Is a Stamp or Seal of a RDP required when you don't have a local ordinance?

[Yankee]

I'm not an engineer but I do have knowledge of the mathematical, physical and engineering sciences. I apply that knowledge in the designing, planning and specifications where the laws allows me to in the exemption provisions under the Engineering laws. I design under the exemption provisions of the architectural laws.I work within the laws and rules of the state.

Interesting, point you bring. It seems like you are leaving the calcs in the faith of the designer/architect/engineer to have done it right.

It is more than "faith" Rick, the stamped engineer or architect is liscensed.

 

[Robert Ellenberg]

I started this thread to address the requirement for an engineer's stamp and got excellent responses and then it evolved into a discussion of public officials liability and checking the DP's work--great discussion.

I have a different but related question. In many places the code uses the term "other approved". The definition of "approved" simply and clearly limits it to "acceptable to the building official". This says to me that I could have something "different", have an engineer show the calculations and stamp it and if the AHJ didn't like it--he could turn it down.

Do all of you read this the same way and if so, do you know of instances of this happening?

 

[texas transplant]

Legally, I can design and do calcs for pretty sophisticated SFRs with full-out non-prescriptive design elements.Ones that can fall into OSSC and many of the engineering standards.

Rick,

You are missing a big part of Peach's and Yankee's point. A REGISTERED DESIGN PROFESSIONAL has specific duties and liabilities under the law. And the REGISTERED DESIGN PROFESSIONAL has passed a test showing minimum competency under the law. Yes you can do calcs for SFRs legally, but how have you proved competency?

Unless it is passed on to your client as an additional fee, it is cheaper for the administration of my department to require a REGISTERED DESIGN PROFESSIONAL to do the calcs, prohibit the unlicensed designer, no matter how many calcs they provide. Bottom line is if I have to hire a RDP to review your calcs, I will either prohibit your work or make your owner pay additional fees for any reviews necessary.

 

[mtlogcabin]

This says to me that I could have something "different", have an engineer show the calculations and stamp it and if the AHJ didn't like it--he could turn it down. Do all of you read this the same way and if so, do you know of instances of this happening?

It would be extremely rare that an AHJ would turn it down because he "didn't like it" a reason would have to be given so the engineer could make changes or provide futher info.

 

[texas transplant]

I started this thread to address the requirement for an engineer's stamp and got excellent responses and then it evolved into a discussion of public officials liability and checking the DP's work--great discussion.I have a different but related question. In many places the code uses the term "other approved". The definition of "approved" simply and clearly limits it to "acceptable to the building official". This says to me that I could have something "different", have an engineer show the calculations and stamp it and if the AHJ didn't like it--he could turn it down.

Do all of you read this the same way and if so, do you know of instances of this happening?

Robert,

I have always interpeted that to mean that anything can be built as long as it can be shown it meets the spirit and intent of the code. Just because the building code wasn't written to cover that particular idea doesn't mean it is prohibited, it means you have to prove to the AHJ that it works.

I wouldn't turn something down just because I personally didn't like it. If the engineering, testing agency reports etc. says it works you better accept it. Just make sure that the design was done correctly. When in doubt send it to your own RDP for their review too. Sometimes you have to do that and its worth it, just make sure you have your fee schedule set up to allow you to pass the cost onto the permit applicant. If you turn something down that a RDP, approved testing agency or other similar group has said will work, just because you don't like it, better have your attorney on board early. There are lots of ways to build something out there that the IRC hadn't taken into account. Besides codes are several years behind technology wise when they finally go into print, considering the amount of time code development takes.

 

[Yankee]

I agree with Tt's comment. the statement is there to allow approval of other means as long as the AHJ deems them as "equal to or betteer than"

 

[RickAstoria]

Rick,You are missing a big part of Peach's and Yankee's point. A REGISTERED DESIGN PROFESSIONAL has specific duties and liabilities under the law. And the REGISTERED DESIGN PROFESSIONAL has passed a test showing minimum competency under the law. Yes you can do calcs for SFRs legally, but how have you proved competency?

Unless it is passed on to your client as an additional fee, it is cheaper for the administration of my department to require a REGISTERED DESIGN PROFESSIONAL to do the calcs, prohibit the unlicensed designer, no matter how many calcs they provide. Bottom line is if I have to hire a RDP to review your calcs, I will either prohibit your work or make your owner pay additional fees for any reviews necessary.

