JUNE| 2019
Newsletter of the
Structural Engineers Association of Washington
State Leadership

Darrell Staaleson (SE)

Vice President

Theodore E. Smith (SE)

Matt Leslie (SC)

Past President
Siri Ashworth (SE)

Jim Farley  (SW) Michael Bramhall  (SE) Matt Leslie  (SC) 
TJ Merrell  (SP)

In the Issue

  1. Seattle Chapter Spring Social
  2. May Dinner Meeting Recap
  3. Structural Engineering Summit
  4. SEA Northwest Conference
  5. Structural Engineers Foundation of Washington Update
  6. SW Chapter Past Presidents Message
  7. Website Policy Update
  8. Standard of Care
  9. YMG Corner
  10. State and Chapter Committee Reports
  11. Employment Opportunities
  12. Membership Postings
  13. Upcoming Events
  14. From the Editor
Seattle Chapter
Spring Social
Coming Closer - A community approach to
ending homelessness in Seattle

Date : Tuesday, June 25 , 2019
Time : 5:00 - 8:30 PM
Location: Lake Union Cafe
3119 Eastlake Ave E, Seattle, WA 98102
Click here for directions .
Registration Fees:
Members, Non-Members, & Guests - $55
YMG - $40
Students - $20

Registration/Social Hour
Buffet Dinner
Keynote Presentation "Coming Closer - A community approach to ending homelessness in Seattle"
President's Award, 2019 Engineer of the Year Award

We’ve all seen the tents around town and, undoubtedly, heard the reports of homelessness across the region and the country. But have we heard much about what is or can be done to combat this? The BLOCK Project is a housing initiative and a community building project in the Seattle area. Through its integrated design, this project will not only offer opportunities for healing and advancement to those formerly living on the fringes of society, but it will also bring connection, relationship, and compassion to the center of our lives and communities. Many social injustices, including homelessness, are perpetuated through emotional and physical separation, which allows us to get stuck on the complexity of the issue. By literally saying, “Yes, in my backyard”, we will begin to see the person afflicted by the issue. The Block project believes this will nurture the empathy needed to catalyze a global movement. 
Please join us on June 25, 2019 for the annual SEAW Spring Social and learn more about this informative and unique approach to addressing a pressing issue in our community.

Benefits and knowledge our attendees can expect to take away from the presentation:

  • This presentation will help give an update of the status of the BLOCK Project, sharing what has done and where it is hoping to go. Awareness of efforts being made to address the issue of homelessness.
  • How each of us can personally address the issue of homelessness.

The homelessness crisis is actually a community crisis. By acknowledging this we begin the process of getting involved. 

Speaker: Rex Hohlbein, Founder + Creative Director at Facing Homelessness / Principal at BLOCK Architects / Co-founder of the BLOCK Project
A Seattle native, Rex ran a successful residential architectural firm for 30 years. In 2010, after befriending several men experiencing homelessness along the Fremont canal, Rex started a Facebook page to raise awareness for those living unsheltered through the sharing of photos and personal stories. Today, that Facebook page has over 50,000 followers, becoming a thriving and inspirational non-profit: Facing Homelessness. In 2017 Rex combined both architecture and community outreach in starting a social justice architecture firm, BLOCK Architects, with his daughter Jenn LaFreniere.

May Dinner Meeting Recap
By Sean Augustino

This month’s dinner meeting was a double-header, with a tech talk followed by the main presentation. It was a bit of a different format, with the tech talk followed by a buffet-style dinner, and then the main event. I was a fan of this setup, and if you have any thoughts on what kind of format you would prefer, send them to SEAW!

The tech talk was by Simpson Strong-Tie on their Yield-Link connections and frames. The Simpson reps described the design philosophy, testing, and behavior of their link and full frames, and why they are different from traditional moment frames or braced frames. What was most interesting to me was that in their Yield-Link Frame the deformations were concentrated at the beam/column joint, these deformations were more uniform up the building than traditional frames, and that they could test up to about 5.5% drift before the frame failed! Simpson also offers handy design tools and plug-ins. For more information on this, please visit https://www.strongtie.com/products/lateral-systems/strong-frame-moment-frames/special-moment/yield-link-structural-fuse . If you or someone you know is interested in giving a tech talk, please let us know!

