Start with what the issued Section 33 32 16 leaves to the drawings: confirm that the pump schedule or station drawings give the pump capacity, number of pumps, and motor characteristics, that the station section shows the wet well and valve vault diameters and depths, the inlet and discharge elevations, and every float or level setpoint, and that the electrical drawings show the power characteristics, the control panel, and the generator connection the section assumes. Then check that the level control option, alarms, wet well material and flotation measures, station piping, valves, hatches, ventilation, and tests kept in the section match those drawings, and that the gravity sewer and the force main beyond the valve vault follow the sections the project actually issued.
Assemble the review package
Gather the lift station site plan, the station plan and section with rim, inlet invert, pump, float or setpoint, and discharge elevations, the valve vault plan and section, the pump schedule and performance data, the gravity sewer plan and profile to the wet well and the force main plan and profile from the vault, any as-built survey of the existing gravity mains, manholes, laterals, force main, and wet well being connected or replaced, the electrical one-line, site electrical plan, panel schedule, control panel elevation, and hazardous location classification, the generator or generator receptacle details, any telemetry or SCADA drawings, the geotechnical report with groundwater levels, the grading plan with finished grade at the station, and the issued Section 33 32 16 with Section 33 30 00, Section 33 31 23.00 10 where issued, and Sections 31 00 00, 03 30 00, and 01 78 23. Follow the flow from the incoming gravity main through the wet well, pumps, and valve vault into the force main before checking the controls.
WBDG publishes UFGS 33 32 16: Packaged Utility Wastewater Pumping Stations as a public guide-specification reference (accessed November 5, 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 |
|---|---|---|
| Pump data the drawings must give | System Description, Submersible Sewage Grinder Nonclog Pumps, Impeller, and Pump Motor articles + pump product data and Pump Performance Curve submittals + Identification Tags and Plates article + pump schedule, station section, and electrical one-line | Do the drawings give the pump capacity, number of pumps, and motor characteristics the pump article says are indicated, and show which pumps carry the grinder units it also leaves to the drawings, are the motor speed, voltage, phase, and frequency blanks filled in to match the one-line, is one impeller material chosen, and does each pump tag carry the same capacity and head on the schedule, the performance curve submittal, and the identification plate? |
| Wet well and valve vault structure | Wet Well and Valve Vault, Fiberglass Basins, Precast Concrete Structures, and Wet Well Base Material articles + fabrication and erection/installation drawing submittals + station and vault plans and sections + Sections 31 00 00 and 03 30 00 | Does the edited article keep the one wet well construction the station section draws, fiberglass basin or precast concrete, with the valve vault integral or separate as drawn, since the guide text names all of these in one sentence, are the inside diameters and depths given, either as indicated or in the article’s blanks, is the precast-in-lieu-of-cast-in-place bracket kept only if the drawings allow it, and are the crushed stone base and any vapor barrier detailed as indicated? |
| Elevations, level settings, and pump sequence | Pump Control System General, Level Control System (float switch or pressure level sensor), and Alternator articles and their notes + station section + gravity sewer profile or as-built survey + control narrative | Is one level control option kept, as the note directs, are the float elevations shown on the drawings, as the float option requires, or the setpoints and sensor range stated for the pressure option, does the plan-specified level at which both pumps run appear on the station section, do the pump off, lead, lag, and alarm levels follow the order the control articles describe, and does the inlet invert on the station section match the incoming gravity main on the profile or the as-built survey? |
| Buoyancy, groundwater, and finished grade | Buoyancy designer note + Buoyancy Calculations paragraphs in the Fiberglass Basins and Precast Concrete Structures articles + Design Data submittal + geotechnical report + grading plan + station section | Does the station section show the flotation measure, such as a base slab, collar, or ballast, for the wet well type drawn, as the note expects the design to have checked, is the sealed buoyancy calculation submittal kept, does the groundwater assumption the articles set for that calculation fit the geotechnical report and the finished grade on the grading plan, and if the contractor may supply the other wet well material, will its flotation measure still fit the excavation drawn? |
| Control panel, alarms, and telemetry | Pump Control System, Enclosure, Sewage Pump Alarm and Control Panel, Alarms, Circuit Breakers, Motor Starter and Overload Protection, Anti-Condensation Heater, and Additional Requirements articles + telemetry designer note + control panel elevation, site plan, panel schedule, and SCADA drawings | Is the control panel located on the site plan and detailed in the enclosure rating and material kept, does the alarm list on the drawings cover high level, loss of main power, no flow, pump failure, and seal failure, as the Alarms article requires, is the remote alarm or telemetry information the note asks for inserted to match the installation’s monitoring system, and does the panel schedule include the per-pump, control, alarm, and spare breakers the Circuit Breakers article lists? |