Then bill appropriate fees to allow for the calc review. However, I would be legally liable for the calcs I make. The calcs would be appurtenant to the design services and therefore is covered under ORS 12.135 for actions. If I don't perform to standard of care, the law allows for a very powerful provision called an injunction. A violation of an injunction is called "Contempt of Court" and that can lead to big fines and imprisonment. That is why, if you do something, do it right.

 

[texas transplant]

Actually Rick we do have a provision in our fee schedule that if the code official (me) decides that a set of plans needs to be reviewed by an outside consultant, the permit applicant has to pay the estimated fee prior to the review.

I also have a local modification in the IRC that I can require a RDP when a SFR goes beyond prescriptive design.

With that I will leave the discussion and agree to disagree with you.

 

[peach]

Hi Tex,

The IRC already has that provision; R301.1.3 "Engineered Design".

Rick, I am an engineer and would never take it upon myself to start with the RDP's assumptions and figure out if they are using the correct equations. That's why they are licensed and insured for errors and omissions. If you want their work product in your files.. good.. great even.

IF the calculations have the tiniest mistake and your (or your consultant) miss it, you are guilty of misfeasance.. which is a tort

Most jurisdictions will not make you immune from tort liability.

Buy umbrella insurance.

 

[RickAstoria]

Hi Tex,The IRC already has that provision; R301.1.3 "Engineered Design".

Rick, I am an engineer and would never take it upon myself to start with the RDP's assumptions and figure out if they are using the correct equations. That's why they are licensed and insured for errors and omissions. If you want their work product in your files.. good.. great even.

IF the calculations have the tiniest mistake and your (or your consultant) miss it, you are guilty of misfeasance.. which is a tort

Most jurisdictions will not make you immune from tort liability.

Buy umbrella insurance.

Bingo! That is why there is errors & omission insurance even for building designers.

Texas Transplant, (and Peach)

R102.2 supersedes ALL other requirements of the building codes. I will have to see it spelled out in your city or county ADOPTED ordinance (LAW). They have to go before the council and adopted.

I do have certain limited provisions within the state law of Texas. As long as I do not advertise myself as an engineer or offer the services as "engineering services" in a manner that would represent myself as an Engineer.

I have read the Texas Attorney General review of the laws that encompasses the exemption. Remember, a government employee or officer may not require something that the LAW does not prohibit. Laws have to be adopted before a public elected body and signed into law by the chief elected official of the governmental jurisdiction.

City government requires the city laws to be adopted by the City Council and signed into law by the City Mayor. In some cases, requires a public vote. State laws must adopted by the State House and Senate and signed into law by the State Governor. Departments / Agency rules or policies do not go through this very PUBLIC process. Therefore, if it isn't in your ordinance then sorry charlie.

Same can be said for anywhere. This is the way ALL government entities work. This is a legal requirement that our UNION of states have adopted and are required to abide by as long as they are part of the union known as the United States.

Peach,

Yes, if I have the tiniest mistake (or my consultant), then I (and/or my consultant) can face penalties for tort claims (such as misfeasance).

12.135 Action for damages from construction, alteration or repair of improvement to real property; “substantial completion” defined; application. (1) An action against a person by a plaintiff who is not a public body, whether in contract, tort or otherwise, arising from the person having performed the construction, alteration or repair of any improvement to real property or the supervision or inspection thereof, or from the person having furnished design, planning, surveying, architectural or engineering services for the improvement, must be commenced before the earliest of:

(a) The applicable period of limitation otherwise established by law;

(b) Ten years after substantial completion or abandonment of the construction, alteration or repair of a small commercial structure, as defined in ORS 701.005, a residential structure, as defined in ORS 701.005, or a large commercial structure, as defined in ORS 701.005, that is owned or maintained by a homeowners association, as defined in ORS 94.550, or that is owned or maintained by an association of unit owners, as defined in ORS 100.005; or

© Six years after substantial completion or abandonment of the construction, alteration or repair of a large commercial structure, as defined in ORS 701.005, other than a large commercial structure described in paragraph (b) of this subsection.

