Submittals and shop drawings

The drawings the design team issues for tender do not show how a steel joist is welded, which sprinkler head goes where or what colour the dock doors are. Shop drawings and other submittals fill that gap. They are prepared by the contractor and its suppliers, reviewed by the Consultant, and then used to fabricate. On a fast warehouse schedule, a late or rejected submittal for a long-lead item can move a milestone by weeks. This lesson walks through the shop drawings clause of CCDC 2-2020 and how an owner keeps the submittal pipeline moving without becoming a reviewer.

Learning outcomes

• Define Shop Drawings and submittals under CCDC 2-2020 and the common Ontario Supplementary Conditions.
• Walk through each step of the shop drawings clause, GC 3.8 in CCDC 2-2020 (GC 3.10 in the 2008 edition), including deviations and the limits of the Consultant's review.
• Build a submittal schedule backwards from the date a product is needed on site.
• Read a submittal register and act on what it shows, using a Northgate roof joist example.

The lesson

Shop drawings and submittals

CCDC 2-2020 defines Shop Drawings broadly: the drawings, diagrams, illustrations, schedules, performance charts, brochures, product data and other data the contractor provides to show details of parts of the Work. Samples, mock-ups and close-out documents are not named in the definition. That is why the OAA-OGCA recommended Supplementary Conditions add a defined term, Submittals, covering shop drawings, samples, models and mock-ups needed before work is incorporated, plus as-built drawings and operating and maintenance manuals, and extend the shop drawings clause to all of them. Many Ontario owners adopt that wording. In the specifications, the procedures sit in Division 01, Section 01 33 00, Submittal Procedures.

Where the clause is, and what moved

If you learned on CCDC 2-2008, you know the shop drawings clause as GC 3.10. In CCDC 2-2020, it is GC 3.8. The OAA's overview of the 2020 changes notes that several of the old sub-paragraphs moved out of the general conditions into Section 01 33 00 of the new CCDC Master Specification for Division 01, including the requirement for the contractor's review stamp. Ontario Construction News made the same point: the old GC 3.10.4 is no longer in CCDC 2, and its content now sits in Section 01 33. If your project uses CCDC 2-2020 with an old Division 01, those requirements may be missing altogether. Check before tender.

GC 3.8, step by step

In paraphrase, GC 3.8 has seven parts, shown in Figure 1.

1. 3.8.1: the contractor provides the Shop Drawings the Contract Documents call for.
2. 3.8.2: it submits them on a schedule agreed with the Consultant, or otherwise in an orderly sequence and early enough not to delay the Work. The OAA-OGCA Supplementary Conditions replace this with a joint submittal schedule prepared before the first application for payment.
3. 3.8.3: before submitting, the contractor reviews each one. By submitting, it represents that it has checked or will check field measurements and conditions, and coordinated the drawing with the Work and the Contract Documents.
4. 3.8.4: the Consultant reviews for conformity with the design concept and general arrangement only.
5. 3.8.5: the contractor must flag in writing any deviation from the Contract Documents. The Consultant must accept or reject each deviation expressly, in writing.
6. 3.8.6: the Consultant's review does not relieve the contractor of responsibility for errors and omissions or for meeting the Contract Documents.
7. 3.8.7: the Consultant returns Shop Drawings on the agreed schedule or, without one, with reasonable promptness so as not to delay the Work. The OAA-OGCA wording substitutes a fixed 10 Working Days, or longer if reasonably required.

GC 2.2.13 is the other side of the same coin: it makes reviewing and responding to Shop Drawings and other submittals part of the Consultant's role.

What the Consultant's review does not do

The review is limited by design. The Consultant checks that the joist layout follows the design concept and general arrangement. It does not check every weld, dimension or quantity. The OAA's practice guidance tells architects to review only what relates to their own discipline and to mark items outside their expertise "not reviewed". Specialty items designed by the contractor's engineer, such as steel joists, precast connections or tilt-up panel lifting inserts, need that engineer's seal; an OAA article recommends returning a sealed-item submittal as "revise and resubmit" until the seal is on it.

