CASE DOCUMENT 962-D

A Guideline
Addressing Coordination and Completeness
of Structural Construction Documents

Prepared by the CASE National Guidelines Committee

Thomas D. Wosser, P.E., S.E., Chairman

Tim Barnard, P.E.
Bob Barnett, P.E.
Glenn Bishop, P.E.
Kevin Moore, P.E.
David W. Mykins, P.E.
James C. Parker, P.E.
Andrew M. Rauch, P.E.
Keith Smith, P.E.
Stuart K. Jacobson, P.E., SERMC Representative
David I. Ruby, P.E., NCSEA Representative
Tom Schlafly, AISC Representative
Ronald La Mere, P.E., National Officer

CA S E Council of American Structural Engineers

1015 Fifteenth Street, N.W., Suite 802, Washington, D.C. 20005 202-347-7474 FAX 202-898-0068

CASE Logo
 IMPORTANT INFORMATION ABOUT THIS DOCUMENT
The material in this document is for information purposes only and is not to be regarded as legal
advice. If legal advice is required, it is recommended that the reader consult an attorney

This document sets forth a number of guideline practices intended to improve the coordination
and completeness of structural construction documents. Guideline practices are to be
distinguished from a standard of care in professional practice. The definition, application and
measurement of a professional standard of care necessarily depends upon a complete and
conscientious evaluation of all of the relevant project-specific factors and circumstances
regarding the structural engineer’s engagement and performance, including scope of services and
other contract terms, the project delivery approach (e.g. fast track), time constraints affecting
service delivery, complex or innovative nature of the project, and others.

The guideline practices described in this document, by definition, do not take into consideration
such factors and circumstances and, as such, should not be used as a substitute for a properly and
professionally conducted professional standard of care evaluation. In other words, failure to
comply with these guideline practices does not necessarily equate with a departure from the
professional standard of care, and compliance with these practices does not necessarily constitute
adherence to that standard. They are also not meant to prohibit alternative approaches to a firm’s
efforts to assess and improve its management practices.

In a number of respects, these guidelines practices define roles and responsibilities of structural
engineers. Any such definitions assume, of course, that the structural engineer has been retained
to provide a scope of services adequate to assume and undertake such roles and responsibilities.
This qualification is especially important in the instance of structural engineers engaged by
contractors on design-build projects.

This document was derived as a general consensus from a group of authors. The views
presented in this document may not necessarily exactly represent the views of any one author or
other members of their respective firms.
 A Guideline
Addressing Coordination and Completeness
of Structural Construction Documents

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Executive Summary
1. Purpose and Goals
2. Background
3. Responsibilities Within the Design Team
4. Project Communication
5. Coordination of Documents
6. Completeness of Documents
7. Dimensions
8. Project Delivery Systems
9. Document Revisions
10. Quality Management
Appendix A – Glossary
Appendix B – Drawing Review Checklist
Appendix C – References

CASE would like to acknowledge the firm of Technology Transfer for their assistance in editing this document.
 A GUIDELINE ADDRESSING COORDINATION AND
COMPLETENESS OF STRUCTURAL CONSTRUCTION DOCUMENTS

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

Since the mid 1990's, owners, contractors, and design professionals have expressed concern
about the level of quality of structural construction documents. They have observed that the
quality of these documents has deteriorated, resulting at times in poorly coordinated and
incomplete design drawings. Inadequate and/or incomplete design drawings often result in
inaccurate competitive bids; delays in schedule; a multiplicity of requests for information (RFIs),
change orders and revision costs; increased project costs; and a general dissatisfaction with the
project.
In an effort to address these concerns, the Council of American Structural Engineers (CASE) has
prepared this “Guideline Addressing Coordination and Completeness of Structural Construction
Documents.” It discusses the purpose of this guideline, the background behind the issue, the
important aspects of design relationships, communication, coordination and completeness,
guidance for dimensioning of structural drawings, effects of various project delivery systems,
document revisions, and closes with recommendations for development and application of
quality management procedures. A Drawing Review Checklist is attached.
The key to achieving the desired level of quality throughout the profession is for each structural
engineering firm to focus on and develop its own specific quality management plan and to
implement that plan on each project. This guideline will assist the structural engineering
profession in achieving that goal. This is consistent with the vision of CASE to be the recognized
leader addressing business practices issues for structural engineering firms and its mission to
provide information and business practice products that will increase profitability, improve
quality, reduce liability, and enhance management practices, as well as provide an investment in
our future.
 A GUIDELINE ADDRESSING COORDINATION AND
COMPLETENESS OF STRUCTURAL CONSTRUCTION DOCUMENTS

1. PURPOSE AND GOALS

The guidelines presented in this document will assist not only the structural engineer of record
(SER) but also every one involved with building design and construction in improving the
process by which the owner is provided with a successfully completed project. Their intent is to
help the practicing structural engineer understand the importance of preparing coordinated and
complete construction documents and to provide guidance and direction toward achieving that
goal.
A “successfully completed project” is a reflection of the quality of the project, which, in turn, is a
product of the quality of all the creativity, services, materials, and workmanship that comprise
the end result. “Quality in the Constructed Project,” published by the American Society of Civil
Engineers in 1988, discusses quality:
“What is quality? For the purposes of this Manual, quality is defined as the totality of
features, attributes, and characteristics of a facility, product, process, component,
service, or workmanship that bear on its ability to satisfy a given need: fitness for
purpose. It is usually referenced to and measured by the degree of conformance to a
predetermined standard of performance.
“In simple terms, quality is meeting the requirements. The requirements may be simple or
complex, or they may be stated in terms of the end result required or as a detailed
description of what is to be done. But, however expressed, quality is obtained if the stated
requirements are adequate, and if the completed project conforms to the requirements.
“Many have stated that they may not know how to define quality, but they know it when
they see it. Quality in the constructed project is obtained by conscientious application of
a thoroughly planned quality-assurance program implemented through a quality-control
procedure. Quality can be characterized as:
• Meeting the requirement of the owner as to functional adequacy; completion
on time and within budget; life-cycle costs; and operation and maintenance.
• Meeting the requirements of the design professional as to provision of well
defined scope of work; budget to assemble and use a qualified, trained and
experienced staff; budget to obtain adequate field information prior to design;
provisions for timely decisions by owner and design professional; and
contract to perform necessary work at a fair fee with adequate time
allowance.
• Meeting the requirements of the constructor as to provision of contract plans,
specifications, and other documents prepared in sufficient detail to permit the
constructor to prepare priced proposal or competitive bid; timely decisions by
the owner and design professional on authorization and processing of change
1-1
 orders; fair and timely interpretation of contract requirements from field
design and inspection staff; and contract for performance of work on a
reasonable schedule which permits a reasonable profit.
• Meeting the requirements of regulatory agencies (the public) as to public
safety and health; environmental considerations; protection of public property
including utilities; and conformance with applicable laws, regulations, codes
and policies.
“Quality in the constructed project is also characterized by complete and open
communication among project parties; selection of qualified organizations and personnel
by the owner for all phases of the project; change orders in publicly bid projects at less
than 5 percent of bid amount (except in cases of change of scope or changed construction
conditions); rapid resolution of conflicts and disagreements; and absence of litigation.”
These guidelines focus on the degree of completeness required in the structural construction
documents (“Documents”) to achieve a “successfully completed project” and on the
communication and coordination required to reach that goal. They do not attempt to encompass
the details of engineering design; rather, they provide a framework for the SER to develop a
quality management process.
Contractors estimate construction costs and develop construction procedures based on the
information presented in the Documents. If Documents that reflect a high level of coordination
and completeness are provided for a project, the construction process proceeds smoothly from
the initial design phase through construction and owner’s acceptance. If incomplete,
uncoordinated Documents are provided, the process will likely contain difficulties and conflicts,
including inaccurate project bidding, increased costs, and missed budgets; construction
misunderstandings; an excessive number of requests for information (RFIs) and change orders;
conflicts among the design and construction teams; a disappointed and angry owner; and
potentially costly and demoralizing litigation. These pitfalls can and must be avoided.
Currently, the coordination and completeness of Documents varies substantially within the
structural engineering profession and among the various professional disciplines comprising the
design team. The SER’s goal should be meeting both the owner’s and the contractor’s needs by
producing a complete and coordinated set of Documents. Owners and contractors generally
understand that some changes to the Documents will occur, because they realize that no set of
Documents is perfect. The SER must focus on completeness, coordination, constructability, and
the reduction of errors in order to minimize potential changes.

1-2
2. BACKGROUND

Documents, that is, drawings and specifications, are the tools structural engineers use to
communicate the elements of the design of structures to contractors. Contractors use the
Documents to develop and submit bids for construction of the structure and then, if selected, to
implement the design. In order for the bid to be accurate, the Documents must describe in
sufficient detail the elements of the structure to be built, the quality with which it is to be built,
and any special requirements governing its construction.
The Documents must therefore be developed to a sufficient level of completeness and
coordination so that contractors can, within customary time constraints, develop a price, submit a
bid, and after award of the contract, build the structure in a manner consistent with their
understanding of the scope of the Documents at the time of bidding. Inherent in this process are
the issues of what is customary in terms of the level of detail and coordination of the Documents
and the degree of scrutiny required of the bidder. (For example, is a steel subcontractor required
to look only at the structural documents or must he also review the architectural and mechanical
documents?)
Inadequate communication results in budget and schedule overruns, disappointed owners, and a
potential risk to the safety of building occupants and the public. Successful communication is
critical for the protection of the public’s safety, which is a structural engineer’s first priority as a
professional.
During the early 1980s professional liability insurance rates increased substantially because of
increased claims. These increases led to the formation of CASE and SERMC during the late
1980s. The goals of these organizations were to reduce the incidence of liability claims and
failures through education and increased awareness of liability issues. Since the mid 1990s, there
has been an increasing perception of a decline in quality of Documents as has been discussed in a
number of recent national publications (for example, “Effective Contract and Shop Drawings for
Structural Steel” in Modern Steel Construction, May 1999, “Botched Plans” in Engineering
News Record, May 2000 “Quality Design is Needed” in Structural Engineer, May 2000). An
increased incidence of professional liability claims of course followed.
The possible reasons and contributory issues related to decline in quality are numerous, and a
combination of many reasons is the likely culprit. Among them are the following:
• Educational requirements.
• Reduced design fees.
• Economic conditions.
• Increased utilization of technology.
One is the decline in technical education taught by engineering schools which has resulted from
the need for schools to be competitive in attracting students. In the 1970s, 156 credits were
required to graduate; whereas, by the 1990s this was reduced to only 120. In addition, technical
subjects have been dropped in favor of the requirement to teach a core curriculum. As a result,