(2) An action against a person by a public body, whether in contract, tort or otherwise, arising from the person having performed the construction, alteration or repair of any improvement to real property or the supervision or inspection thereof, or from the person having furnished design, planning, surveying, architectural or engineering services for the improvement, must be commenced not more than 10 years after substantial completion or abandonment of such construction, alteration or repair of the improvement to real property.

(3) Notwithstanding subsections (1) and (2) of this section, an action against a person for the practice of architecture, as defined in ORS 671.010, the practice of landscape architecture, as defined in ORS 671.310, or the practice of engineering, as defined in ORS 672.005, to recover damages for injury to a person, property or to any interest in property, including damages for delay or economic loss, regardless of legal theory, arising out of the construction, alteration or repair of any improvement to real property shall be commenced within two years after the date the injury or damage is first discovered or in the exercise of reasonable care should have been discovered; but in any event the action shall be commenced within 10 years after substantial completion or abandonment of the construction, alteration or repair. This subsection applies to actions brought by any person or public body.

(4) For purposes of this section:

(a) “Public body” has the meaning given that term in ORS 174.109; and

(b) “Substantial completion” means the date when the contractee accepts in writing the construction, alteration or repair of the improvement to real property or any designated portion thereof as having reached that state of completion when it may be used or occupied for its intended purpose or, if there is no such written acceptance, the date of acceptance of the completed construction, alteration or repair of such improvement by the contractee.

(5) For purposes of this section, an improvement to real property shall be considered abandoned on the same date that the improvement is considered abandoned under ORS 87.045.

(6) This section:

(a) Applies to an action against a manufacturer, distributor, seller or lessor of a manufactured dwelling, as defined in ORS 446.003, or of a prefabricated structure, as defined in ORS 455.010; and

(b) Does not apply to actions against any person in actual possession and control of the improvement, as owner, tenant or otherwise, at the time such cause of action accrues. [1971 c.664 §§2,3,4; 1983 c.437 §1; 1991 c.968 §1; 2009 c.485 §3; 2009 c.715 §1]

Note: Section 3, chapter 715, Oregon Laws 2009, provides:

Sec. 3. The amendments to ORS 12.135 and 12.280 by sections 1 and 2 of this 2009 Act apply only to causes of action arising on or after the effective date of this 2009 Act [January 1, 2010]. [2009 c.715 §3]

The definition of person is well established throughout the Oregon Revised Statutes to establish a legal theory and principle of definition as well as precedents and common definition. Judicial powers can take whatever legal definition that best applies by context.

In ANY case, by no means am I immune from tort. I can do whatever the law allows me to. I am therefore liable to my actions in anything I do. We ALL are UNLESS immunity is explicitly given and to the scope of that immunity.

In Oregon, PLI / E & O insurance is not a legal requirement to have (even for an RDP), but it is something of prudence to CYA in case of any action that can and inevitably will arise.

 

[peach]

Rick,

Cite whatever state statutes you have; case law is made every day (who has the better attorney).

In ALL of the jurisdictions I have worked, the municipal attorneys have told me (without exception) that structural calculations are the single MOST damning incriminating evidence you can maintain. (In case of a structural failure, of course).

I've been in this business a few days now, so I have learned to listen to the person who will defend me.

You do whatever you want.

 

[RickAstoria]

Rick,Cite whatever state statutes you have; case law is made every day (who has the better attorney).

In ALL of the jurisdictions I have worked, the municipal attorneys have told me (without exception) that structural calculations are the single MOST damning incriminating evidence you can maintain. (In case of a structural failure, of course).

I've been in this business a few days now, so I have learned to listen to the person who will defend me.

You do whatever you want.

Yes, but the laws explicitly in Oregon, indemnifies you from the liability of the designer/architect/engineer. You are supposingly required to review all submittals required to be submitted including calcs for code violations. Of course, you are not required to engineer or perform the structural calcs. Is not reviewing the calcs in itself a misfeasance or malfeasance? When I or my consultant performs the calcs, we have utmost liability. You merely need to make sure the calcs derive to result that leads to a code compliant specification. How do you know the beam was properly sized? Do you? If the calcs aren't reviewed then we might have a problematic scenario.

