Read each issued specification section for submission requirements, identify the required deliverable and preserve its exact source paragraph. Reconcile drawing notes and addenda, group related items deliberately, then assign ownership and project dates.
Freeze the source package
Record the manual issue, section list, drawing issue and incorporated addenda. Do not treat a downloaded master specification as the issued project requirement. A section may have been edited to remove a product, change a submission type or assign a different reviewer.
Use the blank tracking template once the required items have been established. This guide covers the preceding task: deriving defensible rows from the actual documents.
Work one section from source to row
In a hypothetical air-handling equipment section, the issued clauses request selected product data, shop drawings and a controls diagram. Create a stable system package ID and list those three required contents, retaining the source paragraph for each. If the procedure requires separate controls review, give that decision its own linked row.
The equipment schedule might also identify a mounting condition that requires coordinated support information. Record that drawing reference and verify whether the requirement belongs to the equipment package or a separate structural submission. Do not add an imagined calculation requirement simply because similar projects often require one.
Reconcile rather than copy headings
A section heading can identify the system without identifying every required deliverable. Read the requirement, qualifiers and exceptions. Distinguish a document submitted for review from a record delivered at closeout, and keep the project’s stated classifications.
When an addendum deletes one unit or changes a model, revisit affected rows. Retain the superseded source in the history and update the active requirement. Mark an ambiguous requirement for clarification rather than resolving it by assumption.
Extraction checks and worksheet
| Check | Sources | Review question |
|---|---|---|
| Document register | Issued manual, section index and addenda | Which sections and amendments govern this extraction? |
| Required deliverable | Project submission clauses | Is this product data, a shop drawing, calculation, sample, test or closeout record? |
| Exact reference | Section, paragraph, page and revision | Can another reviewer locate the requirement behind this row? |
| Package grouping | System scope and review procedure | Should related deliverables share a package or require separate submissions? |
| Drawing additions | Notes, schedules and details | Do the drawings require another deliverable or contradict the manual? |
| Responsibility | Trade scope and review assignments | Who submits the package and who must review its interfaces? |
| Timing | Procurement sequence and confirmed review period | Which actual decision date should the submission support? |
| Reconciliation | Extracted list, requirements and received packages | Are missing requirements, duplicates and unclear rows resolved before distribution? |
Assign the real handoffs
Confirm the submitting party, reviewing disciplines and procurement dependency. A guessed trade assignment can leave a required package unowned. A guessed lead time can make a log look complete while the decision arrives after fabrication has started.
Have a second person reconcile the list against the source index. Check duplicated system packages, missing sections and drawing-only requirements. Use the review checklist when an actual package arrives.
Source and use of AI
UFGS 01 33 00 offers a public example of submittal identification and procedures. Source checked October 13, 2026.
The CSV provides an extraction worksheet, not an automated log generator. If AI assists your extraction, verify every proposed row against its source and retain unresolved questions for the project team.
Bring one task and a sample document to a free 30-minute AEC AI workflow consultation. We will diagnose the handoffs, identify a useful starting point and work through a practical example together.