Construction Project Submittals: Process, Examples, and Best Practices

What are construction submittals?

Construction submittals are formal documents that contractors submit to architects, engineers, or project owners for review and approval before installing materials or beginning specific work. These documents demonstrate that the proposed materials, equipment, or methods meet the project’s specifications and design intent.

This section explores the fundamental aspects of submittals, including common examples, their importance, different types and categories, key distinctions between major submittal formats, the responsible parties, and their role in quality control.

Examples of common construction submittals

Construction projects require numerous types of submittal throughout different phases. Each serves a specific purpose in verifying compliance and facilitating project execution.

The most frequently submitted documents include:

• Shop drawings – Detailed fabrication and installation drawings created by contractors or manufacturers showing how specific components will be built and installed
• Product data sheets – Technical specifications, performance characteristics, and installation guidelines from manufacturers
• Material samples – Physical specimens of finishes, colors, or textures for visual approval
• Mix designs – Concrete or asphalt mixture formulations with proportions and material sources
• Test reports – Laboratory results verifying material properties and performance standards
• Manufacturer certificates – Documentation confirming that products meet specified standards and codes
• Installation instructions – Step-by-step procedures for proper equipment or material installation
• Warranty documents – Guarantees covering materials and workmanship for specified periods

The specific submittals required vary by project scope, complexity, and contractual requirements. A commercial high-rise demands extensive structural steel shop drawings and curtain wall submittals, while a residential renovation focuses primarily on finish samples and fixture cut sheets. Projects typically require 50 to 500+ individual submittals depending on size and complexity (as of 2025). Early identification of all required submittals prevents delays and keeps the project moving efficiently through each phase of construction.

Why are submittals important in construction?

Submittals form the backbone of construction quality assurance and project coordination. They verify that what contractors plan to install matches the design team’s specifications and the owner’s expectations before any materials arrive on site or work begins.

Risk mitigation stands as the primary benefit. Submittals catch discrepancies between specified and proposed materials early, preventing costly demolition and replacement of non-compliant work. A rejected submittal costs time and administrative effort, while installed non-compliant work costs exponentially more in materials, labor, and schedule delays.

Legal protection flows naturally from thorough submittal processes. Approved submittals create a documented chain showing that all parties have reviewed and accepted the approach proposed. This documentation proves invaluable when disputes arise about whether installed work meets contract requirements.

Coordination efficiency improves dramatically with proper submittal management. Reviewing shop drawings reveals conflicts between trades before installation – discovering that ductwork clashes with structural beams on paper costs nothing compared to discovering it during installation.

Budget control tightens through submittal review. The design team confirms that proposed products match the specified performance level and price point, preventing value engineering that compromises quality or contractors proposing premium products that exceed the budget.

The submittal process transforms abstract specifications into concrete, buildable solutions while maintaining accountability among all project participants.

What types of submittals exist?

Submittals fall into distinct categories based on their purpose and the type of review they require. Categorization helps project teams manage workflows and prioritize reviews appropriately.

Action submittals

Action submittals require formal review and a response from the design team before proceeding. These include shop drawings, product data, samples, and mix designs that directly affect the work’s compliance with contract documents. The contractor cannot proceed until receiving approval or conditional approval. Action submittals typically follow a structured review process with specific turnaround times outlined in the contract.

Informational submittals

Informational submittals document activities or provide required information without requiring formal approval. These include construction schedules, progress reports, closeout documents, and certain manufacturer’s instructions. The design team acknowledges receipt but does not provide approval stamps. Contractors proceed with the work regardless of the timing of the design team’s response.

Administrative submittals

Administrative submittals handle project management and contractual obligations rather than technical specifications. Insurance certificates, payment applications, meeting minutes, and safety plans fall into this category. These documents meet contract requirements but do not typically affect the physical construction details.

Procurement submittals

Procurement submittals focus on long-lead items requiring early approval to maintain the project schedule. Elevators, custom curtain wall systems, and specialized mechanical equipment often require submittal review before the contractor needs them on site, sometimes months in advance.

Properly categorizing submittals helps teams allocate appropriate review time and effort. A structural steel shop drawing demands thorough engineering analysis, while a manufacturer’s installation instructions require only basic acknowledgment.

How do shop drawings, product data, and samples differ?

These three types of submittal serve different purposes and require different approaches to review. Clear distinctions prevent confusion and ensure appropriate review depth.

Shop drawings demand the most intensive review time because they involve custom fabrication and coordination between multiple trades. Reviewers verify that dimensions match site conditions, connections satisfy structural requirements, and the proposed installation sequence works logistically.

Product data review focuses on compliance with specifications. Reviewers confirm that the product proposed meets or exceeds performance requirements, carries the necessary certifications, and provides appropriate warranties. The review typically proceeds faster than a review of shop drawings unless the products deviate from the specifications.

Samples require subjective aesthetic judgment alongside technical verification. The architect evaluates whether the color, texture, and quality match the design intent, while also confirming that the physical properties meet the specifications. Samples often require in-person review under proper lighting conditions rather than digital review.

Who is responsible for creating submittals?

