General Engineer - Testing & Commissioning - Libertyville, Illinois

We need to output HTML fragment with sections: About the role? The posting includes "Who We Are" and description. We need to use

for section headings like About the role, Responsibilities, Requirements, Qualifications, Skills, Benefits, Pay, Schedule. We must not repeat job title as heading. We must include sections only when posting has real specific content. We need to extract content. Let's parse: - Who We Are: description of Exelon. Could be "About the role"? Actually "Who We Are" is about company. Could map to "About the role"? The instruction: use

for section headings (e.g. About the role, Responsibilities, Requirements, Qualifications, Skills, Benefits, Pay, Schedule). So we can use those headings if content exists. We have: - Primary Purpose: description of role. Could be "About the role" or maybe "Responsibilities". But we have separate "Primary Duties" and "Job Scope". So we can create sections: About the role: maybe combine Who We Are + Primary Purpose? But we need to avoid duplication. Probably "About the role" could contain the description of the role (Primary Purpose). "Responsibilities" could contain Primary Duties. "Requirements" could contain Minimum Qualifications. "Qualifications" could contain Preferred Qualifications. "Skills" maybe not explicit; we could omit if no specific skills list. "Benefits" we have Benefits section. "Pay" we have salary range and bonus. "Schedule" maybe not explicit; there is mention of extended hours, 24x7 coverage during storms. That's schedule info. So we can include Schedule. We must not include headings with filler like "commensurate with experience". Not present. We must preserve all substantive information; do not invent or summarize away detail. So we need to include details exactly as given, but we can format as

or

. Must not omit any substantive info. We need to strip boilerplate: cookie/navigation/legal/EEO/equal-opportunity/scam-warning boilerplate, duplicated lines, application instructions. There's none evident. We need to output only HTML fragment, no /, no markdown fences. Let's craft sections:

About the role

Testing and Commissioning engineers are a front-line field engineering force that commissions, maintains, and troubleshoots transmission and distribution level protection and control systems inside ComEd substations. System and equipment types include protective relays, SCADA, substation automation, power and control equipment, fiber-optic, power line carrier, and revenue metering. The Testing and Commissioning engineers perform field testing and commissioning engineering activities associated with installation of new equipment along with troubleshooting, repairs, and preventative maintenance of existing equipment. The work associated with commissioning new equipment serves to improve system performance and upgrade capacity of the system. Commissioning new equipment includes creating commissioning plans, writing livening procedures, creating and running test plans, and analyzing test results compared to expected values. They also troubleshoot and perform field investigations for malfunctioning power equipment, system events and protective relaying misoperations. They then support corrective maintenance to repair any identified equipment issues. Lastly, the Testing and Commissioning engineers perform preventive maintenance on protection system components and SCADA. Position may be required to work extended hours, including 24 x 7 coverage during storms or other energy delivery emergencies. North Region main areas: Libertyville, Skokie, Lombard, and Mt. Prospect (includes nearby towns to these main areas).

That covers Primary Purpose and location. Next Responsibilities:

Responsibilities

• Provide technical authority in the field; direct and support substation maintenance and contractor crews on work associated with protection and control systems.
• Interface with ComEd’s Central T&S Engineering, Work Management, Project Management, Operations, Data Maintenance, and Substation Maintenance departments to support T&S daily work activities.
• Play a critical role in substation outage / work planning, maintaining engineering drawings, relay/SCADA database management, NERC/CIP audit support, supporting the engineering PM & CM maintenance programs.
• Advocate of the ComEd Safety culture.

We need to ensure we captured all from Primary Duties paragraph. The paragraph: "Testing and Commissioning engineers are the technical authority in the field. They provide leadership by directing and supporting substation maintenance and contractor crews on work associated with these systems. They continually interface with ComEd’s Central T&S Engineering, Work Management, Project Management, Operations, Data Maintenance, and Substation Maintenance departments to support the T&S daily work activities. The Testing and Commissioning organization also plays a critical role in substation outage / work planning, maintaining engineering drawings, relay/SCADA database management, NERC/CIP audit support, supporting the engineering PM & CM maintenance programs, and is a strong advocate of the ComEd Safety culture. If you enjoy being in a field work environment, troubleshooting equipment and hands-on learning, having a company vehicle, and the opportunity for Overtime, the Testing and Commissioning Engineering department may be right for you." We captured main duties; we omitted the conditional sentence about enjoyment etc. That's more of a promotional note; maybe we can include as a bullet? It's not a duty but a note. Might be considered substantive? It's more about candidate fit. Could be omitted? The instruction: preserve ALL substantive information; do NOT invent or summarize away detail. The sentence "If you enjoy being in a field work environment, troubleshooting equipment and hands-on learning, having a company vehicle, and the opportunity for Overtime, the Testing and Commissioning Engineering department may be right for you." is substantive? It's more of a call to action. Might be considered boilerplate? Not exactly. But it's not a duty. Could be omitted? Might be considered fluff. Safer to include as a paragraph under Responsibilities? But it's not a duty. Could be placed under About the role? Might be better to include as a separate note under Responsibilities as a bullet: "Ideal candidates enjoy field work, troubleshooting, hands-on learning, have access to a company vehicle, and seek overtime opportunities." That's summarizing, which may be considered summarizing away detail. Better to keep exact sentence as a

