Trace each area of cut, fill, or trench backfill from the grading and utility plans into the specification’s fill classification and compaction requirement for that specific use, then confirm finish-grade tolerance and drainage direction before treating a single sitewide note as complete.
Assemble the review package
Gather the grading and site plan, the geotechnical report, the structural foundation and subgrade requirements, the utility trench sections and profiles, the erosion-control plan, and the issued earthwork specification. Start with one building pad or trench run rather than the entire site.
WBDG publishes UFGS 31 00 00: Earthwork as a public guide-specification reference (accessed September 28, 2026). Use your project’s issued specification and amendments for the actual comparison; the guide specification does not automatically govern your project. The checklist below is an original suggested review workflow, not a reproduction of the UFGS requirements.
Eight checks to run against the issued set
Use one record per location or system. The CSV contains the same eight prompts plus fields for source revisions, observed evidence, the review owner, the decision, and closure references.
| Check | Sources to compare | Question to resolve |
|---|---|---|
| Fill classification by area | Soil Materials clause (structural, embankment, porous, topsoil) + grading plan notes | Does each area of fill called out on the grading plan reference the correct fill classification the specification defines, rather than a generic "fill" label applied sitewide? |
| Subgrade compaction by use | Subgrade Preparation clause (percentages for structures, pavements, railroads, shoulders) + civil drawing use at that location | Does the compaction percentage specified match the subgrade use actually shown at that location, such as a building slab versus a pavement, rather than one blanket percentage for the site? |
| Grading around structures | Grading Around Structures clause (drain away from the building) + finish floor elevation and drainage pattern | Does the drainage-away-from-structure requirement match the slope direction actually shown adjacent to the building on the civil and architectural drawings? |
| Trench backfill by feature | Final Backfill clause (buildings/pavements vs. turfed areas) + utility trench routing | Where a trench crosses from a paved area into a landscaped area, does the drawing set apply the correct backfill compaction requirement for each segment rather than one value for the whole run? |
| Buried utility markers | Buried Warning Tape and Detection Wire clause (burial depth by utility type) + utility plan depth-of-cover callouts | Does the utility plan’s buried depth for warning tape or detection wire match the specification’s required depth for that utility type? |
| Rock and unstable material handling | Rock Excavation/Removal of Unstable Material clauses + geotechnical report zones | Does the drawing set flag the areas the geotechnical report identifies as requiring special excavation, consistent with how the specification prices or allowances that work? |
| Utility cover depth | Electrical and Heat Distribution System backfill clauses (minimum cover) + electrical/mechanical site utility drawings | Does the depth of cover shown for direct-buried conduit, duct, or heat distribution piping match the specification’s minimum cover requirement? |
| Finish grade tolerance | Grading clause (tolerance, drain away from structures) + spot elevations on the grading plan | Are the spot elevations on the grading plan achievable within the specified tolerance relative to the structure’s finish floor elevation, and do they consistently drain away from the building? |
Worked example: a trench that crosses from pavement into turf
Illustrative example: a utility trench shown on the civil plan runs from beneath a parking area into an adjacent landscaped strip, but the trench backfill note on the drawings cites a single compaction percentage for the entire run, without distinguishing the pavement-subgrade requirement from the lower compaction the specification allows under turf.
Identify where the trench changes surface condition on the civil plan, confirm the compaction percentage the specification assigns to each segment, and have the designer split the backfill note or add a detail for the transition before construction. Back check the buried-marker depth at the same transition before closing the item.
Avoid a false conflict
A single compaction percentage printed once on a grading plan does not establish that every area of the site was intended to receive the same requirement; the specification frequently assigns different percentages by end use, and a drawing note that does not distinguish them needs to be checked against that structure.
When requirements disagree, follow the project’s document-control and clarification process. Do not assume that drawings always override specifications, or the reverse. Identify the exact sources and request an authorized decision.
Close the issue across the affected documents
Record the location or tag, drawing and specification references, issue dates, observed difference, and the decision needed. Assign an owner and keep the item open until the response identifies the governing requirement. Check the revised drawings and specification references together; a response email alone may leave the issued package inconsistent.
For the overall process, use the guide to drawing and specification conflicts. Mark an inapplicable checklist row with a reason, and distinguish a verified correction from a question that still needs design information.
Where Groundbook fits
Groundbook’s drawing and specification review helps investigate potential disagreements in the documents you supply. Include the relevant specification sections and drawing references, then verify the cited evidence with the responsible reviewers before acting on a finding.