That is what I am worried about not just for myself but for others. A safety net that is full of holes. I would have to assume that we must have some sort of faith at this point that the preparer has done it right. Now, maybe I don't have a whole lot of personal faith in a sheet of paper with a number and a rubber stamp. Just because they are licensed does not mean they are incapable of error. It might be me.

Lets remember this, case law ruling may not be contrary to a statutory law. In general and history, statutes are case rulings that typically have been codified. When it is codified into a statute then it is absolute to how it is written. A Judge can not ignore the statutes. They can make decisions when the area is a grey area but when a statute is clear and a person is found in clear violation then there is no maybes.

vox fatur pro ipsum. - The word speaks for itself.

 

[RickAstoria]

lex est lex. - The Law is the Law.

 

[texas transplant]

Hi Tex,The IRC already has that provision; R301.1.3 "Engineered Design".

Thanks Peach,

I know that section is there, our City Attorney made a couple of small tweaks to make it blend better with the state professional regulation laws and make sure we had (in his opinion) the proper authority to require engineering on the SFRs we needed to.

We are still dealing with the attitude down here, that anybody is smart enough to build and design SFRs (no matter how big and complicated), and it had led to some problems, before I was here, that I have had to clean up. Like you said, I want the attorney to be happy happy happy with the way the ordinances are written and the way we interput the state statutes. Here if I get called on the carpet, the council asks the attorney if I did it right, if the attorney agrees with me, problem goes away, period.

Thanks for the heads up though. I like it when people don't assume I know something, cause I know I still have a lot to learn, even after doing this for so long.

 

[RickAstoria]

Thanks Peach, I know that section is there, our City Attorney made a couple of small tweaks to make it blend better with the state professional regulation laws and make sure we had (in his opinion) the proper authority to require engineering on the SFRs we needed to.

We are still dealing with the attitude down here, that anybody is smart enough to build and design SFRs (no matter how big and complicated), and it had led to some problems, before I was here, that I have had to clean up. Like you said, I want the attorney to be happy happy happy with the way the ordinances are written and the way we interput the state statutes. Here if I get called on the carpet, the council asks the attorney if I did it right, if the attorney agrees with me, problem goes away, period.

Thanks for the heads up though. I like it when people don't assume I know something, cause I know I still have a lot to learn, even after doing this for so long.

Anybody is smart enough to do anything. The real question is - did they take the time to learn what they need to learn before doing. Like learning the engineering sciences before using the knowledge of the engineering sciences.

 

[peach]

Had a PE "design" an addition using 2x4 SPF rafters.. I asked him for an affidavit that he had done the calculations.. he submitted "revised" plans showing 2 x 8 rafters (which happened to be within the prescriptive code for the span involved). (He was infact an electrical engineer who sold his seal, and we knew it).

It was his license on the line, not mine or the city's. I just asked a question and BINGO.. the design changed (to the point that an engineered design was no longer required).

I don't need to see calculations to know that it's not going to work... unless they were using brazilian mahogony or someother exotic species.. then I'd ask for the affidavit anyway, since the exotic species are not included in the NDS tables.

 

[RickAstoria]

Had a PE "design" an addition using 2x4 SPF rafters.. I asked him for an affidavit that he had done the calculations.. he submitted "revised" plans showing 2 x 8 rafters (which happened to be within the prescriptive code for the span involved). (He was infact an electrical engineer who sold his seal, and we knew it).It was his license on the line, not mine or the city's. I just asked a question and BINGO.. the design changed (to the point that an engineered design was no longer required).

I don't need to see calculations to know that it's not going to work... unless they were using brazilian mahogony or someother exotic species.. then I'd ask for the affidavit anyway, since the exotic species are not included in the NDS tables.

I can always show you the tables from various sources.

I can run span calcs based on general wood properties of Ipe. In general rule of thumb, in case of Ipe, I would run it the same spans as douglas fir. Ipe (for example) has a Modulus of elasticity of 3.14 Million. This is darn near twice that of #3 grade Douglas Fir. In general, it is generally safe to run Ipe across the same span as Douglas Fir because all the properties are equal to or greater then Douglas Fir or even Spruce because it is one of the strongest wood species on the planet. That is the only species of exotic wood that I would use from structural members. Most other exotic wood would be for finish decking and flooring. Ipe comes from big trees and therefore could be available in large sections but it can get quite expensive.

