certifying plans?

Depends what the plans are for...

In UK anyone can draw up plans for say modifictions to your house and submit them for Building Regultion Approval.

They are quite helpful generally and may make suggestions...e.g change an iternal wall from lightweight blocks to studwork and plasterboard.

Bigger works or new build would require planning permission .. I believe that anyone can submit the plans as long as they show sufficient working calculation and detail to show it meets regulations.

There is too much of this certification of everything...

In theory I'm not supposed to mess with the house electrics or gas supply...complete tosh...I've re-wired much of it and tidied up the gas installation...(one pipe was terminated by the end being folded over a couple of times....! That was presumably done by someone 'qualified' ) The regulations are often wooly with words like 'competent individual' but then they say that the only arbiter of competence is 'GORGI'. One can be competent without being approved or certified and conversely, those who are approved and certified are not necessarilly competent.

Doubtless some will dissagree...but generally I'd trust my workmanship over any contractor. (one exception is plastering )

Del

While not doubting your competence at such tasks, I do wish to point out that if the work conducted on your gas system, that should have been done by a certified individual, is ever shown to be the cause of a failure that caused a loss of property, your insurance carrier more then likely would not cover the loss. Caution is called for.

Gee it was like that when I moved in!

I had it checked by a CORGI fitter who lives down the road...('cos Mrs Cat said so)...

It was fine...

(Before they made these rules I'd installed gas central heating in my previous hous and had it checked by Britsh Gas.

It was fine...)

<In UK anyone can draw up plans for say modifictions to your house and submit them for Building Regultion Approval.>

Correct. A building design technician or an architect will have all the current requirements at hand and may shorten the process of obtaining approval, simply by minimising the risk of rejection and re-work to drawings produced by the well-intentioned amateur. While both approaches to obtaining approval are acceptable, time and cash-flow may dictate going either down the one route or the other.

<They are quite helpful generally and may make suggestions...>

Indeed. An initial, informal, discussion with the planning office can prove a valuable time saver, and did just that in the recent extensions to the bothy.

<I believe that anyone can submit the plans as long as they show sufficient working calculation and detail to show it meets regulations.>

Correct, though for more complex shapes, for example for foundation design in difficult soils and complex geometries like the interface between Mansard and pitched roofs and open staircases, the measurements and calculations of a qualified building designer can form a valuable component of the application, and provide valuable guidance to the builder, which can save both time and cash later on in the build. In the case of the recent bothy extension works, it was an investment that paid off handsomely.

<In theory I'm not supposed to mess with the house electrics.....complete tosh....>

Correct, it is tosh, and one may still do the installation onesself, though in order to comply with Part P of the Building Regulations in the case of a new installation and extended parts of the old installation, an electrical test certificate will be required from an accredited tester. The certificate must show that both the new and extended circuits comply with the current edition of BS7671, otherwise the local authority cannot issue the Completion Certificate and the building owner will be blocked if attempting to sell the property during the Search procedure. Fortunately, even if one is not qualified onesself to self-certify in pursuit of Part P, there are a number of testing houses listed in Yellow Pages who will do it for a small fee. The recent extensions to the bothy followed this route: self-install and bought-in inspection and certification. As a strategy it worked a treat and saved a fortune!

Quite how it is possible to regulate minor alterations to domestic premises in pursuit of Part P where a planning application is not required remains a complete mystery......

Each jurisdiction, usually a state or province, will have a piece, or more then one, of legislation that has been enacted that will govern how the regulated professions conduct their business in that particular jurisdiction. Contained in the implicated legislation(s) will be all of the requirements required to be followed by anyone practicing the regulated profession.

For example...

In the Canadian territory of Nunavut, all electrical work (on both new installations and maintenance work) is done under the auspices of the "Electrical Protection Act". In that act, the requirement for plans, for electrical projects, to be submitted to the AHJ (Authority Having Jurisdiction), for the approval of the AHJ prior to the work commencing, is clearly spelled out.

Those requirements state that electrical plans for any project, except for a single family detached dwelling, must be submitted to the AHJ for approval by the AHJ. It also states that such plans having an electrical demand larger then 400 amps single phase or 200 amps three phase must be stamped by an engineer registered to practice in the territory by means of current and active membership in NAPEGG.