The main presentation was about common errors in envelope waterproofing and detailing. Ray Wetherholt of Wetherholt and Assoc. gave the presentation. Ray specializes in assessing and designing repairs for envelope failures. He focused on how engineers have a responsibility for the envelope, and how good detailing can make a world of difference, even though we typically think of this as outside of our scope. He brought up issues I had not thought about, including: it’s easier to seal around a round pipe than a rectangular tube, the importance of venting confined spaces (sealed concrete will continue to cure and give off moisture that can cause problems), supports above roof level should penetrate down to the primary structure, and frames above the roof should have room for a roofer to fit their hand for sealing. For more information about the firm visit https://www.wetherholt.com/.

A special thank you to Simpson Strong-Tie, Ray Wetherholt, and all who came out. We hope to see you at the Spring Social in June!
2019 Structural Engineering Summit
By Leo Baran
The NCSEA Structural Engineering Summit is the only annual event designed  by  structural engineers  for  practicing structural engineers. It draws the best of the profession together for the best practical education with expert speakers, a leading trade show and compelling peer-to-peer networking, at an event designed to advance the industry. Take this chance to be a part of this growing and dynamic event!
New for 2019
  • Beginning on Tuesday and ending Friday afternoon, the program offers more education and less overlap.
  • Five Keynote Presentations!
  • The SE3 National Symposium, the first Structural Engineering Engagement and Equity (SE3) symposium to be held in conjunction with a national engineering conference
  • A Welcome Event sponsored by the Structural Engineers Association of California (SEAOC)
Registration rates are the same as last year.
Use this link and register today:   http://www.ncsea.com/events/annualconference/registration2/
SEA Northwest Conference
"Panic! in the Code Change"

August 15-17, 2019

Salishan Resort
Gleneden Beach, OR

Hosted By:
Structural Engineers Association of Oregon

  • Enjoy a dinner and evening with Hart Keene, an interactive illusionist, mind reader, and comedian
  • Take your kids to Snapology workshops where they can learn the basics of STEAM (science, technology,engineering, art, and math) with LEGOs!
  • Attempt to take down Oregon as the reigning water competition champions
  • Relish in outdoor dining
  • Take advantage of the resort’s golf course
  • Bask in the sun on the beautiful Oregon coast
  • Register now and make lodging reservations directly with Salishan Resort using the code SEAO2019
*Note: the code should already be included when using this link. However, shall you choose to book a room outside of the included dates, you will need to contact the resort directly

*Guest Speaker Topics will Include:

•Engineering Tall Wood Buildings: The New Type IV Construction Types
•ASCE 7-16 The Wind Provisions: Changes Affecting the Design Provisions
•Designing with Structural Glass
•An Update to Changes to TMS 402/602-16
•AISI Cold Formed Steel Industry Updates•Updates to Seismic Provisions in ASCE 7-16
•A Summary of Significant Updates in ASCE 41-17

For more information contact Jane: 503.753.3075 | jane@seao.org
Structural Engineers Foundation of Washington Update
By Angela Gottula Twining

The Structural Engineers Foundation of Washington says THANK YOU to those who participated in the GiveBIG campaign and the Foundation of the Future campaign so far. SEFW cannot fulfill its mission without donations from local corporations and individuals like you!
SEFW is pleased to be funding $16,000 in scholarships for the SEAW Scholarship Program and will recognize four students at the SEAW Spring Social at the end of June. Look for SEFW to make appearances at local SEAW Chapter Meetings to talk more about the mission and accomplishments of the organization.
The Fall Forum is being organized right now – keep November open! The date will be announced as soon as it’s confirmed.
We welcome feedback and ideas on future funding opportunities. Please contact  admin@sefw.org  with your comments! Have a great summer.
SW Chapter Past Presidents Message
Click HERE or on image to view
Website Policy Update
Website Privacy Policy Update

SEAW has updated its website privacy policy. See the full policy here: [ policy link ]

The paragraph below has been added:

“The contact information you provide may be used to communicate information and updates pertaining to the Structural Engineers Foundation of Washington, or other communication, in addition to receiving occasional company news, updates, related product or service information, etc.”

