This is a natural consequence of the value of a reviewed-document being ill defined. Consider, what is the difference between a specification and a reviewed specification? In the case of a specification which would pass review, the content is the same, so the difference is clearly not in the content of the specification. The difference must be that the blessing of the review board has meaning to people. This is very reasonable in business: a blessing from a review board indicates that the use of the information is more justified.
However, there is a limit to this, which you may have reached. If the value of the stamp of approval from the review board becomes too great, they are forced to be extremely nitpicky. What they provide to the process is their name, declaring "yea verily, this specification is good." If a company refuses to use any document until it passes the review board, it is very easy to get into degenerate situations where the review board loses sight of their purpose. They get in trouble if they bless something that wasn't right, so if they do not fully understand how the blessed specification will be used, they will naturally rip it to shreds to make sure that nothing bad will ever come back to bite them.
This causes an issue for specifications that do not need this level of rigor. If your specification does indeed need to be blessed at the highest level because the business is going to make key decisions off that information, then that rigor may be desired. In that case, the decision should be important enough that the members of the review board should be able to work with the developer in an offline setting to ensure the specification will pass when it is reviewed. This is a common trick in business: never bring anything to the table unless you have already ensured it will pass.
If your business does not actually need this level of rigor, but it doesn't have a way to implement it, then the business has a major issue that is not the fault of either the developer or the reviewers. The business simply does not have a way to create actionable information at a pace fast enough to keep up with business. The business needs to change. You may be able to create a lower level review board which permits people to use the specification in a limited form, and only call upon the final review board when everyone is comfortable with the document (again, never bring it to the meeting unless you know it will pass the test).
The ways to do this are many, but the first step would be to identify if the specification actually warrants the level of exacting attention it is getting. The correct way to respond to the situation is strongly dependent on how commensurate the process is for the task.