|
|
A monthly publication from the Wisconsin Society of Professional Engineers
March 2009 Edition
WSPE's President's Corner |
|
Fellow P.E.s, As was probably to be expected, WSPE is beginning to feel the impact of the current economic downturn. Our membership renewals are falling behind historical records. As of the end of 2008, we have received $17,256 of our budgeted $58,550 in membership dues revenue. In addition, the revenue from our supporting organizations is virtually non-existent. The potential loss of revenue from these two areas will impact us at both the State and Chapter levels. Secondly, Dale Swenson has indicated that there was only one submittal for the 2009 Governor’s New Product Award program. As a result, discussion is under way regarding the cancellation of this year’s event. The next significant event for WSPE is the 2009 Discovery Conference on Thursday, April 23 in Green Bay. I have mentioned this event in past messages and want to do so again in this communication. The program is shaping up to be truly interesting and informative. The theme for the program is “Energy for Tomorrow.” The topics will include a keynote presentation by Judy Ziewacz, Director of the Wisconsin Office of Independent Energy on Governor Doyle’s 25x25 Energy Goals. In addition, there will be a variety of speakers covering next-generation biofuels, CO2 emission reduction, wind energy, and the utilization of biomass gasification at a power generating plant. Please put this conference on your calendar and plan to attend. In addition to an excellent program, we are planning a conference ice-breaker at the Titletown Brewery the night before. If you haven’t been to the brewery, it is a restaurant and brew house located in the historic Chicago & Northwestern Railroad Depot at the west end of the Nitschke Bridge in downtown Green Bay. Michael J. Lefebvre, P.E. |
|
SPONSOR |
MATHCOUNTS |
|
| The mission of MATHCOUNTS is to increase enthusiasm for and enhance achievement in middle school mathematics throughout the United States. With the generous support of all MATHCOUNTS sponsors and volunteers, and leadership of the National Society of Professional Engineers at the National Level and the Wisconsin Society of Professional Engineers at the local and state level, MATHCOUNTS is providing today’s students with the foundation for success in science, technology, engineering, and mathematics careers. MATHCOUNTS is a national enrichment, coaching and competition
program that promotes middle school mathematics achievement through
grassroots involvement in every U.S. state and territory. MATHCOUNTS offers two unique programs to middle school teachers and students: The MATHCOUNTS Competition Program and the MATHCOUNTS Club Program. The MATHCOUNTS Competition Program The MATHCOUNTS Competition Program provides the extra incentive and the perfect atmosphere for students to push themselves to achieve more in mathematics. Consisting of fun and creative problems, the MATHCOUNTS competitions have written and oral rounds, as well as individual and team components. Though challenging and non-routine, the competition problems focus on the 6th through 8th grade standards of the National Council of Teachers in Mathematics. MATHCOUNTS provides the materials for teachers and students to use as they prepare for the competition series. Participants then advance through School, Chapter and State Competitions until the final 228 students are selected from 57 states and territories to advance to the Raytheon MATHCOUNTS National Competition held each May. The National Competition adds an additional individual component called the Master's Round. The MATHCOUNTS Club Program Often referred to as the MCP, the MATHCOUNTS Club Program was introduced in 2007 for the 25th anniversary year. The MCP is a fun, challenging and FREE program aimed at engaging a wide spectrum of students. The MATHCOUNTS Club Program provides schools with the structure and activities to hold regular meetings of a math club. Depending on the level of student and teacher involvement, a school may receive a recognition plaque or banner and be entered into drawings for prizes. YOUR Role MATHCOUNTS® provides a unique opportunity for you to play an integral role in preparing students to enter the workforce equipped with enhanced mathematical skills. Individuals learn that mathematics can be a challenging, fun and rewarding activity. If you have an interest in math and enjoy working with students, MATHCOUNTS is a natural for you. Typical volunteer activities for individuals and organizations include:
Because each volunteer brings his or her special skills to the program, each MATHCOUNTS program contains a unique variety of activities that increase math awareness and bolster community support for improved math education. For instance, volunteers and sponsors have used their talents and resources to create local and state MATHCOUNTS newsletters and Web sites in other states, encouraged more girls and minority students to participate, and conducted coaching workshops. Those who volunteer for MATHCOUNTS experience the pride of being associated with an effective national program that embodies the highest values of learning and accomplishment. How Can YOU Get Involved? Coordinating your involvement through the MATHCOUNTS coordinator in your area is an important first step. Coordinators can help you identify schools to target during the back-to-school registration drive or help you select a participating school in need of coaching assistance. Your offer to assist at a local competition will also be welcomed by the competition coordinator in your area! To volunteer for the competition, identify your local MATHCOUNTS coordinator and also view posted volunteer opportunities at the MATHCOUNTS.org Web site. Even if nothing of interest is posted, contact your local coordinator so that he or she can help connect you with a rewarding volunteer opportunity whether just at the local competition, state competition or assisting a school. In Wisconsin entering the chapter competitions, we have just short of 100 schools represented, which amounts to about 640 middle schoolers. The chapter competition will reduce this to the top 24 teams and the top 36 individuals that are not on the official school teams to compete at the State competition. At the State competition the top 4 individuals will go on to represent Wisconsin at the National competition. The National Competition will be held May 7-10, 2009 at Disneyland’s Swan and Dolphin Resorts in Orlando, Florida. The Wisconsin State competition will be held March 7, 2009 at the Lowell Center on the University of Wisconsin campus on Langdon Street. VOLUNTEERS ARE NEEDED FOR ALL LEVELS OF THE COMPETITION. For further information regarding your local Chapter and State competitions please contact Norm Arendt 2009 MATHCOUNTS state Coordinator at narendt@sehinc.com. |
|
NSPE’s 2009 Milton F. Lunch Ethics Contest - Deadline 4-17-09 |
|
