×
INTELLIGENT WORK FORUMS
FOR ENGINEERING PROFESSIONALS

Log In

Come Join Us!

Are you an
Engineering professional?
Join Eng-Tips Forums!
  • Talk With Other Members
  • Be Notified Of Responses
    To Your Posts
  • Keyword Search
  • One-Click Access To Your
    Favorite Forums
  • Automated Signatures
    On Your Posts
  • Best Of All, It's Free!
  • Students Click Here

*Eng-Tips's functionality depends on members receiving e-mail. By joining you are opting in to receive e-mail.

Posting Guidelines

Promoting, selling, recruiting, coursework and thesis posting is forbidden.

Students Click Here

Jobs

submit for approval

submit for approval

submit for approval

(OP)
Also be careful about saying things like "submit for ________ approval," and "will be approved by ______," since the logic of the words does not allow disapproval.

(Taken from the 'guide to spec writing')

Do you agree with this?

Many, many publications including AISC documents use 'submit for approval'  

doesn't 'approval' mean subject to a prospective buyer's acceptance OR refusal?

right or wrong?

RE: submit for approval

Approval, at least in the usual engineering context, is more like a tollgate than a fork in the road.

I.e., you submit something for approval, and it's implied that you keep modifying it until it meets the requirements and gets approved.

Mike Halloran
Pembroke Pines, FL, USA

RE: submit for approval

The problems start when you tie a payment to a submittal rather than an approval.

Contractor submits some package of crap, and the next submittal is an invoice for payment for the "submittal".

Always tie your milestone payments to your approval.  "I'll pay you when I say it's good."

RE: submit for approval

Isn't is simply short for

"Submit for the purpose of eventually getting an approval"

??

RE: submit for approval

Submit for review...

RE: submit for approval

You can submit it *for* approval, but you may not get the approval.  "Submit for review" isn't enough; it doesn't bring up the final step of a formal thumbs-up or thumbs-down.

What's really bad is when the spec says something like "The Engineer shall approve the submittal prior to any work being performed"--which, on close reading, puts the Engineer in violation of the contract if they don't approve the submittal, no matter how bad the submittal is!

Hg

Eng-Tips policies:  FAQ731-376

RE: submit for approval

You know I've had this thought a few times.

We submit most of our technical documents (not drawings) by emailing them config control and either leaving it to them to get everyones approval or we CC all the required approvals.

I usually put in the email something like "I'm subbmitting this for approval" but as you say this implies disapproval isn't an option.

If you say submit for review you're not explicitly asking for approval, I can imagine it sitting in the in tray for weeks!

Perhaps it should really be something like "submit to the approval process" and "if deemed adequate will be approved by"

I'm not sure, I'll be interested to see where this goes.

RE: submit for approval

Think about it like lab reports from student days.  You submit a report; you get a B.  In the world of work a B isn't enough.  It comes back again and again until it gets that A.  Submitting a report in real life is a bit like MOT testing it.

RE: submit for approval

How does "submitting for approval" imply no disapproval?  "Will be approved by" implies this, but I don't think "submit for X" necessarily means that X will happen.  The only actual directive there is "submit".  No one is being directed to approve.

Too bad we can't say "submit in the hope of approval" in the spec...

Hg

Eng-Tips policies:  FAQ731-376

RE: submit for approval

If the presumption is that that submitted will be approved, then no approval is actually needed.

If you submit the guide in question for my approval, I will either disapprove it, or approve as edited with the offending statement struck out. Is this a published work?

RE: submit for approval

And of course most contracts have something along the lines of:

Quote:

The owner's approval doesn't mean crap if the thing doesn't work.  The contractor bears full responsibility for making the thing work.

This never stops the contractor from whining "but you approved..."

RE: submit for approval

If you read the guidelines from the liability insurance providers, you should never "approve" anything anyway.  The best response given should be "No Exceptions Taken".  If you approve something you are taking on liability and responsibility.

RE: submit for approval

Even "No Exceptions Taken" allows the inference that had there been something to take exeption to, you would have.

"No Exceptions Noted" seems better, as it allows for the reviewer to miss something.

