Need a book? Engineering books recommendations...
Fwd: Re: Inspection and the Engineer[Subject Prev][Subject Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
- To: wai(--nospam--at)euken.com
- Subject: Fwd: Re: Inspection and the Engineer
- From: rlewis(--nospam--at)techteam.org (Richard Lewis)
- Date: 04 Aug 1997 15:44:27 GMT
At 12:37 PM 3/16/97 -0500, you wrote: >In a message dated 97-03-15 22:11:34 EST, sandyp(--nospam--at)spasic.com (Sandy Pringle) >writes: > >>However, Special Inspection firm accreditation will clearly establish a >>quality system that takes into consideration many elements of Special >>Inspection, only one of which is the qualification of Special Inspectors > > Sandy, what is the difference between what you are describing and what >is used in Northern CA? I forget the specifics now but that group had a booth >at the SEAOC convention in Hawaii and they seemed to describe something >similar. If it works up North, why not extend it statewide instead of >creating a whole new system? ( i imagine there is a reason that you will give >me an education on ). Thanks. > > Tom Harris, SE Hi Tom, The area addressed is different. I believe that the No. Cal system is very similar to the RSIA (Regional Special Inspection Authority) program which is trying to get off the ground in the Basin Chapter cities and addresses the actual licensing of the individual Inspectors. These systems go a long way and accomplish a great deal. The No Cal system, however is sponsored by the Test Labs and that creates a conflict of interest as I said in a previous post which is (I believe) not insurmountable providing some guidelines can be established and adhered to through a verification system as established in a quality manual. ICBOES has established criteria documents for the development of a Quality Manuals, Quality Programs, and Quality Assurance firm accreditation (except Special Inspection at this moment) and for Test Lab accreditation. Inspection is NOT part of Test Lab accreditation as has been erroneously assumed. The Inspection part of Test Labs does require some thought, but I believe it can work that a Test lab can be accredited both as a Test Lab and as an Inspection Body. Our efforts are to establish the existence of criteria for accreditation of Inspection Bodies in Special Inspection. ASTM E329-95c does just that for Test Labs or Inspection Bodies in testing and inspection of construction materials. (Note that the Standards community is trying to conform with the Europeans and call such an organization an Inspection Body rather than an Inspection Agency which has Municipal connotations although in my posts I refer to Inspection firms so not to have confused the issue). The Inspection Body will use whatever criteria is established for the actual licensing of the individual Inspectors and will require they each carry and maintain licenses as is accepted in the jurisdication in which the inspection is to be performed. Of course an Inspection Body will also have a Quality Program to augment, reinforce and support the continuing education of Inspectors as well as many other issues mentioned in the previous post. We embrace the concept of uniformity in Inspector competency requirements as is established by either the No. Cal system or the RSIA program. Both are great ideas founded to meet serious needs. Many municipalities don't have funding to establish and administer Special Inspector programs and they can now require the Inspector maintain a universal type license. I don't think ICBOES wants to be in the business of licensing individual Inspectors, so it would be up to each municipality to adopt a program they are comfortable with. As I understand it, here is little or no cost to the Building Official for the RSIA program as it is supported by licensing fees charged to the Inspector. The RSIA program includes some monitoring. There are problems within each of these programs, but if cooler heads can prevail, we have the possibility of an excellant additional step towards quality assurance. Administration funding and control are the main issues of contention, not surprisingly. There does need to be the allowance for the independent Inspector to be able to work as an accredited Inspection Body without association with any other company and that is possible providing all the criteria of the accreditation of an Inspection Body are met as is, for example, in ASTM E329-95c. Bottom line is that although both programs address Special Inspection, one is for the individual Inspector's licensing and the other is for the Inspection Body which employs those Inspectors. Sorry for the verbosity. I hope I've clarified the issues. R. Sandy Pringle Sandy Pringle & Associates sandyp(--nospam--at)spasic.com STRUCTURAL INSPECTION CONSULTANTS http://www.beachnet.com/~sandyp/index.htm (800)598-1970 Fax(310)376-5294 Hermosa Beach & Redondo Beach, CA Be the master of your will and the slave of your conscience. --- Internet Message Header Follows --- Received: from server1.seaoc.org (bqe.com [188.8.131.52]) by host1.texramp.net (8.8.5/8.8.5) with SMTP id NAA18658 for <rlewis(--nospam--at)techteam.org>; Sun, 16 Mar 1997 13:51:43 -0600 (CST) Received: from corona.beachnet.com by server1.seaoc.org (NTList 3.02.10) id na009555; Sun, 16 Mar 1997 11:49:14 -0800 Received: from localhost (pipe1-19.beachnet.com [184.108.40.206]) by corona.beachnet.com (post.office MTA v2.0 0813 ID# 0-29736U610) with SMTP id AAA158 for <seaoc(--nospam--at)seaoc.org>; Sun, 16 Mar 1997 11:43:05 -0700 Message-Id: <220.127.116.1170316114236.362f678a(--nospam--at)mail.beachnet.com> X-Sender: seaoc-ad(--nospam--at)seaoc.org X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Pro Version 3.0 (16) To: seaoc(--nospam--at)seaoc.org From: "Sandy Pringle" <sandyp(--nospam--at)spasic.com> Subject: Re: Inspection and the Engineer Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Sun, 16 Mar 1997 11:43:05 -0700 Reply-To: seaoc(--nospam--at)seaoc.org Error-To: seaoc-ad(--nospam--at)seaoc.org X-Loop: seaoc(--nospam--at)seaoc.org X-Info: [SEAOC] Owner: seaoc-ad(--nospam--at)seaoc.org X-POP3-Rcpt: seaoc-ad(--nospam--at)seaoc.org Precedence: list X-ListMember: rlewis(--nospam--at)techteam.org [seaoc(--nospam--at)seaoc.org] __________________________________________________ Richard Lewis, P.E. Missionary TECH Team rlewis(--nospam--at)techteam.org The service mission like-minded Christian organizations may turn to for technical assistance and know-how.
- Prev by Subject: Fwd: Re: Inspection and the Engineer
- Next by Subject: Fwd: Re: Insurance
- Previous by thread: Fwd: Re: Inspection and the Engineer
- Next by thread: Fwd: Steel Frames