| All current NSPE individual members, through their NSPE state societies and NSPE chapters, (including student chapters) are invited to participate in the 2009 Milton F. Lunch Ethics Contest. Match your wits with experienced professional engineers and engineering students throughout the country! For more information about the contest (including rules and judging criteria) please click here. |
|
| SPONSOR
UWM - Six departments: Civil Engineering & Mechanics, Computer Science, Electrical Engineering, Industrial and Manufacturing Engineering, Mechanical Engineering and Materials Opportunities for full-time or part-time student to complete a graduate degree. PART-TIME GRADUATE PROGRAM 1. Best suited for working professional Visit CEAS at the Open House on April 4, 2009. For more information, please check www4.uwm.edu/CEAS
or contact bwarras@uwm.edu
|
Engineer’s Liability Exposure for the Contractor’s
Defective Construction |
|
In the March/April, 2005 edition of this e-news, I reviewed the Wisconsin Supreme Court case of Baumeister v. Automated Products, Inc., 2004 WI 148, 690 N.W.2d 1 (2004), where the Wisconsin Supreme Court held that an architect did not breach any contractual duty with regard to the installation of truss bracing as a result of not giving subcontractor employees detailed instructions on the truss bracing during construction. The Court concluded that under the AIA contract, the architect was relieved of any liability with regard to construction means or for safety precautions, and that he did not have any responsibility nor did he control the techniques chosen by the subcontractor during construction, including the use of temporary bracing while erecting trusses. In that article I also referred to a previous case, Vonasek v. Hirsch & Stevens, Inc., 65 Wis.2d 1, 221 N.W.2d 815 (1974), which presaged the Baumeister decision. Since the Vonasek case did not involve injury to contractor employees but rather a claim of defective construction, it may be helpful to professional engineers to know more about the Vonasek case. In Vonasek, the court was called upon to review whether the architect was liable to the general contractor for the collapse of joists during construction. The contractor in that case alleged that the architect had failed to comply with applicable code provisions calling for the use of cross bridging rather than horizontal bridging. However, the court relied upon expert testimony in concluding that either cross bridging or horizontal bridging was acceptable under applicable code provisions. DILHR had approved the construction plans and the administrator of DILHR’s Industrial Safety and Building Division testified that the statute requiring cross bridging was not applicable to steel joists which were as long as the ones specified in this building construction. Other expert witnesses supported that testimony. The Supreme Court held that the trial court had not erred in finding that the architect had not violated the applicable codes. The plaintiff in Vonasek then argued that the common law standard of care should be applied even though the applicable building code was met, and introduced expert testimony that in the building industry, cross bridging would have been required. The Supreme Court held that the trial court was correct in finding that the defendant had not breached any common law duty as to proper design, based on the testimony of consulting engineers who were of the opinion that the special precautions necessary when erecting long-span joists with horizontal bridging are generally known in the steel erection industry, and that if correct erection procedures were followed, horizontal bridging was as safe as cross bridging. The court also held that the architect had no duty to warn the contractor of any hazards associated with the performance of the contractor’s work. While it may seem obvious that a contractor must stand accountable for defective performance, because contractors accused of defective performance will naturally look for explanations which may extricate themselves from liability, attempts to pass the responsibility on to the professional designer can be expected. While this article is not intended to be an exhaustive discussion of potential areas of liability in the preparation of plans and specifications, some general principles can be stated:
The duty owed by the engineer or architect to the contractor will not be the same as the duty owed by the engineer or architect to the owner. The engineer or architect’s duty toward the owner arises out of the scope of work to be performed by the design professional for the owner. The contractor is expected to follow the plans and specifications unless he knows they are inadequate. If the contractor follows the plans and specifications, and the result is unacceptable, the problem would not appear to be one of defective construction. A contractor who asserts a claim against an engineer or architect based upon a theory that the professional designer had a duty to supervise the work of the contractor is destined to fail except where the engineer or architect has in fact contracted to perform such supervision service. Normally under the pre-published Standard Form of Agreement Between Owner and Engineer or Owner and Architect, the professional designer’s legal obligations in connection with observing the contractor’s work is explicitly defined as non-supervision in nature. The purpose of the engineer’s visits to the project sites, for example, under EJCDC No. E-500 (2002 edition), is to enable the engineer to better carry out the duties and responsibilities assigned to the engineer by the contract between the owner and the engineer, and not to supervise the work of the contractor. Such site visits are to permit the engineer to assess the progress and quality of the work, but not to supervise the contractor’s work in progress or to involve detailed inspections of the contractor’s work in progress. Nor does the engineer as a result of such visits have the authority to supervise, direct or control the contractor’s work, and the engineer is expressly given no authority over the contractor’s means, methods, techniques, sequences, or procedures of construction selected by the contractor, or for safety precautions and programs incident to the contractor’s work. Attorney Robert J. Kay is the senior partner in the law firm of Kay & Andersen, S.C. and devotes his time to representing professional engineers, architects, contractors, material suppliers and owners of construction projects. Please feel free to contact him at (608) 833-0077 or visit www.kayandandersen.com. |
|
| SPONSOR |
Welcome New WSPE Members |
|
The WSPE board of directors would like to extend a heartfelt welcome to the following new WSPE members:
New members contribute to the growth, strength and leadership of the WSPE in enhancing its recognition as a leading voice for Professional Engineers throughout Wisconsin and promoting excellence in engineering. |
|
