no exceptions to submittal as corrected per Architects markings.
Comment Attached: Architect takes no exceptions to submittal as corrected per Architects attached comments.
Confirm Markings: Architect requires Contractors confirmation of Architects markings.
(p.s. I don’t see the need for both a “reject” and a “resubmit” action. It seems that all rejected submittals would need to be resubmitted and all requests to resubmit would be rejections of the submittal. It also seems that the stamp would do better to just require all markings to be confirmed.)
Nathan, on Condo work, IMHO,the spec language should match the actual stamp, or at least this is what several attorneys have told me, off the record. The Submittal Stamp in turn should be approved by the Architect’s Insurance Provider…oops, let’s not start a conversation on the use of the words “approved” vs “reviewed” shall we, there are many other previous posts on this forum that tackle those semantics.
The project in question is not a Condo, however I tend to carry thru this reasoning on all my building types, seldom a complaint from clients, of course CSI probably may not approve.
Thanks, Richard, a great response, very helpful.
I interpret it to be this way:
Architect will check one of the first three to signify his or her action on the submittal.
Then architect will select one or more of the last three (or none of them) to indicate where to find his or her comments (if any)
If this is true, then the last three are probably superfluous, since it is the contractors responsibility to examine the returned submittal for comments.
Just a guess…
Jerome, the submittal stamp process is defined by whats in the contract. The specs can amplify that, but not revise it. DPIC’s manual (before the days of XL Group) said something like, “It doesn’t matter what flowery watered down language you use on your stamp. If you use the AIA 201, you review, approve, or take other appropriate action. This has been tested and verified in the court of law on many occasions.”
I do believe there is a difference between “Resubmit” and “Reject.”
I would request that a package be resubmitted if what was submitted basically complied with the requirements, but there were numerous corrections that need to be made or if there was a substantial error that needs correcting.
I would reject a submittal if the entire package did not comply with the requirements, such as the product submitted is a substitution.
I agree, there are better actions for a submittal stamp. What if the submittal was not required? Which of those actions would apply?
Nathan, I AGREE, unfortunately I am seldom privy to my client’s contracts, and IMHO, I fear many of my clients lack a thorough understand of AIA 201. I stopped arguing with clients years ago about their Submittal Stamps, as part of my agreement, the Architect must provide a clean copy of their stamp which I than use to prepare the specs. If the language does not meet AIA 201, its my client’s problem.
Yes. Let the architect answer for submittal stamp.
Stamp language aside for a moment …
How do you coordinate the General Requirements with the General Conditions if you aren’t privy to it?
Back to stamp language …
I wouldn’t bother trying to convince a client to correct the language on the stamp for the same reasons you state. Usually it has been hashed out with attorneys and insurance providers to the point that everybody’s CYA language is tripping all over itself (and everybody thinks they’ve gotten what they want without realizing it conflicts with the General Conditions). The argument was over the second the stamp was ordered.
FWIW, I do coordinate the stamp language in my specs. But I only ever have to coordinate it once, with my firm’s stamp, and then it’s done.
Guest:
How do you coordinate the General Requirements with the General Conditions if you aren’t privy to it?
I have a very good contract, been doing it this way for over 25 years as an independent specwriter, no arguments to date.