Your thoughts on permit reviewers

I've been working about a year now reviewing sanitary sewer and stormwater detention permits. I only had 6 months of roadway design before I took this new job so I was kind of thrown into review without much training and had to learn a lot on my own with some help from my supervisor. I've definitely developed a wide range of engineering and communication skills this past year, but I've also gained a lot of experience arguing with all types of engineers; know-it-alls, incompentent engineers, and engineers that actually DO know-it-all. I'm currently at the point where my comment letters are refined enough to keep design engineers at their seats. I'm just curious what your experiences are with reviewers from public agencies such as mine. What is the best piece of advice for a reviewer such as me? I'm interested to hear from those working in the private sector.

FYI, as the economy slowed down, I havn't had much to review so I went back to school to get my master's in environmental engineering.

I used to work for a private sector which deals with permit application a lot. Personlly, the less comment, the better for us engineers. Some approval even without any comment. If the comments are less than 10, and if only 1 round of comments, that will be comfortable for me.

utoots21 said:

I've been working about a year now reviewing sanitary sewer and stormwater detention permits. I only had 6 months of roadway design before I took this new job so I was kind of thrown into review without much training and had to learn a lot on my own with some help from my supervisor. I've definitely developed a wide range of engineering and communication skills this past year, but I've also gained a lot of experience arguing with all types of engineers; know-it-alls, incompentent engineers, and engineers that actually DO know-it-all. I'm currently at the point where my comment letters are refined enough to keep design engineers at their seats. I'm just curious what your experiences are with reviewers from public agencies such as mine. What is the best piece of advice for a reviewer such as me? I'm interested to hear from those working in the private sector.
FYI, as the economy slowed down, I havn't had much to review so I went back to school to get my master's in environmental engineering.

Click to expand...

I work in Permitting as well in the consulting end writing permits. Honestly some reviewers can be real nitpicky. When I get a four pages list of comments and some of them are insignificant comments like your reds for your property lines don't match, it can make you want to scream. It also makes it hard to want to corporate with the reviewer, but in the end you know you have to. I think you can tell a good reviewer by their comments. Some go way overboard and some don't review it enough. The good reviewers are the ones that fall in the middle. The know what needs to be there and they make sure it is in there right. Just like any job it takes time and experience to get there. I'm still in the learning stages myself.

ahaninil said:

I used to work for a private sector which deals with permit application a lot. Personlly, the less comment, the better for us engineers. Some approval even without any comment. If the comments are less than 10, and if only 1 round of comments, that will be comfortable for me.

Click to expand...

Sorry, I've only had one permit with one page of comments. My section reviews permits that need to comply to a sanitary sewer ordinance and stormwater detention. I don't think one page of comments or approval without comments is likely to happen.

wvgirl14 said:

I work in Permitting as well in the consulting end writing permits. Honestly some reviewers can be real nitpicky. When I get a four pages list of comments and some of them are insignificant comments like your reds for your property lines don't match, it can make you want to scream. It also makes it hard to want to corporate with the reviewer, but in the end you know you have to. I think you can tell a good reviewer by their comments. Some go way overboard and some don't review it enough. The good reviewers are the ones that fall in the middle. The know what needs to be there and they make sure it is in there right. Just like any job it takes time and experience to get there. I'm still in the learning stages myself.

Click to expand...

Good reply. I agree that the best reviewers fall right in the middle and that's where I'm trying to be. I'd like to comment that every reviewer has different ways of making engineering judgment but sometimes can get off base trying to 'perfect'each permit. Sometimes my supervisors review and check my reviews and their comments, too, sometimes makes me want to get up and go home. However, they have their moments when they would rather just let it go especially if its a real messy project and not worth the effort to go over every minute detail.

Maybe I should say, less than 20 comments is good. It realy depends on what are those comments. Some like typo, can be fixed whatever so many. Or maybe just 1 comment can change the design totally which cost a lot of time.

utoots21 said:

Sorry, I've only had one permit with one page of comments. My section reviews permits that need to comply to a sanitary sewer ordinance and stormwater detention. I don't think one page of comments or approval without comments is likely to happen.