Responsibility for the creation of submittals follows a clear hierarchy, though the specific parties vary by contract type and project delivery method. In most cases, the process of submittal creation involves:

1. General contractors
2. Subcontractors and specialty contractors
3. Manufacturers and suppliers
4. Design-build contractors
5. Construction managers

General contractors bear ultimate responsibility for submittal management on traditional design-bid-build projects. They coordinate submittal creation, compile packages from various subcontractors, perform initial quality checks, and formally transmit submittals to the design team. Even when subcontractors create the actual content, the general contractor stamps and submits everything under their authority.

Subcontractors and specialty contractors create the technical content for their scopes of work. The mechanical contractor prepares HVAC equipment submittals, the electrical contractor handles lighting and power distribution submittals, and the steel fabricator produces shop drawings. These parties possess the specialized knowledge to prepare accurate, detailed submittals for their trades.

Manufacturers and suppliers provide product data sheets, test reports, and certifications. They supply technical specifications, performance data, and compliance documentation. Some manufacturers also prepare shop drawings for proprietary systems like curtain walls or pre-engineered metal buildings.

Design-build contractors may have architects or engineers on staff who participate in submittal preparation, blurring traditional lines between designer and builder. This integration potentially streamlines the process but requires careful attention to maintaining design intent.

Construction managers acting as constructors take on responsibilities similar to those of general contractors, while construction managers acting as advisors typically do not create submittals but help owners review and track them.

The contract documents explicitly define submittal responsibilities. Reviewing these requirements during project kickoff prevents confusion and establishes clear accountability from the start.

How do construction submittals support quality control and compliance?

Submittals function as quality checkpoints throughout the construction process, creating multiple layers of verification before materials become permanent components of the project. There are multiple processes involved in the creation of submittals that are focused on the issues of quality control and compliance.

Verification of compliance with specifications

Compliance with specifications is verified before materials are purchased or fabricated. The design team confirms that the products proposed match specified performance levels, physical properties, and quality standards. This pre-installation review prevents non-compliant materials from reaching the job site, where removing them creates significant cost and schedule impacts.

Code compliance documentation

Code compliance documentation flows through submittals containing test reports, certifications, and engineering calculations. Fire-rated assemblies require listings and test reports. Structural connections need engineering stamps. Mechanical equipment needs efficiency ratings and safety certifications. The submittal package assembles all compliance documentation in one place for building officials and inspectors to review.

Validation of performance standards

Performance standards are validated through manufacturer data and third-party testing results included in submittals. The design team verifies that proposed materials will actually perform as required: that insulation achieves the specified R-values, windows meet air infiltration requirements, and concrete reaches the design strength. Physical testing and certification back up manufacturer claims.

Installation quality baselines

Installation quality baselines are established through approved submittals. Once the design team approves a finished sample or shop drawing, that becomes the standard against which field installation is measured. Inspectors and project managers reference approved submittals when evaluating the quality of completed work.

Liability protection

Liability protection is strengthened through documented submittal review. Approved submittals create a paper trail showing that qualified professionals reviewed and accepted the proposed approach. If problems arise later, the submittal record clarifies who specified what, who approved it, and what information was available during decision-making.

Effective submittal processes catch problems while they remain inexpensive to fix, transform abstract specifications into concrete execution plans, and create accountability across all project participants.

What is the relationship between submittals and RFIs (requests for information)?

Construction projects generate mountains of paperwork, and two types of documents frequently cause confusion: submittals and RFIs. Requests for information (RFIs) are formal written questions that contractors submit to architects or engineers seeking clarification on contract documents, design intent, or site conditions.

While both submittals and RFIs serve as tools for communication between contractors and design teams, they serve fundamentally different functions and occur at different project stages. Clarity on their distinct roles prevents workflow bottlenecks and ensures efficient project execution.

RFIs often precede submittals when contractors need clarification before preparing submittal packages. Ambiguous specifications trigger RFIs asking which product meets the design intent, and the response guides the submittal. Conversely, submittals sometimes generate RFIs when reviewers identify conflicts or incomplete information during their evaluation. A shop drawing might reveal dimensional issues that require an RFI for resolution before resubmission.

The practical distinction matters because each document follows different approval workflows and timelines. Treating an RFI like a submittal – or vice versa – creates administrative confusion and delays responses. Projects run smoothly when teams understand that RFIs resolve ambiguity while submittals showcase compliance. Smart contractors use RFIs strategically to clarify uncertainties before investing time in the preparation of detailed submittals, preventing wasted effort on submissions that would face rejection due to misunderstood requirements.

How do you prepare a construction submittal?

The proper preparation of submittals determines whether your materials gain approval on the first review or cycle through multiple rejections. Well-organized submittals with complete information move through the review process quickly, while incomplete or poorly formatted submissions create delays that ripple through the entire project schedule. This section covers the essential information requirements, effective organization strategies, and schedule management techniques that streamline submittal preparation. For reference templates and formats, resources like Smartsheet offer free construction submittal templates, including transmittal forms, logs, and cover sheets that provide examples of standardized starting points for your construction-related submissions.

What information should be included in a submittal?

