Trace each panelboard from the riser and one-line to its schedule, then compare the source named on each, the breaker positions the schedule shows, the conductor material and raceway types drawn, and the grounding shown in each electrical room. The section requires breakers to be placed as the panelboard schedule shows, so the schedules are part of what the contractor builds, not just a load summary.
Assemble the review package
Gather the electrical one-line and riser diagram, every panelboard schedule, the power and lighting plans, the grounding plan or riser, the electrical room plans, the fire pump and controller drawings, the emergency and standby panel schedules, the mechanical equipment schedules that list motors, and the issued Section 26 20 00 with its edits. Review one panel from its source breaker to its last branch circuit before assuming other panels are drawn the same way.
WBDG publishes UFGS 26 20 00: Interior Distribution System as a public guide-specification reference (accessed October 18, 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 |
|---|---|---|
| Panel names and sources | Riser diagram + one-line + Panelboards article | Does every panel on the riser appear on the one-line and on a schedule with the same name and the same upstream source, so the directory the section requires can name where it is fed from? |
| Breaker placement and spaces | Panelboards article + panelboard schedules | Do the schedules show each breaker’s position, its poles, and any “space only” positions, since the section asks for breakers to be placed as scheduled? |
| Feeder and branch conductors | Wires and Cables and Aluminum Conductors articles + feeder schedule | Is conductor material and size stated for each feeder, and if the issued section keeps the aluminum option, do conduit and pull box sizes leave room for the substitution it allows? |
| Raceways and wiring methods | Wiring Methods and Conduit Installation articles + plans and details | Where the drawings call for cable, cable tray, or a particular raceway, is it a method the section permits in that location, including the restrictions on EMT and nonmetallic conduit in equipment and fire pump rooms? |
| Grounding and bonding | Grounding and Bonding and Ground Bus articles + grounding plan | Is the ground bus in each electrical room drawn where the section says “as indicated,” and where lightning protection exists, is the interconnection of grounding systems shown? |
| Fire pump circuits | Motors and Motor Controllers articles + fire pump drawings | Where the section defers the fire pump motor and controller to Section 21 30 00, do the electrical drawings show the fire pump feeder and controller consistently with that section? |
| Emergency source for control circuits | Control Circuits article + one-line + emergency panel schedules | Where the section retains backup control power from the emergency source for designated systems, are those systems identified and is the emergency circuit on a schedule? |
| Protection, surge, and studies | Coordinated Power System Protection and Surge Protective Devices articles + one-line | Does the one-line show where surge protective devices go, and if the coordinated protection article is retained, is Section 26 05 73 in the project manual? |
Worked example: a panel fed from two different places
Illustrative example: the riser diagram shows lighting panel LP-2 fed from distribution panel DP-1, while the LP-2 schedule header says “Fed from MDP” and the MDP schedule lists a breaker labeled LP-2. The issued Section 26 20 00 requires each panel directory to name its source and requires breakers to be placed as the schedules show.
Ask the electrical engineer which source is intended, then correct the riser, the LP-2 header, and the schedule of the panel that should not carry the breaker. Recheck the feeder size and the load totals on both upstream panels, since one of them is now carrying a load it should not.
Avoid a false conflict
A complete-looking panel schedule does not prove the panel is fed the way the riser shows. Schedule headers are often copied between panels, so check the source on every schedule against the one-line, not only the circuits.
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.