As-built / Record Drawings

[skeletron]

In your practice, are you frequently requested to provided sealed as-built/record drawings?
How do you handle this request if you are made aware after the job is completed versus when the job was initiated?

I have a situation where I looked after a delegated scope of work (miscellaneous metal package), sealed shop drawings for a fabricator, and provided a formal letter to the EOR for my delegated scope assurance statement. Months later they are now requesting "as-built" drawings. As far as I know, there were no changes to the shop drawings in the field.

Am I wrong in thinking that the EOR should be sealing record drawings since they would be managing the construction side of things?
My hesitation with sealing "as-builts" is mainly from a document by my association discussing the liability aspects, why they need to be referred to as "record drawings", and how to incorporate a disclaimer statement on the drawings if sealing is a project requirement.

I would love to hear some experience or takes on this one.

 

[phamENG]

If I'm informed after the fact, it's an additional service.

If I do it at all, the document that I provide to them will have my seal removed and a mark indicating that they are as-built drawings. I will also indicate the source of the information in the drawings and a nice CYA note indicating that I'm not responsible for any errors or omissions in the contractor's markups.

 

[JohnRBaker]

By definition, you can't really have an 'as built' drawing, that would be of any value, until AFTER construction was completed anyway. After all, there could be several changes or adjustments made during construction, which got signed-off by all the responsible parties, which would have to be recorded at part of the 'as built'.

Note that my background was a Mechanical engineer, working for a manufacturer of industrial machinery, in my particular case, machinery for large production bakeries. And before we could make our installation drawings for our equipment, we had to know exactly what the building was like that we were going to erect our production machinery. And most of the time, these were not new buildings, often older building which were being repurposed.

I have to admit that my first field job during a start-up, it was a new building, constructed just for this new bakery, but in my 14-years in that part of my work history, that was the only case where that was true. More often than not, we had to send an engineer to the job site with what passed as an 'as built' drawing, with a steel tape and a red marker, first to validate that it was representative of what was actually there, but also to note any changes that had occurred over the years, often items which were missed or were felt to be so minor so to not needing to be recorded. I was asked to do this once while I was on a job site in Fort Worth, TX. I drove over to Alexandria, LA to validate, and mark-up an 'as built' before we were able to finalize a quote to install a new bread oven in an existing bakery. I only found a few changes, but it was important that we had accurate drawings of the site.

And sometimes having what we thought was a valid 'as built' didn't always help. One of the biggest jobs I was involved in was in East Hartford, CT and between the time that we had verified and signed-off on a 'as built' and we started to install one our machines, in this case, a large bread proofer, they had redone the plumbing for the fire suppression system (I suspect the city forced them to update the system when they sought the permits to repurpose the building, which until then had been used as a grocery warehouse). Anyway, while we could still install the machine, we had to trim away and rebuild some of the steel framework, in the field, to avoid the new fire mains. Luckily, no active parts of the machine interfered with these fire mains, but the customer was billed for the extra labor and material needed to accommodate the change. Granted, the original deal was based on the 'as built' which we had been provided and which we had signed-off on and which we had used when we laid-out the production line, but the customer should have immediately updated the 'as built' and provided it us and the other people working to get this bakery installed and up and running (which actually consisted of several different production lines producing several different products).

John R. Baker, P.E. (ret)
Irvine, CA
Siemens PLM:

The secret of life is not finding someone to live with
It's finding someone you can't live without

 

[skeletron]

@JRB: Wow! That's an incredible career niche to be involved with bakery machinery. Super interested to hear your stories!

@phamENG: Your approach sounds similar to what my association has written as a procedure. The fabricator sent me his "as-builts" and it's just the shop drawings with a text box that states "as-built by XYZ". No redlines, no changes, nothing! Most of the sheets are 8.5x11 with no extra space, so even if I were to seal/add a note there would be no space. Last time I submitted a sealed cover letter (in lieu of sealing 40 fab drawings) I got pushback from the EOR who's based across the country. We've had a rocky year with this guy.

 

[JAE]

This is one example of disclaimer language we put on our record drawings:

[red]RECORD DRAWINGS

THESE DRAWINGS REPRESENT RECORD DRAWINGS OF THE PROJECT AND ARE BASED UPON:

1. THE ORIGINAL CONTRACT DRAWINGS
2. AMENDMENTS, REVISIONS AND CHANGE ORDERS APPLICABLE THROUGHOUT THE PROJECT.
3. FIELD ALTERATIONS TO THE PROJECT AS REPORTED BY THE GENERAL CONTRACTOR
4. CHANGES DUE TO EXISTING ACTUAL CONDITIONS.