If you wish to opt-out of information sharing with SEFW, email seaw@aminc.org .
Standard of Care
By Darrell Staaleson, President SEAW Seattle Chapter 2018-2019

One of my duties as President has been to attend the NCSEA Conference in Chicago, IL and the Northwest Conference in Richland, WA to represent our members and bring back information and ideas from engineers throughout the USA. One topic which has been a part of nearly every seminar or discussion is something that is a part of our profession’s origin mythology – such as The Code of Hammurabi for law – and is also continually at the forefront of our professional practice: The Standard of Care. I would like to share a few thoughts with you on this topic.

When I was a cub engineer, back before cell phones, when a laptop computer weighed as much as a spare tire from my truck and was nearly as bulky, I worked for an engineer who I think exemplified what a principal engineer ought to be. It was not always a pleasant situation, but he was an honorable man and I did learn a tremendous amount about the practice of engineering from him. And that is where I formulated my core standards of practice and my understanding of the Standard of Care.

One summer back then, our senior engineer was sent out into the field to make structural observation of a foundation for a school building. When he arrived at the site, the first concrete truck was just pulling in and the contractor was not finished setting the reinforcing steel because he was working that day without his crew. It was not intentional. It just happened. And he was scrambling. Our senior engineer wanted the project to be a success. He did not want the Contractor to be harmed and he did not want to see truckloads of concrete wasted. So, he decided to help the contractor set the reinforcing steel. They got it done. And the concrete for the foundation was placed per the contract documents. Our senior engineer thought he had done a really good job. He was happy when he returned to the office. The principal engineer was, well, not happy! Our senior engineer told me he could not sit down for a week after that ”butt chewin’.” And his ears were still ringing from the yelling. And yes, he deserved it! It was a mistake – made with the best of intentions, but a mistake nonetheless. I was never certain whether he really understood why it was a mistake.

It was shortly after that incident that all of us in the office had to read the “DPIC Liability and Loss Prevention Manual.” This wasn’t just a perfunctory exercise. Our employment depended on it. We had to pass a written exam and an oral interview. We were required to know and use those principles in our practice. If we did not, we would essentially become a high-risk employee. Because knowing and using good practice standards significantly reduces the risk of an error and an insurance claim. 
I still have that manual and I still use those principles. I have added to my methods and Standard of Practice over the years. For example, I now use a “Liability Risk Matrix” from my liability insurance carrier. If a project exceeds the minimum point score, or if risks cannot be mitigated, I do not take the project. Anyone in practice knows that a “plum” project can easily go sideways for any number of reasons. The Liability Risk Matrix helps to make sure those reasons have a low risk of occurrence on the project and that I am not being “starry-eyed” and instead enter into an agreement with clear expectations. What is astounding to me is seeing some engineers in this modern era ignoring some of these core liability principles. One of the areas where this is constantly an issue in my practice is construction phase structural observation and field work.

At the NCSEA Convention in Chicago in OCT 2018 there was one presentation on a case study of a liability claim by John G. Tawresey, Vice President KPFF, Retired. John (I thought courageously) presented a case history of a claim his company was drawn into. I found the case study thought-provoking and I ended up in discussions with John from which I learned about the work being done on the ASCE Committee on Claims Reduction and Management (CCRM). John Tawresey will be writing an article on the Standard of Care for Equilibrium in the Fall 2019. Here is a summary of CCRM’s objective:
“The Committee on Claims Reduction and Management [CCRM] has recognized that the open discussion of professional negligence claims provides the profession with one of the few sources of feedback on the sources of disputes and professional liability claims which arise from engineering projects. Sharing actual claim stories and experiences can alert other engineers about possible pitfalls and areas of concern regarding disputes and claims, and provides practical information which allows engineers to engage in loss prevention tactics and practices. The key issue is this: why do we keep making the same mistakes over and over? Openly sharing actual claims experiences is the single most powerful tool available to practicing professionals which can promote the professional learning process and avoid making those same mistakes over and over.” –CCRM. 

