Winter 2011 - Nebraska Board of Engineers and Architects - State of ...

The Nebraska
PROFESSIONAL
Nebraska Board of Engineers and Architects Newsletter
Winter 2011
Negotiated Rulemaking Results
The Nebraska Board of Engineers
and Architects convened a Negotiated
Rulemaking Committee last summer with
the purpose of exploring NCEES
proposed changes
affecting several existing provisions in
the Nebraska Engineers
NEWS
and Architects
Regulation Act. Negotiated rulemaking is
a process that allows state agencies the
opportunity to resolve controversial issues by
enlisting the direct participation of interested
parties prior to the commencement of formal
rulemaking.
The Board invited a large number of
groups to participate including contractors,
members of the engineering and architecture
professions, municipalities, county officials,
insurers, realtors, and a number of state
agencies including the State Fire Marshal,
State Electrical Board, the Department
of Environmental Quality and Natural
Resources Districts.
The Board identified two issues of particular
relevance for the committee to consider.
The first was the possible elimination
of exemptions in some occupancy
classifications, as described in Rule 10.3,
to increase the safety of people utilizing
structures in which:
• large numbers of occupants congregate
in a small area;
Board Members
Fred Choobineh - Chair, Engineer Member, Lincoln
Krista Kester - Vice Chair, Public Member, Lincoln
Roger Helgoth - Secretary, Engineer Member, Omaha
Mark Champion - Architect Member, Lincoln
Michael Conzett - Engineer Member, Ralston
Albert Hamersky - Architect Member, Lincoln
Jennifer Klein - Engineer Member, Lincoln
Thomas Laging - Architect Member, Lincoln
Staff
Jon Wilbeck - Executive Director
Sandra Weaver - Administrator
Tyler Kohtz - Compliance Officer
Katherine Yañez - Public Information Officer
Jean Lais - Administrative Assistant
Jeanne Vliet - Receptionist
Michelle Thober - Staff Assistant
• occupants cannot self-preserve, such
as children in daycare, jail inmates or
healthcare patients; or
NCARB
• where hazardous materials are being
stored or used.
NEWS
The second issue to consider was a proposal
allowing limited “cross-discipline” practice
between engineering and architecture, which
would provide licensed professionals the
ability to conduct limited practice outside their
area of licensure. More simply, architects
could practice limited engineering, and
professional engineers could practice limited
architecture if they are competent to do so.
The Negotiated Rulemaking Committee
considered these issues at three separate
meetings held in Lincoln last July and
August. A neutral facilitator was selected by
the Board to preside over the meetings and
assist committee members in conducting
discussions and negotiations.
Discussion of the two issues brought
forth differing sets of opinions from the 23
members of the committee. The goal of
the rulemaking process was to achieve
substantial agreement regarding the
proposed changes; enough to develop
recommended policies and language for
submission to the Board.
Giving weight to the opinions and perspective
of the delegates was a final vote cast by
each to approve or oppose the committee’s
recommendations regarding the elimination
of certain matrix exemptions and crossdisciplinary
practice in the state. Of the two
issues, only the latter received consensus
approval as defined by the committee.
Cross-Disciplinary Practice
Recommendations
There were 12 votes to approve, none
to oppose, the proposal allowing limited
continued on page 3
Lincoln Community Foundation Building • 215 Centennial Mall South Suite 400 • Lincoln, NE 68508
P.O Box 95165 • Lincoln, NE 68509
Proposed Statute
Changes
Jon Wilbeck
Executive Director
The following is a list
outlining major proposed
statutory changes to the
Engineers and Architects
Regulation Act. The Board
is actively pursuing these
changes in the current
state legislative session,
which began January 5 th . Changes were
recommended to the Board by its Legislative
Committee; made up of Board members
Albert Hamersky, Roger Helgoth, Krista
Kester, as well as myself and Rich Lombardi
of American Communications.
The changes on cross-discipline practice
are based, in part, from a consensus
recommendation submitted by the
Negotiated Rulemaking Committee (see
Negotiated Rulemaking Results). The list
also includes changes of a more technical
nature. Based on suggestions noted by
its staff, the Board will pursue revisions to
accommodate the introduction of the new 16-
hour NCEES Structural II exam.
Phone: 402.471.2021 • Fax: 402.471.0787 • Email: nbea.office@nebraska.gov • www.ea.ne.gov
continued on page 2

Proposed Statute Changes (continued from page 1)
Note: Where actual statutory language
is presented; additions to statute are
bold and underlined, deletions are noted
with a strikethrough. Commentary, where
applicable, has also been included to
expound on the language contained in the
statute.
81-3429. Board; members;
requirements; per diem; expenses.
