From the notebook
Practice notes, regulation, and the occasional argument with the industry.
Signed pieces on sealed engineering work, regulatory literacy, and what AI assistance does, and does not, change about the profession.
Regulatory literacy
General review vs. building inspection under the OBC
Two different functions are constantly mistaken for one. The designer's general review and the building official's inspection answer different questions under different authorities, and neither one discharges the other.
ReadRegulatory literacy
Mechanical field review under OBC 1.2.2.2
OBC 1.2.2.2 binds the mechanical engineer who sealed the HVAC permit drawings, not only the structural firm on the project. Here is what general review means for mechanical work, and how the report shifts when the observations are instrumental.
ReadWorkflow economics
What Fermito actually does: from field notes to the report you seal
The engineering happens on the site visit. The hour afterward, turning observation notes into the narrative report a P.Eng will seal, is the clerical hour Fermito gives back. Here is exactly what it does between your field notes and the sealed document, and where it sits next to the tools you already run.
ReadRegulatory literacy
What OBC 1.2.2.2 requires in a field review report
Article 1.2.2.2 requires a general review and a professional opinion on general conformity. The field review report is the artefact that proves both. This piece goes element by element through the report the clause contemplates, and what separates a defensible entry from a thin one.
ReadWorkflow economics
Is this just Procore? Where Fermito fits in the construction software stack
Procore runs the project. Bluebeam marks up the drawings. Both shipped AI in 2026. Neither writes the sealed narrative report a licensed engineer signs and stamps - and that is the layer Fermito occupies. Here is how the stack divides, and why the distinction is about the job and the buyer, not the technology.
ReadWorkflow economics
Field notes in your first language - why it matters for sealed reviews
Roughly a third of Ontario's licensed engineers were trained outside Canada. When an engineer mentally translates field observations into English before capturing them, the observations get shorter, vaguer, and slower. Fermito accepts voice and text input in 15+ languages and produces the draft in professional English.
ReadField practice
What belongs in a sealed field review template - and what engineers add back by hand every time
A good template is not a blank document. It is a structural commitment to what a defensible field review looks like, encoded so the engineer does not have to re-invent the format on every visit. The gap between what most off-the-shelf templates contain and what a defensible sealed review actually requires is wider than it looks.
ReadAI responsibility
The next sealed engineering documents AI drafting should reach - and the order that matters
Not all sealed engineering documents are equally ready for AI-assisted drafting. The readiness depends on three factors: how standardised the document structure is, how much it relies on narrative prose versus computation, and how concentrated the buyer persona is. The sequencing is the strategy.
ReadAI responsibility
Drafting assistant vs. generator - the distinction that matters in sealed work
The engineering profession is adopting AI drafting tools without a shared vocabulary for what they do. The difference between 'assistant' and 'generator' is not marketing - it determines whether the tool fits within existing professional liability frameworks or creates a new category of risk.
ReadRegulatory literacy
Why we're building for Ontario, deliberately - and what that means for your firm
Fermito's Ontario-first posture is a product strategy, not a geographic limitation. Regulatory fluency requires depth. A drafting tool that speaks OBC 1.2.2.2, PEO Reg 941, and CSA A23.3 natively is more valuable to an Ontario structural firm than one that covers six provinces superficially.
ReadWorkflow economics
The observation library your firm is already building - it just lives in 729 Word documents
Every structural engineering firm that produces sealed field reviews has an implicit observation library - standard phrases, recurring finding language, house conventions for describing common structural elements. The problem is that no one has extracted it. The library lives in hundreds of Word documents and in the principal's head.
ReadField practice
Anatomy of a defensible sealed review under OBC 1.2.2.2
A field review report that merely records what the engineer saw is not defensible. A defensible review connects observation to standard, standard to finding, and finding to recommendation - with photo evidence anchoring every link in the chain.
