Stamps for bid-related evaluations are important because they are the means by which the results of a review of the submission are presented, which indicate the disposition assigned to the submitter and the limitations of the review. These stamps are often the focus of attention when it comes to the responsibility associated with reviewing a bid. The following is the language of the approval stamp for the contractor`s submission, which may be required via a project specifications section 01Â 33Â 00 â Submission procedure: These stamps are programmed only for use with Adobe Acrobat. In addition, the EJCDC C-700 and AIA A201, along with their related professional design services agreements (EJCDC E-500 and AIA B101), have consistently used the term «approval» for decades to refer to designer reviews of shop drawings, product data, and samples. Regardless of whether one takes refuge behind the sign bearing the words of disposition, the bid plans assigned by the designer must comply with the general conditions of the project and other construction documents. If more than one design professional – whether multiple companies or design professionals with an individual license with responsible responsibility – is involved in the project, only a company`s stamp for reviewing the submission and the name of a design professional responsible for the review must appear on each submission. The only exception is when clearly visible and clarifying language is included to clearly indicate which parts of the submission each stamp applies to and for which parts of the submission each design professional is responsible. In the absence of such clarifying language, the submission stamps of multiple reviewers or the names of multiple responsible design professionals on the same submission – especially if more than one company is involved – it is possible to blur the boundaries of professional liability for the associated bid review. In some situations, the use of separate electronic bid review seals for the submission of measures and for the submission of information, completion and maintenance documents may be impractical. For example, it may be difficult, if not impossible, to set up multiple «buffers» in a project`s online document management system. Some professional design companies may lack confidence that their project teams will consistently use the right stamp when multiple alternatives are available.
Therefore, if only one complete set of injunctions is required, this author suggests the following: With respect to the submission of briefing, closing and maintenance documents, a common approach in the industry is that if these bids indicate full compliance with the contract, an explicit written response from the design professional is not required and the design professional does not need their consent to submit the submission in their Submission Protocol. If this approach is applied, the designer must provide the contractor with a copy of the submitted protocol at least once a month and at any other time at the contractor`s request. The provision that must be specified in the delivery protocol is:âAcceptedâ. In fact, the term «accepted» is used in the C-700 EJCDC in reference to the review of the contractor`s construction progress plans, bid schedule, and engineer`s value plan. Article â3. (c)â above is probably rarely on the boxes for evaluations related to the submission and, if used, would only apply to submissions of a technically professional architectural, technical or geological nature. Its usefulness is obvious: the design professional responsible for the review would be identified and clearly identified, and such disclosure could provide an incentive for responsible design professionals to exercise appropriate oversight of the review. It may also be appropriate to indicate the person`s condition and license number. Lawsuits are arguably the most important type and require written permission from the design professional before purchasing the raw materials for the related item or manufacturing or shipping the item. On the other hand, information, completion and maintenance documents are generally acceptable (if they indicate full compliance with the requirements of the contract) or unacceptable. This suggests that separate bid review stamps may be desirable for: (1) share submissions and (2) information closure maintenance document submissions. As discussed in more detail in this series in the upcoming sixth article («Shop Drawings and Submissionals: Delegated Design Submittals»), this author also recommends a third submission review stamp specifically for delegated design submissions.
I`m trying to create a dynamic stamp for in-store drawing submissions. After spending many hours searching on Google, I`m amazed at one thing: the buffer is set up with all the information in place and the dynamic time and date. My problem is that when I create it as a stamp, it is no longer dynamic. Can anyone help me with this? Thank you. The second article («Shop Drawings and Bids: Bid Types») in this series discussed the four types of bids recommended by the Construction Specifications Institute (CSI) – Stock Submissions, Information Submissions, Closing Bids, and Maintenance Material Submissions – and suggested that the type of bid can advance the arrangements assigned by the design professional. Some submissions, such as.B. multi-sheet shop drawings for manufactured materials (e.B. However, reinforcing steelworks drawings, construction steelworks drawings or detailed product data presentations concerning more than one material or equipment may require the application of more than one tender examination stamp […].