Each submittal requires both administrative information for tracking and technical content for evaluation. Missing either component invites rejection and resubmission delays.

Essential administrative elements:

• Project identification – Project name, number, address, and contract reference
• Submittal tracking details – Unique submittal number, specification section reference, and revision number
• Responsible parties – Contractor name, subcontractor, supplier/manufacturer, and preparer contact information
• Submittal type designation – Shop drawing, product data, sample, test report, or other category
• Action requested – Approval, review, informational, or for record only
• Distribution list – All parties receiving copies for coordination
• Dates – Submittal preparation date, required review completion date, and resubmission dates if applicable

Required technical content:

• Product specifications – Complete manufacturer data sheets with model numbers, dimensions, materials, finishes, and performance characteristics
• Compliance documentation – Test reports, certifications, code compliance letters, and third-party approvals demonstrating that the product meets specifications
• Installation details – Manufacturer’s installation instructions, special requirements, and warranty conditions
• Shop drawings when applicable – Fabrication details, dimensions, materials, connections, and finishes with clear callouts matching contract drawings
• Samples with identification – Physical specimens clearly labeled with project information and specification references
• Notation of variations – Explicit identification of any departures from contract requirements with justification

Different trades emphasize different content. Structural steel submittals focus heavily on connection details and material certifications. Mechanical equipment submittals prioritize performance data and sequence of operations. Architectural finish submittals center on samples and aesthetic coordination. Regardless of trade, completeness matters more than volume – every piece of information the reviewer needs to make a decision belongs in the package.

How to organize your submittals effectively

Organization transforms a pile of documents into a professional submission that reviewers can navigate efficiently. Poor organization frustrates reviewers and slows approvals even when the technical content satisfies requirements. There are many tips and recommendations that can improve the overall organization of submittals and similar documents.

Follow the sequence of the specifications

Match your submittal organization to the divisions and sections of the project specifications. When the specifications request product data for division 08, doors and hardware, organize all door-related submittals together under that division rather than scattering them across multiple packages. This alignment helps reviewers quickly locate information and cross-reference requirements.

Create clear navigation

Begin with a cover sheet summarizing the contents of the submittal, followed by a detailed table of contents for packages containing multiple items. Number pages consecutively and use divider tabs or bookmarks in digital submissions. Reviewers should be able to locate any specific item within seconds without hunting through the entire package.

Use consistent labeling

Establish a clear naming convention and apply it uniformly across all submittals. Include the specification section number, a brief description, and the revision number in every file name or label. “08 1416 – Entry Doors – Rev 0” communicates more than “Doors_final_version2.pdf” and prevents confusion when multiple versions exist.

Highlight key information

Guide reviewers to critical decision points using annotations, highlights, or callout boxes on shop drawings. Circle the specific product on a multi-page catalog sheet. Add notes identifying which color sample applies to which location. Make the reviewer’s job easier by emphasizing what needs their attention rather than making them hunt for relevant details buried in manufacturer literature.

Separate by specification section

Never combine submittals from different specification sections into one package. Each specification section gets its own submittal package with its own transmittal form, even if multiple sections come from the same supplier. This separation maintains clear tracking and prevents complications when one section gets approved while another requires revision.

Maintain digital standards

Digital submittals should use searchable PDFs rather than scanned images when possible. Optimize file sizes for email transmission while maintaining legibility. Create bookmarks for major sections in lengthy documents. Name files descriptively and avoid special characters that cause problems across different computer systems.

How to use a submittal schedule to avoid delays

A submittal schedule maps when every submittal needs submission and approval to keep procurement and installation activities on track. Projects without submittal schedules inevitably face surprises when critical approvals arrive late.

The submittal schedule identifies every required submittal at project start, sequences them logically, and assigns deadlines working backward from when materials must arrive on site. Long-lead items like elevators or curtain walls require submittal submission months before installation, while paint colors might only need a few weeks. The schedule accounts for review duration, potential resubmissions, manufacturing time, and shipping duration.

Critical path integration ensures that submittal deadlines support the construction schedule. If structural steel installation begins in week 12, the steel fabricator needs approved shop drawings by week 4 to complete fabrication and delivery. Missing that submittal deadline pushes the entire structural schedule backward. The submittal schedule highlights these critical dependencies so teams can prioritize high-impact reviews.

The key benefits of submittal schedules include:

• Early identification of all required submittals prevents last-minute discoveries.
• Workload leveling spreads submittal preparation and review across the project timeline rather than creating bottlenecks.
• Accountability is created by clear submission deadlines for contractors and review deadlines for design teams.
• Progress tracking shows submittal status at a glance – pending, under review, approved, or rejected.
• Procurement alignment coordinates material orders with approval timing to optimize cash flow.
• Risk management identifies potential delays early, when options for mitigation still exist.

Update the submittal schedule weekly as actual submission and approval dates occur. Track how long reviews actually take versus the allocated time. When reviews consistently exceed the schedule allowance, adjust future deadlines or address the root cause. The schedule serves as both a planning tool and a performance monitor, keeping all parties focused on maintaining submittal momentum throughout the project.