2-1
industry must compensate for this decline by providing equivalent training, further straining
already overworked, experienced engineering staff.
Studies have shown that relative design fee levels have declined by as much as 20% while the
work required to produce a comparable project has decreased only marginally. These same
studies conclude that quality of documentation has declined substantially in the last 12 to 15
years and that, from the engineer’s perspective, the decline has considerable correlation with
reduced fee levels. This is thought to result, in part, in the inability to retain experienced staff and
to train the less experienced. (See the collection of papers entitled “Engineering Documentation
Standards – Invest in Design to Reduce Project Cost” presented at an industry forum led by The
Institution of Engineers Australia, Victoria Structural Branch jointly with The Australian
Institute of Steel Construction May 9th, 2000 for detailed information.)
The considerable downturn in the economy, in general, and in construction, in particular, in the
early 1990s combined with the technology boom that followed led to a flight of talent from the
established engineering workforce and a drop in the numbers of structural engineering graduates.
The economic and construction rebound that followed in the mid-1990s was especially rapid
overtaxing design engineers, particularly the remaining experienced staff. This was likely also
true for the construction management, estimating, and detailing communities. During the same
period, utilization of technology by both the design and the construction industries increased
production and decreased production time (both design and construction) while substantially
reducing the amount of “think” time and experienced oversight (formerly required to produce a
tangible product). The utilization of technology has also enabled architects to describe structures
with more complex geometry more easily and, at the same time, avoid precise geometrical
definition. Such technological advances include increased power and integration of computer-
based design packages, and increased use of rapid communication via email and wireless
communication. How much harder is it today for a young, inexperienced engineer to say to a
contractor, “Let me review that with someone in my office and get back to you”?
Furthermore, as computer-based analysis has proliferated, so has the complexity of both analysis
and code requirements, making it that much harder for the less experienced to get a feel for the
accuracy and adequacy of their design. The progression toward more efficient use of materials
has further increased this complexity.
Construction submittals frequently use advanced technology by importing digital design
drawings for use in the fabrication process. As simple as this may seem, the greater temptation is
to use them ‘as-is’ without the checks inherent in the older methodology. Increased ability to
control the quality of fabricated products, coupled with more precise design, has also led to more
efficient use of material, but less forgiving structures.
The necessity for good quality assurance practices is too often realized only during boom periods
at which point there is not sufficient time to properly develop and implement them.
Many issues discussed above also have likely influenced the other disciplines that participate in
the design and construction process. Undoubtedly, as a result, a tendency for gaps in scope in the
bid and construction documents has developed for items that fall in “gray” areas between
disciplines. Engineers are advised to look for such issues and to bring them to the attention of the
prime professional so they can be covered.

2-2
In summary, there has been a widening gap between the ability of the construction design
profession to adequately describe its design and the ability of the construction industry to
adequately develop a bid and schedule representative of that which it ultimately requires to
construct projects.

2-3
3. RESPONSIBILITIES WITHIN THE DESIGN TEAM

For any relationship to be successful, the parties must work together. This is especially true with
design team relationships. Design teams are most successful when the parties freely discuss
expectations and requirements before the project starts. Those discussions need to include the
division of responsibilities among the parties, the project milestones, and the expected
deliverables at those milestones. The outcome of these discussions should be recorded in writing
and should be formalized into the contract between the parties.
Although this section deals mainly with the relationship between the design team portion of the
project team, there is another member of the project team involved in this relationship: the
contractor. The members of the design team use their education and experience to translate
architectural concepts into a constructible format; contractors use their education and experience
to construct the project with a focus on cost and schedule. The design process may include the
evaluation of a variety of concepts and solutions. The construction process typically seeks
maximum productivity. Significant change occurring during construction is incompatible with
the concept of maximum productivity. A set of Documents that is complete and coordinated
before construction is essential for achieving productivity.
In general, the prime professional is responsible for the overall coordination of the project. The
prime professional is in the position of having control over the design team. With this control
comes the responsibility for information flow between the team members and for dissemination
of information from and to the owner.
This responsibility is consistent with the contract requirements of both the American Institute of
Architects (AIA) and Engineers Joint Construction Documents Committee (EJCDC) documents.
Section 2.1.1 of AIA B141-1997 (Standard Form of Agreement Between Owner and Architect)
states:
"The Architect shall manage the Architect's services and administer the Project. The
Architect shall …communicate with members of the Project team and issue progress
reports. The Architect shall coordinate the services provided by the Architect and the
Architect's consultants with those provided by the Owner and the Owner's consultants."
EJCDC's Standard Form of Agreement Between Engineer and Consultant for Professional
Services (Document E-570 1997 Edition) states on the first page:
"Engineer shall be the general administrator and coordinator of the professional services
for the Project, and shall facilitate the exchange of information among the consultants
employed by Engineer for the Project as necessary for the coordination of their
respective services."
For a design-build project, the requirements for coordination vary with the many standard
contract forms available. The CASE document (Commentary on AIA, AGC, EJCDC and DBIA
Agreements Between Design Professional and Design/Builder) outlines some of those
requirements.
The structural engineer, when serving as a consultant, does not escape without responsibility.
Structural engineers have a specialized expertise and need to coordinate their work with the

3-1
architect and other consultants. The structural engineer needs to become familiar with the work
of the other disciplines both to inform them of the structural requirements and to adapt the
structure to their requirements. A prudent engineer does not simply rely on information provided
by other team members, but anticipates potential coordination issues on the basis of situations
from previous projects. Failure to follow through with coordination can be expensive or
disastrous, or both.
This requirement is also acknowledged in the standard contract forms. Section 3.1.5 of AIA
C141-1997 (Standard Form of Agreement Between Architect and Consultant) states:
"All aspects of the Work designed by the Consultant shall be coordinated by the
Consultant, and the Consultant shall become familiar with the Work designed by the
Architect and other consultants as necessary for the proper coordination of This Part of
the Project."
The contractor also has a right to expect that the work of the design team has been coordinated.
The courts have ruled that the contractor is justified in assuming that the contract documents are
suitable for construction of the building. This idea is also borne out in the standard construction
contracts between an Owner and Contractor. For example, section 3.2 of AIA A201-1997
(General Conditions of the Contract for Construction) reads, in part:
"…the Contractor shall carefully study and compare the various Drawings and other
Contract Documents relative to that portion of the work. …These obligations are for the
purpose of facilitating construction by the Contractor and are not for the purpose of
discovering errors, omissions, or inconsistencies in the Contract Documents;…" and
"…The Contractor is not required to ascertain that the Contract Documents are in
accordance with applicable laws statutes, ordinances, building codes and rules and
regulations…"
The relationship between the parties sets the tone for the coordination of the project. Prime
professionals must:
• Follow through with their responsibility to be the overall coordinator of the project.
• Make sure that information is distributed to the entire team.
• Inform other team members when their work will be affected.
Structural engineers, when acting as consultants, must:
• Know how their work affects the other members of the team and inform them when
modifications need to be made.
• Know how the work of others affects the structure and make modifications as necessary
or inform other team members if issues cannot be resolved.

3-2
4. PROJECT COMMUNICATION

Project communication is the key to developing coordinated Documents. The greatest

opportunity for a complete set of Documents exists when good communication is coupled with
experience. This section will discuss the following as they relate to project communication:
• Project Scope
• Design Phase Communication
• Pre-Bid Conference
• Bidding/Negotiation/Construction Administration

PROJECT SCOPE
Good communication is essential even before receiving a commission. How engineers present
themselves, their experience, and their firms is communication. The representation of their
understanding of the project scope of work can set the tone for the owner’s expectations, as well
as their own.
The development of a comprehensive scope of services by the SER, in conjunction with the
client, is essential for establishing an appropriate contract and for managing the budget
throughout the design process. It is equally important for sound project management, since it
establishes the responsibilities of the SER including the relationship to other members of the
design team. For a successful project, a clear understanding of each design team member’s
responsibilities is of critical importance. A well-defined scope of services will make clear
whether the design of light gage framing or steel stairs is the responsibility of the SER, an SSE,
or the prime professional or whether the civil engineer or the SER will design the site retaining
walls. It also enables the SER to identify those elements in the scope of other consultants that
may impact the Documents. A clear and comprehensive scope of services provides the basis for
minimizing conflicts, enhancing team project management, and creating the understanding and
communication necessary for a successful project. CASE’s “National Practice Guidelines for the
Structural Engineer of Record” can be of valuable assistance in developing a scope of services.
A comprehensive understanding of the project scope requires free communication among all
parties. The communication should be open, clear, and straightforward to have a well-founded
agreement.
Once an agreement has been established, the next step is to establish the line of project
communication. For most building projects, the architect is the prime professional, whose
involvement is required in all design, coordination and construction issues.
A comprehensive roster of all the team members, including the owner’s representative, is one of
the first documents that should be created by the prime professional. It should include the name
of each firm, appropriate contacts, addresses, telephone numbers, fax numbers, and e-mail
addresses.

4-1
DESIGN PHASE COMMUNICATION
As a starting point, development of a general design information/structural design criteria
worksheet is suggested. Example 4A at the end of this section is a partial list of the type of
suggested information. It includes a list of all consultants and their contacts, fire rating
requirements with proposed rating design numbers from the UL Fire Resistance Directory,
occupancy type, governing building code, code official contact, etc. Once this basic project
information has been established, the design process and the development of the Documents can
begin.
It is important to understand that the project’s prime professional must receive or be privy to all
project information. However, the prime professional is not always responsible for initiating all
communication. AIA Document C141-1997 (Standard Form of Agreement Between Architect
and Consultant) states:
“3.1.5 The Consultant shall provide copies of drawings, reports, specifications and other
necessary information to the Architect and other consultants for coordination and review
during the course of the Project. All aspects of the Work designed by the Consultant shall
be coordinated by the Consultant, and the Consultant shall become familiar with the
Work designed by the Architect and other consultants as necessary for the proper
coordination of This Part of the Project.”
This contract language requires the structural engineer (the Consultant) to coordinate with design
team members outside his or her firm as well as those within the firm. Coordination within the
firm requires, not an outside line of communication, but an internal line of communication which
depends on, for example, the size of the firm; the experience of the designer or designers; the
size of the project, its complexities, and other considerations unique to the firm.
For any given project, the structural engineer has many direct communications with the
geotechnical consultant, the civil engineer, and the mechanical engineer, to name a few.
Interpretation of the subsurface report, site grading, and mechanical openings are examples of
critical communications that the structural engineer may need to make independently without
involving the project’s prime professional. Without regard to the reason for the communication
or the method used to initiate it, the information should be documented. This documentation can
be formal or informal; many times it is only for the engineer’s file.
Team meetings provide an opportunity for clear communication and coordination. They also
provide a time for status reports and information exchange. Monthly or bi-weekly meetings can
broaden the understanding of each team member’s concerns and challenges and the reasons for
particular decisions and solutions. They also allow all team members to exchange and set
priorities for information so that all parties have the information required to meet the project
schedule. A well-organized sequence of team meetings can minimize conflicts, maximize
communications, and maintain schedules.
The project kickoff meeting is usually the first of many project meetings. Usually this meeting is
held after the prime professional has had time to review the project program with the owner.
Thus, it gives the design team the opportunity to better understand the owner’s goals, concerns,
and priorities.

