I personally think the SFPE should have a peer review process to handle
complaints without going to the state board. Who better to caution other
engineers on matters of good engineering practice? Maybe after several
complaints to the SFPE about a particular engineer or firm the SFPE
could take the
: Thursday, February 26, 2009 8:19 AM
To: sprinklerforum@firesprinkler.org
Subject: RE: PE Registration Board Action
I personally think the SFPE should have a peer review process to handle
complaints without going to the state board. Who better to caution other
engineers on matters of good engineering
@firesprinkler.org
Subject: RE: PE Registration Board Action
I think this is an excellent idea. It allows us to not be singled out
for
retaliation, allows an independent 3rd party of peer to review the case,
and
doesn't carry the onus of legal action required for my state's complaint
form. Alas, it wouldn't
...@firesprinkler.org] On Behalf Of
Fletcher, Ron
Sent: Thursday, February 26, 2009 8:19 AM
To: sprinklerforum@firesprinkler.org
Subject: RE: PE Registration Board Action
I personally think the SFPE should have a peer review process to
handle
complaints without going to the state board. Who
-
From: sprinklerforum-boun...@firesprinkler.org
[mailto:sprinklerforum-boun...@firesprinkler.org] On Behalf Of Roland
Huggins
Sent: Thursday, February 26, 2009 11:23 AM
To: sprinklerforum@firesprinkler.org
Subject: Re: PE Registration Board Action
An outstanding idea. Unfortunately, the FL SFPE
Subject: RE: PE Registration Board Action
I personally think the SFPE should have a peer review process to handle
complaints without going to the state board. Who better to caution other
engineers on matters of good engineering practice? Maybe after several
complaints to the SFPE about a particular
AM
To: sprinklerforum@firesprinkler.org
Subject: RE: PE Registration Board Action
Ron,
The problem with this is that generally the members of SFPE and people on
forums like this who take an interest in staying abreast of the industry are
not your problem. It's been my experience
: Thursday, February 26, 2009 9:33 AM
To: sprinklerforum@firesprinkler.org
Subject: RE: PE Registration Board Action
I understand the SFPE is full of PEs, who tend to be a conservative group of
risk-averters, and its good that they are. But where's the threat if they
are simply writing
: RE: PE Registration Board Action
If I match six number I might think about making it my hobby to report the
negligent stuff to the board but so long as I am working for a living it won't
happen. I hope I didn't burn a bridge yesterday when I gave the initials of the
firm that wrote the plan
: sprinklerforum-boun...@firesprinkler.org
[mailto:sprinklerforum-boun...@firesprinkler.org] On
Behalf Of George Church
Sent: Thursday, February 26, 2009 11:33 AM
To: sprinklerforum@firesprinkler.org
Subject: RE: PE Registration Board Action
I understand the SFPE is full of PEs, who tend to be a conservative
[mailto:sprinklerforum-boun...@firesprinkler.org] On Behalf Of Ford,
Charles
Sent: Thursday, February 26, 2009 9:07 AM
To: sprinklerforum@firesprinkler.org
Subject: RE: PE Registration Board Action
I guess I gotta ask... what is/are Pelosi?
C. Burton Ford
Designer- NICET Certified: Fire Alarm,
Special Hazards
:41 AM
To: sprinklerforum@firesprinkler.org
Subject: RE: PE Registration Board Action
Dopey George. I sent him an e-mail yesterday suggesting that from now
on, instead of using the term bulls$#t, we substitute with Pelosi.
Steve Leyton
Protection Design Consulting
San Diego, CA
] On Behalf Of Steve
Leyton
Sent: Thursday, February 26, 2009 10:41 AM
To: sprinklerforum@firesprinkler.org
Subject: RE: PE Registration Board Action
Dopey George. I sent him an e-mail yesterday suggesting that from now
on, instead of using the term bulls$#t, we substitute with Pelosi.
Steve Leyton
13 matches
Mail list logo