 

[RickAstoria]

OR I will use these values for a basis.

http://www.ipe-wood.com/tech.html.htm

 

[peach]

I understand all that, Rick.. I don't do plan review (which is where these issues get flushed out)... although I was a plan reviewer for many years.

Require what you want.

 

[RickAstoria]

I understand all that, Rick.. I don't do plan review (which is where these issues get flushed out)... although I was a plan reviewer for many years.Require what you want.

Are you not a Building Official ?

It is your duty if you don't have have a separate dedicated plan reviewer.

 

[Yankee]

Are you not a Building Official ?It is your duty if you don't have have a separate dedicated plan reviewer.

Boy is this ever getting tiresome. Rick, I am tuning you out.

 

[peach]

PM from another contributor on this forum:

Peach

I finally got with the city attorney about asking for structural calculations just for the file and not reviewing them. He basically stated what your position is. Don't ask for them unless we are going to have an outside peer review done and even then we will not have a copy of the calculations kept on file just a report from the one doing the peer review. The city realizes on the expertise of the engineers for the design.

CONSTRUCTION DOCUMENTS. Written, graphic and pictorial documents prepared or assembled for describing the design, location and physical characteristics of the elements of a project necessary for obtaining a building permit.

His opinion is calculations do not "describe" the design they are used to achieve the structural, mechanical or electrical design therefore our review would be limited to verifying the design loads required for our area and are there enough information on the drawings that the contractor knows what is required. Similar to a mech or electrical design we do not review the design just the installation requirements for the products used.

Thanks for your persistance on this subject and trying to educate the rest of us.

 

[Mark K]

Peach

I believe that this attorneys opinion is not universally accepted and such recommended practices are at odds with the practice in many jurisdictions. Effectively he is promoting self certification. This practice has contributed to a number of the problems they are having in NYC.

In previous communication with ICC staff I have been informed that they consider calculations to be part of the construction documents. I suggest you contact ICC staff for clarification as to their opinion on the need for the structural engineer to submit calculations and on the building officials need to review these calculations.

You might also look in the ICC Plan Review Manual or "Building Department Administration" also by ICC.

 

[Uncle Bob]

First;

"Is a Stamp or Seal of a RDP required when you don't have a local ordinance?"; I believe was answered several pages back, So;

I shall enter the fray of whether the AHJ's Department of Building Safety; is required to review any calculations:

As far as some ICC staffer's opinion is conserned; the ICC emphatically informs us that their staff's opinions are just that, their personal opinions.

Quote from the ICC website conserning Staff Code Opinions:

"Staff code opinions issued by ICC technical staff do not represent the official position of the International Code Council. The final authority of code opinions is the responsibility of the code official. Staff opinion is not intended to influence the code official."

The vast majority of AHJ's Building Officials do not have a staff that is qualified to review an Engineer's calculations; nor, the funds to pay a third party Engineer to review them; and Do Not review them.

There is nothing in the Building Codes that require the Building Official to review any calculations.

"2009 IRC, Section R106 Construction Documents:

R106.1 Submittal Documents. Submittal documents consisting of consturction documents, and other data shall be submitted in two or more sets with each application for a permit. The construction documents, shall be prepared by a registered design professional where required by the statutes of the jurisdiction in which the project is to be constructed. Where special conditions exist, the building official is authorized to require additional construction documents to be prepared by a registered design professional.

Exception: The building official is authorized to waive the submission of constuction documents and other data not required to be prepared by a registered design professional if it is found that the nature of the work applied for is such that reviewing the construction doccuments is not necessary to obtain compliance with this code.

R106.1.1 Information on construction documents. Construction document shall be drawn upon suitable material. Electronic media documents are permitted to be submitted when approved by the building official. Construction documents shall be of sufficient clarity to indicate the location, nature and extent of the work proposed and show in detail that it will conform to the provisions of this code and relevant laws, ordinances, rules, and regulations, as determined by the building official. Where required by the building official, all braced wall lines, shall be identified on the constuction documents and all pertinent information including, but not limited to, bracing menthods, location and length of brace wall panels, foundation requirement of braced wall panels at top and bottom shall be provided."

The 2009 IBC, Section 107 Submittal Documents; reads basically the same.

There is nothing in the Building Codes that require the Building Official to review any calculations.



Uncle Bob