4-2
Before the meeting, the prime professional should request input from the design team and use
this information to prepare and distribute an agenda in advance of the meeting. The prime
professional should allow each party enough time to evaluate the issues and prepare a possible
response for resolution or to add agenda items as appropriate. The agenda establishes a schedule
for the discussions, identifying when different disciplines need to be present and when it appears
that the total design team must be present. The agenda, in itself, can be an excellent
communication tool when used properly.
Meeting minutes should be documented by the prime professional and distributed to all attendees
and other appropriate parties. The prime professional’s documentation should include all action
items identified by the attendees. The SER should also document the meeting for his or her own
record with a focus on reducing possible misinterpretations presented in the prime professional’s
meeting minutes.
Documents are developed in different phases. What might be considered a “conventionally
phased” project is one that has a schematic phase, a design development phase, and a
construction document phase. In a representative fast-track building project, the prime
professional and the mechanical, electrical and plumbing (MEP) consultants are working on the
conventional system, while the SER produces phased construction documents, for example,
foundation construction documents and structural steel packages, after an abbreviated
preliminary structural phase. Typically, the fast-track schedule requires final structural
documents well in advance of the final architectural and MEP documents.
The time when information may be required will vary depending on project phasing. One
method for communicating those needs is through a Structural Information Request or similar
document prepared by the SER. See 4B at the end of this section for an example of a document
that might be used to alert other team members of the needs for each phase. (The document is not
complete; the SER should modify it as required by the project.) Most design team members
understand that the design is a discovery process and that information and/or the form in which it
is requested will require modification as the project develops. The information format is not
important; the information is. Developing a form that can be used from project to project results
in the development of consistent documentation. Such a form may make information gathering
and communication easier for the SER, the team, and the client. The SER should diligently
pursue the needed information.
The experience and knowledge contained in a design firm must be incorporated into the project
via the communication process. Regular reviews and internal communication are vitally
important to the success of a project. Each firm should have a policy of internal review. Waiting
until the end of the project to make a project review is very likely too late. At a minimum, a
detailed review is suggested as each project phase is completed. The review should consider
internal coordination as well as coordination with other disciplines’ documents. An article by
William C. Sherman, P.E., “Quality Assurance for Engineering Contracts” (Structural Engineer,
January 2003) emphasizes the importance of checking procedures and suggests defining
accountable checking procedures for incorporation into engineering contracts.

4-3
PRE-BID CONFERENCE
The pre-bid conference is a communication tool intended to provide clarifications, coordination,
and completeness of the Documents. A successful pre-bid meeting must include the potential
contractors, subcontractors, design team, and owner’s representative. The pre-bid conference
provides an opportunity to present information that will clarify the project for the potential
general contractor and subcontractors before they price it. Contractors can ask any questions that
will help them more accurately price the work. At this conference, the design team should
respond to any requests for information (RFI’s) submitted before the pre-bid conference.
Establishing an agenda for the pre-bid conference encourages open discussion and
communication. Creating the agenda may require a design team coordination review of the
project. A coordinated review of drawings, specifications, the submittal process, and test
requirements can result in an appropriate agenda that generates communication. The design
team, not potential contractors, is responsible for effective communication in the pre-bid
meeting. 4C, a partial example of a pre-bid conference checklist is at the end of this section. The
checklist can be used as a preparation tool.

BIDDING/NEGOTIATION/CONSTRUCTION ADMINISTRATION
This guideline focuses on the development of construction documents, not the construction
administration phase. However, extensive communication extends beyond the development of
the construction documents. Specifically, pre-construction or pre-installation meetings, submittal
reviews, field observations and reports, RFIs, and field changes are all important communication
tools critical to the success of a project. A brief discussion of the procedures for developing
document and construction changes is in Section 9, “Document Revisions.”
The successful project is comprised of a total team communication including the contractor,
subcontractor, prime designer, consultants, and the owner. Communication should be free
flowing throughout the project. All members of the design/construction team must share
experience and knowledge, and each should participate by listening with an open mind,
communicating, and adding information to the process.

4-4
4A
An Example of a Partial
Information/Structural Design Criteria Work Sheet

Project No. Date

Project Name: Architect/Prime
Owner
Geotechnical Engineer
Mech./Plbg. Engineer
Electrical Engineer
Civil Engineer
Other Consultants

Building Code: Edition (Year):

Type Construction: Occupancy:
Wind Speed: MPH Importance Factor: Seismic Zone (Aa or Av):
Soil Type:
Ground Snow Load: PSF

Any Assembly Areas? Fire Rating (or UL#): Roof: Floor: Columns:
Factory Mutual? Is Building Sprinkled? _______
Roofing Type Max Weight PSF
Are Their Roof Top HVAC Units? (Y/N) How Many? ______________

Masonry Block Type: None Normal Wt. Light Wt. Split Face
Running Bond Stack Bond __________

Special Conditions (Loads, Etc.)

Confirmation By: Title: Date:

4-A
4B
An Example of a Partial
Structural Information Request

Project Stage Discipline Items Needed

10% Design Review ARCH 1/8” scale planes.

(Schematic Phase) Typical Wall Sections.
Code check with Fire Ratings.
Floor to floor heights.
Roofing type.

CIVIL Existing & finish grades

GEOTECH Subsurface evaluation.

MECH System selection/description

Mechanical room locations
Roof top unit locations

PLUMB Roof slope / drainage

ELEC No Structural coordination at this time.

35% Design Review

(Design Development Phase)

Repeat and add disciplines to the Phase as needed and outline the structural needs from each.

4-B
4C

An Example of a Partial
Pre-Bid Conference Check List
A. SUBMITTALS

1. Submittal schedule
a. This is the first process to aid with the timely return of submittals.
b. The design team must accept this schedule.
c. Resubmittals must be identified if they are to be put behind a new submittal, or the resubmittal will be
reviewed as the next submittal, thus moving all other submittals back by the time required by the
review of the resubmittal.
d. The length of time for the review of submittals begins at the time it is received in the office of the
structural engineer and ends at the time it leaves the engineer’s office.
B. SPECIFICATIONS

1. All subcontractors need to know what the specifications require.

C. MATERIAL TESTING
1. Provided by Owner
2. Provided by the Contractor
3. Reporting Requirements
4. Concrete
5. Reinforcing
6. Post-Tensioning
a. No tendon shall be cut without approval from the structural engineer.
7. Structural Steel
a. Welds / Welder Certification
b. Bolts
c. Studs
d. Erection
e. Anchor Bolts
8. Steel Joists
9. Metal Deck
D. FOUNDATIONS
1. All Contractors must review the subsurface report.
2. Types of foundations
a. Soil supported footings
b. Rock supported footings
c. Drilled Piers
d. Driven Piles

4-C
5. COORDINATION OF DOCUMENTS

The coordination of documents is an essential step in producing complete design documents.

Coordination may be defined as the act of integrating different elements into an efficient
relationship. With regard to design drawings, coordination is the act of assuring various elements
coalesce and perform as a system in the completed project. The method of coordination as well
as the extent of the effort may vary from project to project. Coordination practices of firms also
vary. Since the ultimate goal is to provide the owner with a successfully completed project, this
section addresses coordination issues and provides guidance to the SER for achieving a
coordinated set of Documents.
Communication and coordination are essential components of a successfully completed project.
The degree of coordination and flow of information are based on the design team relationships
and their contractual obligations. Ideally, the contract stipulates the information the SER needs to
perform the work and indicates items requiring SER coordination with other disciplines.
Although the contract may not stipulate such coordination, it is important to establish the modes
and lines of communication as well as the information required by the various design disciplines
when the project begins. Refer to Section 3 for further details on design team and contractual
responsibilities.
Members of the design team are responsible for coordinating their own Documents under the
general direction of the prime professional. Such coordination requires the correlation of design
calculations, specifications, and existing site conditions with each discipline’s design drawings.
The SER should check that member sizes and connection details are consistent with design
assumptions and analysis results. Further, the SER may be required to provide or submit the
calculations to a reviewing authority. The calculations should be logically organized and include
all assumptions, regulatory requirements, pertinent references, and applicable construction
documentation to indicate a complete and thorough design logic and methodology. Calculations
should also indicate the date, applicable code sections, and reference to the applicable portion of
the structure. The calculations should show that all elements from roof to foundation were
considered, including the lateral force resisting system, and should indicate expected
displacement and other serviceability requirements.
In addition, specifications should be coordinated with the calculations and structural drawings.
The specifications should identify the material types or strengths assumed in the calculations or
otherwise required for completion of the project. Many engineers specify materials or installation
methods either within their drawings or in a section of general notes on the plans. The SER
should perform a coordination check of the drawings and specifications for each project to
prevent conflicts.
Coordination of Documents among the design team members is essential for a smooth-flowing,
successful project. Ideally, all items to be coordinated will be shown in the Documents. For the
SER, this requires that the structural drawings be complete enough so that the structure can be
built. Thus, the drawings should indicate that coordination items have been accommodated, but
the structural drawings do not necessarily need to detail these items. For example, a slab
depression may be adequately dimensioned and detailed in the architectural drawings. In this

5-1
case, the SER often will show the outline of the depression on the structural drawings and add a
note to refer to the architectural drawings for further details.
Coordination of Documents with other disciplines goes well beyond checking that the SER’s
gridline dimensions match the architectural and that the dimensions “close.” Of particular
concern for coordination with architectural drawings, the SER should check that tolerances for
structural materials are accounted for. Construction materials will always deviate from the
“ideal” conditions shown in the drawings due to a variety of factors such as fabricating and
erection practices, material properties, or quality of workmanship. Therefore, it is critical for the
SER to review the structural design in consideration of industry tolerances, (for example, ASTM
A6/A6M, AISC Code of Standard Practice, ACI 301 & ACI 117, PCI specification and those of
other materials). With these tolerances in mind, the SER should prepare the design and
specifications to allow the integration of other building systems, keeping in mind the tolerance
requirements of the structural system. The SER may need to define tighter tolerances to suit the
building system.
More specifically, the design and design details of prefabricated wall panels, partitions,
fenestrations, floor-to-ceiling door frames, and similar elements must account for clearance and
adjustability with regard to the tolerance envelope of the structural framing. For example, a
curtain wall system may extend continuously up the face of a building and be attached to the
spandrel steel beams at each floor level. In this case, the SER should be aware of tolerances for
sweep in a steel beam to avoid conflicts between the beam flange and the curtain wall system.
Designs also should provide for adjustment in the vertical dimension, as required, because of the
axial shortening of loaded columns, creep, or the differential shortening/creep between a heavily
loaded core in comparison with a lightly loaded exterior column.
In preparing the design drawings for the substructure/foundation, the SER should coordinate
with the results of the geotechnical report/site investigation as well as the site grading plans.
Obviously, the foundation design needs to be in accordance with the design criteria in the
geotechnical report. Additionally, the geotechnical engineer’s recommendations regarding frost
depths, dampproofing, excavation, dewatering, fill, and vapor retarders need to be incorporated
into the Documents (although not necessarily on the structural plans). Site grading plans and
frost depths will determine elevations for footings, piles, or piers as well as stem walls, basement
walls, or slabs-on-grade. The SER should send a review set to the geotechnical engineer for
comment on compliance with the geotechnical report before issuing the drawings for
construction.
The SER should also consider the mechanical, electrical, and plumbing systems in the building.
This coordination extends beyond designing the structure to support the loads imposed by those
systems. For example, in buildings with tight ceiling plenums, mechanical ductwork or electrical
and plumbing lines may be required to penetrate the structural framing. The SER must account
for these penetrations to maintain the integrity of the structure. Other items to coordinate include
roof-mounted mechanical units, ceiling-suspended mechanical units, mechanical chases, trench
drains, and floor/roof penetrations or openings.
For some projects, specialty items such as open web steel joists, cold formed steel load bearing
framing, metal plate connected wood trusses, or precast, prestressed concrete members will
comprise a portion of the structure. In such cases, coordination will need to occur between the
5-2
SER and the Specialty Structural Engineer (SSE). A project may have more than one SSE. One
of the most important parts of that coordination is a clear definition of the responsibilities of each
SSE and the SSE’s relationship with the SER, the prime professional, and the contractor. The
SSE may be responsible for elements of the primary structural system, the secondary structural
system, and/or non-structural elements. A clear and complete scope of work, including
performance criteria, should be prepared and reviewed by the SER. (Refer to the CASE
publication “National Practice Guidelines for Specialty Structural Engineers” for more
information.) Since the SSE may not be involved in the design phase of the project, the
Documents should show or specify design and/or performance criteria for proper coordination.
Doing so enables the specialty item to be designed and detailed for the specific needs of each
project. The SER should review submittals as an additional step in the coordination process.
These coordination items are a partial list of details the SER should be checking to prepare a
coordinated set of structural design drawings, specifications, and calculations. A more
comprehensive checklist addressing coordination and completeness of design drawings is
included in Appendix B of this guideline.

