Trace the roof plan’s membrane areas into the specified system, substrate, attachment, and flashing requirements, then confirm slope, insulation, and warranty scope match the same roof area before closing a roofing coordination question.
Assemble the review package
Gather the roof plan, roof details for edges, curbs, and penetrations, the insulation or taper layout, and the issued roofing specification. Include mechanical and electrical roof-penetration information and any existing-roof condition data for a re-roof. This guide focuses on TPO membrane roofing; identify the separate specification and details for other membrane types before comparing requirements.
WBDG publishes UFGS 07 54 23: Thermoplastic-Polyolefin Roofing as a public guide-specification reference (accessed September 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 |
|---|---|---|
| System extent | Roof plan area + specification scope | Do the documents identify which roof areas receive this membrane and distinguish them from adjacent roof types or existing roofing to remain? |
| Slope and drainage | Roof plan slope and drain layout + drainage clauses | Can the drainage path to each roof drain, scupper, or edge be followed, and does it match the specified minimum slope? |
| Substrate and insulation | Roof section + substrate and insulation clauses | Does the specified substrate and insulation match what the roof section shows, including tapered insulation and cover board? |
| Attachment method | Specification attachment clauses + roof detail | Is the attachment method identifiable and consistent between the roof plan notes and the specification, especially at perimeter and corner wind zones? |
| Flashing and terminations | Edge, curb, and wall details + flashing clauses | Does each membrane termination shown in the details reference a compatible flashing accessory and method? |
| Penetrations | MEP roof-penetration plan + penetration and flashing clauses | Are penetrations detailed for the specified system rather than left to a generic sealant note? |
| Walkways and protection | Traffic and maintenance-path notes + walkway-pad clauses | Are equipment access paths and protection pads shown where the specification requires them? |
| Warranty scope | Specified warranty term or type + roof area and system boundary | Does the documented warranty scope match the actual roof area, system, and any excluded existing-to-remain sections? |
Worked example: a curb outside the flashed area
Illustrative example: a mechanical roof-penetration plan shows a new rooftop-unit curb near a roof edge, but the roof detail sheet’s flashing details only cover curbs located away from the perimeter high-wind zone. The specification lists a perimeter attachment requirement that the curb detail does not reference.
Mark the curb location against the roof plan’s wind-zone layout, pair it with the specification’s perimeter clauses, and ask the roofing designer to confirm the correct attachment and flashing detail for that location. Recheck the walkway and warranty scope after the detail is revised, since a relocated curb can affect both.
Avoid a false conflict
A roof detail drawn for one location does not automatically apply to every similar condition; wind-zone requirements, existing-roof interfaces, and warranty exclusions can change the correct answer for what looks like the same curb or edge. Confirm the specific roof area before extending a detail elsewhere.
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.