Recently, I was hired to make a structural design for an addition and renovation of a residence on the east side of the Cascades. I traveled over Snoqualmie pass with the architect to the site. I have known and worked with this architect for 20 years. He has a lot of good ideas and I enjoy hearing his stories about different projects. And it made the time on the road go by quickly listening to him tell about his first project, which was laying out a military base while in the Air Force. 
When we arrived at the site, I made a preliminary condition assessment of the existing structure. This was a 1970’s era timber-framed building supported on a perimeter concrete footing and stem wall. There was a partial half-height basement for the furnace and hot water heater in the center of the building. Even though there was a creek close to the west side and a lake to the south, there was no indication of settlement. The perimeter was sheathed with plywood. In this area the ground snow load is 65 PSF and the wind speed is 110 MPH. The architectural concept was to add a second story at the north end and an open truss great room to the south. This resulted in a 10-foot increase in building height. Analysis per IEBC Sec. 807.5 (10% Rule) showed that the primary difficulty would be in handling the overturning forces from greater wind loads resulting from the increase in building height. With this knowledge of the existing structure we began our discussion of the architect’s schematic design.
In the first hour of my schematic design review, based on my knowledge from the assessment, I was able to eliminate costly new foundations in the basement and at the new prow wall which had been proposed by the architect. The architect was impressed and told the client I had saved him $15,000, about twice my fee. Not bad for 3 hours of work.

We continued our discussion. I explained that since this was a major renovation with both new and existing plywood shear walls in a complex configuration on an existing foundation, some additional construction phase structural observation and field work would be needed. The contractor became belligerent and combative and asked why I thought I needed to look over his shoulder and watch him work and tell him how to do his job? Then he said that most times an engineer is in the field is to fix his own mistakes and it is not right for me to ask the owner to pay for that. I never know exactly what to say in response to this kind of statement, just like when someone tells me they like golf or believe the Earth is flat.

I explained the requirements of the Building Code and the Standard of Care for the construction phase to my client and contractor, in plain English. They “got their backs up” and refused to accept it. Later on, I learned that the contractor had an engineer from Eastern Washington that he had wanted to work with because that engineer never required construction phase services.  
After further negotiations about our agreement in the next week, the client had a major emotional tantrum about construction phase services even though my fee was only 50% of the construction costs I had saved him. So, as a reward for working hard to make the project a success, upholding the highest and best standards of care, and being a loyal and faithful servant to my client, I was fired and called unprintable cuss words - in public. Technically, it was slander. But unlike the curses yelled at Marine Corps General “Hell Devil” Butler, none of the words hurled at me were in French. And it was well worth it to be rid of an irrational client, a cowboy contractor, and a project that gave every indication of being a lawsuit waiting to happen. And yes, I got paid for my services. 
As is my practice, I prepared an “after-action report” to evaluate what I did right and what went wrong. It is not a “fun” exercise, but more like splashing cold water on your face – “a bracing tonic.” Here are a few of my thoughts on this project. 
The construction phase is a constant issue in my practice as it was on this project. So, I revisited the basis for my standard practice for the construction phase. 