5-3
6. COMPLETENESS OF STRUCTURAL CONSTRUCTION DOCUMENTS

The design team is responsible for the coordination and completeness of the Documents for the
project. The SER is responsible for the coordination and completeness of that portion of the
Documents that describe the work under the auspice of the SER, namely the structural drawings
and the technical specifications for the work shown on the structural drawings. Complete
structural documents that are well coordinated within themselves and with the other project
documents provide sufficient information for:
• The bids and/or cost estimates to predict the actual construction cost and schedule with
the precision required by the project.
• The contractor to produce shop drawings efficiently and to meet other specified submittal
requirements.
• The contractor to build the structure required by the project and intended by the SER,
given a predetermined involvement of the SER, inspectors, and testing agencies during
the construction process.
Without specific project parameters, providing a list of information that complete Documents
should contain is impractical. The detail and amount of documentation for complete Documents
may vary widely from project to project depending on such project parameters as size,
complexity, location, sophistication of contractors and the project delivery system (see Section
8). However, in general, complete Documents include:
• Clear descriptions of the structural elements and the organization of the structural system
including necessary schedules, sections, and details.
• Clear specifications for materials and workmanship, specific to the project.
• Coordination within and with the other project documents (See Section 5).
• Dimensions for structural elements and for their locations (See Section 7).
• The relationship of the structure with pertinent nonstructural elements and finishes.
• Documentation of governing codes, design loads and design criteria for various structural
elements and materials as required by code and/or needed for future use.
• Identification of elements or portions of the structure designated to be designed by an
SSE and the clear design and performance requirements for these elements.
• Clearly defined quality assurance measures required for the structure, such as submittals
and submittal requirements, required contractor quality control and independent
inspections and testing. The required minimum levels of inspection and testing can be
found in Chapter 17 of the 2000 International Building Code and Chapter 40 of the 2003
NFPA 5000 Life Safety Code.
When requested as additional scope by the owner or prime professional, and agreed to by the
SER, the SER will provide consulting for the structural performance and structural design
criteria for nonstructural elements such as exterior envelope structure and anchorage, equipment
anchorage, stairs, guard rails, and non-load-bearing walls.

6-1
The SER may wish to review documents by trade organizations such as ACI, AISC, etc., for
additional, material-specific considerations of what should be included in the Documents.
Ultimately, project knowledge and experience will dictate what information must be included in
the Documents to consider them complete.

6-2
7. DIMENSIONS

Dimensioning of structural drawings is one of the most important elements in the consideration
of coordination and completeness of Documents. The SER is responsible for verifying that
adequate dimensions are included on the Documents to permit proper preparation of shop
drawings and construction of the building's structural system. Structural dimensions should
provide to allow accurate bidding and construction of the structure.
In addition to providing the details of assembly and material properties and sizes for all structural
elements, , the structural drawings should include dimensions that govern and allow the proper
installation and assembly of the structure. While it is the goal to include dimensions for every
structural element, as a practical matter, some dimensional information is beyond the control of
the SER and may not be available at the time of document issue. These occurrences should be
limited to secondary structural elements such as dimensions of mechanical equipment support
frames, limits of slab depressions, minor floor openings, etc. When these dimensions are not or
cannot be included, appropriate references should be made. A partial list of the elements
necessary for proper structural dimensioning which should not be omitted, includes the
following:
• Overall building dimensions.
• Column gridlines & column spacing.
• Location of all structural elements with respect to column gridlines.
• Identification of edge of slab.
• Structural floor elevations.
• Top of steel elevations.
• Size of all framing members.
• Adequate description of cross-section shapes.
• Size, including thickness, of foundation systems.
• Relevant elevations of foundations.
• Camber requirements.
• Structural wall thickness.
Additional dimensioning requirements are included in the coordination checklist included in
Appendix B of this document.
Although the responsibility for basic dimensioning of the building rests with the prime
professional, the SER should verify that dimensions shown on the structural drawings are
complete and coordinated in themselves. All dimension strings shown on the structural drawings
should be checked against the architectural drawings and should also be checked for closure. For
some projects, field verification of existing conditions needs to be performed. The Documents
should clearly identify this requirement. Failure to provide this type of quality control on the
structural drawings is one of the most common causes for construction change orders.
The owner, the contractor, or other parties should not be expected to scale dimensions from
either plots or CAD drawings provided by the design team. In fact most common construction
7-1
contracts prohibit the contractor from scaling the contract drawings to obtain dimensions. Even
with the accuracy available with CAD drawings, scaling with different software or different
releases of the same software can lead to erroneous results. Therefore, dimensions required by
the SER should be provided explicitly by the responsible professional and not be scaled from
their drawings.
Ideally, the necessary dimensions should appear on all structural plans and elevations. However,
some structural engineers provide column centerline dimensional information and structural
elevations only once in a set of structural documents, at the lowest level of the structure for
which they are appropriate. Such dimensioning should be considered a minimum, and then only
after assuring that dimensioning is truly complete. Even with such minimal presentation of
"control dimensions," other types of dimensional information should be repeated as appropriate
for clarity and ease of document interpretation. Often this translates to providing enough
dimensional information in the structural sections and details for the design and detail of
connections, reinforcing, etc. with minimal reference to the drawings of other disciplines.
In cases where dimensions are critical, adequate consideration must be given to construction
tolerances, particularly when two different systems must interact. For example, when a curtain
wall must pass by the edge of a concrete slab, the edge of slab dimensions must allow for both
the concrete construction tolerances and the curtain wall manufacturer’s construction tolerances.
To summarize, the dimensions on the structural drawings should be:
• Adequate for bidding, shop drawing preparation, and construction.
• Internally consistent and verified with architectural drawings.
• Explicitly shown on the Documents.
• Provided as needed for clarity and Document interpretation.

7-2
8. PROJECT DELIVERY SYSTEMS

Many methods are available for providing a successfully completed construction project to the
owner. Most of this guideline has focused on the design-bid-build delivery system; however, the
owner may choose one of a number of other common delivery systems. This section of the
guideline focuses on the different project delivery systems available and how they affect the
coordination and completeness of the Documents. While the various project delivery systems
have different requirements at different phases, sufficient information to construct the project is
required in the Documents.

DESIGN-BID-BUILD
Traditionally, the design-bid-build project delivery method has been the primary method of
building construction projects. This method was developed to provide the lowest possible cost
for a construction project. The method works well, but problems are inherent within the system.
One problem is that a general contractor may be forced to accept the bid from subcontractors
who have the lowest bid regardless of qualifications.
In these projects, typically, the prime design professional develops the concepts for the project
and coordinates each phase of the project. The phases of schematic design, design development
and construction documents are based on the informational requirements from each of the design
team members, led by the prime design professional. The Documents should be completed and
coordinated before they are released for construction.

NEGOTIATED DESIGN-BID-BUILD
A rising trend is to negotiate construction contracts with the contractor as part of the design
process. Typically, the contractor is hired early in the design process based on qualifications and
experience with the type of project. The basis of the construction contract is the cost of work plus
a fixed fee. While the contractor typically bids project subcontracts, subcontractors can be
limited to companies qualified to handle the work.
In these projects, the contractor is an equal member of the design team and provides input at each
phase of the contract. This input assists the team by providing cost options early in the project
before the design is committed to a particular path.
The flow of information is somewhat altered because of the contractor’s involvement. Major cost
items are designed first in order to develop cost estimates early in the project. Therefore, it may
be more important for the structural engineer to develop the framing plans by the end of the
design development phase without creating sections and details. The contractor and his
subcontractors provide additional review and feedback for the project before the final drawings
are issued. As with the traditional design-bid-build delivery system, preparing a coordinated and
complete set of Documents is the goal before they are released for construction.

CONSTRUCTION MANAGEMENT
Many owners are using construction management contracts. A construction manager may be
involved in any one of the different project delivery methods. Sometimes the contractor is
brought in early in the process similar to the negotiated contract, and the construction manager
8-1
becomes part of the design team. In other projects, the construction manager is hired at the end
of the design phase similar to the practice used for a traditional design-bid-build project.

DESIGN-BUILD
Over the past twenty years, design-build projects have become more common. Typically, the
owner hires a general contractor to design and build the project. Some owners prefer this method
because there are a single source of contact and a single contract on the project. To provide this
type of project delivery system, some contractors have in-house design teams to handle the
projects; however, many go to the design community to contract for the design of the facility.
Design-build contracts have many variations. One of the simplest contracts involves owner’s
selection of a design-build contractor. The contractor then subcontracts for design services, as
needed, to complete the project. At the other end of the spectrum, the owner develops a limited
set of criteria and invites design-build contractors to bid the project. In the latter scenario, the
owner must analyze and compare the proposals to determine exactly what is being proposed.
This can be a formidable task.
The design professional may work under the direction of the contractor on a design-build project.
Generally, the contractor is an integral part of the design process and often dictates methods and
materials to be used in the construction. The contractor usually dictates what information is
required and at what time. Often, major portions of the design must be done early to provide
pricing information to the owner.
For projects in which several contractors are competing, information provided by the designers
must be accurate enough for the contractor to develop a construction cost to which he will be
bound for the life of the project. The designer has to balance the time required to provide
accurate data for pricing with the cost of the design time. Also, the contractor and designer
should have an agreement on the requirements for contingency, based on pricing an incomplete
design.

FAST-TRACK
The fast-track method can be introduced on most methods of project delivery. In fast-track
projects, the construction begins before a major portion of the design is complete. The structure
may be designed and constructed before final architectural, mechanical and electrical
components are completed. On fast-track projects, the design of elements of each discipline is
issued in phases; for instance, the foundations may be under construction while the
superstructure is still being designed. This method requires the owner, designers and contractor
to recognize that the design may not be complete when issued and there is a significant
probability changes may be required that will potentially affect construction cost. The obvious
consequence for the construction documents is that the structural drawings are typically
incomplete when issued for construction. Thus, the degree of coordination and completeness at
the time the Documents for the building are released for construction might be significantly less
than for other project delivery systems. As a result, coordination and completeness of the
Documents must be completed during construction.

