Match plotted devices to the specified device schedule and zoning scheme, then compare notification coverage, mass notification scope, interfaces with sprinkler and elevator recall, and the deferred-submittal list before treating the plan as complete.
Assemble the review package
Gather the fire alarm and notification plan, life-safety plan, sprinkler and elevator interface notes, mass notification requirements where applicable, the project’s approval conditions and deferred-submittal list, and the issued fire alarm specification. Review one system-wide interface (recall, monitoring, deferred submittals) completely rather than only the device count.
WBDG publishes UFGS 28 31 76: Interior Fire Alarm and Mass Notification System, Addressable as a public guide-specification reference (accessed September 22, 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 |
|---|---|---|
| Device placement and type | Fire alarm plan + specified device schedule | Does each plotted device (detector, pull station, notification appliance) correspond to a device type listed in the specification’s device schedule? |
| Zoning and addressing | Fire alarm plan zoning + specified zone/addressing scheme | Does the drawn zoning match the addressing scheme the specification describes? |
| Notification coverage | Reflected ceiling/notification plan + specified coverage criteria | Does the plotted notification appliance spacing correspond to the coverage basis referenced in the specification for that room type? |
| Mass notification scope | Life-safety/notification plan + specified mass notification requirements | Where a mass notification system is required, does the plan show the same coverage areas and message zones the specification describes? |
| Interfaces with other systems | Sprinkler/elevator/HVAC interface notes + specified monitoring and interface points | Are the elevator recall, sprinkler flow and tamper monitoring, and HVAC shutdown interfaces shown consistent with what the specification requires the fire alarm system to monitor or control? |
| Monitoring connection | Specified monitoring requirements + drawn communicator/connection point | Does the drawing identify the same central-station or supervising-station connection method the specification requires? |
| Power and battery basis | Specified standby/alarm current and battery calculation requirement + device count on plan | Does the device count shown on the plan correspond to what a submitted battery calculation would need to cover, consistent with the specified standby duration? |
| Deferred-submittal scope | Approval conditions/deferred list + specified shop drawing and calculation submittal | Does the deferred-submittal list identify the fire alarm shop drawings and calculations the specification requires, alongside any other deferred fire-protection packages? |
Worked example: a deferred fire alarm package missing from the list
Illustrative pattern echoing a published finding: project approval conditions required sprinkler, alarm, and standpipe systems as deferred submittals, but the drawing set’s deferred-submittal list named only one of those systems, leaving the fire alarm package’s submission responsibility undocumented.
Compare the full deferred-submittal list against the approval conditions and the specification’s own submittal requirements for the fire alarm system. Confirm who is preparing the missing package and update the list before the review closes.
See the published deferred-submittal finding. The illustrative scenario above is separate from that published finding.
Avoid a false conflict
A device symbol on the plan does not by itself confirm coverage or code compliance; verify actual spacing, candela ratings, and audibility against the applicable fire-alarm code with the responsible fire-protection engineer. An addressable system’s point count also does not replace the battery calculation the specification separately requires.
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.