Disclaimer

This page states, in one place, what every product on this platform is and is not. Product-specific disclaimer language (printed on every report and shown at checkout) is a restatement of what's here, not a separate standard.

This is not engineering practice

Every automated report produced by this platform is generated by an automated document-review tool. Expert-reviewed reports and Personal Expert Review memos are read or written by Jay R. Prigmore II, Ph.D., P.E., as informal written consultations. All of them are provided for informational purposes only. None is a stamped or sealed engineering review, a professional engineering opinion, or a determination of code compliance by any Authority Having Jurisdiction (AHJ).

Findings are limited to what is visible in the documents you submit. Absence of a finding does not indicate compliance, adequacy, safety, or approval of anything. All findings must be independently verified by the Engineer of Record against the code edition and local amendments adopted by the AHJ for your project.

No engineer-client relationship is created by any automated report, by any expert-reviewed report, by a Personal Expert Review memo, or by any other interaction with this platform. PEFG, PLLC ("PEFG") is not offering or rendering licensed professional engineering services through these automated products, and none of the outputs described on this page are sealed, stamped, or issued as licensed engineering work product.

What the two structurally-guarded products never say

Method of Procedure (MOP) Review and OLPD Report Review are built so that no output can constitute an affirmative clearance. MOP Review never states that a procedure is safe, complete, adequate, or approved for execution — see its report cover language. OLPD Report Review never states or implies the condition of any equipment, never assigns severity, never estimates remaining life, and never recommends or discourages a maintenance or outage action — it reviews the survey report, not the equipment.

Automated release vs. expert-reviewed

Method of Procedure (MOP) Review and OLPD Report Review sell two lanes at checkout. In the automated lane, no licensed engineer reads the findings before you receive them — the report says so, visibly, on its cover, in a gold banner. In the expert lane, a licensed P.E. on PEFG's staff reads, approves, edits, or removes each finding and adds a summary memo before release — the report says that too, in a navy banner. Neither lane produces a sealed or stamped engineering deliverable.

NEC Focused Drawing Pre-Check also sells two lanes, but its automated lane is not the same as Method of Procedure (MOP) Review's or OLPD Report Review's — it was never sold as skip-review, and it still isn't. In the automated lane, findings go through the same release-gate pass they always have; the report carries no lane banner because nothing about that changed. In the expert lane, a licensed P.E. on PEFG's staff individually reads, approves, edits, or removes each finding and adds a summary memo before release — the report says so, in a navy banner. Neither lane produces a sealed or stamped engineering deliverable.

What this platform does not do

• It does not review Energized Electrical Work Permits.
• It does not assess electrically safe work condition or LOTO isolation adequacy. That determination — including the absence-of-voltage test — is made by a qualified person in the field under NFPA 70E Article 120, and no document review substitutes for it.
• No product offers a live consultation, phone call, or scheduled meeting at any tier or price.
• No product guarantees a minimum number of findings.

Code citations

This platform does not bundle NFPA, NEC, or IEEE standard text into its checklists, prompts, or any grounding corpus. A finding cites a specific code section only when that section's text was present in a document you uploaded for that submission. Where no such text was supplied, a finding is reported as a general engineering observation with no code citation — never a citation recalled from general familiarity with a standard.

Related policies

See also the Terms of Service, Refund Policy, and Data Retention Policy.