Acceptance test report packages, assembled from field sheets for your engineer to review and sign.

A project closes and someone in the office builds the report: a summary, the equipment and tag list, the test specification the job was written to, each device's sheet, the instruments used and their calibration dates, and the deficiencies found and what became of them. Along the way they chase the technician whose sheet never came in, and work out whether a blank means the test was skipped or was never in scope.

For the test, AI reads copies of those sheets and assembles the package: equipment and tag list, named test specification, readings by device as recorded, instrument calibration references, deficiencies noted, and the devices with no sheet. Every value keeps the page it came from. It decides nothing about a result, and your qualified engineer or technician reviews and signs.

The table of contents changes by owner. Western Michigan University's electrical testing section lists the pieces: project name, equipment tested, a checklist of visual and mechanical inspections, test values, a summary interpreting the results, infrared photos, the test equipment with calibration dates, and a line signed and dated by the firm's field superintendent that all required tests are done. Portland State's 2013 specification asks for nameplate data, a description of tests, and analysis and recommendations. Penn State's 2010 checklist wanted its own report forms in one named software format, with one electronic and four paper copies. The draft follows the layout your reviewer names for each owner.

Scope is set device by device. The University of Washington's August 2026 standard pulls in dry-type transformers from 167 kVA single-phase or 225 kVA three-phase, molded and insulated case breakers from 400 amps or with adjustable instantaneous trip, and motors from 10 hp. Penn State went down to individual 100 amp breakers, even on temporary power, and counted every NETA test marked optional unless waived in writing, where Maryland's standards leave most optional tests out. That same Washington standard still names NETA ATS-1999. So each draft records the spec section and edition, and lists a device with no sheet without assuming whether it was in scope.

A reading is never only a number. Western Michigan wants results corrected to 20 degrees C, with both the actual reading and the corrected value reported. Portland State's data records carry humidity, temperature, the technician, as-found and as-left results, and each instrument's traceable ID and calibration due date. Western Michigan caps analog field instruments at 6 months between calibrations and digital ones at 12, while Portland State allows 12 for both. The draft copies each reading with its unit, conditions and instrument, says so when a sheet shows only one of the two values, and lists any instrument with no date on file.

Deadlines stack up before the final binder. Portland State wanted preliminary data within 24 hours of finishing each apparatus and the full report within 15 business days. Washington wants handwritten results within a week and the engineer's results within seven working days, with two weeks for the owner's review before energizing, and says a test that turns up a problem is repeated until corrected and reported again in writing. Maryland asks for reports within five working days and, as each high voltage component finishes, a written statement of whether it is suitable to be energized. So one device can hold two sets of results, and the draft keeps both with their dates.

The signature is someone's license. Maryland wants a registered engineer's signature and seal on the first page of the report body, not on a cover, and a Remarks column saying whether each set of data is within accepted limits. Washington has a licensed engineer review and stamp the compiled report. Those calls stay with those people. Your reviewer will check that each reading sits on the right device and tag, that every deficiency on a sheet reached the deficiency list, and that each missing sheet is really missing. We describe public documents here, and none of it is legal or engineering advice.

If your reviewer says yes, new projects get the same assembly for about 30 days, while a technician can still go back for a missing sheet.

A qualified person reviews and signs every report, and no draft reaches an owner on its own.

Before you sign you'll have a fixed price for that job. Later jobs are priced one at a time, with monthly support after that.