A conversation with insulation industry veteran Rob English, C&I Tech Services Team Leader at Owens Corning, about why outdated insulation specifications continue to plague modern projects and what you can do about it. With 38 years of industry experience, English brings togethMy brother Mark and I run L.C. Insulations, Inc., a mechanical insulation contractor in South Central Pennsylvania serving the Mid-Atlantic region. Our dad, Lary, started the company in 1972, so I grew up around the business, beginning by driving the delivery truck and working in the warehouse when I got my driver’s license. I officially came into the business in 1992 after military service, worked my way through the field, and now spend most of my time managing projects and running the business alongside my brother. Our second-generation family business focuses mainly on commercial and institutional projects: schools, hospitals, government office buildings, and medical office buildings.er the contractor, fabricator, distributor, and manufacturer perspectives.

Fortunately, only about 30% of the projects we are involved with have specification problems. That said, when 3 out of every 10 projects have problems, if the 3 problem projects happen to be active at the same time, it can be an enormous resource drain. Looking back over the last 20-something years, the problem of bad specs does seem to be getting worse.

Identifying Spec Problems Early

When we spot spec issues during bidding, we make notes on our proposal and address them if and when we are awarded the project. It would be ideal if you could get the spec issues resolved before the proposal is submitted, but that’s just not how the timing works in most cases. By the time the request for information (RFI) goes through the chain, you are past the submittal deadline.

The Age-Old Problem of Age-Old Specs

Much of what we run into is not bad engineering, it is old engineering. When someone wrote a given spec 50 years ago, it was not a bad spec, but it is not a current spec. It was written to use materials that have not been manufactured in decades, or securements that are no longer used. A lot of these specs don’t come from inept engineering—they come from inaction. Nobody is putting in the time to update the 50-year-old spec. That is where the majority of bad specs come from. And many of these specs predate the digital age entirely—I can almost smell the mimeograph ink from my elementary school days. I have literally had to tell interns going through a punch list from the general contractor that we have not insulated with cork since before they were born.

The Bakery that Wanted the Impossible (When to Walk Away)

One project that sticks with me involves a national bakery client. Food safety rules meant that we couldn’t use fiber-based insulation anywhere. Fair enough, but the spec called for a material that was not rated for their high-pressure steam system. We explained the mismatch, but the client refused the alternatives that would work. Our only option was to refuse the job—fortunately, a rare situation.

We have also turned down value-engineered opportunities rather than sign off on something we thought was a problem waiting to happen. It is a good reminder for owners and specifiers: When a contractor walks away from work, it is usually not because we do not want the job; it is because the specified materials are not in the long-term interest of the project goals, and often represent a potential liability risk.

The Material Type that Does Not Exist

Here is another example: A steam heat loop project where the client has prefabricated flexible hoses, but wants them insulated using the same material as in the rest of the job, which is a rigid system. That material does not really exist off the shelf. We can work with NIA’s manufacturer and distributor network to chase down options, but we are being asked to supply a material the industry has not developed yet. Luckily for us, when we ran into this situation, the conflict was flagged in our proposal, so back to the specifier it went.

Six Degrees of Separation

I want to be clear: This is a column about getting to better specs, not pointing fingers at engineers. The engineers I regularly work with are extremely good at their jobs and genuinely want a project that runs smoothly. The problem is rarely the person. It is the 30-page legacy document they inherited from someone who retired a decade ago. When I have had the opportunity to talk one on one with the engineer, the response is almost always positive. Nobody wants to be the reason a building’s pipes are insulated wrong.

I remember one instance when I was on site and the engineer happened to be on site too, and I was able to show him my concern. He knew there was a problem from previous emails, but after seeing the situation in person, with my explanation, he signed off on our solution and the problem was solved. Unfortunately, typically, there are many degrees of separation between the mechanical insulation contractor and the design engineer.

Contractors are not engineers, and we do not pretend to be. We are, however, quite open to a quick consult. Talk to a qualified, respected contractor about the problems you commonly see, and we can offer solutions that work in the field for the system design.

How Do We Make Progress?

When everyone else has moved along to the next project, it is the facility owner who eats the cost of a bad spec more than the engineer who wrote it and more than the contractor who flagged it. That is part of why I think this column matters: The fix isn’t complicated. A good mechanical insulation spec does not need to be 30 pages. Simple specs, well thought out and kept current, are a contractor’s dream. If our estimators get specs written in simple language, naming materials that are currently manufactured, then we will likely have no questions, and that project is going to go well. Until that dream-spec situation is a reality, I’ll keep my reading glasses and a bottle of aspirin handy. I’ll need them both.