1.       My agreements are based on “Engineers Joint Contract Documents Committee” (EJCDC) published by ASCE and my practice standards are developed based on the EJCDC Commentary and on my understanding of our profession’s long-standing principles. The EJCDC Commentary gives this guidance:
a.  The law does not require an engineer to deliver a perfect plan; there is no implied warranty or assurance that his drawings and specifications will be perfect and free from defects. However, the skill and judgement provided by the engineer must measure up to the standards of his profession. A set of contract documents or specifications that is so precisely drawn as to allow no flexibility in the means and methods of construction would not be in the interest of any of the parties. Therefore, the intent of the contract documents must be clarified and elucidated by the engineer as the contractor performs his work during the construction phase.
b.   The engineer is to use his best efforts as an experienced and qualified design professional to give the owner a greater degree of confidence that the completed project will conform generally to the contract documents and that the integrity of the design concept of the completed project as a functioning whole has been implemented and preserved by the contractor.
c.  The engineer will provide field orders to authorize minor variations in the work from the requirements of the contract drawings which are compatible with the design concept of the completed project as a functioning whole.

2.       In addition to his duties to his client, the engineer also has a paramount duty to protect the life, safety, and welfare of the public. Which requires the engineer to make periodic site visits to perform structural observation to check general conformance of the construction with the contract documents to be diligent and proactive in serving the public interest. I cannot just pretend to be ignorant of the construction phase as if it is completely separate from the design. The construction is not reliable unless the engineer is part of the construction phase.

This is not just a code provision. This is a part of the Standard of Care which I was taught from my first days at engineering college with Professor Mete Sozen talking about the smell of death and scene of devastation he observed in the aftermath of the 1985 Mexico City Earthquake and telling us that we, as engineers, had a duty to prevent this from happening.

The extent of those construction phase services is determined by the engineer of record based on project requirements and the engineer’s experience and judgement. And there is a wide range of opinion about what is needed on a particular project. But it is definitely not up to a client or contractor to decide whether or not he would like to have that service. Because engineers also have a duty to the public which we have an obligation to fulfill whether the client wants it or not. 

My ‘takeaways’ from the after-action report:

1.       Revisiting the basis for construction phase reinforced that my practice is correct. Until someone I respect shows me a good reason to make changes, I will stay with my current practice. Other engineers might not agree with my opinion. And my opinion probably is not perfect, but it is based on a reasoned assessment of ethics and law, it is defensible, and I have confidence in it. Improvement:
  • Keep to established practices until you find a good reason to make changes.

2.       I explained the concept for the construction phase to my client and contractor, in plain English. Looking back at that conversation, I should have realized then and there that they would never listen. I would never be able to convince them. And if a client will not listen to my advice, I cannot serve them. They will never be satisfied with my work. That is a huge liability risk – a red flag.  Improvement:
  • Set a stop loss on your efforts. From now on I will limit the time I spend attempting to explain construction phase services. If the client does not accept my opinion after 10 minutes, they never will. The project is a dead horse because the client is asking me to perform services contrary to my duties as a licensed design professional. And I cannot allow that to happen. I am better off ending my association with that project right then. That way I can refocus my efforts on finding a rational client with an interesting project and an adequate budget.

3.       Looking back at the conversations with the client, I did not realize soon enough that he could not see the Project in terms of total construction cost but instead was focused on my engineering fee. This represents an unsophisticated client or a client that does not have an adequate budget for the project. Improvement:
  • For an unsophisticated client, change the risk factor in the “Liability Risk Matrix” from “5-High” to “Red-Flag” – decline the project.
  • Verify that the client has a realistic budget for the project.

I have the experience from principals I have worked for and my own experience as a principal. I have read forensic case studies which focus on procedural errors. I have read recommendations from liability insurance carriers. I have read countless legal summaries in ASCE Magazine and I have read the EJCDC Commentaries. And I listened when my Attorney gave advice. But in truth, the real problem is not about what is written in commentaries or opinions or what you or I think as individual engineers in practice. The problem is that this must be defined by the collective wisdom of those in practice in our engineering community.

Like it or not, the Standard of Care is subjective. And in disputes, the Standard of Care will be defined by an expert witness and the legal profession who may, or may not, meet your assumptions of "similar practice." This effectively transmutes our Fundamental Canons of Practice into, as John G. Tawresey penned, the “you should have known rule.” This situation cheapens our ethics and does not engender a climate of fair business practices. Which we know from “The Brooks Act,” leads to lower quality construction and significantly decreases public safety.