Two consequences matter to owners. First, review does not shift design responsibility. Under GC 3.8.6 the contractor still owns errors in its drawings. Second, a Consultant's mark-up is not a free change. The Durham Region 01 33 00 section, typical of Ontario public owners, says notations do not change price or time and requires the contractor to give written notice before proceeding if it believes one does. That mirrors the notice discipline in GC 6.6.

Review actions

CCDC 2-2020 does not prescribe stamp wording. The actions come from the Consultant's stamp and the Division 01 section. Figure 2 shows a common set and what each permits.

The submittal schedule

The single most useful control is a submittal schedule built backwards from the date each product is needed on site. For each item, work back through delivery, fabrication lead time, one resubmission cycle, the Consultant's review period and the contractor's own preparation. Two review cycles is the honest planning assumption for anything engineered. The OAA-OGCA Supplementary Conditions require the contractor and Consultant to agree this schedule before the first payment application, which turns "reasonable promptness" into dates both sides can be held to. In the contractor's Oracle Primavera P6 schedule, the long-lead items should appear as linked submit, review and fabricate activities, not as a single procurement bar.

Northgate worked example

On Northgate Distribution Centre (fictional), Halvorsen Builders Ltd. (fictional) must erect steel joists and deck on top of the tilt-up panels after M5 (panels erected, Friday June 25, 2027) so the roof is weathertight by M6, Friday September 3, 2027. Joists are designed and sealed by the joist supplier's engineer, which makes them a classic delegated-design submittal. Ridgeline Architects Inc. (fictional) and its structural subconsultant review them. For this example, assume Northgate's Supplementary Conditions adopt the OAA-OGCA 10 Working Day review and that joist fabrication takes eight weeks after release. Both are illustrative assumptions; the Northgate fact sheet does not set them.

Working backwards from a joist delivery on Monday July 5, 2027, the owner's representative checked Halvorsen's submittal schedule against Figure 3.

View the data

Step	Start	Finish	Party
Supplier prepares and seals; Halvorsen reviews and stamps	Mon Mar 15, 2027	Mon Apr 5, 2027	Halvorsen
Ridgeline review 1 (10 Working Days)	Mon Apr 5	Mon Apr 19	Ridgeline
Revise and resubmit (5 Working Days)	Mon Apr 19	Mon Apr 26	Halvorsen
Ridgeline review 2 (10 Working Days)	Mon Apr 26	Mon May 10	Ridgeline
Fabrication (8 weeks, illustrative)	Mon May 10	Mon Jul 5	Fabricator
Delivery to site	Mon Jul 5		Fabricator

The plan works, but only just. Good Friday falls on March 26, 2027, inside the preparation window, and the second review cycle is the margin. If the first submission slips to the week of April 19 or the joists need a third cycle, delivery moves past early July and erection runs into the roofing time ahead of M6. The owner's representative did three things. It asked Halvorsen to show the five longest-lead submittals (joists, deck, ESFR sprinkler layout, dock levellers and the rooftop units) as linked activities in the P6 update. It asked Ridgeline to confirm the structural subconsultant would hold time for the joist review in April. And it put the submittal register on the OAC agenda, with items past their planned return date listed by name.

One thing the owner's representative did not do was review the joist drawings itself. Northgate's operations team wanted to see the dock leveller submittal, because they will run the docks for years. That was routed through Ridgeline as owner comments, so the contractor received one set of review comments from the Consultant, as GC 3.8 contemplates.

Owner's move

• Fix the Division 01. On a CCDC 2-2020 project, make sure Section 01 33 00 carries the requirements that moved out of the general conditions, including the contractor's stamp.
• Get the schedule before the first payment. Use the OAA-OGCA wording, or your own, so the submittal schedule is agreed early, with real review periods.
• Track long-lead items as activities. Submit, review, resubmit, fabricate and deliver, linked to the installation that needs them.
• Route owner comments through the Consultant. One reviewer, one set of comments, one stamp.
• Watch deviations. Ask for a list of deviations accepted under GC 3.8.5 each month. Accepted deviations can change what the owner is getting.