How to create a construction submittal log template

A submittal log tracks every submittal from initial preparation through final approval, creating a centralized record that prevents items from falling through the cracks. Without a comprehensive log, submittals get lost, deadlines slip, and finger-pointing replaces accountability when delays occur. Building an effective submittal log requires thoughtful structure that captures all essential information while remaining simple enough for consistent daily use.

Step 1. Establish your core tracking fields

Start with the foundational information that identifies and tracks each submittal. Create columns for the submittal number (using a sequential numbering system), a reference to the section of the specifications, a description of the submittal, and the responsible subcontractor or supplier. Add the submittal type (shop drawing, product data, sample) and the required action (approval, review, informational). These fields form the backbone that every team member uses to locate and identify specific submittals.

Step 2. Add timeline and status tracking

Build columns tracking critical dates throughout the submittal lifecycle. Include the date submitted to the general contractor, the date transmitted to the design team, the contractual review deadline, the date returned from review, and the required resubmission date, if applicable. Create a status field using consistent terminology – options like “preparing,” “submitted,” “under review,” “approved,” “approved as noted,” “revise and resubmit,” and “rejected” provide clarity at a glance. Color-code statuses for immediate visual recognition: green for approved, yellow for conditional approval, and red for rejected.

Step 3. Capture review and approval information

Document who reviewed each submittal and their response. Add columns for reviewer name, review date, and the action taken. Include a field for reviewer comments or reasons for rejection, which proves invaluable when addressing deficiencies for resubmission. Track the ball number or copy number if your project uses physical distribution, ensuring that everyone references the correct version.

Step 4. Link to project schedule and procurement

Connect submittal tracking to downstream activities by adding columns for the required material delivery date and the planned installation date. This linkage highlights which submittals sit on the critical path and which delays will directly impact the construction schedule. Include procurement lead time to calculate backward from when materials must arrive on site to when submittals need approval.

Step 5. Build in distribution and communication records

Track who received copies of each submittal and when. Create columns listing all recipients and their receipt dates. Add a field for file location or a link to the document management system so that team members can quickly access the actual submittal documents rather than just log entries. Include a notes column for relevant coordination information, special instructions, or cross-references to related submittals.

Step 6. Establish update and access protocols

Designate one person – typically the project engineer or assistant project manager – as the log owner responsible for maintaining current information. Set a standard update frequency, ideally daily or at minimum weekly, capturing all new submissions and status changes. Store the log in a shared location accessible to all project stakeholders. Cloud-based solutions enable real-time updates that everyone sees immediately, while spreadsheet-based logs require regular redistribution of updated versions.

Step 7: Implement filtering and reporting capabilities

Structure your log to enable quick sorting and filtering by status, specification section, responsible party, or deadline date. This functionality helps project managers generate status reports showing all outstanding submittals, identify bottlenecks with specific subcontractors, or focus review attention on critical path items. Add conditional formatting that automatically highlights overdue items or submittals approaching their deadlines.

Review your log structure after the first month of use and refine the fields based on actual project needs. Some projects require additional tracking for cost implications, sustainability certifications, or owner review cycles. Simplify or combine fields that team members ignore or find redundant. The goal remains creating a log that is comprehensive enough to answer any submittal question while streamlined enough that updating it never becomes burdensome.

What is the review process for submittals?

The submittal review process involves multiple parties examining proposed materials and methods to verify compliance with the project requirements before installation. This multi-stage review protects project quality by catching problems on paper rather than in the field. The process flows through a defined hierarchy of reviewers, each applying specific criteria to ensure that the submittal meets technical, aesthetic, and regulatory requirements within contractual timeframes.

Who reviews the submittals and what are their roles?

Submittal review follows a sequential path through multiple stakeholders, each bringing specific expertise and authority to the evaluation.

Key reviewers and their responsibilities:

• General contractor – Performs initial review verifying the completeness of submittals, the accuracy of the sections of the specifications, and basic compliance before forwarding to the design team. Checks that subcontractors have included all required information and proper transmittal documentation.
• Architect – Reviews submittals for design intent, aesthetic qualities, coordination with other building systems, and overall compliance with contract documents. Holds approval authority for most architectural submittals including finishes, doors, windows, and building envelope components.
• Structural engineer – Evaluates shop drawings and calculations for structural components, verifying that connections, materials, and load paths satisfy design requirements and building codes. Reviews steel fabrication drawings, concrete mix designs, and structural system submittals.
• MEP (mechanical, electrical, and plumbing) engineers – Assess mechanical, electrical, and plumbing equipment and systems for performance specifications, energy efficiency, code compliance, and coordination with architectural and structural elements. Each discipline reviews submittals within their specialty area.
• Specialty consultants – Depending on project complexity, additional reviewers like geotechnical engineers, lighting designers, acoustical consultants, or commissioning agents evaluate submittals within their areas of expertise.

The architect typically coordinates the design team review, collecting input from all consultants before providing a unified response to the contractor. This coordination prevents conflicting comments and ensures that all disciplines align on the approval decision.

What criteria are used for reviewing submittals?