RE: submit for approval

When I was dealing with such things, we used the "No Exceptions Taken" wording, and included a whole paragraph about how none of the comments in the review transfered any liability or responsibility from the supplier to the Engineer, but I like your "No Exceptions Noted" even better.  Same type of thing about making project observations rather than inspections.

RE: submit for approval

I like the "no exceptions noted" response. But what if you do have an exception or two to red-line. Is there a safer version of "approved as modified?" One that isn't too wordy?

RE: submit for approval

(OP)
The source I quoted from was:
==============================
Guide to Specification Writing
For U.S. Government Engineers
by John Oriel, NAVAIR TSD

http://www.ntsc.navy.mil/resources/library/acqguide/spec.htm?
==============================
Follow the link, download the word doc. and search for Approval.
==============================

I prefer 'No Exception Taken' over Approval - this is what  use:

a. Status 1: No exception taken. Contractor may proceed with fabrication or construction in accordance with specification.
b. Status 2: Contractor may proceed in accordance with specification based on making revisions as noted and resubmit.
c. Status 3: Revise as noted and resubmit. Hold fabrication.
d. Status 4: For information only; review not required.

BUT again - AISC legal department seems fine with the phrase "Submit for Approval"

RE: submit for approval

I have yet to find a project manager that would allow these:

Deficient:
•    The document is of such poor quality that the design intent cannot be determined, or is ambiguous.
•    Document fails to meet minimum acceptable standards for clarity, drafting standards, grammar or spelling.

Non-Compliant/Not Acceptable:
•    The document identifies design intent that is non-compliant to the Technical Specification Requirements.
•    Based on past experience, or engineering review, the presented design poses a substantial risk of unsatisfactory performance.
•    Content is contradictory to other information on the same topic presented in another document.

No Non-Compliant items identified:
•    Review of the document did not identify any non-compliant items.

RE: submit for approval

Read The Contract;  

or, if you're writing the contract, state it carefully.

Items (document, drawing, a widget, a CDRL, whatever) may be "submitted" for a variety of reasons;  approval being just one.  

Not all documents require approval, believe it or not, it's all a matter of where someone want's to spend their money.

RE: submit for approval

On Twilight Zone, didn't Rod Serling always begin the show by saying, "Submitted for your approval..."  I don't think he assumed everyone would therefore approve of the show!

DaveAtkins

RE: submit for approval

Firstly, submitting for approval does not mean that it will get approved. Same as asking for permission does not mean one will be granted the permission. So this argument shall end here.

However, if you want to make something clearer there is nothing that stops you making it so. You can always include plain languages such as “ do not proceed with procurement or fabrication of the product until a satisfactory review, of the submittal, by the Owner and the Architect/Engineer is obtained. No payments will be made for incomplete or unsatisfactory submittals,” etc.

Some Other Points:

There is no need to reinvent the wheel. There are very good master (guideline) specs available from AIA (Published by Arcom) and CSI, etc. They include adequate language for submittals etc. You need to spend some money and remain up to date.

Also in today’s world, legal aspect is very critical so it is important that your insurance carrier and attorneys review your contractual requirements and payment terms.

Thirdly, try to keep the technical requirements and non-technical such as payment separate, that is in separate sections of specs and contracts. Payment terms should be handled in general conditions of the contract and not in technical specification sections.

RE: submit for approval

For years the Aerospace world used "No Technical Objection".  This implied that we did not find anything which caused concern from an engineering/airworthiness viewpoint, however, we were not approving the data.

The regulatory world doesn't like NTO's when an operator attempts to use them as substantiation for repairs/mods.

Randall Shelaga C.E.T.

Red Flag This Post

Please let us know here why this post is inappropriate. Reasons such as off-topic, duplicates, flames, illegal, vulgar, or students posting their homework.

Red Flag Submitted

Thank you for helping keep Eng-Tips Forums free from inappropriate posts.
The Eng-Tips staff will check this out and take appropriate action.

Reply To This Thread

Posting in the Eng-Tips forums is a member-only feature.

Click Here to join Eng-Tips and talk with other members!


Resources