Using another engineers drawings

[jimtheengineer10]

I have been asked to prepared an as-built set of plans for a subdivision which included water and sewer installation. The company I used to work for prepared the subdivision/water/sewer drawings. The town is requiring the details on the as-built plans to match what was originally submitted. The owner would like me to prepare the drawings because my fee is less than the other engineer. It is acceptable for the owner to request the CAD files from the other engineer and then forward them to me to have me include them on my title block and have me stamp them?

 

[sam74]

In a jurisdiction I previously worked in the City Engineering Dept. required stamped as-built drawings and calculations to certify that the plans would function as originally designed. Chances are things were not built exactly as designed. Those items would need to be adjusted to reflect that on the as-built drawings and calculations.

Most times drainage items in particular are not built correctly. As a part of the as-built certification the as-built elevations and volumes of say detention ponds and associated inlet and outlet structures that are not built correctly could adversely effect the drainage calculations. Also since detention ponds are often designed with rather tight tolerances these small changes can effect the drainage calculations and results.

The contractor who built these items in this jurisdiction was required to put up a construction bond prior to beginning the project. If the drainage calculations and results could not be reproduced with the as-built numbers the contractor had the option to fix the problems so the calculations would reflect conformance with design intent therefore allowing me or whoever to stamp a statement saying so or they could forfeit their construction bond and the jurisdiction would use the bond to pay someone else to fix the items until it could be certified.

 

[jimtheengineer10]

The town wants as-built drawings of a roadway that has already been constructed and the water/sewer lines and details. There is a site plan showing the location of the road and water/sewer lines. There are also profiles. There were some changes during construction, such as hydrants moved, culverts moved, etc. The town basically wants the original drawings to be modified to reflect what was actually constructed. Is it acceptable for me to use the CAD files the owner gave me to prepare the as-built drawings? Basically move the hydrants, culverts, etc. to the correct location? If so should I keep their title block information on the plans? Should I add my title block or not?

I have my own details for water/sewer line trenches, shutoffs, catch basins, etc. that contain the same information but are obviously drawn different and have some different notes. However, the town said they want the as-builts to include the exact details shown on the design plans which is the details the other firm prepared. Same question as above, should I just leave their title block on the plans? Should I include my title block?

My client has made it clear that he likes the work the other firm does but doesn't like their fees. He wants to build a working relationship with me, which is why he asked me to do the as-built drawings.

 

[JAE]

should I just leave their title block on the plans? Should I include my title block?

Yes - leave their title block - they were the engineer of record.
No - don't use your title block as a replacement for the original. You can, and probably should, identify you or your firm as the preparer of the as-builts in a boxed in note on the plans.

Is it acceptable for me to use the CAD files the owner gave me to prepare the as-built drawings?

Yes - if given to you by the client/owner as long as you don't re-engineer anything and only use it to incorporate the as-built information given.

The only unethical thing about this would be if you had approached the client and convinced them to use you instead of the other firm when it was their project to begin with.
If the client approached you then I think it is OK ethically.



Check out Eng-Tips Forum's Policies here:
faq731-376

 

[sam74]

I see, unfortunately I know not of the legal aspects personally. I know when the City Engineering Dept. began asking for these stamped as-built drawings the firm I worked for had questions about asking our engineer to certify/stamp basically a licensed surveyors work and who ever updated the drawings to reflect as-built conditions. We never had the issue with having to certify another firms design work on a constructed product. Although I don't see a problem with it necessarily if a thorough review of calculations is completed as well.

I believe we got the City to allow us to update the design drawings with as-built info but not stamped as a normal design drawing would be. There was a stamped letter involved after review that the as-built info reflected on the as-built drawings was in conformance with the design intent which was verified by updating calculations with as-built info. And there might have actually been a statement stamped on the drawings reflecting that the drawings were reviewed and conformed to the original design intent with the reviewing engineers stamp and signature. Any calcs originally submitted with the drawings would have to be resubmitted with updated info to actually back up the stamped statement. I know that in my case water and sewer review/calcs were not submitted to the City but to a public utility. So only storm calculations mattered to my submittal with the city which I know varies from location to location.

But, unless you or your representative was onsite during construction I don't see it as feasible to be certifying details of what was built for below grade construction that is not readily accessible.

If the original submittal to the Town included water and sewer plans and even calculations I would certainly try to verify sewer minimum slopes and pipe sizes were met. I'm not sure water items could be verified unless you were onsite to verify installed pipe sizes. You might also consider updating any calculations associated with water and sewer if they were submitted and approved by the Town originally.

If the town you are working for owns the CAD drawings then I would think they could do what they wanted to with them. I wouldn't see a problem with updating what they give you with your title block but I'm not a lawyer. But I would want to verify that the calculations were still reflective of the original design intent. To me that would essentially put you in responsible charge of that as-built work verification but that might also be a lot more verification than you planned on when you gave them your price for the work.

