- Location
- Mission Viejo, CA
- Occupation
- Professional Electrical Engineer
Re: I am angry and I need to rant
In other words AHJ?s hold no liability for incompetence or ?simple? negligence (they missed something). However, as a P.E., I do hold liability for both - as do manufactures, licensed contractors, owners, operators, etc. In fact, the California Board of Registration for Engineers and Licensed Surveyors has just issued a revised set of rules for both ?Competence? and ?Negligence? as it applies to Professional Engineering.
When I present the differences between the CENELEC (European Union) and NEC versions of ?Zones? for Hazardous Locations one thing I note is the difference of the governmental field inspection function. Rather than ?inspect and enforce? as here in the US, the European model is to ?inspect and inform.?
The difference is the concept that only those with actual liability have the ?right? to require compliance to a certain standard. If there is a perceived non-compliance the inspector notifies the owner (who holds ultimate liability in any case) who then, in consultation with the engineer/contractor/equipment manufacturer/insurance underwriter, etc., determines if it is an ??alternative method where it is assured that equivalent objectives can be achieved by establishing and maintaining effective safety.? Since the inspector?s report is documented in writing there is no defense for those who carry liability. Often, of course, the inspectors concerns are accepted.
Note: A property or facility ?owner? is ALWAYS liable ? even if they are totally ignorant. Many people don?t know that. They may eventually be able to ?spread? the blame and/or get indemnification through insurance or contract; but they are the entity of first liability. The ?owner? may change from time to time too as in the instance of a ?Developer? before public sale of a property.
This is also true; however ?willfull? implies prior knowledge that what ??result[ed] from the issuance of any permit issued, or any inspection or approval made under the provisions of this Code? was wrong - or covered up after the fact. I.e., ?willful negligence? is essentially a criminal act - such as taking bribe or attempting to coerce one or attempting fraud by falsifying records to cover up a poor inspection after the fact. A poor or erroneous interpretation is not, nor is failing to recognize that an installation as non-compliant.
In other words AHJ?s hold no liability for incompetence or ?simple? negligence (they missed something). However, as a P.E., I do hold liability for both - as do manufactures, licensed contractors, owners, operators, etc. In fact, the California Board of Registration for Engineers and Licensed Surveyors has just issued a revised set of rules for both ?Competence? and ?Negligence? as it applies to Professional Engineering.
When I present the differences between the CENELEC (European Union) and NEC versions of ?Zones? for Hazardous Locations one thing I note is the difference of the governmental field inspection function. Rather than ?inspect and enforce? as here in the US, the European model is to ?inspect and inform.?
The difference is the concept that only those with actual liability have the ?right? to require compliance to a certain standard. If there is a perceived non-compliance the inspector notifies the owner (who holds ultimate liability in any case) who then, in consultation with the engineer/contractor/equipment manufacturer/insurance underwriter, etc., determines if it is an ??alternative method
Note: A property or facility ?owner? is ALWAYS liable ? even if they are totally ignorant. Many people don?t know that. They may eventually be able to ?spread? the blame and/or get indemnification through insurance or contract; but they are the entity of first liability. The ?owner? may change from time to time too as in the instance of a ?Developer? before public sale of a property.