THE DRAWINGS WERE PREPARED BY <YOUR FIRM NAME>, BASED ON THE ABOVE INPUT AND ARE NOT BASED UPON EXHAUSTIVE CONSTRUCTION INSPECTIONS OR FIELD VERIFICATIONS. AS SUCH, <YOUR FIRM NAME> DOES NOT CERTIFY THAT THE DRAWINGS EXACTLY REPRESENT THE ACTUAL CONDITIONS.

THE PREPARATION OF THESE DRAWINGS DOES NOT CERTIFY THE CONTRACTOR’S WORK, PERFORMANCE OR FULFILLMENT OF THE CONTRACT DOCUMENTS. THE DRAWINGS SHOULD NOT BE SOLELY RELIED UPON FOR THE LOCATION OF MATERIALS, STRUCTURAL MEMBERS, UNDERGROUND ELEMENTS, ETC.[/red]

We do NOT stamp/sign record drawings as they are jumbled up combinations of the original plans and the information listed above (items 1-4)...thus we can't state that all of the information was designed/developed by us under direct supervision (contractor redlines are not directly supervised by us).

We also never stamp/sign shop drawings unless we do them ourselves. In your case you developed the shops so stamping/signing makes sense when you submit them. But as an as-built or record drawing following up on completed construction - they are simply records of a constructed product using previous engineered drawings as a base.

 

[gte447f]

I second phamENG that the effort required to produce record drawings should definitely be an add serv if it was not included in the original scope of services. The effort required to produce a record set of drawings can be substantial.

I also second everything JAE said.

 

[dik]

JAE... copied, thanks.

-----*****-----
So strange to see the singularity approaching while the entire planet is rapidly turning into a hellscape. -John Coates

-Dik

 

[dik]

JAE These were my notes... I will modify them to include parts of your notes. Wrong copy

'AS-BUILT' DOCUMENTS

AS-BUILT DOCUMENTS SHALL BE PREPARED BY THE CONTRACTOR AND THE COST SHALL BE INCLUDED IN THE COST TO COMPLETE THE WORK U/N

DRAWINGS DENOTED 'AS-BUILT' MAY CONTAIN INFORMATION PROVIDED BY OTHERS AND THAT MAY NOT HAVE BEEN VERIFIED BY THE ENGINEER WHOSE SEAL APPEARS ON THE ORIGINAL DOCUMENT(S). NO WARRANTY OR CERTIFICATION IS PROVIDED REGARDING ACCURACY OF INFORMATION

DIMENSIONAL INFORMATION SHALL BE PROVIDED BY A LAND SURVEYOR REGISTERED IN THE JURISDICTION OF THE WORK UNLESS APPROVED BY THE [ENGINEER | CONSULTANT]

AS-BUILT DOCUMENTS SHALL SHOW ALL DEVIATIONS FROM THE CONSTRUCTION DOCUMENTS

ALL BURIED SERVICES ENCOUNTERED DURING CONSTRUCTION SHALL BE RECORDED ON THE AS-BUILT DOCUMENTS

[THIS DRAWING WAS PREPARED USING UNVERIFIED INFORMATION PROVIDED BY OTHERS AND THEREFORE NO WARRANTY OR CERTIFICATION IS PROVIDED]


-----*****-----
So strange to see the singularity approaching while the entire planet is rapidly turning into a hellscape. -John Coates

-Dik

 

[JAE]

So just to clarify - the record drawing process goes like this for us:
1. The contractor sends us their official/primary "field copy" which usually includes redlines in the plans (of field changes or details not originally included) as well as sometimes lots of pasted-in copies of revisions and amendments.
2. This contractor set also sometimes includes sketches traded during construction that result from Requests for Information (RFI's).
3. We take this contractor set and, within an electronic COPY of our original design set, incorporate all the contractor information provided.
4. We also then take all our own internal items - Revisions, amendments, RFI's, and marry those with this record set.
5. We remove our seals/signatures and add the record drawing disclaimer to the set.
6. We sometimes change the title block to further indicate that this is a record set and not the original design set.
7. We then return this set to the Client/Owner for their future use and reference.

Note also that with BIM/Revit, there's a whole other set of issues since Revit model data is/was intended to be sent forward to the owner as a tool to use in continued management of the building. We have, to date, not usually done this and treated our Revit "drawings" much like our CAD drawings in terms of Record Drawing fulfillment.

