Need a book? Engineering books recommendations...

Return to index: [Subject] [Thread] [Date] [Author]

RE: Plan check submittals and shop drawings

[Subject Prev][Subject Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
There was a quote in the below copied e-mail stating the following, "He
felt
strongly that the architect is responsible for the whole building.
Engineers might approach the problem a little differently since
architects
are much more used to delegating portions of their work." 

Does that mean the Architect of record stamps and signs all the
documents including the structural sheets and calculations?  

-----Original Message-----
From: Drew A. Norman, S.E. [mailto:DNormanSE(--nospam--at)email.msn.com]
Sent: Thursday, November 05, 1998 11:46 AM
To: SEAINT List Service
Subject: Plan check submittals and shop drawings


Reviving an old string, I got an email from my buddy at California's
Department of the State Architect while I was away from the list serve
last
month (busy, busy).  It seemed to me of enough general interest to post
even
though it's a month since we were talking about the issues related to
structural engineer's of record being asked to sign and seal documents
prepared by other professionals.

Summarizing, my friend, a DSA structural engineer, spoke to Fred Hummel
(the
State Architect himself) in an attempt to clarify current thinking on
the
use of disclaimers with such counter-signatures on deferred approval
items.
To avoid risk of adding another layer of interpretation, I will quote
directly from the email I received:

"It was his [Mr. Hummel's] opinion that  the designer is responsible for
the
design of the entire building including the trusses and other
components.
He says that you cannot assume responsibility or not assume (the courts
will
do that for you...)  I pressed him a little bit on the details....  He
said
that, for trusses, he would specify the spacing, the truss type and
profile
and so on....  He would not check the calculations, but he thought that
he
would still have some responsibility for the trusses even if they failed
because of an error made by the truss designer in the calculations.  He
felt
strongly that the architect is responsible for the whole building.
Engineers might approach the problem a little differently since
architects
are much more used to delegating portions of their work.

He also suggested that we set up a meeting with Vilas Mujumdar on next
Tuesday to discuss DSA policy with regard to when the statement can be
used
and when the details of the components MUST be included on the design
drawings."

I do not know the meeting actually came off or what was
discussed/concluded.
I am sending my friend a copy of this post.  Perhaps he will enlighten
us.

For reference, Charles Greenlaw's last post on this subject (from Digest
for
10/10/98) included the following language:

"[in re] ... the issue of the Structural engineer of record having to
sign
and seal design documents prepared (and signed and sealed) by
non-subordinate PE's for component structural elements, such as
proprietary
trusses, on California public school projects covered by the state Field
Act
and administered by DSA. There has been recurring debate as to whether
...
overstamping ... is allowed by the PE Act.

"... I can't account for current DSA practices in this matter ... but I
can
fill in a little history ... [to] ... help resolve fears of conflict
among
the regulations and among the enforcing agencies at present.  I am not
aware
of any controversy lingering about SER's "overstamping" the deferred
design
submittals that are properly stamped by their originator, for DSA work
or
otherwise...."