 

[zelgar]

I would suggest you contact a lawyer before you commit yourself to this project. Being in direct completion with your former employer over a project they've worked on (and are still competing against you) can get messy. Add into the situation with the drawings, a lawyer could give you better advice than other engineers in this forum. Finally, even if what you're planning on doing is legal & ethical, do you want to risk having to defend yourself for keeping your PE license over this project? Even if they can't win, it is possible that your former employer or the EOR may file a complaint against you to your State Licensing Board. I realize I'm stating the worst case scenario, but is this project worth putting your PE license in jeopardy?

 

[MikeHalloran]

I don't see how you can ethically stamp an 'as-built' drawing that shows anything you can't directly observe without excavation or disassembly. Even if you are the EOR, you don't know what liberties were taken with stuff you can't see.

Stamping a plan amounts to saying, "If you build it like my plans and details, it will work as it should; I bet my house on it". That's not the same thing as stamping an as-built, which amounts to betting your house on some contractor's work, even if you can't see what the contractor actually did.



That's my outside perspective; most of my work has been in manufacturing, where the product as built had damn well better look exactly like the design documents say it should.


Mike Halloran
Pembroke Pines, FL, USA

 

[TenPenny]

"As an ethical question, the answer is an undeniably "NO". The company you previously worked for did the drawings. For anyone who has answered "Yes", how would you like another engineer to make a copy of your design drawings, and indicate they are the "AS-Built" drawings, sign and stamp them?"

I missed the part where someone was going to simply claim these drawings were as-built. I understood the idea was to use them as the starting point for the as-builts, in order to make them similar and easy to compare.

You'd have to be crazy to plan on starting from scratch to do as-built drawings, unless what was built bore no resemblance in any way to what was designed. In my opinion.

 

[msquared48]

Mike H brings up a good point about saying things were built a certain way when you physically cannot see the details. You NEVER take responsibility for anything that you have not personally seen.

Even pictures taken by the contractor can be problematical as you are trusting certain factets here, when you should have direct observation.

This is really an exercise in futility without continuous review and documentation during construction by you.

Mike McCann, PE, SE (WA)

 

[JStephen]

I will point out that I have seen a number of disciplinary actions where engineers certified "as-built" drawings when it really wasn't built that way. So if you weren't out there measuring stuff and observing, be very cautious about stamping it as an "as-built" drawing.

The rest of it sounds squirrely to me. I want to buy a Ford, but I don't like what Ford charges for it. So I'm going to get Ford to give it to you for free, and then you're going to sell it to me for half-price. Or am I missing something there?

 

[JNieman]

Throwing my two cents in - we never stamped as-built drawings. We did go and gather information first-hand, including surveying and measuring, but it was not stamped. They were supplemental documents.

 

[nonplussed]

When a contractor decides to switch engineering companies mid way through a project saying that the fees were too high that's usually code for "I can't afford to pay my invoices and am switching firms to avoid paying off debt".

That being said, you need permission, either directly or through your client, to use and make money from the cad files otherwise you may be in breach of copyright law.

 

[Ron]

Using another engineer's drawings is rarely cost effective if you follow the rules of most states for doing so. You have to validate what's on the drawings and document that....so if your typical drawings show that you selected a Wx by Y because you know it will work, when you use another engineer's drawings you have to now show that you went through a process to determine that and document it. Depending solely on engineering judgment to validate another engineer's drawings is risky on two levels....law and liability.

 

[urgross]

Just curious, but did the construction contractor have a requirement in his contract to maintain redlines on site?

 

[BUGGAR]

If the drawings are in the "cloud", then.......................I don't think that's been solved in court, yet.

Look at your agreement when you signed up for the cloud.

 

[beej67]

FWIW, the limit of liability on copyright infringement is the amount of profit (not revenue, profit) you make from the job. So unless the drawings are filed with the Library of Congress, they're probably not going to come at you with a copyright claim. They might come at you with an ethics claim if they get pissed off, though.

If you want to be very clear about the ownership of the design, you could take their drawings, scan them, and then redline the differences by hand. That will make it very clear the difference between your contribution and their contribution to the set of drawings. Copyright is basically about representing someone else's work as yours.

Fun story - I was in a court case once, where I drew up a figure critiquing another engineer's work, based of CAD that we obtained from a municipality via a legal and documented Open Records Request. My figure clearly differentiated between my linework and their linework, and was merely highlighting a critique of their work. They threatened to sue me for copyright infringement for displaying this figure in court. Then, after the hearing, they demanded that I redact my testimony or they would sue me under X and Y provision of this law or that. I asked them how they expected me to recount testimony given to the state judge under oath without being forced to confess to perjury, and they couldn't figure that one out. Whole thing went away. They were basically trying to find any dirty trick possible to scare away expert testimony.

Oh, wait, yeah, that wasn't actually a fun story at all.

Hydrology, Drainage Analysis, Flood Studies, and Complex Stormwater Litigation for Atlanta and the South East -

http://www.campbellcivil.com

 

[JAE]

Well, fun for us.


Check out Eng-Tips Forum's Policies here:
faq731-376