The Pinellas County Job Corps Center in St. Petersburg, FL, is an excellent example of how attention to the smaller, seemingly insignificant details can make a huge difference in the overall quality and appearance of a millwork project. Product for the Pinellas County Job Corps Center consisted of several laminate-clad reception desks and plastic laminate casework. All were specified AWI custom-grade by the architect.

Upon inspection by a Q-representative, several instances of noncompliant work were identified. Specifically, there was widespread and significant chip-out of exposed plastic laminate, especially during installation. This included instances of cracked and crushed cabinet parts, as well as ragged laminate edges where casework parts, fillers, etc. were trimmed or notched, and where transitions occurred between components. Additionally, the flat-head screws that were used to affix the casework to the structural walls throughout the project were not adequately countersunk, and were not filled or covered as required by QSI section 1700-T-5. Furthermore, the doors and/or drawer fronts were inadequately aligned in many locations (QSI 400B-C-1).  

"At the outset, upon installation of the shop-built carcasses, the work was not entirely acceptable," said Paul Palmer, AIA, LEED AP, Renker Eich Parks Architects, St. Petersburg, FL. "The subcontractor did not initially submit AWI certification documents for the shop they were using, but in demonstrating where in our specifications it was required, they then proceeded to ensure the millwork shop was Q-accredited and following the Standards."

Under the auspices of the AWI Quality Certification Program (QCP), three separate inspections of the millwork were conducted. Afterwards, each deficiency was identified in a detailed written report, which was utilized by the general contractor, the subcontractor, and the woodworker to remedy the issues.

"Without the QCP specification in place, the millwork would not have been as successful," Palmer said. "Federal projects, in many cases, are not subject to local inspections (i.e. city/ county inspectors) and as a result, much of the quality control is left in the hands of the general contractor and their subs. In this case, the AWI QCP specifications proved very helpful, and resulted in a higher quality installed product."

“Many of the noncompliant features identified by the QCP were highly exposed. By rectifying these deficiencies the end result of the prescribed corrective work was a much more professional and functional environment for those who visit and work in the facility," added Wayne Hintz, AWI Quality Certification Corporation Inspections Manager.

During our tenure as Q-representative, it has come to our attention that some woodworking companies assume that shop drawings stamped and signed by the general contractor or architect may be treated as approved contract documents, allowing the woodworker to fabricate and use materials that deviate from the architectural drawings and specifications. This assumption is incorrect, and could prevent the project from becoming Q-certified. 

Q-accredited woodworkers hold total responsibility for providing work which is compliant with standards or specifications. If for some reason a standard or specification is legitimately impossible to meet, it is the woodworker’s responsibility to offer alternatives based on experience, and to obtain prior written approval for the change. Section 4.2.13.1 of the QCP Policies assigns the responsibility to the woodworker for alerting the designer and/or owner to features of the shop drawings which deviate from the standards or specifications. Those deviations must be specifically approved by the design professional (or the owner’s representative) in writing prior to fabrication (or inspection by a Q-representative where applicable). Written approval after the fact, such as approval in response to a project inspection report, will render the project ineligible for Q-certification. Acceptance after the fact will allow a self-labeling woodworker to remain in the program under “probationary” status. If a newly accredited woodworker has “provisional” status (i.e. in the process of completing two successful certified projects), acceptance “after the fact” will necessitate an additional provisional project, perhaps at the woodworker’s expense. (See sections 2.6 and 2.7 of the current QCP Policies.)

Per the 2010 QCP Policies, section 4, subsection 4.1.5: Applicability of the Standards with regard to a project may be modified by:

4.1.5.1 Contract documents
4.1.5.2 Change orders; or
4.1.5.3 Written instructions by the design professional and/or the owner's representative.

The above-mentioned written instructions could be in the form of a clouded detail on a shop drawing with a space for initials or signature of the design professional to approve that particular detail (as opposed to a general shop drawing approval). 

