1. In this particular case, the board seems to be implying that it is acceptable for the new engineer to make changes to the original plan set, changes necessitated by any comments of the local jurisdiction. To me, this would constitute a new set of documents that would have to be stamped by the new engineer. If the original documents were approved with no changes, no worries, but I hardly think that will happen.
2. The board, and it looks like the reviewing agency, missed the point that the entire project will have to be redesigned under a newer code edition considering the 5 year time lapse. This also would predicate a new set of documents and a stamp by the new engineer.
3. I also think the legal issue of who is the "Engineer of Record" in this circumstance, a critical issue for the reviewing agency, was not addressed by the board. The board only mentioned at the construction phase as the involvement of the new engineer... Seems nebulous to me as to who the ultimate project engineer of record is in this circumstance.
Mike McCann, PE, SE (WA)