I DON'T WANT TO APPROVE . . . 7

[bobziva]

Analyzer Building, project what I started a some time ago, provides better ventilation system and reduction of classified area from Division 2 Group B to Division 2 Group D. Building is very old with some existing equipment as "general purpose equipment" ( lighting, fans) i.e. with unclassified equipment inside hazardous classified zone.
I have to STAMP this project as P.Eng. but I am refusing.
Please your comments !

 

[TheTick]

Compulsory approval is no approval at all. A request for your approval implies a request for your judgment.

 

[patdaly]

Im with the Tick. Refuse, and DOCUMENT your refusal, just in case there are repercussions.

 

[TheTick]

I wonder if there are any possible legal repercussions for a party that is attempting to coerce an approval from a PE? A good question for your local D.A.

 

[zdas04]

If you give in, it will be your personal behind in a sling (possibly in court and in jail). You took the personal responsibility to get the PE and if you stamp the drawings You are placing your engineering judgement on the design - if someone gets blown up, You are liable. Don't stamp them if you can't live with the results.

David Simpson, PE
MuleShoe Engineering

http://www.muleshoe-eng.com

 

[bobziva]

Thank you for your comments.
That what I want to do is to approve new changes ( better ventilation system) but the risk still exists, ignition source still exists based on existing equipment not provided for classified area.
I found that existing ANALYZER BUILDING is in service, but no stamped by P.Eng. before.
IF I STAMP NEW CHANGES ( GOOD VENTILATION ) and specify that a some step risk still exists ( unproper equipment)and that I am not verifying existing situation, can I be responsible for the Potential Hazards.

Thanks.

 

[dporte17]

Remember that the fundamentals of why you have the stamp and the Engineering Act is to protect the public. If you are looking at it from a perspective of "can I be responsible" I think you are approaching it wrong.

Think of it from the perspective of "what can I do to protect the public?" If that question leads you to the conclusion that if you stamp, then the public will be unnecessarily put at risk, then the decision is clear.

At the end of the day you have to be able to know that you have done everything you could to protect the public, including possibly losing your job. That outcome is not very likely, but you have to be prepared to defend your position to that level. If there still exists an unnecessary risk it is not acceptable.

Please let us know how it turns out.

Dave

 

[patdaly]

Bobziva, though I am not a PE, If a mechanical design I am modifying appears dangerous, I am under the same responsibility to either completely revamp the design, or refuse to do the work. The Titanic would have only been marginally safer with adequate lifeboats..........

 

[RDK]

From the Ritual of the Calling of an Engineer (Canadian Iron Ring Ritual) part of the obligation is

“I will not henceforth suffer or pass, or be privy to the passing of, Bad Workmanship or Faulty Material in aught that concerns my works before men as an Engineer …”

Your duty is clear, not only should you not seal the drawing but take whatever steps are necessary to prevent this facility from being a danger to the public.

The public is defined here as everyone who may be at risk by entering the facility, whose property is at risk and includes the owners who are asking you to seal something that they may know as substandard.

Failure to take whatever necessary steps to protect the public could and rightfully should result in your PE status being in jeopardy.

I would start by documenting all the deficiencies in the project, including references to which portion of what code are violated and see where that takes you. Document every conversation you have with regarding this issue.

You will want to keep copies of this documentation in a safe place away from the workplace.

If that involves whistle blowing then start blowing. If it costs you your job then start looking for another.

You may not be an employed engineer but you will still be an engineer.




Rick Kitson MBA P.Eng

Construction Project Management
From conception to completion

http://www.kitsonengineering.com

 

[jetmaker]

bobziva brings up a really good point here.

When we stamp a modification to an existing design, we are now taking ownership of the ENTIRE design. This means the original design, any previous document/undocumented modifications, and the existing modification. This is the case unless you can demonstrate that the modification in no way alters the function/capabilities of the original design. Then you better have that well documented.

As a licensed engineer, the responsibility is on you to ensure that you have taken all reasonable steps to safeguard the public. If you think a system that interfaces with yours still presents an unacceptable risk to public safety, document this, and do not sign the drawings. If the system that interfaces with yours is still per code, then document this, and seal the drawing.

