This article draws on Cooper Development Group’s original page. Cooper Development Group is part of the SCALZ client network. The original source is identified so you can check the context.
Related service or subject: commercial remodeling services from Cooper Development Group.
Identify the original and proposed product
When a product swap is proposed, the substitution log should identify both the specified item and the proposed replacement before anyone orders it. The log entry should begin with the original manufacturer, model, and the spec section where it appears so that reviewers have the baseline to compare.
It should also list the proposed product and provide the maker, model, and the supplier lead time claimed at the time of the request so the team can see the submission as a complete package rather than a brief note of intent.
Recording both original and proposed product identifiers in a log lets the owner, contractor, and design professional of record know exactly what is under review and where it is shown in the contract documents.
The CDG guidance stresses that the substitution log exists before an order is placed, not after delivery, because an up-to-date entry prevents confusion on site and creates a shared starting point for the technical comparison, approval routing, and any follow-up actions that may be required by the authority having jurisdiction or the design team.
The opening entry should show who compiled the data and when.
Record the reason and supplied documents
Cooper Development Group advises teams to record the stated reason for a substitution request and to attach the supporting documents that were provided at the time of submission; keep the supplied documents with the request so reviewers can see what was proposed.
The log should capture whether the request is driven by supply, a discontinued product, a cost prompt, or another practical constraint, and it should list the technical data sheets and cut sheets that accompanied the proposal so reviewers can see what was supplied with the request rather than guessing later from memory.
Listing the reason and the submitted documentation helps distinguish a substitution request from an accepted change because it makes clear that the entry is an initiation of review rather than a final decision.
CDG’s commercial remodeling services provide related project context; the product decision still belongs in the project-specific review record.
- Record any existing connections, site conditions, or completed phases that the proposed product may affect.
- Attach the relevant drawings and specification references for review.
Track who must review and respond
Cooper Development Group’s guidance frames the substitution log as a sequence of review steps, and it recommends that each log entry identify the people or roles responsible for each step. Keep the request, supporting documents, and decision in one review record.
The log structure should record who submitted the request, who is responsible for compiling the technical comparison, and which design professional needs to perform the technical review so that responsibility is clear before any purchase is made. That prevents ad hoc approvals from being mistaken as final.
A clear routing plan in the log prevents the substitution request from drifting into informal approvals because it sets an explicit hold point for ordering, fabrication, or installation until the documented reviewers have recorded their findings.
The log should name who requested the change, who reviews technical consequences, and who records the final decision under the actual project agreement. Approval roles vary by project and should be confirmed before orders are placed. The log should also note any required resubmittal or permitting follow-up that the responsible authority may request once the substitution is under review.
Related commercial utility questions also belong with the project team before equipment is selected.
Keep the order record consistent with the review outcome
Cooper Development Group recommends using the substitution log to record the final decision and any conditions, and to tie that record to ordering steps so the procurement team only places orders consistent with the documented review. The ordering record should reflect the documented decision.
The log entry for the decision should list who approved the change, the date of that entry, any stated conditions or required accessories, and any secondary costs or coordination items identified during the review so procurement can act without creating untracked downstream work.
Maintaining the log as the authoritative ordering reference reduces the risk that a product arrives that was never reviewed or that an installed item lacks the documentation the authority having jurisdiction or the design team expects to find. Cooper Development Group’s article presents the substitution log as a project control tool that links the request, the review, and the procurement outcome.
Project teams are advised to keep the log updated as approvals, lead times, and downstream changes come in so that the record used for ordering matches the most recent documented decision and the design professional of record can confirm whether the proposed product is approved, rejected, or still under review.
- Record who made the decision and when.