The construction submittal process is the quality-control step where the contractor sends shop drawings, product data, samples, and certifications to the design team for review before anything is fabricated or installed. The owner’s representative logs each submittal, routes it to the right reviewer, and tracks approvals so slow reviews never stall material fabrication or the construction schedule.
The submittal process is the quality control mechanism that verifies, before materials are fabricated or installed, that what the contractor intends to use and how they intend to install it conforms to the construction documents. Submittals are documents, shop drawings, product data, samples, certifications, that the contractor prepares or assembles and submits to the design team for review and approval. The design team’s approval of a submittal is the confirmation that the proposed material, equipment, or installation method complies with the contract documents.
For an owner’s representative or construction manager, the submittal process is both a quality control mechanism and a schedule management challenge. Submittals that are submitted late, reviewed slowly, or rejected and resubmitted multiple times can delay material fabrication and delivery, which delays installation, which delays the construction schedule. Managing the submittal process actively, tracking the submittal log, expediting slow reviews, and identifying substitution requests early, is a core owner’s rep function.
AIA A201-2017, the General Conditions of the Contract for Construction, governs this process in Article 3.12 (Shop Drawings, Product Data and Samples), and the project-specific mechanics live in the specifications, typically CSI MasterFormat Section 01 33 00, Submittal Procedures.
What Submittals Are Required
The construction contract’s submittal schedule, prepared by the GC and reviewed by the design team at project start, lists all submittals required for the project, organized by specification section and due date. The submittal schedule should be tied to the construction schedule: the submittal for the structural steel shop drawings should be submitted and approved in time for the steel to be fabricated and delivered before the structural steel installation date.
Common submittal categories on multifamily and commercial projects:
Shop drawings. Contractor-prepared drawings showing how specific components will be fabricated and installed, structural steel connection details, precast concrete panel layout, curtain wall framing drawings, millwork shop drawings, and elevator cab drawings are typical shop drawing submittals. Shop drawings require careful review for conformance with the contract documents: the structural engineer reviews structural steel shop drawings, the architect reviews architectural shop drawings, and the MEP engineers review their respective discipline’s shop drawings.
Product data. Manufacturer’s specifications, installation instructions, and performance data for specific products specified in the contract documents. Product data submittals allow the design team to confirm that the proposed product meets the specification’s performance requirements before it is ordered and delivered.
Samples. Physical samples of finishes, materials, and products, paint colors, tile, flooring, exterior cladding materials, that the architect reviews for aesthetic conformance with the design intent. Sample approvals often require multiple submittals before the final selection is approved.
Certifications and test reports. Documentation confirming that specific materials or assemblies have been tested and meet the performance requirements specified in the contract, concrete mix design approvals, fire-rated assembly test reports, waterproofing system certifications.
At a glance, submittals fall into these categories, and the category tells you how long review takes and how much lead time sits behind it:
| Submittal type | What it is | Typical examples |
|---|---|---|
| Shop drawings | Contractor-prepared fabrication and installation drawings | Structural steel, curtain wall, precast, casework, MEP coordination |
| Product data | Manufacturer catalog data and cut sheets | Mechanical equipment, plumbing fixtures, doors and hardware |
| Samples | Physical samples for color, texture, and finish | Paint, tile, flooring, stone, exterior cladding |
| Mock-ups | Full-scale assemblies built for approval | Exterior wall mock-up, typical unit bathroom |
| Quality-assurance | Certifications, calculations, and test reports | Concrete mix designs, welder certifications, fire-rating listings |
| Closeout | Documents delivered near completion | O&M manuals, warranties, as-built record drawings |
The Review Sequence and Timeline
When the contractor submits a submittal, it flows to the owner’s representative (or directly to the architect on projects without an owner’s rep) for routing to the appropriate design discipline reviewer. The reviewer examines the submittal for conformance with the contract documents and returns it with a review action, applied as a stamp:
| Review action | What it means | Can the work proceed? |
|---|---|---|
| No Exceptions Taken / Approved | Conforms to the contract documents | Yes — order and install |
| Make Corrections Noted / Approved as Noted | Minor corrections; comply with the notes | Yes, without resubmitting |
| Revise and Resubmit | Does not yet conform; correct and submit again | No |
| Rejected | Does not comply | No |
| For Information Only / Received | No approval implied; informational | Not applicable |
Per AIA A201 Section 3.12.10, the design team reviews only for conformance with the design concept — not for the accuracy of dimensions or quantities the contractor is responsible for — and an approval does not authorize a change to the work.