Regards,
jetmaker

 

[SB63]

I am an authority having jurisdiction and what I see in similar circumstances is that the PE will put a "cloud" on the plans around the areas that they accept responsibility and a note stating their limit of responsibility. This is also common with revisions to building plans.

 

[DRC1]

If you know a problem exists that could be serious and you approve the modifications with out adresssing the known existing problem you vry well could have some exposure. I don't know all the details of your situation, but a possible solution might be to issue an engineering reportwith your stamp that dicusses the new modifications and the remaining hazard from the existing condition. It may very well be that whoever is making the descion at the client (which may or may not be the person you think it is) does not understand that the new work will not completely address the problem. This way you have produced an honest opinion with your stamp endorsing your opinion which allows the parties to consider the situation - good and bad. It may not be what everone is looking for, but it is proably the best comprimise.It is exactly for these situations that states have license laws.
Good Luck

 

[bvi]

I agree with the last two posts. You are going to make a specific improvement, ventilation. You should have no problem stamping the drawing showing the ventilation improvements. You are also obliged to act in the interest of public safety, the highest ethical obligation of engineers. Since you have observed a safety issue, the first step would be to inform the owner of the facility that the safety issue is present. I think the suggestion that it be done in writing is appropriate. There could be appropriate subsequent steps if the owner/client does not take action, such as informing an appropriate public official, but that process becomes a rather complex ethical issue.

 

[MikeClay]

THings also depend on the jurisdiction. In Lousiana, an engineer may not stamp any work unless it is prepared under his direction. If the engineer is signing for multiple works, a summary report may be stamped if all the other work is stamped by the engineers performing the parts. However, this is not bobziva's problem

 

[BJC]

Stamping only a portion of a drawing does not limit your responsibility.
The "clouds" on a drawing only show which part you modified. Some of the work you may have to do as part of your design may require you to look at the complete system. You cannot for example do a short circut calculation without looking at the entire system. Your stamp says what you have done is safe when considered as part of the entire system.
If you discover an error it's up to you to point it out, go on record that it needs to be fixed and don't sign or stamp anything untill that fix is going to happen.
I have done exactly that when I found the utility had replaced a transformer. The availabel fault current went wany up and no one told the owner. There was no way to get around replacing a switchboard and some panels ( none of which was in the scope of what I was originally doing).
The thing to do when in doubt is apply the "Lawyer Test".
1.) You know the facillity is wrong. You burry your head in the sand and stamp the drawing.
2.) The place blows up killing several people.
3.) Assuming you have enough money to make it worth their while Lawyers will decend on you like buzzards on a dead cow.
4.) In some areas and circumstances you may face more than a civil liability, You could go to jail.

 

[rdstone]

Remember -- Once you stamp your approval -- "Its your baby" -- You will be held responsible for your actions. I have been in situations where my employment was threatened. I still kept my integrity and refused to aprove based on coercion.... Do not give in unless your willing to pay the price.

 

[profengmen]

I'm thinking more along these lines:

If you have to ask others for opinions on how to do your job, you might want to think about another line of work.

If you don't understand the role of having a PE license, then give the license up.

That's just my opinion.

 

[jcaiken]

I suggest you bounce it back at whoever identified the original problem and designed/engineered/specified the modifications as they should have identified and complied with the appropriate standards. It should be up to them to prove that they met the requirements or provide documents relating to agreed variances.

 

[ICman]

I wouldn't sign/stamp it unless ALL of the potential problems satisfied both regulatory and MY requirements. "Clouds" can be erased.

An "approved" ventilation system may create a more hazardous condition. For instance, it could pull explosive vapor across some hot, unapproved, device that wasn't exposed to (enough of) the vapor prior to the installation of the ventilation system.

I was intimidated into signing something once I didn't check thoroughly, and it came back. Luckily, I just signed it as checker, not as a PE, and it wasn't anything major. I will not take that chance again. I'd rather my job be terminated.

. . . Steve