Your Senior PE Spends the First Review Hour Checking: How to Move the Checkable Half to Software

Most of the checking a senior PE does in the first review hour does not need a license. Typos, letterhead, a quantity that reads two ways, a claim with no citation, a summary that contradicts the body: each can be written as a rule with a yes or no answer. In this episode MES owner Mike walked through what leaves the PE's desk, what stays on it, and the two handoff habits that keep a software check from drifting.

Why does a report eat an hour before the real review starts?

Because the first thing on the desk is not the engineering. Reports arrive with formatting problems and typos, and the PE either spends one to two hours fixing them or kicks the report back without reading it.

That is not a liability question. No license is needed to notice a missing letterhead or the wrong font, and the hour comes out of engineer time, which is what clients are buying.

So the first question is whether a rule catches those recurring errors before the report reaches the PE at all: company letterhead, Arial 12, the basics.

The same thinking goes a layer deeper, to the things a report depends on. Location, size, scope and design assumptions should move through the document and get flagged when one drifts.

Which checks can leave the PE's desk?

Any check you can write as a rule with a yes or no answer can leave the PE's desk. MES runs three of them, each a rule first and a judgment second.

Software flags each one. The decision under each flag stays with the PE.

| The check | What the rule asks | What the PE decides |
| --- | --- | --- |
| Number consistency | Does the same quantity read two ways? | Which number is right |
| Citation coverage | Does every claim have a reference? | Is the assumption defensible |
| Summary vs. body | Does the summary claim more than the body backs? | Would I seal this |

Number consistency: if the report is built on 100 homes, that number reads the same everywhere, and the check catches the same quantity written two ways.

Citation coverage: every claim carries the formula, the code or the source, linked back so the reviewer can confirm it in seconds. A county code for setbacks is the easy test.

Summary against body: the summary at the end gets swept and updated to match what the body actually says.

That split is what handing the checkable half of a review to software looks like in practice. The pass runs and flags without the PE reading every line.

What still has to stay with the PE?

Three questions, and no rule answers them.

Is that design flow right for this site? Is that assumption defensible? Would I seal this?

A clean software pass is not a seal. The PE still owns the whole report and still makes the call on whether it goes out.

Mike also keeps the engineers on the spreadsheet calculations. What migrates into the check is the assumption, not the engineering.

How do you hand off checking without it drifting?

Treat the tool like a teammate you have to check in with.

Left too long, an AI pass drifts and hallucinates. Check in every few hours, or at least daily, especially while a skill runs 30 minutes to an hour.

The second habit is the calendar. If a report is due Friday, ask for the draft Wednesday, so Thursday is for fixes and Friday is for finishing.

Mike's framing is that this is engineering 101. A teammate you hand work to and never check on is not a plan, and neither is a tool.

What does an hour of PE checking cost, and where do you start?

On lump-sum work, an extra hour of senior time comes straight out of the fee. There are three places it lands.

The firm: one more unbilled hour against a fixed fee.

The client: a mismatch ships when the PE skims the report late.

The PE: less time for proposals, mentoring, hard calls and staffing.

The start is a Monday habit. Tally the reviewer marks in a review and ask of each one: could I write this as a yes or no rule? Then move the checkable list off the PE.

Writing the standards down in 2026 also pays the younger staff back. An EIT can see what was checked and learn why it mattered.

The system still hallucinates. When someone sees something odd, the feedback updates the standard, and the next reports should not repeat it.

Watch the full episode

The full episode is on YouTube: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mbfUBev5ZNA (opens in a new tab)

Frequently asked questions

Which report checks are safe to move off a senior PE?

The ones you can write as a yes or no rule: numbers that match throughout, a reference behind every claim, and a summary that agrees with the body.

Does a clean software pass mean the report is sealed?

No. A pass with no flags is not a seal. The PE still owns the whole report and still decides whether to seal it.

I'm a civil engineer in Texas running a small water and wastewater team, and reports reach our PE with typos and mismatched quantities. Where should we start?

With the checkable list. Tally each reviewer mark and ask whether it could be a yes or no rule, then move that list off the PE.

I lead engineering at a firm in Colorado, and our lump-sum projects keep losing senior hours to review cycles. How do we get drafts earlier?

Work backwards from the due date. If a report is due Friday, ask for the draft Wednesday, so Thursday is for fixes and Friday is for finishing.

How often should someone check on a software pass?

Every few hours, or at least daily. Some checks run 30 minutes to an hour, and a tool left too long drifts.

What should the engineer still do by hand?

The spreadsheet calculations and the engineering calls. What moves into the check is the assumptions, not the design.

Related Resources

• Why Our Senior Engineers Are Not Expensive CAD Operators
• Building AI Infrastructure for an Engineering Firm: The Complete Data Architecture
• Why Your Site Civil Engineer Isn’t the Right Person to Lead TCEQ Permitting

Is your senior PE still the first checker on every report?

We set up engineering reviews the way we set up a design: standards written down, the checkable half caught before it reaches the PE, and senior time spent on the calls that need a license. If review cycles are eating your senior hours, we can walk through it with you.

We specialize in:

• Water engineering
• Wastewater engineering
• Site civil engineering for land development
• Construction administration
• Site feasibility and due diligence

Modern Engineering Solutions, McKinney, Texas. Contact: (214) 833-6748 or mod-eng.com