Common mistakes

1. Assuming review means approval. Review is limited to design concept and general arrangement; the contractor keeps responsibility.
2. Burying deviations. A substitution hidden in product data, not flagged on the transmittal, is not accepted just because the drawing was stamped.
3. Planning one review cycle. Engineered submittals often come back "revise and resubmit" the first time.
4. Owner staff marking up shop drawings directly. It creates conflicting instructions and muddies responsibility.
5. Using a 2008-era Division 01 with CCDC 2-2020. Requirements that moved out of the GCs may vanish.

Quick quiz

1. In CCDC 2-2020, which GC deals with Shop Drawings?

   1. GC 2.4
   2. GC 3.4
   3. GC 3.8
   4. GC 6.3

2. What is the scope of the Consultant's review of Shop Drawings under CCDC 2-2020?

   1. Every dimension and quantity
   2. Design concept and general arrangement only
   3. Code compliance of means and methods
   4. Price and schedule impact

3. Halvorsen's dock leveller product data shows a different model from the specification, but the transmittal does not mention it. What does GC 3.8.5 require?

   1. Nothing, the stamp covers it
   2. The contractor must flag deviations in writing and the Consultant must expressly accept or reject them
   3. The owner must approve the model
   4. A Change Order is automatic

4. Under the OAA-OGCA recommended Supplementary Conditions, how long does the Consultant have to review Shop Drawings, unless more is reasonably needed?

   1. 5 calendar days
   2. 7 Working Days
   3. 10 Working Days
   4. 30 days

5. A Consultant's note on a reviewed shop drawing adds a stiffener Halvorsen did not price. What should Halvorsen do?

   1. Install it and invoice later
   2. Give written notice before proceeding
   3. Ignore the note
   4. Ask the owner's operations team

Show answers and explanations

1. C. GC 3.8 in CCDC 2-2020; the same subject was GC 3.10 in CCDC 2-2008.
2. B. GC 3.8.4 limits the review to the design concept and general arrangement.
3. B. Deviations must be identified in writing, and the Consultant must expressly accept or reject each one.
4. C. The OAA-OGCA wording replaces "reasonable promptness" with 10 Working Days, or longer if reasonably required.
5. B. Typical Division 01 wording says notations do not change price or time and requires written notice first, consistent with GC 6.6.

Key terms

Shop Drawings

Under CCDC 2-2020, drawings, diagrams, schedules, product data and similar data the contractor provides to show details of parts of the Work.

Submittals

A wider term, added by many Supplementary Conditions, covering shop drawings, samples, mock-ups and close-out documents.

Deviation

Any difference between a submittal and the Contract Documents, which must be flagged in writing and expressly accepted or rejected.

Delegated design

Design of a component by the contractor's or supplier's engineer, who seals the submittal.

Submittal schedule

The agreed list of submission and return dates, built back from when each item is needed.

Revise and resubmit

A review action meaning the submittal cannot be used for fabrication until corrected and reviewed again.

Long-lead item

A product whose fabrication or delivery time makes its submittal schedule critical.

References

1. Canadian Construction Documents Committee, CCDC 2-2020 Stipulated Price Contract, Definitions, GC 2.2.13 and GC 3.8 (paraphrased).
2. Ontario Association of Architects, PT.23.11 Overview of the changes in CCDC 2-2020 (May 23, 2024).
3. Ontario Association of Architects and Ontario General Contractors Association, Recommended Supplementary Conditions for CCDC 2-2020 (revised March 15, 2024).
4. Clive Thurston, Revised CCDC 2 and the new Division 01, Ontario Construction News.
5. Ontario Association of Architects, The shop drawing review process: a brief discussion.
6. Ontario Association of Architects, Reviewing submittals.
7. Regional Municipality of Durham, Section 01 33 00 Submittal Procedures (specification template).

Verified on November 6, 2026.

Next lesson in this trackOAC meetings and minutes that hold up