 

[EngrPaper]

Only answering the first question with a "no". I've never heard of a client of ours being willing to pay for as-builts simply due to the time that it would take to do that. That is, though, coming from the piping discipline. If there is a change or deviation that is needed through an RFI, its usually brought up prior to (occasionally during) construction and we revise the IFC drawings with the approved change. We don't come after the fact to receive field markups or otherwise. The drawings also generally have some flexibility in them at approved places (field fit welds, etc.) so 100% dimensional accuracy there is not needed.

 

[dik]

We generally stipulate that the Contractor provide the client with a 'marked up' set of 'As Built' drawings... If the owner wants a revised drawing set showing this data, it is in addition to normal services. The drawings have the above disclaimers.

-----*****-----
So strange to see the singularity approaching while the entire planet is rapidly turning into a hellscape. -John Coates

-Dik

 

[skeletron]

Thanks y'all. Much of what you have talked about is in line with my thinking.
Here is what my association has written as well:

"...discourages use of the terms “as-built
drawings” or “as-constructed drawings,”
as those terms imply that the drawings
show exactly what was built or
constructed (in circumstances in which
the Professional Registrant who supplied
the drawings did not carry out or directly
control the construction work). The terms
may suggest an unintended level of
certification or impose unintended
liability on the Professional Registrant..."

"...Professional Registrants are not permitted
to Authenticate information on record
drawings provided by others whom they
did not Directly Supervise. This means
that Professional Registrants are not
permitted to take professional
responsibility for record drawings that are
prepared by, or are based on information
or measurements provided by, a
contractor, developer, operations
manager, or others responsible for
implementation or construction..."

"...Authenticating record drawings also has
serious implications for professional
liability insurance coverage..."

"...If a Professional Registrant Authenticates
and takes professional responsibility for
record drawings, which include asconstructed information prepared by
others, this may be considered a warranty
or guarantee of the accuracy of the asconstructed information. As a result, the
Professional Registrant’s liability
insurance coverage for any claim
concerning the accuracy of the asconstructed information may be
compromised or negated..."

"...recommends that the Professional
Registrant responsible for the
professional engineering or professional
geoscience work and field review does not
Authenticate record drawings when the
as-constructed information was provided
by others, unless the following
declaration (or a similar one prepared by
the Professional Registrant’s insurance or
legal advisor) is provided on the drawing:

“The seal and signature of the
undersigned on this drawing certifies that
the design information contained in these
drawings accurately reflects the original
design and the material design changes
made during construction that were
brought to the undersigned’s attention.
These drawings are intended to
incorporate addenda, change orders, and
other material design changes, but not
necessarily all site instructions.
The undersigned does not warrant or
guarantee, nor accept any responsibility
for, the accuracy or completeness of the
as-constructed information supplied by
others contained in these drawings, but
does, by sealing and signing, certify that
the as-constructed information, if
accurate and complete, provides an asconstructed system which substantially
complies in all material respects with the
original design intent.”

..."

 

[dik]

Great... which association?

-----*****-----
So strange to see the singularity approaching while the entire planet is rapidly turning into a hellscape. -John Coates

-Dik

 

[skeletron]

BC

 

[dik]

thanks...

-----*****-----
So strange to see the singularity approaching while the entire planet is rapidly turning into a hellscape. -John Coates

-Dik

 

[Aesur]

We occasionally get asked for as-built drawings, typically on larger projects. Either this comes at an add service or was built into the original fee if we knew about it at the time. We have verbiage similar to JAE above and cannot and will not seal as-built drawings as we have no way to knowing the building was actually built per our drawings. If you seal the drawings I would think you take on unnecessary additional liability as you are essentially saying you confirmed it was built per your drawings, even with disclaimers.

 

[zelgar]

I think there are times when a PE does need to sign as-built drawings. For example, where the engineer is doing Construction Quality Control and is involved with overseeing the construction and testing required (e.g., for a landfill, the subgrade, soil liners, flexible membrane liners, etc.) then as-built drawings that are signed & sealed by a PE is necessary and sometimes required by regulations.

 

[dik]

I think that's a whole other category.

-----*****-----
So strange to see the singularity approaching while the entire planet is rapidly turning into a hellscape. -John Coates

-Dik

 

[dik]

I recently added a thread that had a really good discussion about construction contracts:

thread768-515124

Part of the article included:

-----*****-----
So strange to see the singularity approaching while the entire planet is rapidly turning into a hellscape. -John Coates

-Dik

 

[JStephen]

It seems like through the years, I have seen a number of disciplinary actions by state boards where engineers signed "As built" drawings which in fact did not represent the as-built condition. (Involving somewhat major issues, as I recall, not just an erring measurement or something).
Anyway, in our work, the project consultant will have contract drawings, we'll have shop drawings, and the only "as builts" will be redlined drawings submitted by the contractor, which are not normally sealed.