Signing and Sealing Drawings Prepared by Others 8

[Strengi]

I have a client that has inquired if I would be interested in signing and sealing drawings prepared by a steel fabricator. As part of the process, I would review these drawings, make any necessary comments or markups, and then review the revised set. I realize that as a professional engineer I can't sign and seal documents prepared by others, or documents that weren't prepared under my supervision, but is there any possible way I could help my client out, perhaps by writing a signed and sealed supplementary letter? Any help of previous experiences would be greatly appreciated - thanks in advance.

 

[JAE]

Strengi,

This does pop up now and then. I've had it happen to me and here are a few thoughts on the matter:

1. Consider calling your Engineering board to discuss what sort of efforts, etc. would be required. Many times the board appreciates you visiting with them on this...very up front and they can sometimes provide good feedback that is consistent with your area's laws.

2. I would always keep in mind the engineer's "primary directive" - Public Safety and Welfare - in whatever course you take.

3. I normally consider the effort to check someone else's work via a thorough and "legal" review as almost as much effort as doing it myself the first time. You should go through ALL the necessary calculations yourself and verify all the details, notes, specifications, etc. So in the end you perhaps save 10% of the effort of developing the concept or framing - the rest should be (must be?) repeated by you.

4. Consider this aspect: The reason so many engineering laws are written with the terms "direct supervision" is to encourage people to rely on engineers and the value we bring to a project. The more we engineers help the clients out by doing reviews instead of [red]getting hired in the first place to do the work[/red] the more we engineers will get left in the wake of life.

 

[hokie66]

Excellent advice by JAE.

 

[theonlynamenottaken]

I second that. This is why JAE is at the top of the list on the right of my screen...

 

[dgkhan]

I gave one more star to JAE. I think we as engineers should take care of clients, projects and other fellow engineers too. By the way JAE, it happened to me that I ended up spending 110% of time in reviewing, contrary to if I were to design from beginning.

 

[MiketheEngineer]

Excellent advice by JAE.

I have done this many times BUT - I get involved w/ the project upfront, do the calcs and have their draftsmen draw it for my review and incorporate any changes required.

These drawings are under my supervision because I did the calcs and can order any changes necessary before I seal.

Kind of like a "real" office but with a remote drafter.

 

[JStephen]

First, check your state rules. Some states specifically allow this. Many states specifically prohibit this. You might consider whether the originator is already in violation of rules anyway.

Generally, I don't think it would be objectionable to review drawings and calcs done by others and write a letter stating your findings. However, most of the time, if sealed drawings or calcs are required, then a letter stating they were reviewed won't be adequate anyway.

 

[youngstructural]

Excellent, well-written post. Another star for JAE.

Cheers,

YS

B.Eng (Carleton)
Working in New Zealand, thinking of my snow covered home...

 

[Strengi]

Thank you all for your input, especially JAE. It's engineers like you who give us all the reputation we deserve.

 

[SlideRuleEra]

JAE, I had never considered your Item #4; excellent point. Kudos!

http://www.SlideRuleEra.net

http://www.VacuumTubeEra.net

 

[RobertEIT]

I totally agree with JAE's oppinion. But now there is another very common senario, in which the review of a structural design by other engineer becomes a must. Here is one senario: "a structural product (say a steel building) by a manufacturer in state "A" sold to State "B", State "C"..... State "Z", as it is impossible for the structural engineer of that manufacturer to have registered in all of those States, so the manufacturer has to find a structural engineer in those States to review the design and get stamped and sealed. What is you guys thoughts on this senario?

 

[SlideRuleEra]

RobertEIT - Getting licensed in multiple states is not unreasonable. I have worked with plans for manufactured buildings that were sealed by an Engineer that was licensed in several dozen. JAE is licensed in 20 states.

The foundations for a building can be somewhat "tricky", since they are site specific. Many building manufacturer's specifically exclude the foundation for that reason.

http://www.SlideRuleEra.net

http://www.VacuumTubeEra.net

 

[JAE]

Robert.

I'd say the Metal Building Co. would want to pursue this in a couple of ways. One would be to attempt to get licensed in as many states as possible where they do business.

Second, if it is "impossible" to do so (I know an architect licensed in 50 states plus Canada plus a few other areas) then they could conceivably get engineers lined up in the other states and establish some sort of design/quality/review process that would be part of their normal operating procedures.

This process would have to satisfy both the engineer taking the responsibility as well as that state's board of engineers.

It would be interesting to know how some of these pre-engineered folks actually do it....or maybe it would be scary to know...

 

[dcredskins]

I agree with MiketheEngineer. This is what we do in east-coast. I have done it so many times.

 

[JStephen]

Robert, the preferred approach is to get licensed in multiple states. This is not especially difficult, certainly not impossible, although there can be some challenges. Check into the NCEES Council Record program which simplifies this. You do wind up with an investment in PE renewal fees, corporate licenses, etc. I think I'm licensed in 19 states right now, working on a couple more.

 

[BigH]

Gents - the ideal way is to have one national license where states such as California (seismic) or Alaska (permafrost) or Florida/SC/LA/GA (hurricane) can add caveats that require the additional designation specific to that state - but only under controlled circumstances and situations. It is riduculous, in my view, that one has to be licensed in 50 states or in 10 provinces, etc. A Chartered Engineer (UK) doesn't have to have (to my knowledge) special licenses for Scotland, England, Wales, Northern Ireland. Let's see, avg $50/state x 50 states = $2500/yr out of your personal pocket, mmmmmm. (okay, some companies might pay but some would only pay for the province/state in which you live and are stationed).

 

[hokie66]

But, BigH, that is why all 50 states want their own bite of the cherry. Just another tax. You are absolutely correct, of course, but try selling it.

 

[JAE]

BigH,

This has more to do with the Federal system than a money grab. To have a national license would violate the US Constitution. At least that's what I've heard described by many engineers over the years.

 

[MiketheEngineer]

AND its not usually $50. I think the TN license is $200 and the USE TAX (COA) is like $400. THEY call it a USE TAX!! I least they are upfront about it.

Many states are at least $100 or more per year. And I am registered in 43 states.

 

[JStephen]

I think that's a Professional Privilege Tax in TN.

As to the "tax" idea for these licenses- that comes up largely in the corporate certificates of authority, which in most cases don't accomplish anything other than raising revenue.