Construction contracts specify required review times for submittals, typically 10 to 21 days from receipt for standard submittals, with acknowledgment that complex submittals may require longer. The owner’s representative’s role is to manage this timeline: logging each submittal when received, tracking the review period, following up with design reviewers who are approaching or past the response deadline, and ensuring that approved submittals are returned to the contractor before the fabrication or installation date creates a delay.
When a submittal is rejected and requires resubmittal, the clock restarts. A submittal that goes through three review cycles adds 30 to 60 days to the material’s lead time, which can create a direct schedule impact if the affected material is on the critical path.
What the Owner’s Rep Reviews For
The owner’s representative’s review of submittals is not the same as the design team’s technical review. The design disciplines are reviewing for technical conformance, whether the shop drawings correctly reflect the structural design, whether the product data confirms specification compliance. The owner’s representative is reviewing for: completeness (is this submittal the correct document for this scope?), conformance with the submittal schedule (was it submitted on time?), and any indications that the contractor is proposing substitutions or deviations from the contract documents that require design team attention.
When the owner’s rep identifies a proposed substitution embedded in a submittal, a different product from what the specification requires, presented as if it were the specified product, that substitution should be flagged for the design team’s specific attention rather than treated as a routine conformance review.
Substitutions vs. Or-Equal Products
Construction specifications typically designate specific products by manufacturer and model number, followed by “or approved equal”, indicating that the design team will consider substitutions that are demonstrably equivalent to the specified product. The substitution review process is distinct from the standard submittal review process: a substitution request requires the contractor to document why the proposed product is equivalent to the specified product, and the design team to make a specific determination that equivalence is established.
When contractors submit product data for a product that is clearly different from the specified product without explicitly flagging it as a substitution request, they are attempting to obtain an approval by misrepresentation, or more charitably, by hoping the reviewer doesn’t notice the difference. An owner’s representative who is reviewing submittals carefully will catch these attempts and route them as substitution requests for explicit design team evaluation.
The Submittal Register
The submittal register (or log) is the master tracking document, and on a well-run project it is a live record, not a static list. Built from the specifications before construction starts and reviewed at every project meeting, a useful register carries, for each item: the specification section and submittal number, description and type, responsible subcontractor or supplier, required submission date, the date it was actually submitted and received, the reviewer, the review action returned with date, the resubmittal cycle number, the fabrication and delivery lead time, the related construction-schedule activity with a critical-path flag, and a “ball-in-court” field showing who holds the item right now. That last field is what keeps reviews honest: it shows at a glance whether a stalled item is waiting on the contractor to resubmit or on the design team to respond, which ends the argument about who owns the delay.
The Submittal Schedule and Long-Lead Items
The submittal schedule sequences every submittal against the construction schedule, and AIA A201 Section 3.10.2 requires the contractor to prepare one promptly after award. The design team’s review obligation is measured against that schedule, so a submittal sent late has no claim on the review period it would have had on time.
The math is unforgiving on long-lead items. Take an elevator on a 20-month build with a 4-week review cycle and 20 weeks of fabrication after approval. A contractor who does not submit the elevator shop drawings until month four will not see equipment delivered until roughly month eight, and any slip in review — or a single resubmittal cycle — pushes the certificate of occupancy with it. Sequencing that submittal into month one is the difference between an elevator that beats the finishes and one that holds up final inspection. This is why submittal management is a schedule function, not a paperwork one.
Common Problems and Delays
The same failures recur project after project: late initial submissions that move every downstream date; resubmittal churn when the contractor skips its own review (AIA A201 Section 3.12.5 makes that review the contractor’s obligation) or answers only some of the design team’s comments; reviews that sit past the contractual period on critical-path scope and need escalation the moment they go overdue; incomplete submittals that are returned before review even starts; material ordered and installed without an approved submittal, which defeats the quality-control purpose entirely; and missed long-lead items that surface too late to recover.
A submittal process that is activated at project kickoff, tracked against the construction schedule throughout the project, and managed with the same discipline as the RFI and change order processes prevents the fabrication and delivery delays that are the most common source of schedule slippage on complex construction projects.
Innergy Integral provides these services in Bellevue, WA and across our six-state footprint.
Related: Construction Management Services · Construction RFI Process · Owner’s Representative Services · Construction Management Guide
Markets: Construction Management Seattle WA · Construction Management Dallas TX · Owner’s Representative Houston TX