8-2
SPECIALTY STRUCTURAL ENGINEERING
Some structural elements or components specified on projects require the design of specialty
engineers. This may be due to a proprietary system or manufacturer and/or fabricator procedure.
The SER must adequately describe the work to be done so the specialty engineer understands
what is required. An example of specialty structural engineering work is steel joists. The SER
selects a joist based on SJI performance criteria. The manufacturer then designs and fabricates
the joist based on SJI criteria. A specialty engineer familiar with the manufacturer’s fabrication
process performs the joist design. Whenever a specialty engineer is required on the project, the
SER should provide sufficient information within the Documents for the specialty engineer to
perform the design and analysis. Readers may want to review the CASE “National Practice
Guidelines for Specialty Structural Engineer” and the Florida licensure law as references to the
design aspect of a project. (See the Florida Board of Professional Engineers website
www.fbpe.org.)

PERFORMANCE DESIGN
Using specialty engineering, the SER may specify criteria to be met on a project and allow the
specialty engineer more flexibility. Using a similar example to the one above, joist girders are
defined by the depth of the member, number of panel points, and the load at each panel point.
The joist manufacturer is free to select, within the limitations of SJI requirement, any
combination of member sizes and configuration that will support the intended load. This
approach requires that the SER define the design loads as well as the serviceability requirements
for the structural elements to integrate them with the remainder of the structure. Again, the
reader is referred to the Florida licensure law for an example of that state’s requirements for
information required to specify performance design criteria. (See the Florida Board of
Professional Engineers website www.fbpe.org.)

DEFERRED APPROVAL
On most projects, designers reserve the right to approve or reject material based on specialty or
performance design. For example, the structural engineer may specify concrete with certain
design parameters of strength, air and slump and ask the supplier to submit a mix design that
meets those criteria. The designer then has the option to review and accept or reject the mix
design. The Documents should clearly define those items requiring deferred approval.

SUMMARY
The designers of today are faced with a multitude of options and decisions on every project.
Each decision influences the quality of the final project and determines the detail required at
each phase of the project. At some point in the project, all the Documents must be sufficiently
complete to construct the project. The “Tennessee Board of Architectural and Engineering
Examiners Reference Manual for Building Officials and Design Professionals” leaves no doubt
about the intent of their law by stating, “Completeness and coordination of all necessary
information is the responsibility of the registered architect and/or professional engineer.”

8-3
9. CONSTRUCTION DOCUMENT REVISION

This section deals with changes or clarifications that affect the construction contract. It does not
attempt to address all elements required during the construction process to make a project
complete; however, document revision is a critical part of that process.
A construction project usually is a unique prototype similar to a Detroit concept car, although
with a significantly reduced amount of development time and budget. As a result, design changes
originating from any one of a multitude of potential sources are inevitable. Understanding that
they are inevitable and providing a reliable mechanism for implementing and tracking these
changes are essential in the construction process.
When a change is made, clearly identifying and communicating to all relevant parties in a timely
manner is critical. Potential parties to the process include the following:
• Owner
• Design professionals (including owner’s representative./construction manager)
• Contractor
• Subcontractors
• Construction inspectors
• Building officials
Clear lines of communication must be established at the outset of the project. Typically,
communication to and from the design team flows through the prime professional or the owner’s
representative/construction manager as described in Section 8. Changes or clarifications
affecting the construction contract must be officially recorded through a formal set of procedures
to be followed throughout a project. Often, but not always, these changes result in changes to the
project drawings or specifications.
Document revisions and clarifications may arise from a number of sources including owner's
change of program, unforeseen construction conditions, architectural or system changes, requests
from the contractor, and document errors or unclear presentation. The SER can minimize
document errors and unclear presentation through quality management and careful attention to
coordination and completeness. With sound quality management, the number of requests for
information (RFIs) submitted by the contractor can be significantly reduced, simplifying the
project for all.
Changes and clarifications may stem from a contractor’s RFI, or the design team may initiate
them. The format for the revision generally involves revised drawings or sketches, but it may
also be a written directive. The following serves as a guide for terms defining procedures that are
normally followed when documenting revisions or clarifications:
(Source: The Architect’s Handbook of Professional Practice, American Institute of Architects)
• Addenda: A written or graphic instrument issued by the architect before execution of the
construction contract that modifies or interprets the bidding documents by additions,
deletions, clarifications or corrections.

9-1
 • Requests for Information (RFI): Contractor’s written request for clarification or other
information. Normally this will come to the SER after being directed to the prime
professional.
• Proposal Request (PR): A document issued by the prime professional after contract
award that may include drawings and other information used to solicit a proposal for a
change in the work; sometimes called a “request for a change” or “bulletin.”
• Architect Supplemental Instructions (ASI): A document used to issue additional
instructions or interpretations or to order minor changes in the work, with no change in
the contract sums or the contract time.
• Change Order (CO): An amendment to the construction contract signed by the owner,
the prime professional, and contractor that authorizes a change in the work, an adjustment
in the contract sum or the contract time, or both. It is a written documentation that
includes a written description of the change.
• Construction Change Directives (CCD): A document used in the absence of total
agreement on the terms of a Change Order. This document, signed by the owner and the
prime professional, is used to direct a change in the work prior to agreement on
adjustment in contract sum or contract time. The CCD may contain proposed methods for
adjusting the contract sum or contract time. The contractor is obligated to promptly
proceed with the directed change in the work and to advise the prime professional of
agreement or disagreement with the proposed adjustment of contract sum or contract
time. If the contractor signs the CCD, indicating agreement including contract
adjustments, the agreement is to be recorded as a Change Order. If the contractor does
not agree with the proposed adjustments contained in the CCD, the adjustments are to be
determined by the prime professional. When the owner and the contractor agree with the
determination by the prime professional, the agreement is to be recorded by an
appropriate Change Order.
Architect Supplemental Instructions, Change Orders and Construction Change Directives all
constitute changes to the construction contract after it has been executed. While sketches and
written instructions may suffice for minor changes, major changes warrant proper documentation
through revised drawings. The SER should also consider revising the drawings if there is a need
to record minor changes in a permanent record. Changes on drawings should be clearly
identified, with dated revision number and “clouding.” Prompt issuance and clear description of
changes, communicated to all interested parties, are essential to minimizing their impact on cost
and schedule.

9-2
10. QUALITY MANAGEMENT

Concepts in quality management have matured and have been adopted by many organizations.
Systematic application of quality management concepts can be beneficial to all organizations
including engineering firms. Although formal quality systems are often perceived to be useful
primarily in larger organizations, they can be designed for organizations of any size. They are
powerful tools for controlling and improving commercial success in addition to controlling
quality. In fact, any set of routine practices forms a system. Those routines that affect quality are
a quality system. The goal of this section is to encourage periodic reviews of those routines and
systems and to give ideas on improving those systems. A routine goal of a quality management
system is continual improvement of quality.
Every structural engineering firm should establish its own systematic quality management
process that can and will be applied to every project. Those procedures should provide for the
following:
• Orderly management of production.
• Review, coordination, and checking of contract documents, especially as they apply to
project planning.
• Design criteria, calculations, drawings, and specifications.
The quality management plan should be a written document that can be readily applied to each
project and will achieve effective planning, operation, and control of processes. The plan should
be designed to suit the individual characteristics of the particular structural engineering firm and
it should be flexible enough to adapt readily to changing conditions. The plan must be managed
and monitored to measure quality, analyze performance, and provide for continuing
improvement.
Many publications about quality systems are available. Although the systems vary widely in
extent, the level of detail, and specific content, successful quality systems do have common
features.
Most good quality management systems have some level of written description. Commonly they
include a policy, procedures, minimum qualification of personnel and minimum resource
requirements, and quality control methods. Quality control can include periodic internal reviews,
occasional external reviews and analysis of feedback from outside sources such as field calls,
RFIs, code reviews. Quality management systems normally contain the following key elements:
• Provisions for defining project requirements, planning to meet those requirements, and
reviewing to evaluate how well the requirements were met. These project requirements
include information the prime professional defines but also include code and
serviceability schedule requirements.

A-1
 • Provisions for personnel to manage the process of engineering. Managers should spend
time looking at the process in addition to looking at specific projects. The key to quality
management systems is that the system provides the manager the tools to review the
process, to identify nonconformance and to improve quality.
• Periodic reviews to evaluate how well quality measures met goals, followed by revisions
to improve those goals and achievement. Those revisions include development of tools
and procedures to avoid errors that have been recognized and to improve the achievement
of goals such as meeting the time estimates.
• Requirements for records and documentation of quality measures.
• Methods to segregate and control nonconformances.
• Methods of measuring performance against established goals. Although an obvious
method is to measure nonconformances such as changes after the construction issues, an
organization could also measure design time relative to the estimate, project cost relative
to estimated project cost, percent of schedule milestones met or other measures of quality
performance.
Managing these routines or quality systems is an investment in time and effort that should have a
positive return. Using concepts developed by professionals in quality system management is an
effective way to gain a new perspective in establishing or reviewing these systems.

A-2
APPENDIX A

GLOSSARY

The following terms are used in this Guideline:

ACEC American Council of Engineering Companies

ACI American Concrete Institute
AGC Association of General Contractors
AIA American Institute of Architects
AISC American Institute of Steel Construction
AISI American Iron and Steel Institute
AITC American Institute of Timber Construction
Architect A person or organization professionally qualified and duly
licensed to perform architectural services
ASCE American Society of Civil Engineers
ASTM American Society for Testing and Materials
AWS American Welding Society
Building A structure used or intended for supporting or sheltering a
specific use or occupancy.
CASE Council of American Structural Engineers
Client The individual, agency, corporation or other legally
recognized entity which engages for hire the services of the
Structural Engineering firm
that is legally authorized to provide professional Structural
Engineering Services.
Contractor The individual or other entity responsible for performing and
completing the construction (or portion thereof) of a project
required by the Contract Documents.
CM Construction Manager
CRSI Concrete Reinforcing Steel Institute
DBIA Design Build Institute of America

A-3
Documents As used herein, the construction documents prepared by the
design team, including the design drawings, specifications,
addenda, change orders and clarification drawings
EJCDC Engineers Joint Construction Documents Committee
IBC International Building Code
MBMA Metal Building Manufacturer’s Association
NFPA National Fire Protection Association
NISD National Institute of Steel Detailing
Non-Structural Elements Elements of a Building that are not Primary or Secondary
Structural Elements. Items in this category could be exterior
curtain walls and cladding, non-bearing partitions, stair railings,
etc.
Owner The individual or entity who has legal possession or equitable
interest in the structure
PCI Prestressed Concrete Institute
Primary Structural System The completed combination of elements which serve to support
the Building’s self weight, the applicable live load which is
based upon the occupancy and use of the spaces, the
environmental loads such as wind, seismic and thermal. Curtain
wall members, non-load-bearing walls or exterior facade, to
name a few items, are not part of the Primary Structural System.
Prime Professional The leader of the design team charged with the design of a new
or remodeled facility, either an architect or an engineer. The
Prime Professional is responsible for determining and
interpreting the needs of the Client and for coordinating the
work of the other members of the design team.
RFI Request for Information
Scope of Services A detailed description and list of tasks that are required to
provide the Structural Engineering on a given project.
SDI Steel Deck Institute

