What is required?
A specific, usable action title—not a copied heading or a generic “submit shop drawings.”
Construction submittal software
Construction submittal software that builds the register from the specifications.
SubmittalsHQ processes the project manual, finds actionable submittal requirements, and builds a reviewable register with every item connected to its source.
The first pass, rebuilt
Stop treating specification review like data entry.
A typical register starts with someone searching hundreds or thousands of pages for the word “submit.” That catches noise, misses context, and produces vague entries that must be interpreted again later.
SubmittalsHQ reconstructs the section hierarchy, identifies actionable requirements, and retains the page and paragraph behind each result.
23 09 23 · Direct Digital ControlHigh confidence
Power, signal, and control wiring diagramsShop Drawing · Source page 742 · ¶ 1.5.B.3
Submit diagrams showing power, signal, and control wiring...
✓ Source verifiedReview item →
Every item should answer three questions.
Where did it come from?
The specification section, source page, paragraph reference, and surrounding language stay attached.
Does it belong?
Confidence and review tools help a person confirm, edit, merge, split, or suppress the finding.
Built for defensible review
Automation is useful only when the work can be checked.
SubmittalsHQ does not ask your team to trust a black box. Deterministic extraction creates the audit trail. Targeted AI helps interpret titles, types, parties, and questionable items. Your reviewer makes the final call with the evidence visible.
Process the project manual
Detect CSI sections and reconstruct headings, paragraphs, and source locations.
Build the draft register
Collect explicit requirements and group related actions without losing their origins.
Review the exceptions
Focus attention on low-confidence items, missing actions, and suggested merges or splits.
Export the working register
Filter, edit, and export a concise register for the project team.
Search-result register
Submit Shop Drawings
23 09 23 · Page 742
SubmittalsHQ register
Power, Signal, and Control Wiring Diagrams
23 09 23 · §1.5.B.3 · Page 742 · source linked
Why the first register matters
The submittal process inherits the quality of its starting point.
A vague or incomplete register creates downstream work. Project engineers reopen sections to interpret rows. Trade partners receive unclear requests. Procurement dependencies are discovered after the schedule is already under pressure.
A stronger register does not eliminate project judgment. It gives that judgment a better foundation: a specific requirement, a traceable source, an understood type, and a visible review decision.
Common problems with manually assembled registers
- One generic row for an entire specification section
- Copied headings that do not describe the required deliverable
- Procedural language mistaken for an actual submittal
- Qualifications, reports, and closeout requirements overlooked
- Duplicate items created from repeated or cross-referenced language
- No source reference for checking a disputed entry
More than the paragraph containing the word “submit.”
General and administrative requirements
Product data, shop drawings, samples, qualification data, delegated-design information, certificates, schedules, and project-specific procedures.
Requirements outside the obvious article
Selections, fabrication details, testing records, field reports, demonstrations, warranties, and other deliverables located in products or execution language.
Parent and child relationships
Headings, lead-in directives, numbered children, cross-references, and source locations are evaluated together so short fragments retain their meaning.
For the people who have to stand behind the register
General contractors can use SubmittalsHQ to prepare the first project-wide register, review exceptions, and provide the project team with a more usable starting point. Subcontractors can focus on their assigned specification sections, identify scope-specific requirements, and compare those findings with the contractor’s log.
The product is deliberately focused. SubmittalsHQ processes specifications and supports register creation and review. It does not claim to replace the project’s downstream submittal routing, design-team review, or document-control platform.
What “defensible” means here
It means a reviewer can explain why an item exists. The record retains the specification section, page, paragraph, supporting language, confidence, and human disposition. When someone asks whether a requirement was omitted, duplicated, or interpreted too broadly, the discussion can begin with the contract document rather than memory.
That traceability is also why SubmittalsHQ does not hide uncertain results. Requirements that appear incomplete, unusually broad, or dependent on parent context should receive attention—not automatic confidence.
Before you process a project manual
Does SubmittalsHQ manage the entire submittal workflow?
No. The current product focuses on specification processing and submittal register creation and review. Your existing project platform can continue to handle package routing, design-team responses, revisions, and final records.
Does the generated register still require review?
Yes. Construction specifications contain project-specific language and judgment calls. SubmittalsHQ reduces the clerical first pass and directs the reviewer to evidence and exceptions; the project team remains responsible for the final register.
Can the register be exported?
Yes. The working register can be filtered, edited, and exported for use in the project’s established process.
Is this only for general contractors?
No. General contractors can build a project-level register, while subcontractors can review the specification sections tied to their scope and identify likely obligations early.
See it on a real project manual
Get accessBuild a register your team can verify.
Use the same principles with or without software.
What belongs in a submittal register?
Understand the source documents, fields, types, grouping choices, schedule relationships, and common quality problems.
Where do requirements appear?
Review Parts 1–3, quality-assurance language, field records, closeout obligations, and source hierarchy.
Explore the learning center
Follow the complete cluster of practical guides for specification review and register creation.
Start with one controlled document set
A useful evaluation should use a known project-manual issue and a defined review scope. The team can examine detected sections, compare representative requirements with the original PDF, review flagged decisions, and inspect the resulting register before discussing a broader rollout.
Judge the cleanup—not only the speed
Fast extraction has little value if the output contains generic titles, duplicates, missing context, or untraceable rows. Evaluate how much reviewer effort is required to produce a register the project team would actually use.