… Each member of the board shall
receive as compensation not more than
sixty dollars per day for each day or
substantial part of a day actually spent in
traveling to and from and while attending
sessions of the board and its committees,
or authorized meetings of the National
Council of Architectural Registration
Boards, the National Council of Examiners
for Engineering and Surveying, or their
subdivisions or committees, or for other
authorized business of the board, and all
necessary expenses incident to the
performance of his or her duties under the
Engineers and Architects Regulation Act as
provided in sections 81-1174 to 81-1177.
» The change slightly clarifies and expands
the criteria for per diem payments to Board
members.
81-3442. Prohibited acts; penalties.
Any person who performs any of the
following actions is guilty of a Class I
misdemeanor for the first offense and
a Class IV felony for the second or any
subsequent offense:
(1) Practices or offers to practice
architecture or engineering in this state
without being licensed in accordance with
the Engineers and Architects Regulation
Act, unless such practice or offer to practice is
otherwise exempt under the Act;
81-3449. Practice of architecture;
exempted activities.
The provisions of the Engineers and
Architects Regulation Act regulating the
practice of architecture do not apply to the
following activities:
(16) A licensed architect’s limited practice of
engineering in connection with any building,
structure, or work classified as a business
(except outpatient clinics), mercantile, storage,
factory, or utility occupancy less than 6,000
square feet in building area, provided that the
architect certifies competence to perform the
work as required by the board.
81-3453. Practice of engineering;
exempted activities.
The provisions of the Engineers and
Architects Regulation Act regulating the
practice of engineering do not apply to the
following activities:
2011 UPCOMING EVENTS OF THE NBEA
Jan 31 NBEA application deadline for PE first-time applications
Feb 8 NBEA - UNL Visit - Sign up for April 2011 FE exam, Lincoln
10 NBEA - UNO Visit - Sign up for April 2011 FE exam, Omaha
10-12 NCEES Board Presidents Assembly, Atlanta, GA
11 NBEA Board Meeting, 8:30 a.m., Lincoln, NE
15 NBEA application deadline for all FE applications and PE
retake applications
18 NCEES exam registration deadline
MAR 3 NBEA Strategic Planning Meeting, Lincoln, NE
4 NBEA Board Meeting - 8:30 a.m., Lincoln, NE
11-12 NCARB Regional Meeting, Jersey City, NJ
APR 8-9 NCEES Engineering Examinations
19 NBEA - UNL Visit - Sign up for Oct 2011 FE exam, Lincoln
22 NBEA Board Meeting, 8:30 a.m., Lincoln, NE
28 NBEA - UNO Visit - Sign up for Oct 2011 FE exam, Omaha
MAY 5-7 NCEES Central Zone Meeting, Detroit, MI
20 NBEA Board Meeting - 8:30 a.m., Lincoln, NE
JUN 22-25
NCARB Annual Meeting, Washinton, DC
2
(19) A licensed professional engineer’s limited
practice of architecture in connection with
any building, structure, or work classified as a
business (except outpatient clinics), mercantile,
storage, factory, or utility occupancy less than
6,000 square feet in building area, provided that
the professional engineer certifies competence
to perform the work as required by the board.
» These changes will allow for limited
cross-discipline practice between
the professions of engineering and
architecture by licensed architects and
professional engineers.
81-3443. Enforcement procedures.
Charges A complaint against any person or
organization involving any matter coming
within the jurisdiction of the board shall be
in writing and shall be filed with the board.
The charges complaint, at the discretion
of the board, shall be heard within a
reasonable time in accordance with the
rules and regulations and may be heard
through the use of a hearing officer. The
accused shall have the right to appear
personally with or without counsel, to
cross-examine adverse witnesses, and to
produce evidence and witnesses in his,
her, or its or her defense. The board shall
set the time and place for the hearing
and shall cause a copy of the complaint
charges, together with a notice of the time
and place fixed for the hearing, to be sent
by registered mail to the accused, at his,
her, or its or her last-known business or
residence address known to the board,
at least thirty days before the hearing.
If after the hearing the board finds the
accused has violated the Engineers and
Architects Regulation Act or any rules or
regulations, it may issue any order or take
any action described in section 81-3444.
If the board finds no violation, it shall enter
an order dismissing the charges complaint.
If the order revokes, suspends, or cancels
a license, the board shall notify, in writing,
the Secretary of State and the clerk of the
city or village in the state where the person
has a place of business, if any. The board
may reissue a license to any person whose
license that has been revoked. Application
for the…
81-3444. Disciplinary actions
authorized; civil penalties.
(1) The board may after hearing, by
majority vote, take any or all of the
following actions, upon proof satisfactory to
the board that any person or organization
continued on page 4

Negotiated Rulemaking Results (continued from page 1)
cross-discipline practice by licensed
architects and professional engineers
between the professions of engineering
and architecture on projects of specific
occupancies under 6,000 feet in size.
The following language was prescribed
and voted on by the Negotiated
Rulemaking Committee:
Any building, structure, or work which
contains two or more occupancies
shall use the most restrictive
occupancy applied to the entire
building for purposes of utilizing Rule
10.3.