Reviewers evaluate submittals against multiple criteria to ensure that the proposed materials and methods meet the project requirements.

Specification compliance forms the foundation of every review. Reviewers verify that the products proposed match specified performance requirements, physical properties, and quality standards. The submittal demonstrates that the materials achieve the required fire ratings, durability standards, energy efficiency levels, and aesthetic qualities outlined in the specifications.

Design intent alignment ensures that the submittal reflects what the design team envisioned. Architects confirm that finishes, colors, and textures match the project aesthetic. Engineers verify that equipment capacity and system configurations achieve the intended performance. Deviations from design intent trigger rejections even when submittals technically meet specifications.

Coordination verification catches conflicts before installation. Reviewers check that submitted components fit within the available space, connect properly to adjacent systems, and do not interfere with the work of other trades. Shop drawings reveal dimensional issues, access problems, or installation sequence challenges that require resolution.

Code and regulatory compliance confirms that submittals satisfy building codes, accessibility requirements, energy standards, and local regulations. Test reports, certifications, and compliance documentation prove that products meet mandatory requirements beyond just the project specifications.

How long does the review process typically take?

Review duration varies significantly based on the complexity of submittals, the project delivery method, and reviewer workload.

Contract documents typically specify maximum review periods, often 14 days for standard submittals and longer for complex items. Actual review times depend heavily on submittal quality: complete, well-organized submissions with all required information move faster than incomplete packages that require clarification.

Reviewers prioritize critical path submittals affecting the construction schedule, potentially expediting reviews for long-lead items when contractors flag urgency. Conversely, submittals presented in large batches or during peak periods face longer review queues. Resubmissions following rejection generally receive faster turnaround since the reviewers focus only on addressing the previous deficiencies rather than conducting complete evaluations.

Projects using digital submittal management systems often achieve shorter review cycles than paper-based processes because routing, notifications, and status tracking happen automatically. Clear communication about schedule impacts and submittal priorities helps design teams allocate review resources effectively and prevents delays from becoming project obstacles.

What are common issues encountered with submittals?

Even well-managed projects encounter submittal challenges that create delays, rework, and frustration across project teams. Most submittal problems stem from preventable mistakes rather than unavoidable circumstances. Recognizing common issues, understanding the rejection process, and implementing quality control measures before submission keeps projects moving smoothly and maintains productive relationships between all parties.

What happens when a submittal is rejected?

Rejection initiates a corrective cycle that extends the approval timeline and delays subsequent activities. The design team marks rejected submittals with specific reasons for non-compliance, such as missing information, deviations from the specifications, coordination conflicts, or inadequate documentation. The contractor receives the rejection with detailed comments identifying the deficiencies that require correction.

Review responses fall into several categories:

• “Approved” authorizes proceeding as submitted.
• “Approved as noted” permits proceeding with minor modifications marked on the submittal.
• “Revise and resubmit” requires that specific issues be addressed before resubmission.
• “Rejected” indicates fundamental non-compliance requiring substantial rework.

Resubmission follows the original review path through the contractor to the design team, though reviews typically proceed faster since the reviewers focus only on correcting the deficiencies identified rather than conducting comprehensive evaluations. Each rejection cycle adds 10-20 days to the approval timeline, directly impacting procurement schedules and installation dates. The submitting party bears responsibility for resubmission costs, revised drawings, and any resulting schedule delays. Multiple rejections signal deeper problems – misunderstood specifications, inadequate coordination, or insufficient preparation – that require immediate attention to prevent project-wide impacts.

How can you avoid common mistakes in submittals?

Most submittal rejections result from recurring, preventable errors that careful preparation eliminates.

Common mistakes and prevention strategies:

• Incomplete information – Review checklists of submittal requirements before submission. Include all required product data, certifications, test reports, and installation instructions rather than assuming that the reviewers will request missing items.
• Incorrect references to specification sections – Verify that the specification section number matches the content of the submittal. Cross-reference the technical specifications index before assigning submittal numbers.
• Generic manufacturer literature without highlighting – Mark catalog pages clearly indicating which specific product, model, color, or finish applies to the project rather than submitting entire catalogs.
• Missing notation of deviations or substitutions – Explicitly identify and explain any departures from the specified products, even minor ones, with justification for the proposed alternative.
• Poor quality shop drawings – Ensure that drawings are dimensionally accurate, properly scaled, clearly labeled, and coordinated with the contract documents before submission. Illegible or incomplete drawings guarantee rejection.
• Insufficient coordination – Cross-check submittals against other trades’ approved submittals to identify conflicts before submission rather than discovering coordination problems during review.
• Late submissions – Submit according to the approved submittal schedule. Last-minute submissions force rushed reviews that catch fewer problems and create downstream schedule pressure.

Implementing an internal review process before transmitting submittals to the design team catches most errors. Designate an experienced team member to verify completeness, accuracy, and compliance with the specifications before the contractor stamps and forwards submissions. This quality control step prevents wasted review cycles and maintains project momentum.

What are the consequences of poorly managed submittals?

Schedule delays: Late or rejected submittals push material procurement and installation dates backward, compress downstream activities, and risk missing project milestones. Critical path delays from submittal problems often prove impossible to recover.