For the purpose of QCP project certification, the only time changes can be made to the contract documents is before the related QCP inspection occurs; all changes must be agreed to in writing by both the buyer and seller. Changes, in writing, must be presented to the Q-representative prior to, or during the QCP inspection.

Finally, woodworkers should be aware that a QCP-registered project probably includes requirements that are usually not part of their other projects, such as those negotiated directly with long-time clients. Woodworkers agree to meet those additional requirements when they become Q-accredited.  These additional requirements may require special attention to written change orders. 

QCP is committed to level the playing field while ensuring the quality specified by the design professional is the quality which was provided. This commitment is guided by the program policies and AWI’s standards, of which the limited authority of shop drawings is a component.

Tightly written specifications leave little or no room for interpretation or guesswork. Yet, if too vague or ambiguous, modifications to codes and standards released following the publication of the specifications, but before the bid date, may exclude the current standard. It is not uncommon to see project specifications calling for the "Architectural Woodwork Quality Standards", Latest Edition or the "AWI Quality Standards" in lieu of a specific release such as the Architectural Woodwork Quality Standards, Eighth Edition, Version 2.

AWI’s current standard is the Architectural Woodwork Standards (AWS), Edition 1. Which standard should apply if the “Quality Standards” are referenced in the specifications? If necessary, lawyers can argue both sides of this debate, and if left to legal interpretation, the answer is “whatever the judge says it is.”

QCC consulted Michael P. Davis, an attorney specializing in construction and contract law with Chamberlain, Hrdlicka, White, Williams & Martin in Atlanta, GA, for guidance as to how to best avoid these situations. Mr. Davis advised that when the specific reference is lacking, it is advisable for the woodworker to submit a Request for Information (RFI) to the design professional prior to bid, seeking clarification as to which AWI standard is required for the project.

If you are unable to get a response, make sure your bid includes the specific standard you used for the estimate, thereby qualifying your bid.

So, in the spirit of the Q, follow these three simple steps when the specifications are vague or ambiguous:

1. Identify the information which is lacking.
2. Ask for clarification; Submit the RFI.
3. Qualify your bid.

The average cost of a repeat inspection due to noncompliance with the Standards is $1,100. This cost, which includes but is not limited to travel, meals, lodging and per diem for the Q-representative conducting the reinspection, is easily avoidable. Below are some helpful hints for woodworkers on preparing for the various types of QCP inspections: Accreditation, biennial, and project compliance inspections.

Accreditation Inspection 
Following satisfactory completion of the test and references, QCC will contact the applicant woodworking firm to schedule an accreditation inspection, the purpose of which is to determine the firm’s ability to manufacture, finish and install work in compliance with the Architectural Woodwork Standards (AWS).

1. Send shop drawings to your Q-representative for review prior to, or during the accreditation inspection.
2. Refer to the Minimum Sample Criteria included with the application packet and in the program policies. During the accreditation inspection, the Q-representative will inspect samples of work in the sections you want to certify. If samples of these items are not already available in the plant, the woodworker is required to manufacture samples in preparation for the accreditation inspection.
3. Previously completed work in place may be used as a sample, but must not be older than two years. Prepare to show documentation of the timeframe.
4. Submit evidence that the same management team was in place for all QCP projects provided as samples. This may be substantiated in the form of payroll records or any type of correspondence confirming dates of employment.
5. Shop drawings are required for all samples shown which includes the items from the recently completed projects.
   
   Woodworking firms are responsible for ensuring all compliant materials are ready for review prior to the Q-representative’s visit. Failure to do so may result in repeat inspections which occur at the expense of the woodworking firm.