Licensed architects may practice
engineering in connection with any
building, structure, or work classified
as a business, mercantile, storage,
factory, or utility occupancy less than
6,000 square feet in building area,
provided that the architect certifies
competence to perform the work.
Licensed professional engineers may
practice architecture in connection
with any building structure, or work
classified as a business, mercantile,
storage, factory, or utility occupancy
less than 6,000 square feet in building
area, provided that the professional
engineer certifies competence to
perform the work.
The committee also approved a
certification requirement in conjunction with
the new rules. Proposed as either a rule
or Board policy, professionals engaging
in cross-disciplinary practice would be
required to affirm their competency to do
so by signing a certification statement.
While it was not agreed upon by the entire
committee, most members supported
having the statement appear on the cover
sheet of design documents along with a
listing of applicable page numbers.
There were 11 votes in favor of the
following certification language:
I, (name of licensee), certify that I am
a licensed design professional who
is competent to perform the (type of
work) based on my training, education,
and experience. I also understand the
risk of being disciplined by the Board
if this portion of the work proves me
to be incompetent and presents a
risk to public health, life safety, and/or
other hazards attributed to my design.
The size of the project is within the
prescribed limits defined in the E&A
Act. I take full responsibility for my
work.
(signature), (date), (seal)
Legislative Pursuits
Since the Negotiated Rulemaking
Committee was unable to reach a
consensus on revisions to the exemption
matrix in Rule 10.3, the Board-appointed
Legislative Committee has provided the
Board with a recommendation to suspend
further pursuit of changes to the matrix
at this time. This decision, however, does
not eliminate the possibility of the Board
revisiting the issue in the future.
While the original intent of the negotiated
rulemaking process was to gather
recommendations for proposed rule
changes, the Board’s Legislative
Committee felt that statutory changes
were better suited for the cross-discipline
practice provision. This approach is more
conducive considering there are currently
a number of statutory revisions that would
need to take place in order for the new
provision to work.
Board efforts will now focus primarily on
supporting statutory changes in favor of
the cross-discipline recommendations
provided by the Negotiated Rulemaking
Committee. In addition, the Board will
address other minor and, in their view,
non-controversial changes. To learn more
about the Legislative Committee’s plans
to move forward with the drafting of these
legislative updates, see the accompanying
article Proposed Statute Changes.
Hamersky receives
Cunningham Gold Medal
Board member Albert Hamersky was awarded
the Harry F. Cunningham Gold Medal at the
AIA Nebraska Excellence in Design Gala
last October. The Gold Medal represents AIA
Nebraska’s highest honor and is awarded in
recognition of distinguished achievements in
architecture or service to the profession of
architecture in the state.
Hamersky has served a 20 year term with the
Nebraska Board of Engineers and Architects. A
licensed architect, he holds a Bachelor’s degree
in Architecture from UNL and a Masters in
Architecture from MIT.
Kohtz appointed
Compliance Officer
In August, Tyler Kohtz
joined the Nebraska
Board of Engineers
and Architects as
compliance officer. The
position, previously left
vacant by the promotion
of Jon Wilbeck to the
role of executive director, is primarily
responsible for investigating complaint
cases submitted to the Board.
Before joining the Board, Kohtz served
as an unemployment insurance
adjudicator for the Nebraska Department
of Labor. As an adjudicator he gained
experience applying both federal laws
and state statutes to complex claims
investigations. Prior to that experience
Kohtz spent three years as a drafter for
Chief Industries; working in both Grand
Island and Omaha offices.
“We are pleased to have Tyler as the
Board’s new compliance officer,” said
Executive Director Jon Wilbeck. “His
education and work experience have
proved to be valuable assets in meeting
the challenges of the position.”
A native of Nebraska, Kohtz graduated
from Chase County High School. After
acquiring an Associate’s Degree in
Drafting and Design, he went on to
obtain a Bachelor’s Degree in Marketing
Management from Bellevue University
in 2008. Kohtz shares a home in Lincoln
with his wife Wendy and their two dogs.
The couple is expecting their first child in
April.
Pictured above: AIA Nebraska President Kristi Nohavec
(right) and nominator Mark Champion (left) present Albert
Hamersky with the gold medal award.
3

Proposed Statute Changes (continued from page 2)
has violated the Engineers and Architects
Regulation Act or any rules or regulations.
Upon a finding that a person or organization
committed a violation, the The following
actions may be taken against such person
or organization a holder of a license upon a twothirds
majority vote of the board…
» The ‘charges to complaint’ revisions are
consistent with the de facto procedures the
Board follows in investigating compliance
cases. Additionally, complaints can be filed
against organizations as well as licensees
and non-licensed individuals.
81-3444. Disciplinary actions
authorized; civil penalties.