Good reply. I agree that the best reviewers fall right in the middle and that's where I'm trying to be. I'd like to comment that every reviewer has different ways of making engineering judgment but sometimes can get off base trying to 'perfect'each permit. Sometimes my supervisors review and check my reviews and their comments, too, sometimes makes me want to get up and go home. However, they have their moments when they would rather just let it go especially if its a real messy project and not worth the effort to go over every minute detail.

Click to expand...

wvgirl14 said:

I work in Permitting as well in the consulting end writing permits. Honestly some reviewers can be real nitpicky. When I get a four pages list of comments and some of them are insignificant comments like your reds for your property lines don't match, it can make you want to scream. It also makes it hard to want to corporate with the reviewer, but in the end you know you have to. I think you can tell a good reviewer by their comments. Some go way overboard and some don't review it enough. The good reviewers are the ones that fall in the middle. The know what needs to be there and they make sure it is in there right. Just like any job it takes time and experience to get there. I'm still in the learning stages myself.

Click to expand...

I agree. I've worked with stormwater reviewers who didn't know what they were doing, and it was a total waste of money to my clients to have to explain not only the code to the review but also tell him/her how to do his/her job. I often wondered if they even had a supervisor.

On the flip side, I've also worked with a gravel pit review who knows his stuff inside and out. He is patient and willing to explain what he needs for an approval. If the client so much as crosses him, then he remembers it for all eternity and makes the client dot every 'i' and cross every 't' just to show he has the last say on the matter. Personally, I like him, and he doesn't hold anything against me, but it makes working for the client, who just ticked him off, much harder and costs the client way more money in the long run.

Your right. You definetely don't want too mess with a reviewer. They can make your project baloon in cost. I try my best to stay on good terms with them. Most try to work with the client. There are some that try to push their weight around, and you just have to learn how to deal with them. Sometimes they ask for things that make their life easier but cost the client more to get the information that may not be necessy or that should be done by the reviewer. You just have to find that happy medium. It doesn't do you good or your client good to blow up or smart off a reviewer.

Nice topic! I've been reviewing permit applications for stormwater, septic systems, wastewater treatment plants, water quality certificates, injection wells, and just about anything else water-related (plus landfills and NEPA environmental review) for 11 years now. I've narrowed my technique to focus on big-picture issues first (will the design work, and does it meet the intent of the rules) and the nitpicky stuff last, which most of the time I don't even bother with. My attitude is that the design engineer is ultimately responsible for the fine details of the project - my responsibility is only to make sure he has satisfied the requirements of the regulations, and his design won't hurt anyone else.

I have some designers, who I respect a great deal, that get along well with me and have even served as my reference for the PE exam. But there are plenty others who don't like me very much at all. For the most part, they are the under-qualified engineers or the clientele of the rubber stampers, so their animosity doesn't bother me too much (their goal is usually to get around every regulation they can, anyway, because compliance is not their business - they are usually the construction contractor and just want to start building). I often get more nit-picky with them, because they do such poor work anyway, I hope that they learn something from the process and try a little harder next time. Some of them do, and have (over time) developed better relationships with me.

And then there is a small number of experienced engineers who object, on principle, to having anyone else review their plans ("I'm a PE! You can't question me!") Those guys are the biggest pain in the ass because they often refuse to make changes, and the only way (as a regulator) to deal with that is continue to send them the same deficiency list over and over, which they then use as proof (to your boss, the local politicians, etc.) of how "unreasonable" you are. Regulations (and the laws of physics, sometimes) simply do not apply to these guys - they know it all, and the regulation/equation/book is wrong.

The biggest lesson I have applied over time is to always suggest a possible solution to each deficiency noted. That does two things for you: One, it helps the regulated engineer learn what the regulations expect of them, and two (most important?) it gives you a great "out" when some sleazy local politician comes for your head on behalf of one the the "bad" engineers - almost without fail. "But I told them how to fix it!" "Three times!"