ReadField practice
Photo evidence in sealed field reviews - what makes a site photograph defensible
Photo documentation is the evidentiary backbone of sealed field review reports. Yet there is no published standard for what constitutes good photo evidence in Ontario engineering practice. After reviewing hundreds of FRRs, the difference between strong and weak photo evidence comes down to three properties.
ReadWorkflow economics
The real cost of a field review - a time-and-motion breakdown from a twelve-engineer firm
A structural engineering firm in the GTA tracked every hour that goes into a field review report - from the drive to site through the sealed PDF leaving the office. The numbers explain why senior engineers spend their evenings drafting instead of reviewing.
ReadCustomer stories
Five things a close reading of GTA parking-garage SRRs reveals about sealed fieldwork
A year of sealed site review reports from a single Ontario structural practice, covering concurrent parking-garage repair projects, exposes five features of how sealed fieldwork is actually produced - features that surface only when the reports are read as documents rather than described in the abstract.
ReadRegulatory literacy
What every Ontario sealed engineering document has in common
Field reviews, reserve fund studies, condition assessments, Phase I ESAs - they look different on paper. Underneath, they share a seven-part structure that determines whether the document holds up under scrutiny or falls apart in a dispute.
ReadAI responsibility
What 'signed and sealed' means when AI wrote the first draft
'Signed and sealed' under Ontario engineering practice has a specific legal meaning: the licensed professional attests that the document was prepared under their supervision, reflects their professional judgment, and they accept personal liability for its contents. That meaning does not change when the first draft is produced by an AI tool.
ReadAI responsibility
The attestation boundary: why every AI drafting tool for licensed professionals needs an explicit signing moment
When a physician signs an Abridge note, the 'sign' moment is a button in Epic. When an attorney files a Spellbook draft, the 'file' moment is their hand. The professions that have gotten AI drafting right share one UX pattern - and it tells AEC exactly what to build.
ReadRegulatory literacy
What PEO Regulation 941 already says about AI-assisted drafting - and what it doesn't
Ontario's regulatory framework for AI-assisted sealed work is more developed than many firms realise. The 2021 rewrite of Regulation 941 section 53, and PEO's November 2025 adoption of the EGBC Practice Advisory on AI use in professional practice, together govern the question. This article walks through what the combined framework says and where the remaining gaps sit.
ReadField practice
Sealed opinion letters: the daily-habit doc category
Short sealed letters are roughly a quarter of a structural firm's output, almost invisible in trade press, and their brevity is what makes them defensibility-critical.
ReadField practice
Inside a shoring requirement letter: the acceptance language
Shoring requirement letters are short, contractor-facing, and written against the clock; the sections, assumptions, and limitations carry disproportionate defensibility weight.
ReadRegulatory literacy
What a Condo Act s.44 Performance Audit actually requires
Every new Ontario condominium corporation has to commission one. It must be done between 6 and 10 months after registration. It must be signed by a P.Eng. or a licensed architect who is independent of the declarant. And it sets the opening balance for everything the Tarion warranty file will adjudicate during the first year. This article walks through what section 44 requires, who is bound by it, and what a defensible audit report looks like on the page.
ReadRegulatory literacy
OBC general review (1.2.2.2): not just structural engineers
OBC 1.2.2.2, the general review clause, binds every P.Eng. who sealed a permit drawing, not just structural. What it requires, and how it shifts by discipline.
ReadField practice
What sealed field review reports reveal about Ontario fieldwork
We read a large corpus of sealed field review reports written by licensed Ontario engineers and classified every observation. Concrete findings about how sealed fieldwork actually gets written, what photo evidence looks like across the corpus, and where the drafting patterns hold.
ReadField practice
Five documentation patterns that weaken sealed field review reports - drawn from 729 real FRRs
After analysing 729 field review reports from an Ontario structural practice, five recurring documentation patterns emerged that make reports harder to defend under scrutiny. None are engineering errors - they are drafting errors that happen when the bottleneck between site visit and sealed document is too tight.
Read