Cost overruns: Expedited material orders, premium shipping charges, and rework from the installation of non-compliant materials inflate project costs. Delay-related impacts include extended general conditions, acceleration costs, and potential liquidated damages.

Quality compromises: Inadequate review time or skipped submittals result in non-conforming work requiring expensive correction after installation. Rushed approvals to maintain schedules sacrifice the quality verification that the submittal process provides.

Damaged relationships: Chronic submittal problems erode trust between contractors, design teams, and owners. Poor submittal management signals broader project management deficiencies that make all parties more cautious and less collaborative throughout the remaining work.

How to manage submittals throughout the construction project

Submittal management demands consistent attention from project kickoff through final closeout rather than sporadic reactions to missed deadlines. Successful projects treat submittals as a continuous workflow requiring strategic tracking, clear communication protocols, and appropriate technological support. Proactive management keeps submittals flowing smoothly, while reactive approaches create bottlenecks that cascade into schedule delays and cost overruns.

What strategies help in tracking submittals?

Effective tracking focuses attention on the right submittals at the right time rather than treating all submissions equally.

Prioritize critical path items that directly impact construction schedule milestones. Flag long-lead equipment submittals, structural components, and building envelope systems that require early approval to prevent downstream delays. Review these submissions first and expedite their evaluation regardless of submission order.

Monitor submittal aging by tracking days under review and days since rejection. Submittals approaching contractual review deadlines need immediate attention and potential escalation. Items sitting in “revise and resubmit” status for extended periods signal problems requiring intervention before they impact the schedule.

Conduct weekly submittal status reviews with the project team. Walk through outstanding submittals by trade, identifying bottlenecks with specific subcontractors or reviewers. This regular cadence uncovers problems early and maintains accountability across all parties. Update the submittal log immediately following these reviews to reflect current status and any revised priorities.

Track approval rates and reasons for rejection to identify patterns. If one subcontractor faces repeated rejections, they need additional support or clarification of the specifications. If one reviewer consistently exceeds review timeframes, the issue requires discussion and resolution before it affects the entire submittal schedule.

How to communicate effectively about submittals with the team

Clear communication protocols prevent submittals from disappearing into administrative black holes where nobody knows their status or who owns the next action.

Submittal-specific communication practices:

• Establish clear submission protocols – Define exactly how submittals get transmitted (email, project portal, physical delivery), what documentation accompanies them, and who receives copies at each stage.
• Send immediate acknowledgment – Confirm receipt of submittals within 24 hours, providing the assigned submittal number and expected review completion date so submitters know their package has arrived and entered the review queue.
• Issue review deadline reminders – Notify reviewers 3-5 days before contractual deadlines, escalating to project leadership when deadlines approach without response to prevent contractual violations.
• Communicate rejections with specificity – Return rejected submittals with clear, detailed comments explaining exactly what requires correction rather than vague statements like “does not comply” that force submitters to guess at deficiencies.
• Announce critical approvals – Broadcast approval of long-lead or critical path items to procurement and field teams immediately so they can proceed with ordering and planning without waiting for formal log updates.
• Hold submittal coordination meetings – Schedule dedicated sessions when complex submittals require input from multiple trades, bringing all affected parties together to resolve coordination issues before formal submission.
• Escalate persistent delays – Elevate chronic submittal problems to senior project leadership when normal communication channels fail to resolve bottlenecks affecting the construction schedule.

Document all submittal-related communications in the project record, including submission notifications, review responses, and escalation actions. This documentation proves invaluable when schedule delays or disputes arise requiring reconstruction of the submittal timeline.

What role does technology play in managing submittals?

Digital submittal management platforms transform submittal workflows from manual, paper-intensive processes into automated, trackable systems. Technology provides real-time visibility into submittal status, automates routing and notifications, and creates searchable archives of all submission and review activity.

Modern platforms enable simultaneous review by multiple parties, automatic deadline tracking with escalation alerts, and integration with project schedules that highlight submittal-driven constraints. Cloud-based access ensures that all project stakeholders can view current submittal information regardless of location. Tools like Revizto and other construction management platforms centralize submittal documentation alongside related project information, reducing the administrative burden and improving coordination.

The section below on dedicated tools and software explores specific capabilities of platforms and selection criteria in detail.

What tools and software can assist in creating submittals?

Digital submittal management platforms eliminate the administrative chaos of paper-based tracking and email chains, replacing manual workflows with automated systems that ensure nothing falls through the cracks. These tools centralize submittal documentation, automate notifications, and provide real-time visibility into review status for all project stakeholders.

Essential platform capabilities include:

• Automated routing workflows – Submittals automatically flow to the appropriate reviewers based on section of the specifications or trade, eliminating manual forwarding and ensuring consistent distribution.
• Real-time status tracking – All parties view current submittal status, review progress, and pending actions through live dashboards rather than requesting updates.
• Deadline monitoring and alerts – Systems automatically flag approaching review deadlines and overdue items, triggering notifications to the responsible parties before delays impact the schedule.
• Cloud-based document storage – Approved submittals, review comments, and revision history remain accessible throughout the project lifecycle and during the preparation of closeout documentation.
• Schedule integration – Platforms link submittal approvals to construction activities, highlighting critical path dependencies and submittal-driven schedule constraints.
• Complete audit trails – Systems log every submission, review action, comment, and status change with timestamps and responsible parties, creating defensible project records.