NAPEGG, is the professional engineering organization in our territory. The authority for NAPEGG and how it regulates the professions it controls is contained in a separate piece of legislation whose name escapes me at the moment.

The rules of NAPEGG will determine who, as in what type of engineer, may apply his stamp to a plan for a given project. Here is a link to NAPEGG's web site...

http://www.napegg.nt.ca

Each jurisdiction, at least in North America, will have similar enabling legislation in effect. You need to identify what holds sway in your particular jurisdiction and in any jurisdiction you wish to work in. Do not assume that things are the same from one jurisdiction to another, they seldom are!

Rick...

If you live in a disaster prone area (hurricanes, earthquakes, dolomite . . .) certification would be required.

Other states and countries might not be that strict.

You should contact the authorities.

In general, in the US, plans for public works, large buildings, and parts of residences (e.g., trusses) will have to be submitted for approval with the stamp and signature of a Professional Engineer. The structural engineer you mention often has a license. It tells you the person has graduated from an accredited school (ABET), that the person has put in several years at increasing responsibility under the supervision of a PE, and that the person has passed a standardized test showing knowledge. The weakness in the system is that, at least in some states, a person can get a PE in Electrical Engineering and then sign off trusses. Professional ethics is supposed to take care of that, but, well....

All this varies from state to state, but it's sort of standardized.

OK, let's focus. OP stated he was in CA, USA, not UK, or Canada.

No way Registered PE in EE discipline certifies structural plans in CA. Or for that matter, non-registered "structural engineer".

Remember, earthquakes are a concern in CA so you are not going to want the EE, even if registered to certify "outside" his discipline.

While focusing is always a good thing, the OP also asked about other jurisdictions both inside and outside the US. As such, he received answers that were "focused" on more then just California.

The legislator in CA seems to be conservative and very thorough and will surely have a system in place to minimize damage and life loss during disasters.

I think CA did indeed learn from past mistakes.

I would advise ArtbyJoe to rather follow the law / code to the letter.

In other areas not prone to disasters it woud be absurd to intoduce stringent provisions.

Requiring certification does not mean that that particular jurisdiction is "conservative". More likely, it is done to ensure that a responsible person has "signed off" on the plans. Should something go wrong, this person will be held responsible.

The backend to this system is that before becoming "registered" as a professional, the applicant has had to prove through education, experience, and sucessfully passing two 8 hour exams designed to measure competance, that said person is worthy of this license to practice.

I am speaking about the requirements in the US. Other countries may have other policies on how to hold people responsible and these systems may be superior to how it is done in US.

About 20 years ago, these tests became national meaning that individual states could no longer prepare a test that was more selective. Instead, now, NY and CA require higher grades on the exams than other states to "pass".

All states grant reciprocity to a NY or CA license meaning that once you have either of these, you have all 50 (assuming you can pony up the fees). However, the reverse is not true, NY and CA will not reciprocate a license from the other states.

You could be a non-registered professional and be more qualified than the professional, but in some jurisdictions, not able to certify the plan. Analogy: just because one has a drivers license, does not mean one is going to drive well.

Maybe the use of the word conservative is not the best but I can't think of another word. (It does not have anything to do with politics)

Our National Water Act provides for a register of approved Prof Engineers (run by the engineering council) for levels of dam safety designs. Unfortunately it is not operational yet.

There was a few failures of floors and roof structures in the past.

I think it may be due to insufficient control over designers and contractors.

I have to agree with you that registering as a PE do not always count for much. A friend of mine just never bothered to register but he will out-engineer anybody else.

There are Engineering firms throughout the US that can "wet-stamp" (apply the round signed and dated seal of their PE certification within a particular state) plans prior to their submittal to local permitting authorities. Some firms are licenced in all 50 states, meaning they have at least one member on staff that has applied for and passed licensing in each state. National firms will pass jobs to the appropriately licenced staff engineer.

In order to obtain a building permit, you do indeed need this seal in addition to all calculations that prove the structural soundness of the structure in question. These calculations have to follow guidelines set forth in the IBC (International Building Code) which is often updated yearly. Even though it's called International, it isn't truly international.

