Will this tell me my MOP is safe to execute?

No, and it cannot be made to. Determining that a procedure is safe, that all energy sources are identified, or that isolation is adequate are decisions reserved to a qualified person in the field. The engine only emits gaps, questions, and inconsistencies — there is no pass, complete, adequate, or approved finding type available to it, and post-generation validation rejects any text asserting sufficiency or readiness for execution.

Why are all three documents required?

Because the cross-check is the point. A MOP reviewed alone can only be checked for internal structure. Read against the single-line and the scope of work, it can be checked for whether the equipment it names exists where it says, whether the affected loads match the topology, and whether the work described is the work scoped. Submission is blocked without all three rather than silently producing a weaker review.

What is the difference between the automated and expert lanes?

The automated lane releases the pipeline findings directly, with that stated in large type on the report cover. The expert lane is read personally by Jay R. Prigmore II, Ph.D., P.E. — every finding approved, edited, or removed by a licensed Professional Engineer before you receive it. Both lanes are fixed-price and self-serve; neither is a stamped deliverable.

Same day for the Single equipment and System tiers, one business day for Complex, on the automated lane. Expert-reviewed is typically three business days. Prices for every tier are published and locked before you upload.

Who wrote the checklist this runs against?

Jay R. Prigmore II, Ph.D., P.E. — a Ph.D. electrical power engineer who led electrical quality and field reliability engineering for a global hyperscale data center fleet, where the MOP is the operative safety document. The checklist is original prose and reproduces no NFPA 70E, NFPA 70, or Uptime Institute text.

Review · mop-review

MOP Review

Structural completeness and cross-document consistency — never a go/no-go.

Reviews a draft Method of Procedure for structural completeness against an owner-authored MOP structure checklist, and cross-checks it against your single-line and scope of work. Never renders an affirmative clearance — this review does not approve a procedure for execution.

This review does not approve this procedure for execution.

What this product is for

A Method of Procedure is reviewed under the worst possible conditions: late, by people who wrote parts of it, against a clock, with a switching window already booked. What gets missed is rarely exotic — it is a back-out plan that stops halfway, a step that assumes a breaker position nobody verified, an affected-load list that does not match the single-line, a return-to-service sequence with no acceptance criteria. This product reads your draft MOP against 46 structural checks and cross-checks it against the single-line and scope of work you submit with it. All three documents are required, because a large part of the value is in the comparison. It never approves a procedure and never says one is safe to run — those determinations belong to a qualified person in the field, and the engine is prevented in code from making them.

What the 46-point checklist covers

46 discrete checks across 12 areas. Applies to: Draft Methods of Procedure with a single-line diagram and a written scope of work.

Equipment and boundary identification
Impact and affected loads
Prerequisites
Personnel and roles
Equipment and materials
Step sequence
Back-out plan
Emergency response
Return to service
Standing interrogation set
Cross-check against single-line and scope
Communication and notification

Grounded in an owner-authored review checklist. Every finding includes its source page and, where a code citation applies, the section it is based on — never from memory.

What this explicitly does not do

Determining that a procedure is safe to execute
Assessing whether all energy sources have been identified
Assessing whether isolation or lockout is adequate
Approving a procedure for execution
Any determination reserved to a qualified person in the field

These are structural limits on the product, not a description of effort. Absence of a finding is never evidence of compliance.

A finding in this product's format

Back-out plan does not return the system to the documented starting configuration

The back-out sequence restores the primary path but does not address the tie position changed earlier in the procedure, leaving the system in a configuration that matches neither the starting state nor the intended end state. Confirm the intended abort configuration and state it explicitly, including who authorizes the abort and at which step abort is no longer available.

Illustrative and redacted. Not real customer data. See full sample reports →

Turnaround

Automated release: Same day for Single equipment/System, 1 business day for Complex.
Expert-reviewed: Typically 3 business days.

What you'll upload

Draft MOP (required)
Single-line diagram (PDF) (required)
Upload the most recent field-verified single-line. This review compares your MOP against the drawing you provide. It cannot identify equipment or sources that are not on that drawing.
Scope of work (PDF, or use the text field below) (required)

If this document needs more than a preliminary screening, the same firm offers a stamped engineering review by a licensed P.E.(opens in a new tab, external site) directly. That work is engaged separately from this Service — buying a review here does not create that engagement.

MOP Review — common questions

Will this tell me my MOP is safe to execute?: No, and it cannot be made to. Determining that a procedure is safe, that all energy sources are identified, or that isolation is adequate are decisions reserved to a qualified person in the field. The engine only emits gaps, questions, and inconsistencies — there is no pass, complete, adequate, or approved finding type available to it, and post-generation validation rejects any text asserting sufficiency or readiness for execution.
Why are all three documents required?: Because the cross-check is the point. A MOP reviewed alone can only be checked for internal structure. Read against the single-line and the scope of work, it can be checked for whether the equipment it names exists where it says, whether the affected loads match the topology, and whether the work described is the work scoped. Submission is blocked without all three rather than silently producing a weaker review.
What is the difference between the automated and expert lanes?: The automated lane releases the pipeline findings directly, with that stated in large type on the report cover. The expert lane is read personally by Jay R. Prigmore II, Ph.D., P.E. — every finding approved, edited, or removed by a licensed Professional Engineer before you receive it. Both lanes are fixed-price and self-serve; neither is a stamped deliverable.
How fast is it?: Same day for the Single equipment and System tiers, one business day for Complex, on the automated lane. Expert-reviewed is typically three business days. Prices for every tier are published and locked before you upload.
Who wrote the checklist this runs against?: Jay R. Prigmore II, Ph.D., P.E. — a Ph.D. electrical power engineer who led electrical quality and field reliability engineering for a global hyperscale data center fleet, where the MOP is the operative safety document. The checklist is original prose and reproduces no NFPA 70E, NFPA 70, or Uptime Institute text.

Review lane

Automated release

Same day for Single equipment/System, 1 business day for Complex.

from $199

Expert-reviewed

Typically 3 business days.

from $395

Estimated units (used to set your price tier)

Contact email

I have verified that the file I am uploading is the document I want analyzed *

Check the filename and open the file before you upload it. This review analyzes exactly the file you submit. If you upload an extract, a summary page, or a single sheet of a larger set, it will be reviewed as submitted and the missing content will be reported as findings — that is a completed review and it consumes your payment.

Company / firm

Project name or internal reference

Jurisdiction — city/county and state *

Adopted code edition *

Scope of work (if not uploaded as a PDF)

Facility type *

Work classification *

Redundancy topology *

Expected redundancy state during the work *

e.g. "N+1 reduced to N for 4 hours"

Date the single-line was last field-verified *

Enter a date, or "unknown."

Is this work concurrent with other active MOPs on the same system? *

I confirm the file I am uploading is the document I intend to have analyzed, and I understand that an incomplete or partial submission will still be reviewed and will consume my payment.I understand this is an automated preliminary screening, not a stamped engineering review or a compliance determination, and that all findings must be verified by the Engineer of Record.I understand this review does not approve the procedure for execution, does not confirm the procedure is safe or complete, and that the MOP requires full review and approval by the responsible engineer and facility management before any work begins.

You'll be redirected to Stripe to pay. You'll upload your documents on the next page, after payment.