| Power, generator connection, and hazardous location | Pump Control System General article (surge and phase protection, generator receptacle, power characteristics, NFPA 70, explosion-proof installation) + Connection for Portable Generator article and note + Pump Motor and Additional Requirements articles + electrical one-line, site electrical plan, and area classification | Do the one-line and site electrical plan show the power characteristics the control article says are shown on the plans, is either the portable generator receptacle with its manual transfer switch or a permanent generator drawn, and where the receptacle paragraph is deleted for a permanent generator, as its note directs, is the receptacle sentence in the Pump Control System General article edited to match, and do the electrical drawings classify the wet well as the hazardous location the pumps and motors are listed for, with conduit seals at wet well penetrations and no junction boxes between the pumps and the panel? |
| Station piping, valves, and the force main | Station Piping, Ductile-Iron Pressure Pipe, PVC Plastic Pressure Pipe, Fittings, Insulating Joints, Flexible Flanged Coupling, Isolation Gate Valves, Check Valves, Quick Disconnect System, Pipe Support, and Wet Well Vent articles + station and vault sections + force main plan and profile + Section 33 30 00 or 33 31 23.00 10 | Do the station and vault sections show the discharge piping, guide rails and quick disconnect, the check valves and isolation valves of the types kept for each size range, flanged fittings inside the wet well and vault and mechanical joint fittings outside, flexible couplings where indicated, insulating joints between dissimilar metals, and a screened vent, and are the force main, emergency pump connection, and air release valves that the Station Piping article sends to Section 33 30 00 actually specified, since the current 33 30 00 has no articles for the last two and Section 33 31 23.00 10 is the UFGS force main section? |
| Hatches, ventilation, testing, and start-up | Access Hatch Covers, Ventilating Blower, and Dehumidifier articles + Field Quality Control, Testing Procedure, Field Representative, Warranty, and Operation and Maintenance articles and the warranty note + station plan, site plan, and Section 01 78 23 | Are hatches drawn over the pumps and valves, as the hatch article says they are indicated, with a heavier rating requested where the site plan puts a hatch in a drive, is one ventilation basis kept, NFPA 820 or a fixed air change interval, does the test kept, pressure sensor or float, match the level control option kept, and is an extended warranty considered where the warranty note’s critical mission or high flow conditions apply? |
Worked example: a surveyed inlet invert, two level options, and a receptacle left behind
Illustrative example: a new duplex packaged lift station replaces an aging wet well at the low point of a base housing area, and the design team has an as-built survey of the existing gravity mains, manholes, laterals, force main, and wet well. The station section shows an inlet invert that differs from the surveyed invert of the incoming main, the lag pump start is drawn below the lead pump start, the issued Section 33 32 16 keeps both the float switch and the pressure sensor options with only the float test, the motor blanks are empty while the one-line shows a different phase from the pump schedule, the Connection for Portable Generator paragraph is deleted because the electrical plan shows a permanent generator but the control article still calls for a generator receptacle, and the new force main is drawn in a pipe material that no section in the project manual covers.
Ask the civil engineer of record to reconcile the inlet invert with the survey, reorder the level settings to match the control narrative, keep one level control option with its matching test, and either add the force main section the project needs or change the force main material to one the issued sections cover. Ask the electrical engineer to fill in the motor blanks from the one-line and to decide whether the station keeps a receptacle alongside the permanent generator, then edit the control article to match.
See the published equipment and sequence finding. The illustrative scenario above is separate from that published finding.
Avoid a false conflict
Section 33 32 16 covers a packaged station whose supplier furnishes the pumps, controls, and rail system as a unit. The gravity sewer, manholes, and laterals up to the wet well follow Section 33 30 00 and the sanitary sewer guide, and that section has no lift station articles. The Station Piping article sends the force main outside the wet well and valve vault to Section 33 30 00, while WBDG also lists Section 33 31 23.00 10 Sanitary Sewer Force Main Piping, Active, published in August 2018 to supersede Section 33 34 00, with articles for force main pipe, joints, gate, check, plug, pinch, and air release valves, valve vaults, thrust restraint, and pressure and leakage tests; check which one your project issued before calling a force main requirement missing. Excavation and backfill follow Section 31 00 00, the vapor barrier follows Section 03 30 00, and operation and maintenance data follow Section 01 78 23. WBDG shows the older Section 33 32 13.13 Packaged Sewage Lift Stations, Wet Well Type as superseded by Section 33 32 16. Pump selection, wet well sizing, cycle times, buoyancy, and hazardous area classification are design decisions for the civil, mechanical, and electrical engineers. The current guide section cites NFPA 70, NFPA 820 in its 2016 edition, AWWA C104, C110, C111, C115, C151, C500, C509, C515, C517, C600, C605, and M23, ASTM C478 and D3753, ISO 1940-1, NEMA MG 1, and UL 67 and UL 489; confirm the editions your project invokes with the engineers and the authority having jurisdiction.
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.