B-1
Secondary Structural Elements Structural Elements that are structurally significant for the
function they serve but do not contribute to the strength or
stability of the primary structure. Examples may include but not
be limited to: support beams above the primary roof structure
which carry a chiller, stairs, elevator support rails and beams,
retaining walls independent of the primary Building, and
flagpole or light pole foundations.
SERMC Structural Engineers Risk Management Council
SJI Steel Joist Institute
Specialty Structural Engineer (SSE) A licensed professional engineer, not the Structural Engineer of
Record, who performs Structural Engineering functions
necessary for the structure to be completed an who has shown
experience and/or training in the specific specialty.
The Specialty Structural Engineer is usually retained by a
supplier or subcontractor who is responsible for the design,
fabrication and (sometimes) installation of engineered elements
or by the general Contractor or subcontractor(s) responsible for
construction related services.
Standard of Care That level of skill and competence ordinarily and
contemporaneously demonstrated by professionals of the same
discipline practicing in the same locale and faced with the same
or similar facts and circumstances.
Structural Construction Documents The SER sealed Drawings and Specifications issued for
construction purposes, plus the Clarification Drawings,
Addenda and Change Orders issued in accordance with the
Contract Documents.
Structural Engineer An engineer with specialized knowledge, training and
experience in the sciences and mathematics relating to
analyzing and designing force-resisting systems for buildings
and other structures

B-2
Structural Engineer of Record (SER) The Structural Engineer who is legally eligible to seal the
Structural Documents for a Building Project. This seal
acknowledges that he has performed or supervised the analysis,
design and document preparation for the Building Structure and
has knowledge of the requirements for the load carrying
Structural System. The SER is responsible for the design of the
Primary Structural System.
Structural System That portion of a Building which carries and transmits loads,
both self-weight and externally applied. May be either Primary
or Secondary.
UL Underwriters Laboratories Inc.

B-3
APPENDIX B

PREAMBLE TO APPENDIX B – DRAWING REVIEW CHECKLIST

In the design and construction professions, the importance of providing the owner with a
“successfully completed project” is clearly paramount. And it is the opinion of the writers
of CASE that this issue is well understood within the professions.
However, it is also clear that the understanding is not adequately carried forward in the
prosecution of some projects, and, consequently those projects fall short of achieving that
sought-after “successfully completed” status. The reasons for these short comings are
myriad and varied, but chief in importance among them are lack of attention to project
planning, communication, coordination, and the detailed efforts necessary to provide an
appropriately complete set of design documents.
This Guideline serves to reacquaint the members of the structural engineering profession
and their colleagues in other disciplines in the design and construction profession with
those principles of coordination and completeness. While most practitioners can and will
apply those principles, many structural engineers have found the use of checklists to be an
aid in the production of quality Documents. This Guideline includes, in Appendix B, a
“Drawing Review Checklist,” provided to assist structural engineers in their goals to
produce Documents of a quality that will lead to the “successfully completed project.”
This checklist is based upon the “Checklist for the Development of Contract Documents
and Submittal Review”, prepared by CASE in 1995 and revised in 1997. It has been
developed based on the broad experience of the committee, with the intent of identifying
key elements concerning coordination and completeness, but with the recognition that a
checklist can never be considered to be complete. A checklist should be considered as a
“Living Document”, subject to periodic revisions. Each structural firm should consider
the checklist included in this Guideline and develop a firm checklist, applicable to the
practice of the SER. While the use of such checklists is an extremely helpful tool, it
should not be considered as establishing a standard of care, or a scope of basic services.

B-4
 DRAWING REVIEW CHECKLIST INDEX

I.
General Drawing Format
II. Architectural/Structural Coordination
III. Civil/Structural Coordination
IV. Mechanical-Electrical-Plumbing/Structural Coordination

V. General Structural Drawings

VI. General Foundation Systems
VII. Driven Pile Foundation Systems
VIII. Drilled Pier Foundation Systems
IX. Concrete Systems
X. Masonry Systems
XI. Structural Steel Systems
XII. Steel Joist Systems
XIII. Metal Deck Systems
XIV. Wood Systems
XV. Pre-Engineered Building Systems

B-5
 CASE
DRAWING REVIEW CHECKLIST

Project: Project Manager: Reviewer:

Project No.: Engineer: Date:

I. GENERAL DRAWING FORMAT

√ √ √
ITEM Yes No N/A COMMENT
A. Is there a Project cover sheet including:
1. Name of Project?
2. Address of Project?
3. Design team and Contact person?
4. Scope of Work?
5. Location and Project Site Plan?
6. Deferred Item List?
7. List of Governing Codes?
8. Drawing List?
B. Do the sheet titles in the Drawing Index match the
individual drawing titles?
C. Are the dates, commission members, revision
descriptions, and initials consistent from sheet to
sheet?
D. Do title blocks appear consistent between
structural and architectural drawings (project
name, fonts, text size, drawing numbering
convention, etc.)?
E. Are drawing scales shown correctly?
F. Do plans show north arrow for orientation?
G. Are match lines shown consistently from sheet to
sheet?
H. Are match lines consistent with locations shown
on architectural drawings?
I Are structural plans orientated to match
architectural drawings?
J. Are key plans correctly shaded or hatched?

B-6
II. ARCHITECTURAL/STRUCTURAL COORDINATION

√ √ √
ITEM Yes No N/A COMMENT
A. Do structural drawings address items shown on
demolition drawings?
B. Has the SER provided special direction on
demolition plans, particularly if phased or partial
demolition involves specific planned procedures,
including shoring?

C. Are all dimensions checked for consistency in

themselves and in agreement with architectural
drawings?

D. Are all column locations and orientations shown

the same on structural and architectural drawings?

E. Do perimeter slab edges agree with those shown

on architectural drawings?
F. Do depressed or raised slab limits agree with those
shown on architectural drawings?
G. Do floor and roof elevations agree with those
shown on architectural drawings?
H. Do structural drawings reflect additional structure
for folding suspended partitions, including any
deflection limitations?
I Do expansion joint locations agree with those
shown on architectural drawings?
J. Do control joints in walls agree with those shown
on architectural drawings?
K. Do architectural drawings specify adequate lintels
for non-load bearing wall openings?
L. Do architectural drawings adequately specify
design elements for stairs by others, including
stringer, post, and railing sizes?
M. Is all information noted as "See Structural" noted
on structural drawings?
N. Is information shown in wall sections in
agreement with structural drawings?
O. Are brick ledges and footing steps in agreement
with structural drawings?

B-7
 √ √ √
ITEM Yes No N/A COMMENT
P. Are governing regulations and code references
coordinated between architectural and structural
drawings?
Q. Elevator Coordination
1. Do design loads include allowance for impact?
(typ. double static)
2. Are supports designed per ANSI/ASME
reallowable stresses and deflections?
3. Are loads designed for and points of application
indicated on drawings?
4. Does elevator up-pull reaction at pit included for
high speed elevators? Similarly for underslung
elevators?
5. Are intermediate elevator rail supports provided
where required?
6. Are Separator beams and intermediate rail bracing
designed for specified reactions including
horizontal?
7. Is elevator hoist beam provided over center of
shaft?
8. Is minimum clear overrun provided above top
floor served?
9. Is elevator sill support detail coordinated with
architect and elevator spec.?
10. Are clear hoistway dimensions coordinated?
R. Are references to Architectural drawings clearly
identified?
S. Are connections for architectural attachments
coordinated with structural requirements?
T. Are connections for equipment and systems
referenced to structural documents as applicable?

B-8
III. CIVIL/STRUCTURAL COORDINATION

√ √ √
ITEM Yes No N/A COMMENT
A. Do new or old underground utilities (power,
telephone, water, sewer, gas storm drainage, fuel
lines, fuel tanks) interfere with foundation
systems?

B. Do building foundations interfere with property

lines or foundation systems for existing adjacent
buildings?
C. Have utility inverts been coordinated with footing
elevations?
D. Do roadways result in the potential surcharge of
retaining walls or below grade building walls?

E. Do final site elevations correspond to elevations

used for design of retaining walls or below grade
building walls?
F. Is drain tile routing and slope coordinated with
footing elevations?
G. Have earthwork requirements regarding
compaction, imported fill materials and
engineered fill been specified in accordance with
the Geotechnical Report used as the basis for
design?

IV. MECHANICAL-ELECTRICAL-
PLUMBING/STRUCTURAL COORDINATION
A. Do footing elevations accommodate plumbing
inverts/elevations?
B. Are floor openings framed out to accommodate
ductwork and other penetrations?
C. Are lintel provisions included for all ductwork and
other penetrations?
D. Do toilet penetrations conflict with steel/concrete
beams and joists?
E. Does imbedded conduit conform to ACI 318?
F. Has light fixture interference with structural
framing been checked?

B-9
 √ √ √
ITEM Yes No N/A COMMENT
G. Are slab openings coordinated with risers (ducts,
hot and chilled water, conduit banks, bus ducts)?

Are slab openings and support for grease traps

provided?
Has punching shear been evaluated for conc. Flat
slabs/plates with mechanical openings?
H. Are riser supports coordinated (every floor,
specific floors, base support)?
Do reactions account for expansion/contraction?

Are slab construction details provided around

conduit banks?
I. Are beam web penetrations/notches and their
reinforcement coordinated with M.E.P. and with
other framing e.g. perpendicular beam
connections?

J. Do structural drawings account for heavy hanging

loads due to piping, particularly near mechanical
or boiler rooms?
K. Have reactions for mechanical or electrical
equipment been shown on the drawings where
necessary for the design of specialty structural
systems by others?
L. Do M/E/P drawings show special details for
piping, equipment, etc which crosses building
expansion joints?
M. Do structural drawings address vibration isolation
of mechanical equipment?
N. Are acoustic criteria for structure surrounding
heavy mechanical equipment known and included
in design (addl. mass)?
O. Are cooling tower/generator/chiller/boiler support
criteria coordinated?
Is separate steel above vibration isolators
included?
Is coordination with support criteria for vibration
isolators incl.?

B-10
 √ √ √
ITEM Yes No N/A COMMENT
P. Is cellular deck required?
Are trench headers considered in design?
Q. Have transformer vaults/network protection rooms
been designed to address special requirements of
the local authority, such as blast loading?

R. Has structure been designed to support snow

drifting due to large mechanical rooftop
equipment?
S. Has the roof been designed to accommodate storm
water retention on roofs?
T. Are hold-down slabs required for buried tanks?
U. Are oil tank spillage retention basins required?
V. Have footings been stepped to accommodate sump
pits?
W. Have footings been stepped down to accommodate
rain water leaders coming down at columns?

V. GENERAL STRUCTURAL DRAWINGS

A. Is there a Structural Cover Sheet including:
1. Governing Codes?
2. Design Criteria?
3. Geotechnical Information?
4. Construction Material Specifications?
5. Inspection & Testing Programs?
6. Drawing Legends?
7. Abbreviation?
B. Do plans present proper information for:
1. North Sign?
2. Dimensions, grid lines, scale (need to be
consistent with others)?
3. Define elevations of floor?
4. Define all structural members & lateral lead
resisting system
5. Locations of Openings, Mech. Units?

B-11
 6. Cross Reference details?

