AI review · 31-point checklist by a Ph.D., P.E.
Coordination & Selectivity Review
Flags what needs verification in your protection settings — never a selectivity verdict.
- From $199
- Price shown before you pay
- 31
- Checklist points
- 1 day
- Typical turnaround
What it's for
We check your protection settings table — every device, band, and rating — and flag what needs curve verification. We never call a system selective.
Works withSKM Power*ToolsETAPEasyPower— exported to PDF.
Who it's for
Built for the people who sign off
The engineer sealing a coordination study
Catch incomplete rows and unverified pairs before settings leave your office.
The owner or commissioning agent receiving the settings
Know whether the sheet you were handed can actually be verified.
The manager whose team keeps re-checking settings tables
Stop paying engineering rates to check that a table is complete.
The contractor who got review comments back
Find the second wave of comments before the next review round.
What it doesn't do
Clear limits, stated up front
- Plotting or interpreting time-current curves
- Determining that coordination succeeds or fails
- Recommending settings
- Certifying selective coordination for code compliance
A clean report is never proof of compliance.
Turnaround
What to expect
Automated
Typically 1 business day, plus review time.
You upload
- Device settings table (PDF or XLSX)required
- TCC plot export (optional PDF)optional
What's checked
31 checks across 6 areas
- Settings table completeness
- Overlap and verification flags
- Device ratings
- Code-driven coordination requirements
- System configuration and operating states
- Study documentation
Sample finding
Device pair requires verification against manufacturer curve data
Illustrative and redacted. See full sample reports →
The cost of the first pass
Your engineers should be engineering, not proofreading.
The first pass through a document is the slowest, least interesting part of review. We do that pass and hand back a list with every item tied to a page. Your engineer still makes every call.
Defaults to the $300/hr rate PEFG prices its own expert lane from. Change it to yours.
We don't measure this and won't pretend to — the default is deliberately low. Set it to what it actually takes.
- Your first pass — 2 hours at $300/hr
- $600
- Coordination & Selectivity Review — System
- $449
- Difference, per document
- $151
Turnaround: Typically 1 business day, plus review time.
A preliminary screening, not a substitute for your review. The Engineer of Record verifies every finding, and absence of a finding is never evidence of compliance.
Why it is consistent
Every item, every time
The full checklist runs on every document, even on a deadline.
The same standard every time
Depth does not depend on who was free that afternoon.
An audit trail by default
Every finding carries its page and the checklist item behind it.
It does not get bored
Matching ninety label values to ninety study rows is where people slip.
If this goes wrong
First order, any product: tell us why it missed and we refund it.
Email support within 7 days of release with your order ID and a short note on what it missed. First paid order only, one per customer, refunded in full.
Always refundable, first order or not
- Wrong document type. If what you uploaded is not a document this product reviews, re-upload the right file or take a full refund.
- Non-delivery. If we fail to deliver a report, you get a full refund.
- Before you upload. Paid but not uploaded yet? Email support for a full refund.
- Malware-rejected with no clean resubmission. If your file fails the malware scan and you cannot send a clean copy, take a refund.
Anything else? Email support with your order ID — a person reads every request. support@pefgconsulting.com. Full terms: refund policy.
Need more than a screening? PEFG offers a stamped engineering review by a licensed P.E.(opens in a new tab, external site) as a separate engagement.
FAQ
Common questions
Will this tell me whether my system is selectively coordinated?
No. That limitation is structural, not stylistic — the engine is prevented in code from emitting any finding that concludes coordination succeeds, fails, or is achieved, and mandatory limitation language appears on every report saying so. Curves are not independently plotted or interpreted. What you get is a list of what is missing, inconsistent, or in need of verification.
Then what is it actually for?
For finding, in a day rather than a week, everything about a settings package that would stall a review: incomplete device data, unstated operating configurations, ratings that were never declared, narrative that contradicts the table, and device pairs a reviewer will want curve evidence for. It is the pass you would want a second engineer to make before the study goes out.
What do I upload?
The protective device settings table is the primary document — that is what gets read page by page. Coordination study narratives and TCC plot exports can be submitted alongside it and are read as supporting context.
Who wrote the checklist this runs against?
Jay R. Prigmore II, Ph.D., P.E. — a Ph.D. electrical power engineer and voting member of the IEEE 1584 working group. The checklist is original prose; no NFPA 70, IEEE 242, or manufacturer text is reproduced in it, and no clause is cited unless its text appears in a document you supplied.
Can this satisfy a selective coordination requirement in the code?
No. Certifying selective coordination for code compliance is explicitly out of scope. This is an automated preliminary screening, not a stamped deliverable and not a compliance determination.