Biennial Inspection
All currently accredited firms must be inspected biennially (every two years), and should expect to follow the same steps, albeit to a more limited extent, as those listed above for the accreditation inspection. If, however, noncompliance is determined, the following policies apply:

• If a sample is found noncompliant during the biennial inspection, the woodworker will be required to submit compliant samples within 60-days of notification from the QCP office and receipt of the inspection report in order to retain Q-accreditation in that particular section.
• If the woodworker was previously certified for premium-grade in a particular section, but the biennial inspection sample conforms solely to custom-grade requirements, they may choose to accept the grade change from premium to custom, or produce and provide premium-grade compliant samples within 60-days of notification in order to retain premium-grade accreditation in that section.
• If samples of some previously certified sections are unavailable during the biennial inspection, the woodworker will retain accreditation in those sections for the current period. However, inspection of samples in these sections on or before the next biennial inspection is mandatory in order to retain accreditation in these sections. [Whereby a Q-representative must visit the woodworking facility every two (2) years, compliant work in the sections for which a participant is accredited must be shown every four (4) years.]
• NEW: In lieu of this two-year interval, which in the past was conducted separately from project inspections, the QCC Board of Directors recently chose to base the timing of the biennial inspection upon the last time a Q-representative visited the plant, and in which the work shown was compliant with the AWS, thus allowing for a project inspection to serve as a biennial inspection. With this change, accredited firms will be able to show fewer samples, spend less time preparing for the inspection, and spend less money.

Familiarization with the Standards and proper planning are key to specification compliance and project certification, two main objectives of the Q. Below are some of the most commonly missed items identified by Q-representatives during premium-grade installation inspections.

• Exposed ends of solid lumber not self-returned
• Trim not matched for grain and color
• Inside corners mitered instead of coped
• Trim not being blind nailed or fastened in a concealed fashion
• Drywall screws or noncompliant fasteners being used
• Semi-Exposed screws not countersunk, filled, and concealed
• Doors not adjusted for alignment per the Standards’ tolerances
• Open cabinets not installed with concealed methods

The QCC offers several suggestions for project managers utilizing the Q. For instance, the FAQ section of the Web site, www.awiqcp.org, contains numerous examples of instances that apply to project managers. Included in this section are the QCP Policies, the published document that governs the program. In many respects, the policies are equally as important as the Standards for successful accreditation maintenance and project certification.

Additionally, there are some new policies in effect which apply to a company’s program status in the event that a registered project is found to be noncompliant with the Standards.  They boil down to this:

1.  Previously, minor deficiencies accepted by the architect or owner in response to the inspection would often not prevent certification of the project. Whether or not certification would be authorized was at the discretion of the Program Director, depending on the nature and extent of the deficiencies.
     
Now, unless the acceptance of those conditions is noted by the woodworker and accepted in their noncompliant condition by the architect prior to inspection, those deficiencies would have to be physically remedied in order for certification to take place. An architect’s acceptance in lieu of corrective work is still necessary, but will only allow the woodworker’s continued participation in the program (on a probationary basis), and not certification of the project.

Current policies specify that noncompliant items in shop drawings or submittals must be explicitly noted and accepted by the architect. A general acceptance of the shop drawings does not qualify as specific acceptance of those noncompliant items. This remains the same. 

2.  Section 1 of the new Standards (Architectural Woodwork Standards) indicates that proposed deviations from specifications and Standards by the woodworker must be discussed and approved by the architect in documents completely outside of the shop drawings and other submittals. Any noncompliance involved in the proposed deviations must be explicitly noted and accepted.

In order to confirm that a particular project has been registered and is on track for Q certification, the AWI QCC has released a new project certification label for shop drawings. The label, which is to be placed on the shop drawings, will be distributed to Q-accredited woodworkers upon payment for project labels and/or certificates of compliance. It includes the Q-logo, the project name and number, and the Q-accredited woodworker’s name.  

Additionally, as part of an ongoing, comprehensive marketing campaign, QCC is encouraging all architects to “Look for the Label.” The benefits of the new label for architects include confirmation that the job meets the specifications and Standards, as well as reassurance that the Q-accredited woodworker has been vetted, and is qualified to produce and/or install architectural woodwork that meets the specifications and Standards. A benefit of the new label for woodworkers includes confirmation that the QCP-specification will be upheld. So, look for the project certification label on QCP-specified project shop drawings to ensure the quality of your next project.