√ √ √
ITEM Yes No N/A COMMENT
C Are notes consistent with sections, details and
specifications.
D. Do drawings conform to design calculations and
sketches?
Do notes provide necessary design information for
prefabricated items?
E. Are special provisions for future expansion
shown?
F. Is the nomenclature consistent throughout all
drawings and specifications?
G. Are legend and abbreviation lists shown?
H. Are floor and roof elevations shown and in
agreement with architectural drawings?
I. Are typical details adequately referenced and
applicable?
J. Do scheduled items shown on plan correspond to
items in schedules?
K. Do all sections match the location and orientation
of section cuts on plans?
L. Are all scales indicated correctly?
M. Are drawings and specification coordinated?
N. Is there a clearly identifiable load path for gravity
and lateral forces?
O. Have design review comments been resolved?
P. Are all special details included and properly
referenced?
Q. Is there a clearly identifiable complete load path
for support of gravity loads and bracing of lateral
forces?
R. Is lateral bracing dependent upon any sequence of
erection, or on a variety of building systems? Are
special construction procedures identified?
S. Are material tolerances considered and provided
for within materials, between different materials
and between structural and non-structural
elements?

B-12
VI. GENERAL FOUNDATION SYSTEMS

√ √ √
ITEM Yes No N/A COMMENT
A. Is any shoring required for stability of structure
during construction specified as the responsibility
of the Contractor?
B. Is shoring required to maintain stability of
adjacent buildings clearly shown on demolition
and building plans or specified as the Contractors
responsibility?

C. Is shoring required to maintain stability of

excavations specified as the responsibility of the
Contractor?
D. Are submittals regarding shoring design and
construction requested for proof of meeting design
requirements, but not for review and approval by
the SER?

E. Is shoring design provided on drawings?

F. Are submittals regarding shoring design and
construction requested for proof of meeting design
requirements, but not for review and approval by
the SER?
G. Are earthwork requirements clearly explained in
the specifications – Do they include requirements
of the geotechnical report with regard to
compaction, imported fill materials and
engineered fill?

H. Are details provided to address issues associated

with running utilities under foundations?

I. Are special requirements for sequencing of

earthwork operations identified in drawings or
specifications?
J. Are dewatering requirements indicated in the
specifications?
K. Are requirements for footing cuts shown on
drawings?
L. Is backfill and drainage fill properly indicated?
M. Are existing soil conditions shown in drawings or
specifications for bidding purposes?

B-13
 √ √ √
ITEM Yes No N/A COMMENT
N. Do the foundation plans clearly show the locations
of all foundation elements: footings, walls, piers,
caissions, cofferdams, mat foundations, pier caps,
grade beams, slabs-on-grade?

O. Are foundation schedules used as needed?

P. Are all footing conditions completely detailed and
properly reinforced?
Q. Are final elevations of foundations shown (top of
footing or bottom of footing)?
R. Are foundations placed at proper depth for frost
line?
S. Are all footing steps shown?
T. Is standard footing step shown?
U. Are footing elevations set to distribute bearing
pressure below adjacent pits or other foundations?

V. Are sumps shown and detailed?

W. Are waterstops shown?
X. Will foundations be expected to resist secondary
loading associated with future construction and is
it so noted?
Y. Is bracing specified for basement wall backfill if
placed prior to final bracing?
Z. Do drawings indicate the maximum allowable soil
stress for DL, DL+LL and Gravity Loads +
Lateral Loads?
AA. Are base courses and capillary water barriers
shown under slabs-on-grade and do they conform
to recommendations of the geotechnical report?

BB. Is the Geotechnical Report properly referenced in

the General Notes and Specifications?
CC. Are slab-on-grade reinforcing, slab thickness,
construction joints, contraction joints, flatness
requirements, finishing and curing properly
specified?

B-14
VII. DRIVEN PILE FOUNDATION SYSTEMS

√ √ √
ITEM Yes No N/A COMMENT
A. Are pile driving limitations listed in the
specifications including hours of operation, energy
delivered, etc.?
B. Are bid lengths and quantities established?
C. Are unit prices called for variation from bid?
D. Is final layout for piles indicated on foundation
drawings?
E. Do driven pile schedules or notes specify driving
lengths, pile diameter and thickness, splices, cut-
off elevations, etc.?
F. Is test pile program shown on the drawings and is
detailed information provided in the
specifications?
G. Is the interface between the top of the pile and the
bottom of the pile cap/foundation clearly detailed
on the drawings?
H. Is pile cap reinforcing shown?
I. Are pile caps interconnected?
VIII. DRILLED PIER FOUNDATION SYSTEMS

A. Are drilled piers shown on the Foundation Plan,

showing relationship between piers and other
foundation elements?
B. Are requirements for drilled hole casings shown
on the drawings and described in the
specifications?
C. Do drilled pier schedules specify shaft diameter,
bell diameter, length, reinforcement, confinement,
etc.?
D. Pier vertical reinforcing:
1. Are size, quantity & length shown?
2. Are splices permitted?
3. Are splices staggered?
4. Are splices required?
5. Dowels - are size, quantity, length and embedment
length into pier shown?

B-15
 √ √ √
ITEM Yes No N/A COMMENT
E. Are pier dowels and/or anchor rods shown?

F. Is the interface between the top of the pier and the

bottom of the pier cap/foundation clearly detailed
on the drawings?
G. Is pier cap reinforcing specified?
H. Are pier caps interconnected?
I. Are test holes specified and referenced to the
geotechnical report?
J. Are pier bid quantities and lengths shown?
K. Are methods of acceptable hole drilling clearly
explained in the specifications?
L. Are dewatering requirements for drilled holes
shown on the drawings and listed in the
specifications?
IX. CONCRETE SYSTEMS
A. Do structural drawings or specifications reference
all applicable ACI & CRSI standards, including
ACI 301, 315, 318, and the CRSI Manual of
Standard Practice?

B. Are concrete compressive strengths at stated ages

specified for all structural elements? Are key
requirements for concrete mixes specified?
C. Is strength and grade of all reinforcement clearly
specified?
D. Are all structural elements, such as slabs, beams,
girders, columns, walls and foundations, clearly
identified, located, dimensioned and detailed?

E. Are sections and details complete and are they

referenced?
F. Are reinforcing steel requirements adequately
detailed for all structural elements?

B-16
 √ √ √
ITEM Yes No N/A COMMENT
G. Are columns completely identified on plans,
schedules and details, showing?:
1. Locations?
2. Sizes and orientation?
3. Grade and size of reinforcing steel; strength of
concrete?
4. Number of reinforcing bars for each column type.-
Plan details of each type?
5. Details of ties or spirals for each column type?
6. Splice locations and details; dowels?
H. Are slabs, joists, beams and girders, completely
identified on plans, schedules and details,
showing:
1. Member identification and location?
2. Sizes?
3. Complete reinforcing details for each member
type, including number and size of straight and
bent bars?
4. Number, size and spacing of stirrups and stirrup
ties.
5. Identify number of layers of steel?
I. Are beam/column joints adequately detailed?
J. Are minimum steel requirements met?
K. Are typical reinforcing steel hooks and bends
clearly defined?
L. Are lap splice and development length
requirements clearly identified?
M. Are type and location of mechanical and welded
splices of reinforcement properly specified and
detailed?
N. Are any special coating requirements for
reinforcing steel called out?
O. Is required concrete cover for reinforcing steel
called out?
P. Are sleeve locations and details called out?
Q. Is special trim reinforcement identified around
sleeves or openings?
R. Are construction joint details provided?

B-17
S. Are slab depressions identified and detailed?
T. Are finishing and flatness requirements specified?

U. Is lightweight concrete properly identified and

specified, including maximum density used in
design calculations?
V. Have provisions of ACI 318, Chapter 21, Special
Provisions for Seismic Design, been applied?

W. Have possible reinforcement congestion problems

been evaluated?
X. Are camber requirements identified?
Y. For post-tensioned concrete:
1. Is minimum concrete compressive strength at time
of post-tensioning specified?
2. Have tendon material properties been identified?

3. Are magnitude and location of prestressing forces

given?
4. Do drawings clearly indicate effective force
requirements for all uniform and banded tendons?

5. Do drawings clearly indicate tendon profiles and

minimum concrete cover requirements for all post-
tensioned elements?
6. Is stressing sequence given for post-tensioning
tendons?
X. MASONRY SYSTEMS
A. Is value of f'm specified?
1. Specify all masonry materials?
2. Specify all required testing and inspection?
3. Specify bond type?
4. Specify cold/hot weather requirements?
5. Specify grouting procedures?
6. Is Special Inspection required?

B-18
 √ √ √
ITEM Yes No N/A COMMENT
B. Are control joints specified, and are they:
1. Spaced as required?
2. Placed to avoid concentrated loads?
3. Do they allow for arching at openings?
4. Are they placed to coincide with floor joints for
wall supported slabs?
C. Will all walls with reinforcing have cells at least
2"x2"? Are cells with reinforcing required to be
filled with grout, not mortar? Is extent of grouting
of cells clearly identified?
D. Is all reinforcing steel clearly shown? Are bond
beams shown for horizontal steel?
E. Are non-structural walls isolated to allow for
relative movement, yet braced for out of plane
forces?
F. Are locations of intermediate bond beams shown
on sections and wall elevations?
G. Are walls designed and connected for out of plane
forces?
H. Are lintel details provided for all openings?
I. Are shelf angles required for brick support
properly located and anchored?
J. Do shelf angle joints allow for deflection,
shrinkage, creep and brick expansion?
K. Are brick expansion joint locations coordinated
with brick lintels?
L. Are brick ledge details coordinated with
architectural elevations?
M. Are anchors for floor/roof joists, beams, etc.
properly located and detailed?
N. Are there joints to permit seismic drift or for walls
subjected to differential vertical movement or
settlement?
O. Are veneer tie details appropriate?

B-19
 √ √ √
ITEM Yes No N/A COMMENT
P. Where masonry walls serve as shear walls to resist
lateral forces:
1. Have all stresses been checked and is reinforcing
adequate?
2. Are connections of diaphragms and collectors to
walls properly detailed?
3. Has overturning been properly considered?
4. Has reinforcing been provided at opening jambs,
heads, and sills to meet seismic or wind load
requirements?
Q. Have construction tolerances been considered?
XI. STRUCTURAL STEEL SYSTEMS
A. Is the AISC Code of Standard Practice referenced
and amended as necessary?
B. Are sizes and material grades clearly identified for
all framing members, bracing members, plates,
bolts, studs, etc., including special material
requirements?

C. Has the following dimensional information been

provided and checked?
1. Geometry and working points necessary for
layout.
2. Location of all members, based on column grid
lines, including offsets from column lines and
point locations for sloping members.
3. Slab edge distances and girt lines with respect to
grid lines.
4. Floor, roof and top of steel elevations.
5. Camber requirements, including cantilever ends
and backspan.

B-20
 √ √ √
ITEM Yes No N/A COMMENT
D. Are steel connections and details complete,
including:
1. Permanent bracing.
2. Column stiffneners and web doubler plates.
3. Bearing stiffeners in beams and girders.
4. Openings in steel and web reinforcement.
5. Sizes and dimensions of all connection materials
and welds and number of connectors.
6. Column splice details.
7. Truss details and end connections?
E. If connections are to be designed by the
Fabricator, are the following provided:
1. Shear, moment and axial forces necessary for
design.
2. Are forces given at service load or factored load?

