mtlogcabin said:
Tort and negligence are not in the code and I could care less about all the liability you may or may not be exposed to. If calcs have to be done to prove the design then you are practicing engineering and no longer providing a design from the prescriptive requirements of the IRC. JMHO
When an exemption or exception exists in licensing laws, it is an exemption/exception to the licensing requirements of that chapter. In Oregon, the exemption/exception exists under both Architect law (ORS 671) and Engineer's law (ORS 672).
An exemption/exception is not required in under Engineer's law if one was only to be permitted to design prescriptively. It would only be an exemption under Architect Act (ORS 671). The exemption/exception under ORS 672 is pertinent to the context of engineer's law. OSBEELS is the SOLE entity in charge of enforcement of the Engineer's law just as OBAE is responsible for the enforcement of Architect law.
The B.O. is not in charge of those matters. I was informed by OSBEELS that SFR and other exempted buildings are exempt for the licensing requirements and preparing calcs such as structural calcs would therefore be exempt. However, OSBEELS would not want unlicensed persons referring to themselves as Engineers and in general would prefer that the term "engineering services" not be used. However, a person can provide structural calcs, and other such as they are pertinent to the designing, planning and specifications in connection with exempt buildings.
Now, read 102.2. Therefore, the B.O. shall not cause to effect to nullify any provision of federal, state and local laws in carrying out the enforcement of the building codes. In Oregon, only a local law can nullify the exemption. However, there has to be a codified local law (not a policy or rule or regulation or interpretation) to nullify a statute. Statutes are codified state laws. It takes a codified local law to nullify a codified state law. It takes a codified law trump another codified law.
It may not be in the building code but that is how laws operate.
Regulations and agency rules are always subordinate to any codified law. In essence, if you violate the exemption/exception in the statutes in carrying out the enforcement of the building codes then you are breaking the code in the process and breaking law as well.
The B.O.s here do take a reasonable approach to handling this. If the building is exempt, anyone can submit drawings and calcs. However, calcs like the drawings needs to meet the same standard as anyone else (including architects and engineers). However, if they don't meet the codes and applicable standards and fails, permit is not issued. If calcs and drawings meet code and standards and are well and properly prepared (regardless of licensure status when in connection with exempt buildings) then they will be approved. If the preparer can not reasonably prepare particular drawings and calcs then the B.O. may require a qualified RDP to prepare those portions.
That is reasonable for protection of public HSW. Failed calcs simply means permit is denied EVEN if it is stamped by an Architect or Engineer.
In the end, it doesn't matter who but the end result. The only jerks really complaining and have issues and wants to restrict the non-licensed "competitors" are licensed design professionals (architects and engineers). Mostly architects. They are the ones making all the noise because it is all about money and not really about HSW as that is all red herring.