In keeping with the Q’s focus on compliance and QCP-certification, below are three steps that provide a solid foundation for veneer selection, engineering, purchase, and manufacture.

1. Confirm the specifications and the grade of work. Among other things, verify the veneer selection, veneer matching and panel sequencing required by the design team. The success of a project begins with an understanding of the architect’s specifications, as well as the Architectural Woodwork Standards (AWS). The exchange of information is essential. Submit questions during bid phase or prior to veneer purchase, especially when veneer panels will be outsourced.

Section 8 – Wall Surfacing, item 1.2.10.1 of the AWS, requires that the design professional specify the following: Species, slicing, matching of veneer leaves, matching of veneer leaves within a panel face, matching between panels, end-matching, grain direction (if other than vertical), fire-retardant rating (if required), and selected flitch information (if reserved). 
  
2. Clarify all conflicts between the contract documents, the architect’s specifications, and the AWS, including panel sequencing within items, rooms, or areas. Success and certification is dependent upon proper planning and engineering. Mockups are often required, and in the case of large or complex projects, they are worthwhile. If there are deviations from the specifications and/or the AWS, the woodworker must obtain written acceptance (a letter of modification, e.g.) from the architect accepting these deviations prior to the fabrication of the work.

The Preface to the AWS, Item 5.4, describes the following general drawing requirements for architectural wall surfacing to be supplied by the design professional:

5.4.1 Elevations should indicate the placement of architectural wall surfacing, including each panel size, as well as edge, corner, reveal, ceiling, and base treatments.

5.4.1.1 Door and/or other woodwork matching should be so indicated.
5.4.1.2 Reveals should be as specified; however, a minimum of 1/4" (6.4 mm) is recommended.

5.4.2 If a finish schedule is used in lieu of elevations, it should clearly indicate all of the above.

Section 1 – Submittals, item 4.2.3 of the AWS, outlines specific items required of the woodworker for drawing submittals for wall surfacing. Changes in this section from the AWS’ predecessor, the AWI Quality Standards Illustrated (QSI), warrant careful review.

In the absence of a grade specification, custom-grade is the default. Section 8, item 4.2.11.4.1, lists custom-grade requirements for transparent finish wood panels: Faces: plain-sliced leaves, book-matched leaves, running match within panels, sequenced, numbered, pre-manufactured sets between adjacent panels and sequenced, numbered, pre-manufactured sets within a project area. 

Some Q-accredited woodworkers have encountered inconsistencies between the written specifications for face veneer matching relating to Section 8, “Wall Surfacing,” and those for Section 10, “Wood Casework.” If custom grade is the default due to the absence of grade specification, note that the grain direction of cabinet drawer fronts, per the AWS, must run and match vertically.

If premium-grade casework is specified, the crown pattern in cathedral grain must point up and run the same direction for the entire project. Custom-grade cabinetry requires that the veneer run and match vertically within each cabinet, while premium-grade requires that veneer run and match vertically within each room. Wood veneer cabinet faces and paneling are sequenced when blue print matching is specified.
 
Due to differences between the QSI and the AWS, it is highly advisable that the manufacturer and supplier thoroughly review these and other sections of the AWS that directly relate to their line of work for any deviations from the QSI. Suggestions for corrections, clarifications, or improvements to the AWS are welcome by the AWI Technical Committee. Some issues are already under review by the Joint Standards Committee, and will be addressed with the release of the AWS, Second Edition. Click here to submit questions and comments regarding the AWS.

• Implementation of a Quality Management System (QMS). Under the guidance and training of Tami Damian of The LEAD Group, QCC implemented a quality management system in conformance with ISO 9001-2008. This is the international standard for companies that are dedicated to continual improvement of customer service. Specifically, the QMS brought the QCC into conformance with ISO 65, the international standard for associations that operate certification programs. While the adaptation of a QMS took significant time and effort to implement, it has already proven a valuable tool, allowing us to manage growth without sacrificing quality of service.
  