3. Is LRFD or ASD to be used in design of

connections?
4. Any dimensional limitations or restrictions on
connection type?
5. Bolted or welded?
F. Are base plates and anchor rod requirements
complete, including:
1. Base plate elevations.
2. Type of leveling system and details.
3. Plate dimensions and orientation, rod diameter and
embedment, size of holes, weld requirements. (4
minimum)
G. Have specific members or portions thereof to be
painted been identified, along with required
surface preparation?
H. Have specific requirements for architectural
exposure been specified?
I. Have fireproofing requirements been clearly
specified on architectural drawings and
specifications?

B-21
 √ √ √
ITEM Yes No N/A COMMENT
J. Are force diagrams given for trusses that are not
shown with detailed connections? Do they include
truss geometry and applied loads?
K. Are structural steel connections to concrete or
masonry shown?
L. Have the AISC Seismic Provisions for Structural
Steel Buildings, including Supplement No. 2 been
reviewed?
M. Is the Structural Welding Code of the American
Welding Society properly referenced, recognizing
that certain provisions of the code are mandatory
only when specified by the SER? Have the
following items been specifically addressed?

1. Has non-destructive testing been specified? -

extent and degree?
2. Has verification inspection been required?
3. Have special weld acceptance criteria been
required?
4. Are toughness criteria clearly specified?
5. For non-tubular applications, has cyclical loading
been identified?
6. Are there additional requirements not addressed in
the AWS Code?
7. Where some of the usual responsibilities of the
SER are to be performed by Contractor, are they
clearly identified?
N. Are slab edge conditions detailed? Is there
torsional restraint for perimeter beams?
O. Are shear connectors identified, including
quantity, diameter, and length?
P. Are moment frames and braced frames shown and
referenced to elevations?
Q. Are openings for M.E.P. shown and dimensioned?
Are locations of penetrations or notches in steel
beams identified?
R. Are curtain wall support details accommodated
and coordinated with architectural?

B-22
 √ √ √
ITEM Yes No N/A COMMENT
S. Are any special restrictions on shop or field
assembly clearly identified?
T. Have construction tolerances been considered and
provided for?
U. Are secondary members sized for efficiency by
using fewer different sizes?
V. Is structure constructible/erectable? Are pieces
sized to permit connection?
XII. STEEL JOIST SYSTEMS
A. Where HVAC or major plumbing is run through
webs is the requirement to align panel points
specified?
B. Ceiling extensions (bottom chord) required?
C. Is depth of the bearing seat shown?
D. Are joist size and spacing shown?
E. Have type of bridging and spacing been specified?

F. Are special connections detailed when joist frames

into column flange or web?
G. Are bracing and bracing loads for continuous
beams at bottom flange required by extending
bottom chord angles?
H. Is joist bridging specified, including cross
bridging at discontinuities?
I. Is width of support for steel or masonry bearing
adequate?
J. Is depth of joist consistent with fire rating
requirements?
K. Are joists and girders with top chord axial forces
or applied end moments properly designed to
transfer load into the chord?

B-23
 √ √ √
ITEM Yes No N/A COMMENT
L. When defining loads on special joists are the
following considered?:
1. Define gravity and lateral loads separately.
2. Identify or estimate self weight.
3. Indicate net wind uplift.
4. Do not specify a standard joist designation with
special loading.
5. Consider constant shear joists where location of
loading is uncertain.
6. When joists are on a bias (not plumb), consider
effects of gravity forces on bracing.
XIII. METAL DECK SYSTEMS

A. Are gages, depths and types of metal decking

shown on the plans?
B. Do drawings specify that decking must be
continuous over two or three supports?
C. Have minimum required structural properties of
floor and roof decking been specified and
coordinated with the project specifications?
D. Is deck attachment pattern and fastener type
specified, including sidelap, support, and
perimeter conditions?
E. Does deck attachment pattern and fastener type
provide required shear diaphragm strength?

F. Is special inspection required for all diaphragm

attachments?
G. Have deck support details at columns been
provided?
H. Is continuous edge angle provided at perimeter of
metal roof deck?
I. Is deck finish indicated?
J. Are sheet metal pour stops shown?
K. Are deck opening supports detailed?
L. Have the Steel Deck Institute Design Manual for
Composite Decks, Form Decks and Roof Decks
and the Steel Deck Institute Diaphragm Design
manual been referenced?

B-24
 √ √ √
ITEM Yes No N/A COMMENT
XIV. WOOD SYSTEMS
A. Are species and grades of timber specified and
shown in the notes?
B. Is nailing schedule shown or reference made to
governing code requirements or applicable
criteria?
C. Are sizes and types of bolts, screws, nails,
engineered wood products and wood framing
connectors clearly identified and specified?
D. Are adequate details shown, identifying all
framing members and connections, including
details for diaphragms and shearwalls?
E. Are required lateral bracing, blocking and bridging
details called for on the drawings, including
blocking at bearings?
F. Are bolt spacing, end distances and edge distances
adequate?
G. Are beams, blocking lintels or headers detailed at
roof, floor and wall openings?
H. Are walls properly attached to foundations, floors
and roof?
I. Are typical details provided for wall construction?

J. Has wood shrinkage been accounted for?

K. Has deflection criteria been checked?
L. Have the following been checked or identified for
shearwalls and diaphragms?
1. Plywood panel thickness and grade.
2. Panel orientation and placement.
3. Blocked or unblocked.
4. Fastening patterns at edges and interior supports.

5. Adequate chords to resist flange forces.

6. Adequate collectors and drag struts.
7. Connection details for transfer of forces from
diaphragm to wall and wall to wall.
8. Adequate wall anchor bolts.

B-25
9. Provision for overturning forces through floors
and at foundation.

B-26
 √ √ √
ITEM Yes No N/A COMMENT
K. For wood structural elements engineered by others
(i.e., Glu-lam systems, pre-fabricated trusses, etc.):

1. Are design code and criteria identified?

2. Do plans show appropriate geometry for others to
determine shape, span, etc.?
3. Are design loading requirements shown or
specified?
4. Are shop drawings and calculations required to be
submitted by others?
5. Are calculations to be signed and sealed by a
licensed engineer?
XV. PRE-ENGINEERED BUILDING SYSTEMS
A. Are the design criteria and applicable code or
standard specified, including all design loads and
serviceability limitations?
B. Are building geometry and clearance requirements
specified?
C. Is responsibility for foundation design clearly
identified?
D. Is effect on existing adjacent buildings
considered?
E. Is there a requirement for a letter of design
certification and the design calculations to be
signed and sealed by the building Manufacturer's
Engineer who is a Specialty Structural Engineer?

F. Is the end use of the building identified, along

with project specific conditions such as
importance factors, side sway criteria and
environmental conditions?

G. Is a note included that foundations for pre-

engineered buildings or for equipment shall not be
placed until the design loads and anchor bolt sizes
and arrangement have been submitted on shop
drawings and approved?

H. Is the MBMA, Design Practices Manual

referenced for metal buildings?

B-27
 √ √ √
ITEM Yes No N/A COMMENT
I. Are metal buildings required to be designed for
unusual dead loads such as ventilation equipment,
sprinkler system piping, ceilings, cranes?

J. Are design reactions shown on plan?

K. Is manufacturer required to submit loads for their
building?
L. Is erection required to be under the observation of
the SER or other registered engineers?

B-28
APPENDIX C

REFERENCES
The following references are included in this Guideline or are considered to be potentially
helpful to structural engineers in their pursuit of well coordinated and complete documents.
American Institute of Architects
AIA B141: Standard Form of Agreement between Owner & Architect
AIA C141: Standard Form of Agreement between Architect & Consultant
AIA 201 General Conditions of the Contract for Construction
AIA Architects Handbook of Professional Practice

American Concrete Institute

ACI 117: Standard Specification for Tolerances for Concrete Construction and Materials
ACI 301: Specifications for Structural Concrete
ACI 315: Details and Detailing of Concrete Reinforcement
ACI 318: Building Code Requirements for Structural Concrete and Commentary
ACI 530/ASCE 5/TMS 402: Building Code Requirements for Masonry Structures

American Forest and Paper Association

AF&PA: National Design Specification for Wood Construction and Supplement

American Institute of Steel Construction

AISC: Code of Standard Practice for Steel Buildings and Bridges
AISC: Manual of Steel Construction/Load and Resistance Factor Design Specifications for
Structural Steel Buildings
AISC: Seismic Provisions for Structural Steel Buildings
AISC: Seismic Provision Supplement No. 2
AISC: Detailing for Steel Construction

10-1
American Iron and Steel Institute
AISI: Specifications for the Design of Cold-Formed Steel Structural Members
AISI: Specifications for the Design of Cold-Formed Steel Structural Members, Supplement No. 1

American Institute of Timber Construction

AITC: Timber Construction Manual

American Society of Civil Engineers

ASCE: Quality in the Constructed Project
ASCE 7: Minimum Design Loads for Buildings and Other Structures
ASCE 37: Design Loads on Structures During Construction

American Plywood Association

APA-: Plywood Design Specifications

American Welding Society

AWS D1.1: Structural Welding Code - Steel

Council of American Structural Engineers

CASE: National Practice Guidelines for the Structural Engineer of Record
CASE: National Practice Guidelines for Specialty Structural Engineers
CASE: National Practice Guidelines for Special Inspections
CASE: Commentary on Code of Standard Practice for Steel Buildings and Bridges
CASE: Checklist for the Development of Contract Documents
CASE: Contracts #1 thru #14

10-2
Concrete Reinforcing Steel Institute
CRSI: Design Handbook

Engineering Joint Construction Documents Committee

EJCDC E-570: Standard Form of Agreement Between Engineer and Consultant for
Professional Services
EJCDC E-500 Standard Form of Agreement between Owner & Engineer for Professional
Services
EJCDC C-700 Standard General Conditions of the Construction Contract

Florida Board of Professional Engineers

FBPE: Licensure Renewal; Laws and Rules; 61G15, Florida Administrative Code. In
particular, Chapter 61G15-30 “Responsibility Common to all Engineers” and Chapter
61G15-31 “Responsibility Rules of Professional Engineers Concerning the Design of
Structures.”

International Fire Protection Association

IBC: International Building Code

Metal Building Manufacturers Association

MBMA: Design Practices Manual

National Fire Protection Association

NFPA 5000: Building Construction & Safety Code

National Institute of Steel Detailing

NISD: Guidelines for Successful Presentation of Steel Design Documents

Precast/Prestressed Concrete Institute

10-3
PCI: Design Handbook: Precast and Prestressed Concrete

Research Council on Structural Connections

RCSC: Specification for Structural Joints Using ASTM A325 or A490 Bolts

Steel Deck Institute

SDI: Design Manual for Composite Decks, Form Decks and Roof Decks
SDI: Diaphragm Design Manual

Steel Joist Institute

SJI: Standard Specification for Open Weld Steel Joists, K Series
SJI: Standard Specifications for Longspan Steel Joists, LH Series and Deep Longspan Steel
Joists, DLH Series
SJI: Standard Specification for Joist Girders

Tennessee Board of Architectural and Engineering Reference Manual for Building Officials and
Design Professionals
Underwriters Laboratories
UL: Fire Resistance Directory

10-4