(3) Civil penalties collected under
subdivision (1)(e) of this section shall be
remitted to the State Treasurer for credit
to the permanent school fund distribution in
accordance with Article VII, section 5, of the
Constitution of Nebraska. All costs collected
under …
» Considered a minor change, the revision
better represents the recommended
language for distribution of civil penalty
monies per the Nebraska Attorney General
and the Legislature’s Revisor of Statutes.
81-3449. Practice of architecture;
exempted activities.
The provisions of the Engineers and
Architects Regulation Act regulating the
practice of architecture do not apply to the
following activities:
(4) Any public works project with
contemplated expenditures for a completed
project that do not exceed one hundred
eighty-six thousand dollars. The board shall
adjust the dollar amount in this subdivision
every, every fifth year, with the first adjustment
to be effective on July 1, 2014 commencing July 1,
2009. The adjusted amount shall be equal
to the then current amount adjusted by
the cumulative percentage change in the
Consumer Price Index …
81-3453. Practice of engineering;
exempted activities.
The provisions of the Engineers and
Architects Regulation Act regulating the
practice of engineering do not apply to the
following activities:
(4) Any public works project with
contemplated expenditures for the
completed project that do not exceed one
hundred eighty-six thousand dollars. The
board shall adjust the dollar amount in this
subdivision every fifth year, with the first
adjustment to be effective on commencing
July 1, 2014 2009. The adjusted amount
shall be equal to the then current amount
adjusted by the cumulative percentage
change in the Consumer Price Index for
All Urban Consumers published by the
Federal Bureau of Labor Statistics for the
five-year period preceding the adjustment
date. The amount shall be rounded to the
next highest one-thousand-dollar amount;
» The dollar amount for the public works
exemption was adjusted on July 1, 2009 to
$100,000 using the method described in
the original statute. These edits allow for
the next adjustment and are intended to
eliminate misinterpretations of the statute.
81-3449. Practice of architecture;
exempted activities.
The provisions of the Engineers and
Architects Regulation Act regulating the
practice of architecture do not apply to the
following activities:
(12) The practice by qualified members of
other legally recognized professions who are
otherwise licensed or certified by this state to
perform services consistent with the laws of
this state, the training, and the code of ethics
of those respective professions, provided
such qualified members do not represent
themselves to be practicing architecture and
do not represent themselves to be architects
The practice of any other certified trade or legally
recognized profession;
81-3453. Practice of engineering;
exempted activities.
The provisions of the Engineers and
Architects Regulation Act regulating the
practice of engineering do not apply to the
following activities:
(8) The practice by qualified members of
other legally recognized professions who are
otherwise licensed or certified by this state to
perform services consistent with the laws of
this state, the training, and the code of ethics
of those respective professions, provided
such qualified members do not represent
themselves to be practicing engineering and
do not represent themselves to be professional
The practice of any other certified trade or legally
recognized profession;
» These changes are an attempt to clarify
the current exemption.
4
81-3451. Professional engineer or
engineer-intern; license; application;
examination; requirements.
(2)(a) A person holding a certificate
of licensure to engage in the practice
of engineering, issued by the proper
authority of a state, territory, or possession
of the United States, the District of
Columbia, or any foreign country, based
on requirements that do not conflict with
the Engineers and Architects Regulation
Act and were of a standard not lower than
that specified in the applicable licensure
law in effect in this state at the time
such certificate was issued may, upon
application, be licensed as a professional
engineer without further examination.
» The addition allows for the reciprocal
licensing of engineers who hold licenses
issued in territories of the United States,
and is consistent with the intent of the
current statute.
(2)(b) A person holding an active Council
Record with the National Council of
Examiners for Engineering and Surveying
whose qualifications as evidenced by the
Council Record meet the requirements of
the act may, upon application, be licensed
as a professional engineer without further
examination except as required to examine the
applicant’s knowledge of statutes and rules and
regulations unique to the State of Nebraska.
» As with all license applicants,
professional engineers who hold an
NCEES Record and are applying for
reciprocal licensure must take and pass a
short exam covering specifics of the E&A
Act.
(2)(c) A graduate of an Accrediting Board
for Engineering and Technology accredited
engineering curriculum, enrolled as an
engineer-intern, and having a specific
record of an additional four years or more
of progressive post-baccalaureate-degree postaccredited-degree
experience on engineering
projects…
» There are engineering programs not
accredited at the baccalaureate level.
The University of Nebraska-Lincoln’s
architectural engineering program, for
example, is accredited at the master’s
level only. This change is intended to make
clear that an accredited degree, at any
level, is a prerequisite for licensure as a
professional engineer by examination.
continued on next page

On January 1, 2011, NCEES began using a new
standard for its education credentials evaluations
for engineering licensure candidates. NCEES
will use this standard to evaluate
• Engineering degree programs outside the
United States
• U.S.-based degree programs in engineering,
engineering technology, related science, or
mathematics that are not accredited by the
Engineering Accreditation Commission of
ABET, when coupled with a master’s degree
or doctorate from a program that is EAC/
ABET-accredited at the undergraduate or
graduate level
Candidates in the above categories are typically
referred to NCEES Credentials Evaluations
by the state board where they are applying for
licensure.
