CD Reviews and Approvals

CD reviews and approvals establish multiple verification checkpoints ensuring design quality, coordination completeness, code compliance, and owner satisfaction before issuing documents for bidding and construction. This systematic review process catches errors, verifies design intent, and obtains necessary approvals from all stakeholders.

Internal QA/QC Review

Internal quality assurance and quality control review represents the first defense against errors, omissions, and coordination conflicts. QA/QC procedures vary by firm size and project complexity but typically include self-review by the designer, discipline lead technical review, cross-discipline coordination review, and senior engineer or principal review before external submission.

Self-review requires designers to systematically check their own work against checklists covering calculation accuracy, drawing completeness, specification coordination, and basic coordination. This review catches simple errors before consuming senior reviewer time. Discipline lead reviews verify technical accuracy, design standard compliance, and adherence to project-specific requirements established in earlier design phases.

Senior Principal Review

Senior principal review provides experienced oversight verifying overall design quality, constructability, and alignment with owner objectives. Principal reviewers assess system selection appropriateness, equipment sizing reasonableness, energy efficiency compliance, maintenance considerations, and life cycle cost implications. This review catches fundamental design flaws that detailed reviews might miss while focused on technical minutiae.

Principal review also evaluates risk factors including aggressive schedules, tight spatial constraints, innovative technologies, or challenging site conditions. Principals may recommend value engineering alternatives, identify long-lead procurement items requiring early bidding, or flag coordination issues requiring enhanced attention. Their experience base allows pattern recognition of problems encountered on previous projects.

Owner Review 100% CD

Owner review at 100% Construction Documents provides final verification that the design meets project requirements, budget constraints, and operational objectives before bidding. This review typically involves facility management staff, operations personnel, maintenance supervisors, and owner’s project managers who verify practical aspects of equipment access, maintenance requirements, and operational sequences.

Owner review meetings walk through complete drawing sets addressing system operations, equipment locations, control strategies, and maintenance provisions. Equipment schedule reviews verify capacity, efficiency, and feature requirements. Specification reviews confirm warranty provisions, spare parts requirements, training expectations, and commissioning procedures. Owner comments must be addressed before final document issuance though some may be deferred to submittals or commissioning phases.

Authority Having Jurisdiction Submission

Authority having jurisdiction submissions include building department permit applications, fire marshal reviews, health department approvals, and other regulatory reviews required before construction. Submission requirements vary significantly by jurisdiction but typically require complete stamped drawings, equipment schedules, supporting calculations, energy code compliance documentation, and permit application forms.

AHJ review durations range from days to months depending on jurisdiction workload, project complexity, and submission completeness. Incomplete submissions generate rejection requiring resubmission with additional delays. Proactive communication with plan reviewers, pre-submittal meetings, and thorough initial submissions minimize review duration. Electronic plan review systems used by many jurisdictions accelerate review cycles compared to paper-based processes.

Building Permit Application

Building permit applications compile all required documentation including architectural, structural, mechanical, electrical, plumbing, and fire protection drawings plus energy code compliance forms, special inspection programs, and jurisdiction-specific requirements. Mechanical permit applications typically require equipment schedules highlighting capacities, efficiencies, refrigerants, and fuel types plus ventilation calculations, load calculations, and duct construction specifications.

Permit fees typically calculate based on project valuation, equipment quantities, or system capacities per jurisdiction fee schedules. Expedited review options may be available for additional fees. Some jurisdictions require separate mechanical permits, fire protection permits, and energy permits while others consolidate all building systems under a single permit. Understanding jurisdiction-specific requirements prevents delay and facilitates smooth permit issuance.

Code Review Response

Code review comments require systematic response addressing each item with drawing revisions, specification changes, calculation submittals, or written clarifications. Some comments identify legitimate code deficiencies requiring design changes. Other comments reflect reviewer misunderstanding of design intent requiring clarification without design changes. Response documentation must clearly address each comment with specific drawing or specification references.

Disputed code interpretations may require appeals, code variance requests, or alternative compliance path demonstrations. These situations require careful documentation of code language, design rationale, and equivalent compliance arguments. Building official meetings may be necessary to resolve complex code issues. All code review responses must be documented and incorporated into final issued documents.

Addenda Issuance Bidding

Addenda issued during bidding require careful management to ensure all bidders price identical scope. Each addendum requires sequential numbering, clear identification of changes, complete distribution to all plan holders, acknowledgment requirements on bid forms, and adequate time before bid opening for bidders to incorporate changes. Significant technical changes may require bid date extension to allow proper pricing.

Addenda documentation practices include issuing revised full sheets rather than sketches to prevent coordination errors, using revision clouds and delta symbols to highlight changes, providing written descriptions of changes, and coordinating all affected drawings and specifications. An addenda log tracks all issued addenda, distribution dates, and bidder acknowledgments. Late addenda issued within 48-72 hours of bid opening risk bidder claims for additional time or pricing errors.

Final CD Issuance for Construction

Final CD issuance incorporates all addenda, owner comments, and code review responses into a complete construction document set. This final set becomes the contract documents referenced in construction contracts. Electronic issuance typically provides PDF files with appropriate security settings preventing editing while allowing printing and commenting. File naming conventions identify project, discipline, sheet number, and issue date.

Construction document transmittals clearly state the purpose of issuance - “Issued for Bidding,” “Issued for Permit,” or “Issued for Construction” - and list all included documents. Some projects maintain separate sets for bidding versus permit versus construction to reflect different review cycles. Final issuance represents a major project milestone transitioning from design to construction phases with corresponding shift in team focus from design development to construction support.

Post-Issuance Document Control

Post-issuance document control maintains clear records of what was issued, to whom, when, and for what purpose. Electronic document management systems track all document distributions, maintain version control, and provide audit trails. As-issued document sets are archived as baseline references for interpreting contractor questions, evaluating proposed changes, and addressing disputes about original design intent.

Changes after final CD issuance require formal change management through bulletins during bidding or change orders during construction. Design teams should resist casual redline changes or verbal modifications that bypass formal change control. All post-bid changes must be evaluated for cost and schedule impacts, coordinated across all affected disciplines, and properly documented to maintain contract document integrity.