The dailies in USACE CQC format. Three-phase inspections. The submittal register, the deficiency list, the package — and the Government's own transmittal forms, as real PDFs. Born on federal jobs.
Rebuilt from the published editions and checked field by field. They come out as real PDFs, not a print dialog.
Transmittal of Shop Drawings, Equipment Data, Material Samples, or Manufacturer's Certificates of Compliance. MAY 2017 edition. Transmittal numbering per the form's own Note 2 — 09 29 00-001.1. Action codes A through R, and the certification statement verbatim.
Submittal Register, JUN 2024 edition. Not the 1997 one — we checked, because the edition on most reference sites is superseded.
USACE Contractor Quality Control format. It assembles itself out of the day's work — inspections, punch raised and closed, constraints, deliveries, photos, and each sub's own daily — then you review and sign it.
The full loop, with the gates in it — not a folder with a status column.
Every required item by transmittal number, spec paragraph and SD classification, with the state machine enforced on every path — including a phone that was offline for three days.
Each sub gets a package request listing exactly what they owe, by paragraph and classification. Lead time is required on every item; the package will not submit without it.
QC gates, item by item against the spec. Missing and non-compliant items produce the deficiency list, with the seven-calendar-day complete-package resubmittal on it.
Section cover sheets in register order, missing-item sheets in position, deficiency list, recommended register update — assembled, then released with a disposition.
Where a sheet points at a section, SPECUP compares them — fire ratings, gauges, types, board thicknesses — and checks references both ways: a sheet pointing at a section that isn't in the book, a paragraph pointing at a sheet that isn't in the set.
Every item shows the words on the sheet and the words in the paragraph, side by side, and drafts the RFI. You read both before anything is sent. It flags for clarification; it does not rule.
It reads the written blocks on a sheet — schedules, general notes, keynotes — and the references between the two sets. It does not read geometry. If it had nothing to compare, it says so rather than reporting clean.
A delivery is checked against the approved submittal — manufacturer and model, with an accepting action code. Code A or B accepts. Code F is receipt acknowledged; it is not approval. No approved submittal to check against means it is non-conforming, not a delivery.
Preparatory gets held because there's a meeting. Follow-up gets held because it recurs. Initial — first work in place — is the one that quietly doesn't happen, and it's the only one that catches a wrong installation before there are four hundred feet of it.
Work about to run with no Initial inspection recorded raises a hold point against the responsible sub — on their screen, on the constraint log, on the lookahead. Not a reminder in somebody's inbox.
Nobody ticks it off — not the sub, not your QC manager, not the GC. It clears because a submitted Initial inspection for that work exists, and the constraint records which inspection cleared it.
A sub can request the inspection and a super can request one. The request goes on the constraint log, not into a text message, and it clears when the inspection is actually recorded.
Every field the contract asks for — transmittal number, section, paragraph, activity, item, submittal type, description, SD classification, status, revision, ball in court — as its own document, and as a CSV that opens in Excel. Ball in court is derived from each package's status, so it cannot go stale.
What the contract documents say and what is actually there, side by side, with a photo and a date — written standing in front of the condition rather than reconstructed three months later. Both directions: a sub to you, and you to the Government.
Submittal Type is filled in from the SD classification only where the two lists map cleanly. Where they don't, the cell is blank and a person types it. A plausible-looking wrong value on a contract register is harder to catch than an empty one.
Straight answer, because you will ask and everyone else will dodge it.
SPECUP produces the documents and the data those systems want — the register, the transmittal, the daily — out of the work you already did. You carry it across.
There is no integration with RMS, QCS or ProjNet, and we will not claim one. They are Government systems with no published third-party interface. Anyone telling you they sync with RMS is telling you something else.
The work that eats a QC manager's week is producing the content, not the upload. The upload is a minute.
SPECUP is not FedRAMP-authorized and not CMMC-certified. If your contract requires either, we are not your platform yet, and we would rather tell you now than at the audit.
Prohibited by the agreement and guarded in the app — the rule is on the upload screen, not buried in a PDF. That exposure sits with your federal contract, and we are not going to be how you lose it.
Unclassified submittal, QC and field work — which is most of the paperwork on most federal jobs, and all of the paperwork that gets a package rejected.
Two minutes, your own numbers, no email required. If Russell already handles something you're paying people to do, you'll see it on the same screen.