NCEES
NEWS
The NCEES Engineering Education Standard
was developed by an advisory group of state
licensing board members and administrators
along with NCEES staff. The group worked
in consultation with state licensing boards to
determine the minimal education requirements
necessary to be considered for entry into the
engineering profession. The standard will
replace the existing practice of comparing a
candidate’s educational history against ABET
accreditation criteria.
“The big advantage of using the new standard
is that NCEES will evaluate graduate-level
coursework in addition to work at the bachelor’s
level,” Executive Director Jerry Carter said.
“Now, we can give licensing boards an
assessment of an applicant’s whole educational
experience.”
NCARB
Licensing Update:
NEWS
NCEES will offer the new 16-hour
Structural Engineering exam for the first
time in April 2011. The exam is divided
into two 8-hour components, which will
be offered on successive days. The
Vertical Forces component focuses
on gravity loads and incidental lateral
loads. The Lateral Forces component
focuses on wind and earthquake loads.
To pass the exam, examinees must
obtain acceptable results on both
8-hour components.
Due to the change, first-time examinees
that successfully complete only one
component of the exam will no longer
be eligible to receive a civil engineering
license by the means outlined in Rule
2.5.2.4.2 of the E&A Act. The rule
states that those “who pass the first
eight-hour component of the NCEES
Structural Engineering examination…
will be licensed as a Professional Civil
Engineer.”
Proposed Statute Changes (continued from page 4)
(2)(c) of a grade and a character which
indicates to the Board of Engineers and
Architects that the applicant may be
competent to practice engineering shall
be admitted to an eight-hour examination of
at least eight hours in length, administered
by the board, on the principles and
practice of engineering. Upon passing
the examination, the applicant shall be
granted a certificate of licensure to practice
engineering in this state if the applicant is
otherwise qualified. … An applicant who
does not hold an Accrediting Board for
Engineering and Technology accredited
engineering degree but who is enrolled
as an engineer-intern in this state and
has a specific record of an additional six
years or more of progressive experience
on engineering projects of a grade and a
character which indicates to the Board of
Engineers and Architects that the applicant
may be competent to practice engineering
shall be admitted to an eight-hour
examination of at least eight hours in length,
administered by the board, in the principles
and practice of engineering…
81-3452. Engineering examinations;
board; procedure.
(2)The examination will be given in at least
two sections and may be taken only after
the applicant has met the other minimum
requirements as described in section
81-3451 and has been approved by the
board for admission to the examination as
follows:
(b) The principles and practice of
engineering examination consists of at
least an eight-hour test period on applied
engineering. Passing this examination
qualifies the examinee for licensure
as a professional engineer if all other
requirements for certification are met.
» The new NCEES Structural Exam will
be offered for the first time in spring 2011
as a 16-hour exam. The revised statute
language will allow engineers who pass
this exam to be licensed as a professional
structural engineer.
(3)(b) An applicant who does not hold an
Accrediting Board for Engineering and Technology
accredited engineering degree may be admitted
to the fundamentals of engineering examination
if he or she has six years of engineering work
experience or engineering-related education. Upon
passing the examination, the applicant shall be
enrolled as an engineer-intern. This subdivision
terminates on January 1, 2005 A person enrolled
as an engineer-intern in a state, territory, or
possession of the United States, the District
of Columbia, or any foreign country, based
on requirements that do not conflict with the
Engineers and Architects Regulation Act and
However, as termed by NCEES,
applicants do not “pass” components
of the new structural exam, but instead
“receive acceptable results.” Only after
receiving acceptable results in both
components will examinees pass the
exam. Assuming all other requirements
are met, examinees will then be eligible
for professional structural engineer
licensure.
were of a standard not lower than that specified
in the applicable law in effect in this state at the
time such person applied to the board and who
is a resident of the state may, upon application,
be enrolled in this state as an engineer-intern.
» Section (2)(c) states that engineering
exam applicants must be enrolled as an
engineer intern before being admitted to
the Principles and Practice of Engineering
Exam. This revision eliminates the existing
statute, which expired in 2005, and allows
those applicants who have taken the FE
exam in another jurisdiction to become
enrolled as an engineer intern in Nebraska.
There are other changes being proposed
by the Board which, in their opinion, are
minor wording changes and do not affect
the content or intent of the existing statute.
If you would like more information about
these proposed changes, please contact
the board office.
5

Recently Resolved Compliance Cases
The following cases were reviewed for
compliance by the Nebraska Board of
Engineers and Architects, and resolved
via the action noted. These summaries
are provided for licensee education and
information, and should not be interpreted
as a full description of the cases
described. In cases where disciplinary
action was taken by the Board per Neb.
