• R.D. Lieberman,Consultant

Four Reasons Why Specifications Take Precedence Over Drawings


Most construction contractors understand that Federal Acquisition Regulation (“FAR”) 52.236-21, Specifications and Drawings for Construction, specifically states that “in case of difference between drawings and specifications, the specifications shall govern.” This clause is mandatory for use in fixed-price construction contracts over $150,000. FAR 36.521. A recent construction contract not only included FAR 52.236-21, but three other clauses that similarly stated that the specifications took precedence over the drawings. ATI TACOSE S.C.a R.L. (“TACOSE”), ASBCA Nos 59157, 59200, January 4, 2017. These clauses related to two claims for constructive changes by the government.

The Navy awarded a contract to TACOSE to design and build a dormitory at Aviano Air Base in Italy. The solicitation did not include a finished design, but rather, a package setting forth minimum requirements, including specifications and drawings. TACOSE was required to design and construct the dormitory in accordance with these requirements.

TACOSE submitted two claims:

  1. To add 144 “mass notification system speakers” to the Life Safety notification systems, one in each sleeping room. TACOSE contended that the drawings only showed speakers in the common rooms, but not in the 144 sleeping rooms.

  2. For the additional cost of a perimeter waterproofing membrane and insulation under the ground floor membrane, a feature required by Italian and European building codes.

The contract required compliance with all applicable building codes, even if these codes were not expressly listed in the contract. In addition the contract incorporated by reference the U.S. Department of Defense “Unified Facilities Criteria” used for DOD facilities.

In order to resolve discrepancies between specifications and drawings, the contract included the following:

  1. FAR 52.236-21, discussed above

  2. Naval Facilities Acq. Supplement 5252.236-9312, Design Build Contract-Order of Precedence, which showed that specifications took precedence over concept drawings.

  3. General requirements, which stated “in case of differences between project specifications and the accompanying drawings, the specifications will govern.”

  4. DOD FAR Supplement (“DFARS”) 252.236-7001, Contract Drawings and Specifications, which states that “omissions from drawings or specifications or misdescription of details of work that are manifestly necessary to carry out the intent of the drawings and specifications, or that are customarily performed, shall not relieve the contractor from performing such omitted or misdescribed details of the work.”

TACOSE asserted that the drawings in the solicitation showed speakers were required only in common rooms and not all the sleeping rooms. The Board reiterated the frequently stated principle that a contract must be read as a whole, giving meaning to all its parts, including the order of precedence clauses. The Board held that these four provisions made it abundantly clear that not only the DOD Unified Facilities Criteria required speakers in all 144 sleeping rooms, and the “Fire Protection” section of the specifications also required such speakers.

As for the insulation issue, specific insulation requirements were not prescribed in the body of the contract. However, the contract incorporated building codes and similar standards into the contract specifications, and directed the contractor to follow all applicable Italian and European codes and standards for each product and installation required. The Board held that compliance with Italian standards was therefore required, and both the waterproofing membrane and insulation under the ground floor membrane were called out by the Italian standards.

Both of TACOSE’s claims were denied by the Board.

Takeaway: Especially in construction contracts (even design-build construction contracts), the contractor must pay close attention to order of precedence clauses, and all clauses or specifications that are incorporated by reference. Merely consulting the drawings is not sufficient.


Recent Posts

See All

The website of Richard Donald Lieberman, a government contracts consultant and retired attorney who is the author of both "The 100 Worst Mistakes in Government Contracting" (with Jason Morgan) and "The 100 Worst Government Mistakes in Government Contracting." Richard Lieberman concentrates on Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR) consulting and training, including  commercial item contracting (FAR Part 12), compliance with proposal requirements (FAR Part 15 negotiated procurement), sealed bidding (FAR Part 14), compliance with solicitation requirements, contract administration (FAR Part 42), contract modifications and changes (FAR Part 43), subcontracting and flowdown requirements (FAR Part 44), government property (FAR Part 45), quality assurance (FAR Part 46), obtaining invoiced payments owed to contractors,  and other compliance with the FAR. Mr.Lieberman is also involved in numerous community service activities.  See LinkedIn profile at https://www.linkedin.com/in/richard-d-lieberman-3a25257a/.This website and blog are for educational and information purposes only.  Nothing posted on this website constitutes legal advice, which can only be obtained from a qualified attorney. Website Owner/Consultant does not engage in the practice of law and will not provide legal advice or legal services based on competence and standing in the law. Legal filings and other aspects of a legal practice must be performed by an appropriate attorney. Using this website does not establish an attorney-client relationship. Although the author strives to present accurate information, the information provided on this site is not guaranteed to be complete, correct or up-to-date.  The views expressed on this blog are solely those of the author. FAR Consulting & Training, Bethesda, Maryland, Tel. 202-520-5780, rliebermanconsultant@gmail.com

Copyright © 2020 Richard D. Lieberman