[CLC-Discussion] Rejection of PE drawings by non-PE plans examiner

[Mark Young]

This Rule is intended to prevent tragedies, such as the Kansas City Hyatt
Regency skyway collapse, where the contractor modified supports for the
skyways to make the design easier to construct.  The structural engineer was
not consulted about the change.  The change tripled the load on the
supports, which failed during a concert … killing 114 people and injuring
219.

Mark Young, Esq.

_____________________________________________
From: clc-discussion-bounces at lists.flabarrpptl.org
[mailto:clc-discussion-bounces at lists.flabarrpptl.org] On Behalf Of Jeff
Price
Sent: Thursday, May 29, 2014 10:16 AM
To: clc-discussion at lists.flabarrpptl.org
Subject: [CLC-Discussion] Rejection of PE drawings by non-PE plans examiner


In reading and reviewing the FAC concerning professional engineers and their
duties, I came across 61G15-26, Supervision Standards “61G15-26.001;
Standards for Supervision of Governmental Employees by Professional
Engineers” 
https://www.flrules.org/gateway/ChapterHome.asp?Chapter=61G15-26
The key wording is, “This rule shall prohibit non-professional employees
governed by this rule from overriding, or approving, accepting or rejecting,
or modifying engineering documents prepared by professional engineers unless
such actions are concurred in by a professional engineer in responsible
charge of the employee and that said professional engineer takes full
responsibility for such a decision.” (and yes, there are definitional
standards in the rule, and exceptions, but none I believe apply here).
So, I have a plans examiner (governmental employee), who is not a PE and has
no training as a PE, rejecting (or for argument’s sake approving what is
later found to be bad) signed, sealed and stamped construction drawings
created by a FL PE.
Shouldn’t I be able to request and discover the “concurrence” (however that
was documented or communicated) that must have accompanied the plans
examiner’s decision? Doesn’t the city/county have to produce the
“professional engineer” who took (or takes) “full responsibility” for the
plans examiner’s decision? And if there was no “engineering supervision,”
what is the result? 

Jeffrey L. Price, Esq.
Florida Bar Board Certified - Construction Law      
 
Niesen|Price|Worthy|Campo, PA
5216 SW 91st Drive  Gainesville, FL 32608
Ph (352) 373-9031   Fax (352) 373-9099
http://npw-law.com <http://npw-law.com/> 

 << File: ATT00067.txt >>                 << OLE Object: Picture (Device
Independent Bitmap) >>               << OLE Object: Picture (Device
Independent Bitmap) >>  

This communication is intended for the sole use of the individual or entity
to which it is addressed and may contain information that is privileged,
confidential and exempt from disclosure under applicable law.  If the reader
of this communication is not the intended recipient, employee or agent
responsible for delivering the message to the intended recipient, you are
hereby notified that any review, dissemination, distribution or copying of
this communication is strictly prohibited.  If you have received this
communication in error, please immediately notify me by telephone, delete
this communication, and destroy any copies of it.  Thank you. << OLE Object:
Picture (Device Independent Bitmap) >> 


---
This email is free from viruses and malware because avast! Antivirus protection is active.
http://www.avast.com
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: winmail.dat
Type: application/ms-tnef
Size: 11026 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://mailman.fsr.com/pipermail/clc-discussion/attachments/20140603/1510f8e5/winmail.dat>