Rev. Stat. §81-3444, the names of the
individuals and/or organizations involved
are included.
Case #09.19 – A complaint was filed against an
engineer that allegedly misrepresented the truth
to a county jurisdiction on a project in eastern
Nebraska.
Action: The complaint alleged that the engineer
did not provide truthful information which resulted
in the construction of a dangerous road.
Furthermore, the engineer did not follow the
proper design codes for street grades while designing
the subdivision. Although aspects of the
initial design were not done in accordance with
the county’s code, the county Board granted
a waiver for the engineer to deviate from the
applicable codes in this particular development.
The board’s investigation revealed that the
engineer did not violate any state or local laws.
Also, the information offered by the engineer for
the project was found to be accurate. The Board
closed the case without prejudice.
Case #10.02 – A complaint was filed against the
owner of a building for unlicensed practice of architecture
and engineering on a “B” occupancy
renovation project in southwestern Nebraska.
The owner did not hire an engineer or architect
to perform the work.
Action: The owner of the project believed the
project was exempt per Chapter 10 of the Rules
and Regulations. He consulted an architecture
firm for the preliminary design work, and had
the impression that an engineer or architect
was not required to do the work on the project
since the impacted area was believed to be
only 2,265 square feet; therefore, not requiring
the services of licensed professionals per Rule
10.3.2. An initial review of the project indicated
that over 3,000 square feet may be impacted by
the expansion, which would make the project
subject to the E&A Act. The Board’s Compliance
Officer conducted a site visit to gather additional
information regarding the area impacted by the
office expansion. After review of the information,
it was the opinion of the Board that the renovation
project did not adversely impact more than
3,000 square feet. The Board closed the case
without prejudice.
Case #10.04 – Plans were submitted to a city in
southwestern Nebraska in which the mechanical
and electrical engineering was performed by a
Professional Civil Engineer. The building official
with jurisdiction was concerned that changes
to the system’s design submitted to him were
indicative that the engineer was practicing engineering
outside his area of education, training,
and experience in violation of Rule 5.1.3.
Action: The Board directed a review of the
project documents by a licensed professional
engineer. It was her opinion that the Respondent
did have an understanding of, and experience
in, mechanical and electrical engineering.
However, her review also noted some potential
deficiencies in the work of the Respondent.
The Respondent’s former employer provided
information regarding the mechanical and electrical
engineering training and experience of the
Respondent, and the Respondent was asked to
appear before the Board. It was the opinion of
the Board that, after considering the evidence,
that the Respondent did have the education,
experience, and expertise to practice mechanical
and electrical engineering. The Board closed
the case without prejudice.
Case #10.05 – A complaint was filed against an
engineering firm relating to a development and
adjacent property in an eastern Nebraska city.
In 2002, the Complainant discovered that his
property was receiving damaging storm water
runoff from the development.
Action: It was the opinion of the Board that the
complaint was not brought to its attention within
a reasonable amount of time after the date of
discovery. The Board closed the case without
prejudice.
Case #10.06 – A complaint was filed against
an individual for the unlicensed practice of engineering.
The Respondent, who is also a Registered
Land Surveyor, submitted a preliminary
storm water drainage report associated with a
city subdivision in western Nebraska.
Action: The Respondent indicated that he was
unaware that the storm water drainage report
prepared by him was considered the practice of
engineering. He also indicated that he did not
lead anyone to believe that he was an engineer,
or that he was able to practice engineering. The
individual declared that he not only informed the
client that they would need to hire an engineer
for the project, but also assisted them in getting
estimates from engineers for the project. The
Board closed the case without prejudice, but
also recommended that the Respondent identify
his authorship of the report along with his title
and qualifications, and that in the case where
a final report is to be submitted at a later date,
the titling of the report should include language
identifying the report as “preliminary” or
“conceptual” in nature, so that the report would
not be interpreted by a member of the public as
being prepared by a professional engineer.
Case #10.07 – A complaint was filed against a
firm regarding the architectural and engineering
services rendered for a hotel in central
Nebraska. The complaint alleged that the firm
did not complete plans and specifications for the
project in accordance with a verbal agreement
entered into, nor did the firm act with reasonable
care and competence.
Action: The Board’s investigation was to determine
if the firm in question acted with reasonable
care and competence per Rule 5.1.1. It was
the Board’s opinion that the firm did not act in
an incompetent manner. The Board closed the
case without prejudice.
Case #10.12 – An engineering firm allegedly
attempted to hire a city council person for an
eastern Nebraska city as a marketing consultant
for the firm. A conflict of interest situation may
6
arise when a city council person is in a marketing
position for a firm that does engineering
work for the city.
Action: The Board’s investigation revealed that
this matter made it no further than the “idea”
stage. The engineering firm did approach the
city councilperson with the possibility of hiring
the individual as a marketing consultant.