But I am sick and tired of the whole business. It really wears you down. I am actively looking to move on, and get away from permit review work.

I've had reviewers stamp plans seemingly without so much as looking at them or fail me completely (not even an "approved with exception" because I didn't have a submittal sheet for every nut and bolt. A certain Midwest city was so intensive that the plans get approved about the time construction ends.

I sometimes felt a little worried about commenting on plans before I got my PE. I did plan review for a County in Ohio and it got to the point that I knew pretty much all of the engineers who submitted plans. There were times I could just do everything over the phone, i.e. "I'll go ahead and recommend the planning commission approve the subdivision, but this will need to be changed before final plans come in for signature".

I learned the hard way that new guys got everything in writing. One engineer was supposed to include a note on the final set of plans about which water main they were going to connect to. He added the note which seemed fine, but left it just vague enough that when it came time to connect the water line the developer decided he was going to connect to the wrong line because it was easier. They both came in for a lengthy "discussion" where the developer basically said he was going to do it that way and that was that. I never forgot either one of them, nothing vindictive, but any plans they sent in from then on got the most thorough review possible. The engineer was a little distraut when he called the building department to see if there was anyone else that could review their plans and found out I was it...

If you get big projects to review like I did, one thing I would suggest is to make a checklist of review items and add new things when you come across them. I was always coming across something unique that I might not think to check for every time a set of plans came in. I got with our IT guy and we set up a database in Access where I could go through and check the things that were missed and hit a button and it would print out a letter with all those comments listed.

MGX said:

I've had reviewers stamp plans seemingly without so much as looking at them or fail me completely (not even an "approved with exception" because I didn't have a submittal sheet for every nut and bolt. A certain Midwest city was so intensive that the plans get approved about the time construction ends.

Click to expand...

There were a few times that plans came in that were so bad that I just sent back a letter telling them that they needed to redo their plans with a reference as to where to find our construction standards online.

jeb6294 said:

There were a few times that plans came in that were so bad that I just sent back a letter telling them that they needed to redo their plans with a reference as to where to find our construction standards online.

Click to expand...

I have seen plans that are define terrible. Some looked as if they were drawn using crayons on butcher paper. I could not conceive of allowing such abominations out of the door. I wonder how some of these guys find jobs.

Early on the importance of being friendly and professional with reviewers was made very clear. Rarely do I ever have and trouble getting plans approved.

One of the requirements for every plan that came through the building department was that every plan be signed off on by all the reviewing agencies...no matter how big or small the project. A decent chunk of this county is still pretty rural so there were several times that I stood at the front counter helping somebody do their "site plan" for a new pole barn or a shed or a chicken coop on a piece of scrap paper. I'm pretty sure putting a 20' x 40' pole barn on their 30 acre lot 100' from anything is not going to affect the runoff from the site but I still had to have a site plan to sign off on.

My best piece of advice is that it's OK to find an original submission satisfactory.

One municipality I dealt with was terrible at this. We would comb through every detail and they would respond months later with one or two tiny snags.

It became apparent that every application was being approved after two submissions. So eventually we just started each project by quickly submitting a half@$$ed application.

I work mostly on mine permits, and as of 2009 we do everything e-permit (online permitting required by the state). I guess there is some benefits to it, but I think if I was the reviewer loading and checking maps would be hard. You can see alot more on a print out than a screen. I am not a huge fan of the system, but that is the way it is. Once a section is approved it gets a check mark beside it. All our comments are emailed to us. It is definetely different.

ALBin517 said:

My best piece of advice is that it's OK to find an original submission satisfactory.
One municipality I dealt with was terrible at this. We would comb through every detail and they would respond months later with one or two tiny snags.

It became apparent that every application was being approved after two submissions. So eventually we just started each project by quickly submitting a half@$$ed application.

Click to expand...

LOL I figured that's what people start doing as they submit more and more permits. It gets kind of frustrating because in a way it's like telling us "Do our design for us". However, our section comments within a week of receiving submittals so we're not so bad =D.