But not all professional engineers are "Professional Engineers". Only "Professional Engineers" are legally qualified to apply this stamp. It's often more of an issue of having paid the fee within a particular state, than the level of engineering competence. The wet-stamp that any particular licensed engineer is qualified to apply has a specification of which type of engineer they are state licensed as. Below their printed name, it will say CIVIL, or STRUCTURAL, etc. The permitting authority will of course not allow a state licenced electrical engineer to sign-off on a structural issue.

As far as other parts of the world, from personal experience I know that in the Caribbean Islands they use the IBC, but they, like many other areas have their own version and interpretation of it. But still even there, you must have a seal of a PE that is licenced for the individual island.

Much of this is well-known to most of us here that deal with building permitting issues, but not having that experience, perhaps this is the information you were seeking.

There are of course exceptions to every situation.

Happy New Year!

Correct. While both professionals derive a living from engineering, only the "Registered PE" can certify the plan if such certification is required. I have yet to figure out what an "amateur engineer" is, but I am quite familiar with "arm-chair quarterbacks" and "amateur radio" operators both of which I am.

Often, the engineer that did the work was acting under the direct supervision of the guy with the stamp and this is legal. It is not legal to stamp the plan unless you have carefully overseen the work.

Sigh, I am only registered in two states!

Often, the engineer that did the work was acting under the direct supervision of the guy with the stamp and this is legal.

Yes, quite often actually. Which means that the work was usually not done by a licensed engineer from that state, but that the licensed engineer is taking the responsibility for its accuracy.

Multi-state licensing can get expensive!

And if you read enough threads on CR4, at times it seems that the amateur engineers outnumber the PE's! Although I'd have to say that sometimes it doesn't matter. I'd guess that the opinions of a non-engineer (amateur) on a structural matter may be just as valid as those of a Chemical Engineer, on the same issue. IMHO

Actually, "Guest" beats them all by a large margin!

I usually talk to my "primary care physician" when I have a structural engineering problem. Watch out for registered professional surveyors pretending to be registered professional engineers and vice versa. You can no longer pretent to be both.

I seem to have stirred up a bit of a mess with my comment about "cross-engineering". I don't know about California, and I suspect most if not all states have as their intent that Professional EEs not approve trusses or water runoff. However, in at least two states that I am familiar with, the approval is left at the local level and most of those will accept any PE, including such things as Nuclear. I'm not claiming it's good, or even in the spirit of the law, but it is in fact a "loophole" in the application of the law. That was what I said.

Certainly your comments did not stir up anything; the problem is as old as time itself.

You know the saying "civil engineering is the second oldest profession", some can now guess the first.

The problem at the local level does not exist and I can explain why. The out-of-discipline "professional" has violated his code of conduct. When caught he will be disciplined. It is just that he hasn't gotten caught yet in every case.

Usually, he won't until someone gets hurt; i.e. the I35 bridge collapse and suddenly people are wondering who certified this bridge?

TVP45 ... yes, I did write "The permitting authority will of course not allow a state licenced electrical engineer to sign-off on a structural issue."

But I do agree with your statement that approval is left at the local level. Although I'm not sure that most will accept any PE, regardless of specialty. At least not in my own experience.

I won't doubt you that it happens occasionally, since there is no law that I know of to prevent it. But the local approving authorities that I personally have dealt with throughout the western US normally take a personal interest in the safety of the structures that are being erected in their own municipalities. The net of liability in cases of catastrophic failure can be cast pretty wide when something goes terribly wrong. I would think that it would be simple common sense to cover your butt by rejecting applications where the engineering has been certified in such a way.

But ... I guess the key phrase there is "common sense". That's a characteristic that is not guaranteed by any means! Yes, a loophole indeed!