The firm also solicited opinions from the City
Attorney and the Nebraska Accountability Commission
regarding possible conflict of interest
concerns. Both entities indicated that a conflict
of interest would not exist if the individual
recused themselves from city business relating
to the firm. However, the engineering firm also
found out that it may no longer be eligible to
bid on certain projects as a result of hiring this
individual. The firm decided to abandon the
plan, and no actual conflict of interest situations
occurred. The Board closed the case without
prejudice.
Case #10.14 - A complaint was filed against an
organization that was offering to practice engineering
without a Certificate of Authorization.
Action: The firm, United Engineering Inc.,
was registered with the Nebraska Secretary of
State’s office with their nature of business as
providing engineering services. Upon further
investigation, it was found that the firm offered
civil engineering services on their web site.
The Office Administrator for the organization,
which did not come from an engineering background,
indicated that the owner, a professional
engineer no longer with the company, was
responsible for the Certificate of Authorization.
The Office Administrator also declared that the
firm did employ a professional engineer on staff
full-time and would immediately reapply for a
current Certificate of Authorization. The Board
ordered the firm to pay the amount Certificate
of Authorization fees in arrears along with the
expenses incurred by the board in investigating
the complaint.
Case #10.15 - Plans were submitted to a city in
eastern Nebraska for a senior housing project.
An engineering seal was placed on the architectural
drawings. A complaint was filed against the
professional engineer for the unlicensed practice
of architecture.
Action: The Respondent indicated that the seal
was placed on the drawings by mistake. The
firm’s practice was to scan each professional engineer’s
or architect’s signed seal into the CAD
system, and the CAD technician was responsible
for applying the correct seal to the correct
layer. This error was missed during all the
reviews prior to submittal. The organization was
notified of this matter by the city building official,
and as a result the firm resubmitted the plans
with the responsible architect’s seal, signature,
and date on the architectural sheets. The firm
has also taken steps to prevent this error from
occurring again. The organization will no longer
scan signed seals into the CAD system, but will
only scan the seal; the professional engineer
or architect must sign each seal by hand. Also,
layers will be set in the CAD system that will not
allow an engineering seal to be placed on archicontinued
on next page

Licensure Updates April 7, 2010 through December 22, 2010
Architects By Exam
Gregory A. Brown Kansas City MO
Michael K. Eckmann Omaha NE
Keith A. Herrman Omaha NE
Cody L. Hillen Omaha NE
Sarah M. Janiak Lincoln NE
Matthew Manning Lincoln NE
Dwayne R. Meyer Elkhorn NE
Caleb J. Rogers Omaha NE
Joseph P. Vodicka Omaha NE
Eric D. Westman Omaha NE
Matthew T. Whaley Omaha NE
Professional Engineers By Exam
Architectural
Daniel Karnes Omaha NE
Chad T. Liechti Bellevue NE
Melissa R. Thomsen Omaha NE
Chemical
John P. Gilroy Overland Park KS
Civil
Bryce Anderson Omaha NE
Justin S. Anderson Papillion NE
Matthew S. Beran Lincoln NE
Brent N. Bonham Kansas City MO
Jill C. Brandt Omaha NE
James P. Brunkhorst Sandy OR
Adam R. Christensen Omaha NE
Renee M. Day Yutan NE
Samuel David Decker La Vista NE
Michael David Forsberg Omaha NE
Brent Frerichs Lincoln NE
Daniel C. Fricke Lincoln NE
Nicholas Gordon Omaha NE
Robert J. Gregalunas II La Vista NE
Aaron J. Grote Omaha NE
John P. Haggerty Omaha NE
Sean Ryan Hughes Roeland Park KS
Jason A. Lehn Ainsworth NE
Everett Owen Omaha NE
Piotr Paczkowski St Petersburg FL
Clinton Powell Grand Island NE
Jamie L. Reinke Cortland NE
Christopher M. Rolling Omaha NE
Michael Sandene Reston VA
Juan C. Szymanski Omaha NE
Electrical and Computer
Cole C. Brodine Kearney NE
Jonathan H. Dockhorn Columbus NE
Steven W. Gocek Nebraska City NE
Matt E. Kalin Norfolk NE
Drew A. Lange Crofton NE
Korey R. Wells Blair NE
Nicholas E. Wischhof Columbus NE
Environmental
Amanda J. Medcalf Lincoln NE
Mechanical
Brian Boyd Lincoln NE
Joseph Maro Craig Glenwood IA
Daniel Stephen Dixon Lincoln NE
Aaron Epps Lincoln NE
John Eurek Omaha NE
Todd C. Kubicek Omaha NE
Adam T. Luchsinger Omaha NE
