Τεχνική επισκόπηση πριν από την υποβολή

What this is

A technical review of your own documents before they go to a lender, a grant evaluator or a buyer. We read them the way the reviewer on the other side will read them, and tell you what will not survive that reading — while there is still time to fix it.

What we review

• Yield models and production forecasts: PVsyst configuration, loss assumptions, P50/P90 derivation, and whether the stated yield actually follows from the inputs.
• Battery storage sizing: power-to-energy ratio, round-trip efficiency, degradation profile and duty cycle, checked against the revenue case they are meant to support.
• Design packages: string voltage windows, protection coordination, grounding and earthing, voltage drop and ampacity against IEC requirements.
• Safety test reports: which edition of UL 9540A the report was run to, and whether the tested configuration matches what is being built. The 6th edition changed the installation-level test and removed the standalone unit-level test for most non-residential systems, and the 2026 edition of NFPA 855 added Annex G.11 on large-scale fire testing. A report that predates either is not wrong, but it no longer answers the question an evaluator is asking.
• Grid connection assumptions: whether the export limit, connection voltage and energisation date in the model match what the network operator has actually granted. See Grid Connection Strategy for the work that establishes them.
• Vendor specifications and bills of material: catching the errors that otherwise survive into procurement.
• Capital estimates: separating verified vendor pricing from assumption, and naming which is which.

What you get

A written review listing every finding, ranked by whether it changes the numbers, changes the design, or changes nothing. Each finding cites the document and the calculation behind it. Where a finding is a judgement call rather than an error, it is labelled as one.

When it is worth doing

• Before a lender appoints its technical adviser. Findings raised by their adviser cost time and negotiating position. The same findings raised by your own reviewer cost neither.
• Before a grant submission. A scoring panel does not ask for clarification. It scores what is in front of it.
• Before a sale or a partner’s diligence. Every unexplained number in the data room becomes a price adjustment or a condition precedent.
• Before procurement commits. A specification error caught on paper is an email. Caught on site, it is a change order.

What this is not

This is pre-submission review, not lender-facing due diligence. We do not issue certified due diligence opinions until professional indemnity cover is in place in the relevant jurisdiction. We do not carry fire protection engineering — where a project needs thermal runaway assessment or fire safety sign-off, we say so and work alongside a fire protection engineer.

Related work

If the question is the connection itself rather than the documents, start with Grid Connection Strategy. For a single connection you already hold, the fixed-scope Grid Position Review answers it for a fixed fee. The published zone data behind both is in Romania grid capacity by zone.