David Stutzman: August 2010 Archives

"Limiting the scope of the spec writers may save a few thousand dollars during the design phase, but it can result in expensive conflicts after construction contracts are awarded."

- Derek B. McCowan, PE, Simpson Gumpertz & Heger Inc., Waltham, Mass, "Using Spec Writers  Properly," Consulting - Specifying Engineer, June/July 2010.

When will this statement become apparently true? Probably only after a problem is discovered that could have been avoided.

If the specifier (I prefer this to spec writer because it connotes a project contribution greater than writing) is involved during early design and participates throughout the project, the design intent will be better understood. Then the intent that cannot be detailed can be conveyed to the contractor through the specifications.

To achieve the best results, specifications must be, well... specific. They must describe what is required for the specific project for the specific conditions, not generic suitable for any project. Specifications can be written so they are "right" or so they are "not wrong." These two are very different.

Sometimes specifiers are forced to write a "not wrong" spec. This usually occurs when the design schedule is short, when the specifier is asked to start near project completion, when little documentation of product selections exists, or any combination of these. The "not wrong" spec is generic, non-specific. It lists basic products and materials, but does little to address project specific conditions. The detail of terminations and interfaces with adjacent materials - issues that can easily lead to failures - are glossed over or not even mentioned.  This lack of specificity can lead to unnecessary, expensive change orders. Processing these change orders increases construction administration costs, and can result in budgetary disaster on a project.

To produce a spec that is "right," the specifier must understand the project and the design intent. This information cannot be conveyed from progress drawings alone. Project narratives explaining the design thought process are invaluable for an overall understanding. Project meeting notes and design team interviews play an important role, conveying the critical issues the team considered when making product selections and refining drawing details.

Ensure the specifier is involved, early, and continuously. Make sharing available information, routine. Most importantly, respond to questions, thoughtfully and timely. With proper information, your specifier will consistently produce specs "right" for your project.

Competitive Construction Procurement: What do I need besides the drawings and spec? Bidders need additional information about the bidding process to ensure their bids are responsive to the owner's needs and hopefully (for them) successful. Learn what documents are required for competitive bidding and what the key elements must be included in the Invitation to Bid to help ensure a smooth process.

Visit http://www.conspectusinc.com/publications.htm to view or download 2040-Bid Requirements 10.08.01 and all previous Tech Tips.

Share your comments, your opinions, about this month's Tech Tips, by posting a comment, here.

Fifty-three members of CSI's Specifying Practice Group met August 5 to discuss the updates for two of CSI's formatting documents: SectionFormat and PageFormat. The meeting included wonderful discussion and interaction among the members while reviewing the specific updates. The power outage at CSI headquarters, ended Erica Cox's ability to show poll questions and to field questions from the group, but did not deter the others from completing the meeting.

The latest revisions to SectionFormat and Page Format were published in 2008. This was the first update to the documents in 10 years. The new documents are now being used by the commercial master specifications providers such as ARCOM's MasterSpec and CSRF's SPECTEXT. So the industry will begin to see a shift to these new formats as new project specifications are started using the current commercial master specs.

View the presentation

Join your colleagues to discuss current issues affecting everyone who must read or write construction specifications. Join the group to receive automatic meeting notices and login instructions. The group meets the first Thursday of each month from 3:00 - 4:00 PM eastern time.

Group members agreed that they expect Project Manuals to be issued with consistent formatting.  They also agreed that industry accepted good practice is the main reason for the expectation. SectionFormat and PageFormat provide the structure for consistent formatting. PageFormat includes information about how to present text on a printed or electronic page so it is easily readable and so important information can be found quickly. SectionFormat sets the order and hierarchy of the text within the specification section. The basic section structure is an outline with CSI's famous 3 parts: Part 1 - General, Part 2 - Products, and Part 3 - Execution and article titles forming the first two outline levels.

PageFormat allows for alternating headers and footers to accommodate duplex printing. This will keep the more important information at the unbound edge of the paper and the less important information at the bound edge. PageFormat gives examples of what is considered more and less important. The only mandatory information is the section title, section number, and page number.

Headers and footers can include either project information or spec section information, but should not include both. Project information includes the project number, title, location. Section information includes section title, number, and page number.