John R. Nelson Omaha NE
Ryan T. Sawall Columbus OH
Benjamin T. Toman Omaha NE
Structural
Brent M. Davis Springfield MO
Joel Fairfax Omaha NE
Benjamin C. Jennings Brookline MO
Nancy M. Melby Omaha NE
Ryan P. Pelster Omaha NE
Jason Lorenz Suelter Lincoln NE
Thomas L. Taylor Elkhorn NE
Emeritus Licensees
Emeritus Architect
Harold Fletcher Jr. Frankfort KY
Paul A. Lage Omaha NE
Peter R. Lage Jr. Omaha NE
Jed Moulton Omaha NE
James T. Rice Richmond VA
R. Dennis Rieke Jr. Gretna NE
Danny G. Schlichenmaier Lincoln NE
Brian D. Thilliander Omaha NE
Orrin H. Wendt Sioux Falls SD
Charles A. Wilscam Jr. Omaha NE
John E. Wisniewski Lee’s Summit MO
Emeritus Engineer
Richard D. Kuchenrither Boulder CO
Otto P. Leinhauser III Newtown PA
Roger H. Lescelius Columbus NE
Richard A. Libner Park Ridge IL
John D. Linder
Fountain Valley CA
Barry J. Ling Anthem AZ
James A. Lofton Cassville MO
James W. Ludwig Columbus NE
H. A. Lung Covington KY
Allen D. Mitchell Alpharetta GA
Leslie E. Moldenhauer Johnstown CO
Norman P. Nelson Lincoln NE
John A. Nienaber Hastings NE
Timothy J. Owens Columbus NE
Robert F. Payer Storm Lake IA
Glenn L. Reeder Jr. Hampstead MD
Ronald C. Roche Austin TX
David L. Rollins Omaha NE
Steven B. Sample Pasadena CA
Edward Anton Serfozo Wheat Ridge CO
Robert A. Sexton Rice Lake WI
Daniel J. Sharp Lincoln NE
Eldon R. Strasheim Lincoln NE
John Milton Thomas Norfolk NE
Thomas E. Tiedgen Lincoln NE
John C. Tone Denver CO
Jeffrey J. Uhrig Poynette WI
Richard M. Velten Ballwin MO
Andrew Vidikan Los Angeles CA
Douglas C. Weber Arvada CO
Laird E. Weishahn Navarre FL
Herbert W. Williams
Oklahoma City OK
Robert J. Yechout Omaha NE
Li Yu Carbondale KS
7
Robert D. Ziebarth Bay Village OH
Deceased Licensees
Architect
Philip B. Georgeson Bennington NE
Robert D. Hecker Sioux City IA
Robert L. Moore Omaha NE
Donald L. Patton Lone Tree CO
John H. Thiessen Castle Rock CO
Engineer
Joel M. Bard III Omaha NE
Richard M. Hansen Lombard IL
Gregg D. Horner Omaha NE
Donald G. Lamp Lincoln NE
Louis F. Lederer Camp Verde AZ
William L. Porter Springfield IL
Ronald E. Ross Lincoln NE
Travis James Good, an Omaha native, was
posthumously given an honorary EI Certificate by the
Board on April 16, 2010. He passed away three days
prior to taking the FE Exam and was just weeks away
from graduating with a civil engineering degree from
Iowa State University.
Compliance Cases
tectural drawings, or an architectural seal to
be placed on engineering drawings. It was the
Board’s opinion that the firm took the proper
steps to not only correct the problem, but also
prevent it from reoccurring. The Board closed
the case without prejudice.
Case #10.16 - A complaint was filed against an
unlicensed individual for the practice of engineering
without a license, and also for offering
to practice engineering as an organization
without a Certificate of Authorization. The Complainant
noted that the Respondent was doing
a site evaluation and environmental engineering
at a location in eastern Nebraska.
Action: The Board’s investigation was to
determine if the work being done on the site
was the practice of engineering per N.R.S.
§81-3421. The list of services in the proposal
includes recommendation of further work
related to environmental monitoring testing and
O&M activities, well field assessment and options
for future use, potential and recommended
site use, wetland development and stream
bank mitigation, recreation use analysis,
wildlife and endangered species analysis, and
contamination assessment. The Respondent
indicated that he was gathering public information
that already existed and preparing it as a
document. It was the Board’s opinion that the
Respondent was not practicing engineering
by gathering already existing information and
preparing it as a document, and as a result, the
organization was not practicing engineering.
The Board closed the case without prejudice.

Robert L. Hanna, illustrator and
a Nebraska Emeritus Architect.
Ted Kooser, U.S. Poet Laureate (2004-2006) and recipient
of the 2005 Pulitzer Prize for Poetry, is a Nebraska Poet.
Illustrator’s Note: The illustration accompanying this poem is meant to give the reader
a glimpse into the world of the author and features the poet’s beloved dog Alice, who
passed away last autumn.
“Oh, Mariachi Me.” Valentines. Lincoln: University of Nebraska Press, 2008.
215 Centennial Mall South, Suite 400
P.O. Box 95165, Lincoln, NE 68509
PRSRT STD
U.S. POSTAGE
PAID
Lincoln, Nebraska
Permit No. 212