The platforms available range from comprehensive construction management suites to specialized tools. Integrated systems like Procore and Autodesk Construction Cloud incorporate submittal management alongside scheduling, RFIs, and document control. Revizto offers submittal workflows integrated with BIM coordination and issue tracking, connecting submittals directly to 3D models and project visualization. Standalone document management platforms focus specifically on submittal and drawing control for teams preferring dedicated solutions.

Selecting the appropriate software depends on project complexity, team size, existing technological infrastructure, and the integration with other project systems required. Most platforms offer cloud-based access, enabling field teams, subcontractors, and design consultants to participate in submittal workflows from any location, dramatically reducing response times compared to traditional paper-based processes.

What are the best practices for successful submittals?

Mastering the fundamentals of submittals sets the foundation, but implementing best practices elevates submittal management from adequate to exceptional. These proven approaches transform submittals from administrative burdens into strategic project tools that drive quality, maintain schedules, and strengthen stakeholder relationships. The following practices distinguish high-performing project teams from those constantly firefighting submittal problems.

How to ensure compliance with project specifications

Compliance starts long before submittals reach the review stage. Embed specification review into procurement planning so subcontractors and suppliers understand the requirements before proposing products or preparing shop drawings. Distribute specifications with bid packages and hold pre-award meetings clarifying critical requirements, acceptable manufacturers, and approval criteria.

Create specification compliance checklists customized for each section of the specifications. These checklists translate dense specification language into verification points that preparers confirm before submission. A mechanical equipment checklist verifies efficiency ratings, sound levels, warranty terms, and certification requirements rather than expecting preparers to interpret specifications independently.

Maintain approved equals and substitution logs documenting all deviations from the specifications accepted during procurement. When specifications allow “or approved equal,” record exactly which alternatives have gained approval and under what conditions. This documentation prevents confusion when multiple acceptable options exist and ensures consistency across similar submittals.

Involve specialty consultants early when submittals address performance-critical systems. Structural engineers should review steel connections during the preparation of shop drawings rather than discovering problems during formal review. This proactive engagement catches compliance issues while solutions remain simple and inexpensive.

What steps can be taken to improve the quality of submittals?

Quality improvements require systematic approaches rather than hoping the preparers get it right.

Implement mandatory internal reviews before external submission:

• Technical accuracy checks – Verify that dimensions, calculations, and specifications match the contract documents
• Completeness verification – Confirm that all required documents, certifications, and samples accompany the submission
• Coordination reviews – Cross-check against related approved submittals from other trades
• Specification compliance audits – Mark exactly where the submittal addresses each specification requirement
• Clarity assessments – Ensure that shop drawings use the proper scale, clear callouts, and readable labels

Establish submittal preparation standards defining minimum quality expectations. Provide templates, examples of approved submittals, and common reasons for rejection to guide preparers. Standardization reduces variability and raises baseline quality across all submissions.

Track and analyze rejection patterns to identify systemic issues. When rejections cluster around specific subcontractors, sections of the specifications, or types of deficiency, address the root causes through additional training, clarified requirements, or revised preparation processes. Use rejection data to drive continuous improvement rather than accepting poor quality as inevitable.

Schedule adequate preparation time in the submittal schedule. Rushed submittals sacrifice quality for speed, virtually guaranteeing rejection and resubmission, which ultimately takes longer than doing it right initially.

How to foster collaboration between stakeholders on submittals

Collaboration transforms submittals from adversarial approval-seeking into cooperative problem-solving that benefits all parties.

Establish shared submittal goals which emphasize that everyone wins when submittals gain first-time approval. Frame the process as collective quality assurance rather than contractors proving compliance to skeptical reviewers. This mindset shift encourages open communication about challenges and uncertainties before they become formal rejections.

Create transparent submittal visibility where all stakeholders access current status, pending reviews, and outstanding issues. Transparency prevents surprises, enables proactive intervention when problems emerge, and builds trust through information sharing rather than information hoarding.

Hold pre-submittal conferences for complex or critical items. Bring contractors, fabricators, designers, and specialty consultants together to discuss approaches before investing effort in detailed preparation. These sessions surface coordination issues, clarify ambiguous requirements, and align expectations, dramatically improving first-time approval rates.

Respond to submittals with collaborative intent rather than rigid pass-fail judgments. When submittals fall short, provide guidance helping preparers correct deficiencies rather than simply rejecting with “does not comply” stamps. Design teams who view themselves as project partners rather than gatekeepers facilitate better outcomes for everyone.

Celebrate submittal milestones when critical approvals arrive or when teams achieve extended periods without rejections. Recognizing successful submittal management reinforces its importance and motivates continued excellence.