So, we can either continue to let someone else define our Standard of Care, or we can define it ourselves as a professional association. And I think that the primary purpose of SEAW is to define the Standard of Care for the structural engineering community in Washington State.
I encourage you to give some thought to the issue of the Standard of Care for construction phase services and then share your thoughts in Equilibrium or on our SEAW Group on Facebook.

You can start by asking yourself these questions:
1.       What is the current Standard of Care in the Seattle area?
2.       What should the Standard of Care be?

  1.  “Commentary on Agreements for Engineering Services and Construction Related Documents,” Prepared for Engineers Joint Contract Documents Committee (EJCDC No 1910-9) by John R. Clark, Esq, published by ASCE, 1993 Edition.
  2. “The Brooks Act at 40: A Law that Works.” https://news.asce.org/the-brooks-act-at-40-a-law-that-works/
  3. Proceedings of 2018 Structural Engineering Summit – Chicago, Risk Management – Claims Studies, by John G. Tawresey FASCE, Vice President KPFF, Retired.
YMG Corner
By Sean Augustino

Hello SEAW members! Summer is fast approaching, and that may mean a slowdown for SEAW, but the YMG is not stopping the fun!

First off is a recap of our past events. We hosted two on-campus student luncheons, at UW and Seattle U. Both were successful, and we had good student engagement, with lots of useful questions and advice going back and forth. A special thank-you to the firms who sent representatives, and for the students who participated! We also hosted our May Happy Hour on the 21 st of May at the Garage in Seattle, in partnership with Steel Encounters. This was a special Happy Hour with a bowling tournament included! Everyone had a great time, and it was one of our best-attended events, with about 40 people in total. A very special thank-you to Steel Encounters for their generous sponsorship. A big thank-you also to Contech for sponsoring our June Happy Hour on the 6 th of June at Tap House Grill in Seattle. It was also very well attended and we played a lot of pool!

And now a look ahead! We will be having our first PE Information Session on Tuesday, June 18 th 5:30-7:30p at KPFF. You can learn about the application, the exam, and what you need to know to get ready. Also, we will be running our YMG Vancouver Trip on Fri 7/19- Sat 7/20. Friday will be a tour of Sika’s production facility in Surrey, BC (extremely limited space!) and Saturday will be a tour of Mass Timber projects in Metro Vancouver, led by Fast+Epp. If you are interested or want more info, e-mail lindaji@mlaengineering.com.

Also be on the lookout for some other summer events, including potential tours, as well as our election ballots for the 2019-’20 YMG Board. In addition, if you’d like to be involved in helping plan the 2020 SEA Northwest Conference in Seattle, e-mail us at seawymg@gmail.com . We hope to see you at an event soon! 
May 2019 Social at Garage Billiards in Seattle sponsored by Steel Encounters. 
June 2019 Social at Tap House Grill in Seattle sponsored by Contech. 
State and Chapter Committee Reports
Contact the committee chair if you are interested in learning more or getting involved:
  • NCSEA Delegate – Chun Lau
  • Earthquake Engineering Committee – Kai Ki Mow
  • One of the current main focus and an important topic that the committee hopes to address in the upcoming year is the Increased Seismic Load in the newly published ASCE 7-16. 
  • Members interested in EEC can find additional information regarding the meeting on the SEAW website calendar or can contact the committee chair.
  • Outreach Committee - Pete Opsahl
  • To sign up to volunteer or to mentor, visit the SEFW page. 
  • Sustainability Committee – Rachel Vranizan
  • Refresher Committee – Mark Whiteley
  • Public Information Committee – Darrell Staaleson
  • Disaster Preparation/Response Committee – Joyce Lem
  • WABO Liaison Committee – Charlie Griffes
  • The SEAW/WABO Liaison committee is now available for questions from SEAW or WABO members. These questions can be about subjects addressed in the white papers already issued or general questions in the realm of structural engineering practice as it relates to interaction with the various building departments. Comments or questions can be emailed to charlie@ctengineering.com.
  • White Paper 6b - 2017 on Deferred Submittals
  • Wind Engineering Committee – Scott Douglas
  • Technology Taskforce – Morgan Wiese
  • Membership Task Group – Jill Shuttleworth
  • Continuing Education Committee – Nathalie Boeholt
  • Scholarship Committee – Kevin Solberg 
Employment Opportunities
Are you currently seeking employment as a structural engineer, senior manager, or a senior engineer technician? Check out our job board for current employment opportunities.   Learn More
Mid-level Design Engineer and Senior Project Manager 
Seattle Structural is looking for qualified professionals to join our talented group practicing across a number of different industries. Seattle Structural offers an excellent opportunity to work on a variety of public and private institutional, healthcare, educational, and commercial projects both domestically and internationally. We offer a competitive salary and a relaxed, collaborative work environment. Benefits include medical insurance, transit reimbursement, and retirement matching. Seattle Structural is a firm that makes it easy to become personally invested in the achievements of your company.