• Q-representative Training. Over the past year, QCC has been fortunate to enlist the help of six new Q-representatives. Each representative has undergone extensive training both in the office and in the field. Moreover, we doubled the amount of time devoted to training all Q-representatives this year. As a result of these efforts, the consistency and quality of inspection reports has steadily risen. Feedback on the quality and relevance of inspections and inspection reports has been positive from both design professionals and woodworkers. Both groups are using the inspection reports to make informed decisions impacting project quality.
  
• Policy Changes. There have been a number of policy amendments that have enabled QCP to further hone the quality of services to our stakeholders. Of note, projects that have been shown to have deficiencies during inspection, which were later accepted by the owner, will no longer be eligible for certification. Deficiencies must either be corrected, or the woodworker must show that the deviations were accepted in contract documents prior to inspection (ie: as part of a change order.)
• Educational Outreach. Since the beginning of this year, QCC has delivered 40 lunch-and-learn presentations to nearly 600 design professionals nationwide. As a result, the number of project registrations is up 20 percent over last year, and the number of labeled projects is up 21 percent over the same period.

Last but not least, we need your help! The QCC is preparing to distribute short surveys to all of our stakeholders. When you receive these surveys, please take a few moments to complete them and let us know how we’re doing. We are, after all, committed to making continual improvements for the benefit of our customers, but we need your feedback. 

Should you have any questions or comments about any of these new developments, feel free to contact me at celias@awiqcp.org. We look forward to working with all of you in the future.

Ashley Goodin, who joined the AWI QCC as a Q-representative in 2009, has been hired to fulfill  the new staff position of Compliance Auditor. In this role, Ashley will work with AWI QCC Inspections Manager Wayne Hintz, and will be responsible for reviewing and following up on inspection reports, answering technical questions, and training Q-representatives.

Ashley's passion for building and construction began at a young age in his father's backyard hobby shop. At the age of 15, he was contracting millwork and minor remodeling with a small private high school in his hometown of Americus, GA.  After a stint of building scenery, acting, and working as production manager for a theatrical production company, Ashley went to work for a residential cabinet company in Brasstown, N.C.  He then returned to theater as a project manager for a stage rigging company, where he was responsible for complete project management, from design through the fabrication and installation of rigging equipment for firms including the Charlotte Symphony Orchestra, Baltimore Museum of Art, and Towson University.  Woodworking continued to beckon during Ashley’s time as a project manager, so he returned to Americus, where he was a shop foreman and then a millwork shop owner until he joined the ranks of the Q-representatives in 2009. Ashley resides in Americus with his wife and three dogs. In his spare time, Ashley enjoys home brewing beer, boating, gardening, and leisure travel. He is a member of the Americus Kiwanis Club Board of Directors.  Ashley is also a volunteer firefighter with the Sumter County Fire Department.

Due to an unprecedented 71 percent increase in demand for project inspections over the first-quarter of last year, the QCC is pleased to announce the addition of the following new Q-representatives:

Paul Fenner
Paul Fenner brings 33 years of construction experience to the AWI QCC team. He is a 1979 graduate of Montclair State University, Montclair, N.J., where he studied wood technologies and theatrical design. As a general contractor in Pennsylvania and Georgia, Paul specialized in commercial and residential projects, with emphasis on architectural woodwork and historic restoration. He has worked through the ranks as a trim carpenter, cabinet installer, supervisor, estimator, and project manager, handling a wide array of projects from historic church renovations to log and timber-framed homes. Paul also volunteered several years with Habitat for Humanity, where he managed blitz build projects, and with Sherwood Pictures coordinating special effects for motion pictures.  He and his wife, Pat, reside in southwest Georgia, where they homeschool their five children.  Paul is responsible for conducting inspections in Georgia, Mississippi, Alabama and North Florida.