ALPHA ENGINEERINGPower & Energy · Since 1979
We review submittals against the engineering intent, answer the field questions as they come up, witness commissioning, and hand back drawings that describe what is actually installed. The engineer who designed it is the one checking it, so no substitution quietly changes how your system behaves.
What you end up with: a system that performs the way the design said it would.Most projects start with the first option by default, simply because nobody decided otherwise.
The GC reports progress as they see it, with no separate engineering review. They judge changes against code, not the design's engineering assumptions.
Fits well if: the project is simple enough that engineering judgment calls are unlikely.An owner's rep handles schedule, budget, and coordination, but can't catch a substitution that's code-compliant yet misses the design intent.
Fits well if: you're separately routing technical submittals to an engineer.An engineer who knows the original design reviews submittals and field changes against design intent, not just code compliance.
Fits well if: performance depends on details a GC or non-technical rep couldn't evaluate.Engineering-led oversight covers four checkpoints from submittal to final sign-off.
Let's keep the next project built the way it was drawn.
Let's Talk →