Group members were divided about their preferences for using alternating headers and footers on printed and electronic specifications and the medium for published specs. With all the opinions, perhaps this could be a debate in itself during a future meeting.

PageFormat introduced a new concept, allowing tables and graphics to be inserted into the specifications. Both concepts clearly acknowledge that specs are not produced with an IBM Selectric Typewriter anymore. The group seemed to believe that graphic images in the specs will be limited. Tables can be placed in Part 2 or at the end of Part 3. Using word processing tables rather than tabbed text will help maintain formatting especially when files are shared among several users on different computers.

Underlining text should be avoided according to PageFormat. Underlining includes URL identification.  These statements drew considerable discussion from the group. Underlining may interfere with using track changes to show revisions to specifications. The Microsoft Word's default is to show new text as blue and underlined.

And here is where CSI Headquarters lost power. So member comments were abruptly ended, just when the discussion was getting good.

SectionFormat was expanded from a partially filled single page to nearly two full pages of suggested specification article titles. As you can imagine, new titles were added, some were moved from one Part to another, and some were reorganized within the same Part. Part 1 - General was reorganized to follow Division 01 - General Requirements. And new primary and secondary article titles were included to match the same tiles used in Division 01.

An option was provided to specify submittals as a single article or as Action Submittals and Informational Submittals. Feedback after the meeting from group members indicated they liked the idea of splitting the submittals article into Action and Informational. The list will help the reviewers to know what is expected of them. And hopefully prevents informational submittals from being marked "Approved" and being returned to the contractor.

Part 2 updates also included some new primary article titles. A new concept was introduced for specifying systems and assemblies. Most of the Part 2 article titles can be gathered under a single article to describe complete systems and assemblies. Or these same article titles can be used independently to specify multiple products or materials. How this Part 2 concept will be implemented, remains to be seen. Specifying systems and assemblies in a single article may create a deep outline structure within a section, a condition that PageFormat indicates should be avoided.

Primary article titles were added to Part 3 to capture Division 01 titles for Startup, Closeout, and Maintenance. The article for Schedules was replaced by Attachments.  Now schedules, tables, illustrations, forms and other items appended to the spec section can be listed in the attachments article. Then the attachments can take on the format best suited to present the information they contain rather than be constrained by the restrictions of SectionFormat and PageFormat.

To help ensure consistent formatting in a project manual, a sample was shown that included a table with formatting instructions within a specification section. The text of the section illustrates the instructions to help consultants understand what is expected. Anyone wishing the formatting instructions can email me directly to request a copy. dstutzman@conspectusinc.com

I was reminded recently about a quote from our client that I first heard years ago.

"I don't care what the drawings show. Give me a good spec and I will get what I want!"
Paul Lyons, WATG, Director of Construction Administration

The words had a profound impact and made a lasting impression. Paul used the spec as an effective tool for construction meetings to ensure that what the contractor built or intended to build met the intent of the documents. Often these discussions are about the drawings, and especially the details, rather than the spec.

The demand for a good spec means more than the words in the project manual. It is about the process as much as it is the result. For without knowledge of what is required to construct a building correctly, even the most skilled spec writer cannot improve the chances of a project's success. Specifiers transcend spec writing by accepting the challenge to produce what is needed, not just what may be obvious or implied by basis of design product selections.

It seems ironic that the specs take on such importance during construction especially since design is the predominant consideration when developing construction documents. The reasons for the role reversal may be many aside from the fact that attorneys and judges understand words better than drawings.

Specifications are global. The written requirements apply to the entire project, whereas the drawing details apply to a specific instance. The drawings cannot possibly show every unique condition. So the specifications must describe construction that results in completed assemblies with appropriate transitions, terminations, and relationships among the many materials and manufactured products.

Specifications contain embodied knowledge. Specifications are constantly developing and improving by capturing the experience of each completed project, for the benefit of all future projects. Well developed office master specs will include comments about what works and what does not. Though never published with the spec, these comments are an invaluable instructional resource and help ensure project specs meet project needs.

Specifications are normally prepared by well experienced individuals with the capacity to interject technical reason and building science into the design. Most importantly, specifiers will "see" what is not shown on drawings and will document what is required to complete the construction.

So specifications that help document the process and complete the design team's product selections become a valuable tool for construction document enforcement.  And, at times, the specs will be the only means to get what you want to make the project right.