. Let's add a

after the list. Thus Responsibilities section:

for duties, then

for the conditional sentence. Next Requirements: Minimum Qualifications. We need to capture all details: Bachelor of Science degree in Engineering or Licensed Professional Engineer (2) (3) Ability to analyze and interpret complex electrical and mechanical systems. Knowledge and ability to apply problem solving approaches and engineering theory Knowledge of engineering designs, principles and practices. Knowledge of complex field test equipment. 4-7 years of professional engineering experience (1) (3) (See Note). Broad knowledge and experience with regulations, guides, standards, codes methods, practices, and advanced engineering principles necessary to perform very complex or unique assignments for a specific Minimum of two related career experiences (4) (i.e., changes in technical job responsibilities, which may or may not include a change in department) OR Engineer in Training OR 50% complete (by hours) with advanced technical degree, M.B.A. or Project Management Certification (1) master's degree in engineering reduces the OJT experience requirement by 1 year. (2) License must be issued by the state in which you are practicing. (3) PE License reduces the OJT experience requirement by 1 year. (4) Career related experiences is defined as changes in technical job responsibilities and does not have to include a change in department Note: Items (1) and (3) are mutually inclusive, whereby the maximum experience requirement reduction is one(1) year (e.g., in the case of an employee with both a master's degree in Engineering AND a PE license, the minimum experience requirement would be reduced by one (1) year). That's a dense block. We need to preserve all info. Could format as

with each requirement as
• . But we must not lose any detail. Let's break into bullet points: - Bachelor of Science degree in Engineering or Licensed Professional Engineer. - Ability to analyze and interpret complex electrical and mechanical systems. - Knowledge and ability to apply problem solving approaches and engineering theory. - Knowledge of engineering designs, principles and practices. - Knowledge of complex field test equipment. - 4-7 years of professional engineering experience. - Broad knowledge and experience with regulations, guides, standards, codes, methods, practices, and advanced engineering principles necessary to perform very complex or unique assignments. - Minimum of two related career experiences (i.e., changes in technical job responsibilities, which may or may not include a change in department) OR Engineer in Training OR 50% complete (by hours) with advanced technical degree, M.B.A. or Project Management Certification. - Master's degree in engineering reduces the OJT experience requirement by 1 year. - License must be issued by the state in which you are practicing. - PE License reduces the OJT experience requirement by 1 year. - Note: Items (1) and (3) are mutually inclusive, whereby the maximum experience requirement reduction is one year (e.g., in the case of an employee with both a master's degree in Engineering AND a PE license, the minimum experience requirement would be reduced by one year). We need to keep the numbering references? Might be okay to drop them as they are just footnote markers. The instruction: preserve ALL substantive information; do NOT invent or summarize away detail. Dropping the reference numbers (like (2) (3)) might be considered losing detail? They are not substantive; they are just citation markers. Probably okay to drop. But we should keep the meaning. We'll output as
  • ...
  . Next Preferred Qualifications: - Strong teamwork, interpersonal skills and the ability to communicate with all management levels. - Strong written and oral communication skills. We'll put under

  Qualifications

  maybe? Actually we have Qualifications section for preferred qualifications. The instruction list includes Qualifications as a heading. We'll use that. Next Skills: Not explicitly listed; we could omit. Next Benefits: we have a Benefits paragraph with many items. We'll put under

  Benefits

  with
  items. Benefits list: - Annual salary will vary based on a candidate’s skills, qualifications, experience, and other factors: $92,000.00/Yr. – $126,500.00/Yr. - Annual Bonus for eligible positions: 15% - 401(k) match and annual company contribution - Medical, dental and vision insurance - Life and disability insurance - Generous paid time off options, including vacation, sick time, floating and fixed holidays, maternity leave and bonding/primary caregiver leave or parental leave - Employee Assistance Program and resources for mental and emotional support - Wellbeing programs such as tuition reimbursement, adoption and surrogacy assistance and fitness reimbursement - Referral bonus program - And much more - Note: Exelon-sponsored compensation and benefit programs may vary or not apply based on length of service, job grade, job classification or represented status. Eligibility will be determined by the written plan or program documents. We need to keep the salary range and bonus as part of Benefits? There's also Pay section. The instruction says create Pay/Schedule/Benefits sections only if posting actually states them. The posting includes salary range and bonus under Benefits paragraph. It also mentions "Annual salary will vary...". That's pay info. So we could create a Pay section for salary and bonus, and Benefits for other benefits. But the instruction says prefer a few substantive sections over many thin ones. Could combine Pay and Benefits? But they are distinct headings. The instruction: "Prefer a few substantive sections over many thin ones." So we might combine Pay and Benefits into one Benefits section? But they said use headings like Benefits, Pay, Schedule. If we combine, we would not have a Pay heading, which might be okay if we don't have separate Pay