I certainly did not mean that most places allow this, only that some do. And, I wonder if the big difference is between the eastern US and western US. Here in PA, outhouses have been illegal only about 20 years, and I know of some still in use.

hello everyone,

i wanted to thank all of you for your comments.

i found posts 16, 17, and 18 very good and informative. this basicly confirmed what my buddy was telling me.

so, is there a certified PE from california or NY here on this blog, that is interested in getting involved with me? this is for my thin shell structure. i am first just looking for guidence in my parameters based upon my material selections. i entend this to be an owner built with certified PE guidence.

i see this as a two stage process.

first is that because of california laws and my physical location, i am not required by law to get a building permit for my structure, as long as it is intended as owner occupied. which it is.

second: if i wanted to build for someone else, anywhere else, with my unique construction parameters, i would need to have it certified each time.

i have figured out how to build an extremly low cost structure. insulated, thin shell, with insulated slab. as of now, i have managed to get the cost down to about $15 per square foot (for cost of materials for the insulation, shell and slab only). i entend to build this myself, without the cost of hiring contractors. i do plan to hire an experienced cement finishing man to help me with the slab.

further comments appreciated.

Keep us informed of your progress

any pics?

of course we understand if you need to it under wraps

The concept of licensing is typically to provide (ambulance-chasers) and insurance companies a clear trail of blame, especially in California, I would think. (If Truth-in-Advertizing were strictly enforced, California might therefore have to change it's name to Letigia, or Welfaria, but that's another discussion...)

I am told that it used to be that a Licensed Civil Engineer, in California, could sign off for just about any kind of civil-type work. Such an engineer could sign-off for surveys, structural, water-treatment, you-name-it. But then, the (guiding lights...) changed the rules to where such a civil engineer could sign-off for, say, surveying work only if the engineer was currently up-to-snuff in that category of work, will sufficient current expertise in that area, so as to have adequate competency to actually take responsibility for the consequences. (Sort of sounds like a California Law would sound, doesn't it?) Thusly, certain California civil engineers could still sign-off for the structural aspects of a two-story building, but not all of them. In any case, if you want to build something in the way of a house, or an addition to a house, in California, the best thing you could do would be to go to the City, or County, that has the relevant jurisdiction over it, and simply ask them what they require. If it eventually comes around to a time to sell what ever you build, it will probably be worth thousands of dollars in the selling price if the work was done with all the necessary approvals. (Better do it quickly, though, before California passes any more new laws that will make the already exorbitant construction costs get even higher.)

You are all wrong. California is no different than any other state (at least in the abstract).

Civil engineering is very broad field. The term originally meant "non-military" engineer. We are now celebrating the 100th year of engineering registration in US. We have added a bunch more since then (Electrical, Mechanical, Control, etc.).

One main branch of civil engineering is structural engineering. Those having this as their specialty would have no trouble stamping a bridge plan, or steel building design, etc.

Environmental is the branch of civil that specializes in water and wastewater treatment, transmission lines, pumping stations, etc. In a large A/E firm, they would be considered "process" engineers. They would not stamp the structural plans. A structural engineer either in-house or from another firm would do so.

It is not unusual for one to get a B.S.C.E. followed by an M.S.C.E. with the M.S. in one of the sub-categories. In fact this was the rule rather than the exception at one time.

None of the above disciplines could prepare a land-plan where new lot lines or subdivisions are created. This would be done by a Registered Land Surveyor.

The category "civil" still exists. They would design the site plan, grading, drainage, etc. and probably not the bridge.

The lawyer actually does do some real work, typically when variances or non-conforming use is required to satisfy the Zoning Board and in filing the subdivision plans and lot deeds and protective land covenants.

Then there is the architect. Again, he would not be responsible for the structural calculations for obvious reasons; he had NOTHING do do with them.

All of this is spelled out very clearly at the National Council of Examiners for Engineers and Surveyors website ( http://www.ncees.org/ ). This site is quite good in bringing some clarify to the matter of who does what.

Individual state requirements may vary somewhat but must as a minimum meet the federal standards.

As stated before throughout this tread, some local boards may not be up to speed on all of this. There seems to be a growing backlash (in this thread) against those states (such as CA, NY, MA, etc.) who try to maintain the standards.

Hey, how come I can't get away with here what I got away with back in East Overshoe? Simple answer, cuz they don't have bridges yet and we do!

The regulations are going to be enforced moreso in the development zones than in the boonies.