Responses to Encap's post:
You did not mention whether this project involved a public entity but I sense that you're actually talking about a private project.
In fact, this is a public project, paid for with public funds.
First of all there is no legal requirement in any state in the United States dictating that a PE stamp be used on any NON-PUBLIC projects;
I'm not sure what you categorize as "non-public" projects, and I can't speak to what is required in your state, but in Pennsylvania, every commercial building construction project must have a building permit along with construction documents. The UCC was adopted in PA by law. Section 403.42a(b) of the Pennsylvania Uniform Construction Code states:
"A licensed architect or licensed professional engineer shall prepare the construction documents under the Architects Licensure Law or the Engineer, Land Surveyor and Geologist Registration Law. An unlicensed person may prepare design documents for the remodeling or alteration of a building if there is no compensation and the remodeling does not relate to additions to the building or changes to the building's structure."
I have not seen a building code official accept an unsealed set of documents since PA adopted the UCC.
therefore, the fact that this person's license expired 8 years earlier is a moot point!
Anyone who claims to be a registered PE in Pennsylvania without a current registration is in violation of PA state law….period. Please read the countless posts above.
Also, you don't need a proprietary system to have it's calculations and drawings signed off by a registered PE anymore than you need a non-proprietary system to be signed off (it's not an issue)
In this case, the Contract documents very specifically required this system be designed under the supervision of a legally registered professional engineer, signed and sealed. In your opinion, perhaps I didn't "need" to do this. But I chose to include this requirement; therefore it was contractually required to be provided. And representing himself to be a licensed engineer is an issue, regardless of whether it was required or not. Anyone who claims to be a registered PE in Pennsylvania without a current registration is in violation of PA state law….period
To be perfectly blunt, a PE stamp is really just "window dressing" when you really think about it.
I think the respect you have for the profession is pretty clear here.
Only a very small percentage of the engineers ever employed in this country (or anywhere else) actually possess a PE stamp.
Without a doubt, there are countless, competent, non-registered individuals performing engineering design work throughout the world. However, to be done legally in PA, it must be done under the supervision of a registered professional.
If a PE stamp was required everytime construction plans were issued, this country would come to a screeching halt. No new hotels, no new refineries, no new sport stadiums, etc.
Based on some earlier remarks about "industrial exceptions", I can't speak to the refineries. But I would be interested if you could cite any documentation about any specific sports stadiums or hotels within the U.S. that you believe haven't been designed under the supervision of registered professionals.
FYI: The vast majority of PE licenses are held by public servant Civil Engineers who work for the city , state, and federal highway departments. (The fact is they could contract out to private firms with few or no PEs and the quality would be just as good and everything would probably be cheaper too)
Another impressive statement of fact; I would be interested if you can reference any published statistical data that supports your "facts" rather then presenting your opinions as fact.
Finally, yes it's true that you can't put "Professional Engineer" on your business card, stationary, etc.
Obviously one can; The drawings I received were sealed! The question is, will the state registration board enforce the state law?
I have never heard of anyone getting in trouble for putting Mechanical Engineer on their card or referring to themselves as such.
I agree. But in PA, as well as other states noted from other's posts, the state laws says otherwise. So it's still just a matter of enforcement.
As I said before, my objection isn't really with the use of the title of "engineer". It is with unlicensed individuals representing themselves to be PE's. The whole topic of the "title" came up in ElecEng's post on 2/20. My response was simply to cite what is written as the state law. If that is being "holier than though", than so be it.
![[2thumbsup]](/data/assets/smilies/2thumbsup.gif "[2thumbsup] [2thumbsup]")
)