Professional and Career Topics

I've been thinking recently about jurisdictional rules and how they are applied.

On one end of the spectrum you have the mindset that the rules are the rules, and there is no room for variances or exceptions, regardless of if the rule's author had accounted for this specific circumstance.

On the other end, you have the mindset that rules are just suggestions, and the right influence can get you around any requirement.

How can jurisdictional authorities strike a healthy balance that serves their citizens and protects the environment well?

-------------------------------------------


------------------------------
Heidi C. Wallace, P.E., M.ASCE
Tulsa, OK
------------------------------

Our military has rules and regulations for virtually everything; however, it also has rules for waiving the rules. Requests for waiver must be in writing ("There's a form for that") and must be approved by a specified authority. My experience (Corps of Engineers) and friends (Army, Air Force, and Navy) has been that sensible reasons get waivers approved. Occasionally, someone who enjoys being hardnosed or fears being criticized refuses all waivers but most approving officials understand the need and appreciate the flexibility.

It seems something like that ought to work in civil infrastructure as well. For example, requiring curbs and gutters increases runoff volume and rates, yet some cities require them. Grassy swale waivers reduce the flooding threat, if allowed. 

Bill

------------------------------
William McAnally Ph.D., P.E., BC.CE, BC.NE, F.ASCE
ENGINEER
Columbus MS
------------------------------

Author Jason Pargin argued recently that signs are absolutely useless... no matter what they say, a sign alone lacks the authority to prohibit anything.  It actually can plant the idea of doing what you are not supposed to do by being there.  The other day I was eating my lunch outside by a historic dam.  There was a "fence" along the edge of the riverwalk.  This was not an engineered load rated guardrail as it would have been much more robust with posts spaced much closer.  The sign on the fence said "Do not climb or sit on the fence."  Regardless of whether code requires this barrier to be a fence or a guard, the owner has now labeled it a fence... which is not load rated for fall protection.  The owner has also acknowledged that this fence may not hold up if someone actually falls into it or grabs on to it as they get too close to the edge.

So does the sign and the rule achieve what the owner to trying to do to protect patrons?  Is the building official OK with this condition?  Alas, this is what an engineer thinks about during their lunch break.  Your design should work to achieve the anticipated conditions under regular use and perhaps consider extreme events to the extent which they can be mitigated.  Do not rely on rules and signs alone to ensure safety.

------------------------------
Chad Morrison P.E., F.ASCE
Professional Engineer
Greenville RI
------------------------------

Heidi – I would say Rules founded upon legitimacy have a greater appeal of acceptance across the board – than those that are not. Rules, for that matter all Laws, are viewed by people as legitimate when they are fair, moral, ethical and justified.

Even then – are they "Set in stone"? Perhaps not – because everything has time and space (jurisdictional) connotations in the evolving canvas of societal pursuits – and is subject to the scrutiny of analyses and interpretations. This does not mean – Rules are "meant to be broken" either.

Rules are written (even unwritten, as the case of parental rules) by individuals, groups or organizations for better management of things. The purpose is to establish trust between the rule-writer and rule-follower in case of impositional rules – or otherwise, in case of consensus-based rules. Unlike laws – they preclude the purview of gov enforcement.

As Bill pointed out – military and members-in-uniform require sort-of-strict-rules to function – to establish chain-of-command procedures – even then they are interpretable, and relaxable in response to special cases and circumstances.

But, the pursuits of a civilian life – cannot function like the rules of a military service. If they do – creativity and innovation that define the thrival of a society will be greatly jeopardized and inhibited.

--------------------

Dr. Dilip K Barua, PhD

Website Links and Profile

-------------------------------------------