Conclusion

Construction submittals form the quality assurance backbone of successful projects, transforming abstract specifications into verified, buildable solutions before materials arrive on site or work begins. Mastering the submittal process – from initial preparation through final approval – directly impacts project schedules, budgets, and delivered quality. Projects with disciplined submittal management avoid costly rework, maintain construction momentum, and deliver results that match design intent and owner expectations.

The submittal journey involves multiple stakeholders working collaboratively toward shared quality goals. Contractors bear responsibility for complete, accurate submissions that demonstrate specification compliance. Design teams provide timely, thorough reviews that catch problems while solutions remain inexpensive. Owners benefit from the verification and documentation that submittals provide, protecting their investment and ensuring that the finished project performs as intended. When all parties approach submittals as cooperative quality assurance rather than adversarial approval-seeking, projects run smoother and relationships are strengthened.

Technology continues to transform submittal workflows from paper-intensive administrative burdens into streamlined digital processes with real-time visibility and automated tracking. Modern platforms eliminate manual routing, prevent items from disappearing into review queues, and create comprehensive project records accessible long after construction is complete. Organizations investing in proper submittal management – through trained personnel, effective processes, and appropriate technology – consistently deliver projects more successfully than those treating submittals as administrative nuisances to be minimized.

Excellence in submittal management distinguishes professional construction organizations from those perpetually fighting fires and explaining delays. The practices outlined throughout this guide provide the foundation for building robust submittal processes that support project success from groundbreaking through closeout.

Key takeaways

• Submittals verify compliance before installation by demonstrating that proposed materials, equipment, and methods meet the project specifications and design intent, preventing costly rework from non-conforming work.
• Proper preparation accelerates approvals through complete documentation, clear organization, accurate specification references, and internal quality checks that catch errors before external submission.
• The review process involves multiple parties, with architects, engineers, and specialty consultants each evaluating submittals against technical, aesthetic, coordination, and regulatory criteria within contractual timeframes.
• Technology streamlines workflows by automating routing, tracking status in real-time, sending deadline alerts, and maintaining searchable archives that eliminate manual administrative burden.
• Common problems are preventable through submittal schedules that identify the requirements early, quality control processes that catch mistakes before submission, and clear communication protocols that keep all parties informed.
• Collaboration produces better outcomes than adversarial relationships, with early coordination meetings, transparent information sharing, and shared quality goals improving first-time approval rates and strengthening project partnerships.

Frequently asked questions

How long does the construction submittal process last?

The complete submittal process typically spans from early procurement phases through project closeout, often running 6-18 months depending on project complexity and duration. Individual submittals require 2-6 weeks from initial submission to final approval, with shop drawings and complex systems taking longer than simple product data or samples. Critical path items and long-lead equipment often need submittal approval 3-6 months before installation to allow adequate fabrication and delivery time. The submittal schedule maps all required submissions across the project timeline to ensure that approvals arrive when needed.

Why is it essential to perfect your submittal process?

Poor submittal management directly causes schedule delays, cost overruns, and quality problems that ripple throughout the entire project. Rejected submittals create 2-3 week resubmission cycles that push procurement and installation dates backward, often impacting the critical path and delaying project completion. Installing materials without proper submittal approval exposes projects to non-compliance with specifications, warranty issues, and the potential removal and replacement of non-conforming work at significant cost. Professional submittal management protects project schedules, budgets, and quality while demonstrating organizational competence to clients and design teams.

What future trends should you be aware of in construction submittals?

Artificial intelligence and machine learning are emerging to automate submittal review, flagging non-compliance with specifications and coordination conflicts before human reviewers examine submissions. The integration of building information modeling (BIM) increasingly connects submittals directly to 3D models, enabling visual coordination reviews and automatic clash detection between trades. Digital twins and virtual construction platforms will link approved submittals to as-built models, creating comprehensive digital records that support facility management long after construction is complete. Blockchain technology may eventually provide immutable submittal audit trails, though widespread adoption remains years away.

What are the most common reasons for submittal rejection?

Incomplete documentation tops the rejection list, with missing certifications, test reports, installation instructions, or product data forcing reviewers to reject submittals they cannot fully evaluate. Non-compliance with specifications follows closely, occurring when proposed products fail to meet the required performance levels, materials, finishes, or manufacturer requirements outlined in the contract documents. Poor quality shop drawings with dimensional errors, missing details, illegible labels, or inadequate coordination information guarantee rejection regardless of the acceptability of the product. Late submissions that arrive after contractual deadlines or without adequate review time before the required delivery dates often face rejection simply due to timing issues.

What are the legal consequences of ignoring submittal deadlines?

Contractors missing submittal deadlines breach contract obligations, potentially exposing them to liquidated damages if delays impact project completion dates. Design teams exceeding contractual review periods may face claims for delay damages and schedule extensions, shifting responsibility for timeline impacts from contractors to designers. Installing materials without approved submittals violates contract requirements and building codes, creating liability for non-compliant work that may require removal and replacement at the responsible party’s expense. Proper submittal documentation provides legal protection for all parties by establishing what was proposed, reviewed, approved, and installed, making the submittal record crucial evidence in construction disputes.