I think that the real issue here is not whether or not the document
in question has an electronic stamp, a faxed stamp, a photocopied stamp or,
in fact, no stamp at all. The real issue, in my opinion, is whether the
document is legitimate or a forgery.
I have had my stamp forged in the past. In my case the deed was
done by photocopying the signed stamp from another document onto transparent
stick-on material; the stick-on stamp is then applied to any document.
Admittedly, this does require that photocopied documents are acceptable,
however, drawings are almost always reproductions with the engineer's stamp
on the original; and color fax-scanner-copiers are now very low in price and
very readily available. As evidence, my own combination color scanner, fax
machine, copier, bears the "Brother" brand name, cost only $296.00, and
produces copies that are virtually indistinguishable from the original.
I think this type of forgery may be related to the consideration "Is
engineering a product or a service?" If engineering is to be considered a
service (my own personal belief) then how the stamp is applied, or even
whether there is a stamp or not, is irrelevant. I think the only real way
to prevent forgeries is for the authority having jurisdiction to the
identity of person submitting the design for permitting, to confirm that the
person is, in fact, a registered professional qualified to oversee the work,
and to have the person sign a statutory declaration that (s)he is, in fact
assuming full responsibility for the project.
Anyway, please excuse my ranting. I feel strongly about this
subject!!
Regards,
H. Daryl Richardson
----- Original Message -----
From: "Thor Tandy" <vicpeng@telus.net>
To: <seaint@seaint.org>
Cc: "Ed Huston" <huston@smithhustoninc.com>; "Gillian Pichler"
<gpichler@apeg.bc.ca>; "Peter Mitchell" <mitchell@apeg.bc.ca>
Sent: Wednesday, August 15, 2007 2:14 PM
Subject: RE: Texas PE
> There are companies out there that specialize in electronic
> sealing/signing
> software. Here at the Assoc. of Profess. Engineers of BC (APEGBC) they
> already have commissioned such a company. All the issues aired so far in
> this thread have been addressed and the powers that be are satisfied that
> it
> is secure enough.
>
> If you want more detail on the rigorousness/effectiveness of the software,
> call the APEGBC at 1-604-430-8035 and ask for Peter Mitchell or Gillian
> Pichler.
>
> I understand we are poised to make it available to our membership.
>
> Thor A. Tandy P.Eng, MIStructE, Struct Eng
> Victoria, BC
> Canada
> vicpeng@telus.net
>
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Rand W Holtham [mailto:RHoltham@CBI.com]
> Sent: Wednesday, August 15, 2007 12:54 PM
> To: seaint@seaint.org
> Subject: Re: Texas PE
>
>
> The intention (IMHO) of the anti-electronic signature is that the
> responsible Engineer had at a minimum touched the engineered document and
> that some other person did not issued the document without the consent of
> the responsible engineer. The electronic signature makes rubber stamping
> infraction just too easy. So a faxed copy of a seal document is legitimate
> as I see it as much as a photocopy of a stamped document is legit.
>
>
> Rand
>
>
> "Jerry Coombs" <JCoombs@carollo.com>
>
>
> The original document must be signed, sealed, and *transmitted*. It may
> be
> followed by a facsimile of whatever sort, but there must be a real paper
> trail to the original, to the person distributing them. One fuzzy area
> that is not explicit, but seems acceptable, is to fax a sealed addendum,
> correction, etc; but these should really be followed by a hard copy, too.
>
>>>> "Jordan Truesdell, PE" <seaint1@truesdellengineering.com> 8/15/2007
> 6:22 AM >>>
> I've been away for a bit, and didn't get a chance to reply earlier. Does
> this mean that you cannot fax a sealed document? And for the prohibition,
> does it apply to sending the document or to the validity of the sent
> document?
> Jordan
>
>
> Jerry Coombs wrote:
> If you can't find a blank, I may be able to strip name/ number from
> mine and send. Keep in mind that it is NOT ALLOWED in Texas, as in
> many states, to transmit a signed stamp electronically.
>
>
> ******* ****** ******* ******** ******* ******* ******* ***
> * Read list FAQ at: http://www.seaint.org/list_FAQ.asp
> *
> * This email was sent to you via Structural Engineers
> * Association of Southern California (SEAOSC) server. To
> * subscribe (no fee) or UnSubscribe, please go to:
> *
> *
http://www.seaint.org/sealist1.asp
> *
> * Questions to seaint-ad@seaint.org. Remember, any email you
> * send to the list is public domain and may be re-posted
> * without your permission. Make sure you visit our web
> * site at: http://www.seaint.org
> ******* ****** ****** ****** ******* ****** ****** ********
>
******* ****** ******* ******** ******* ******* ******* ***
* Read list FAQ at: http://www.seaint.org/list_FAQ.asp
*
* This email was sent to you via Structural Engineers
* Association of Southern California (SEAOSC) server. To
* subscribe (no fee) or UnSubscribe, please go to:
*
*
http://www.seaint.org/sealist1.asp
*
* Questions to seaint-ad@seaint.org. Remember, any email you
* send to the list is public domain and may be re-posted
* without your permission. Make sure you visit our web
* site at: http://www.seaint.org
******* ****** ****** ****** ******* ****** ****** ********