^There are engineers here who openly advise other engineers to just use us as their plan checker, and not to put much effort into design, because we will straighten it out for them. That kind of sucks, but it goes hand-in-hand with the poor quality of engineering (all foreign, all ultra-low budget) that we mostly get out here.

utoots21 said:

I've definitely developed a wide range of engineering and communication skills this past year, but I've also gained a lot of experience arguing with all types of engineers; know-it-alls, incompentent engineers, and engineers that actually DO know-it-all. I'm currently at the point where my comment letters are refined enough to keep design engineers at their seats.

Click to expand...

Awesome that you are able to see your own self-development!!

utoots21 said:

I'm just curious what your experiences are with reviewers from public agencies such as mine. What is the best piece of advice for a reviewer such as me? I'm interested to hear from those working in the private sector.

Click to expand...

Like Dleg, I am a regulator/permitting engineer for a state agency for nearly 10 yrs. My last day of work for this agency happens to be Feb 27th and I am actually moving to work for power/utility industry near you.

utoots21 said:

FYI, as the economy slowed down, I havn't had much to review so I went back to school to get my master's in environmental engineering.

Click to expand...

Advanced education at a time of slow economy IS a smart invesment - invest in yourself!

However, what do you want to do with an environmental engineering degree? (says the guy with an environmental engineering degree ... )

Dleg said:

Nice topic!

Click to expand...

Totally agree!!

Dleg said:

I've narrowed my technique to focus on big-picture issues first (will the design work, and does it meet the intent of the rules) and the nitpicky stuff last, which most of the time I don't even bother with. My attitude is that the design engineer is ultimately responsible for the fine details of the project - my responsibility is only to make sure he has satisfied the requirements of the regulations, and his design won't hurt anyone else.

Click to expand...

I take the same approach!

Dleg said:

The biggest lesson I have applied over time is to always suggest a possible solution to each deficiency noted. That does two things for you: One, it helps the regulated engineer learn what the regulations expect of them, and two (most important?) it gives you a great "out" when some sleazy local politician comes for your head on behalf of one the the "bad" engineers - almost without fail. "But I told them how to fix it!" "Three times!"

Click to expand...

I have found this to be a NECESSITY in most of the review comments that I hand down. In many cases, you have to do this not only so the consultant needs a little direction to remedy the deficiency or the consultant needs some ammunition to go back to his client and explain why something needs to be different or cost more money.

Dleg said:

But I am sick and tired of the whole business. It really wears you down. I am actively looking to move on, and get away from permit review work.

Click to expand...

Best of luck brotha Dleg !! As of tomorrow .. I am heading out the door! :multiplespotting:

I really hope you are not too far behind me!

JR

I'm not sure how much, if any, you deal with structural plans review, but I agree with most on here. Keep your comments to the big picture, and you'll appear competent as well as providing a reasonably save engineering quality control. It really is a balance as too much review begins to turn into the agency being the engineer of record. There are some jurisdictions like the one in Las Vegas and Orange County areas that are extremely picky - especially if they are administered by the Department of the State Architect jobs in California. They will ask you to come up a finite element analysis on some structures where simple mechanics using conservative methods of roark's formulas will suffice. It is really ridiculous some times. The worst plan review I've received was on a particularly large 2-story structure: 28 comments on a 150-page calculation package.

FWIW, it sounds like you're in the middle and still catching the major things. Some plans examiners want to site and resite everything even if it's obvious. Everyone involved will look at YOU, the reviewer, and see you as a problem instead of a solution-especially if the structure doesn't change.

jregieng said:

Best of luck brotha Dleg !! As of tomorrow .. I am heading out the door! :multiplespotting:
I really hope you are not too far behind me!

JR

Click to expand...

Nice! I hope to not be too far behind, but maybe around summer. I've got a number of irons in the fire right now. My latest best idea is becoming a PHS Commissioned Officer - I've been talking with the three PHS officers we have on-island, and I may be submitting my application tomorrow. It would be a great job - basically the "getting real things done" side of what I am already doing now. From regulation to operation and/or construction. Far more satisfying in the long run, I am hoping.