Seattle Structural is an Equal Opportunity Employer.

We are filling two positions. Candidates must meet the following requirements:
  • Mid-level Designer: 5+ years of experience.
  • Senior Project Manager: 10+ years of experience.
  • BS or MS in Structural, Civil/Structural, or Architectural Engineering.
  • Experience in steel and concrete buildings, lateral analysis, deep foundations, and marine projects are desired.
  • Working knowledge of CAD and Revit preferred.
  • Strong emphasis on client service.
  • Excellent communication skills.
  • Strong technical skills.

Please address inquiries to:
Howard Burton, President
Seattle Structural PS Inc.
3131 Elliott Ave STE 600A
Seattle, WA 98121
Structural Engineer II
AJP Engineering is a small dynamic structural engineering firm located in downtown Seattle and we have an immediate opening for a Structural Engineer with 2-5yrs experience.
We consult on a wide range of projects: high-end residential, multi-family, public housing, commercial/industrial, and expert witness.
We offer a casual work environment (great views from the 19 th floor!) with a competitive compensation package; 1.5x overtime pay, sick time, paid holidays and vacation, flexible hours, health insurance, and IRA with matching contributions.

An ideal candidate has:
  • Strong project management skills
  • Bachelor of Science required, MSCE in Structural Engineering preferred.
  • Experience or coursework designing wood-framing, steel, and concrete.
  • Familiar IBC, ASCE7, NDS, AISC, ACI, and ASCE
  • Possesses strong written and verbal skills as well as AutoCAD drafting. 
  • Passed EIT and moving towards PE registration.

To apply for this position, submit a cover letter and a resume to info@ajpeng.com
Executive Director
Northwest masonry industry association is seeking an Executive Director. Responsibilities include association management; building code development; creation of educational programs and delivering technical presentations; technical support for design professionals; and coordination of industry research projects.

Northwest location permitting residence in Washington or Oregon. To express interest, submit a cover letter and resume to admin07@nwcma.org .

Position Requirements:
  • Bachelor’s degree in civil/structural engineering.
  • Minimum 3-5 years’ experience in commercial building design. A professional license is preferred.
  • Excellent oral and written communication skills.
  • Ability to work independently.
  • Outgoing personality with the ability to provide design guidance and engage design professionals in discussions regarding building material selection. Existing contacts within the regional A/E/C community preferred.
  • Some travel away from home with overnight stays.

For additional information please visit www.nwcma.org/careers .
Membership Postings
In accordance with SEAW bylaws, membership applications are vetted by the executive director, granted probationary status by the chapter board, and posted for membership comment. Membership is considered accepted 30 days after posting if current year dues are paid and no member objections have been received.   Read More

New Members:
  • Jill Walsh
  • John Strub
  • Jesse Dixon
  • Kyle Cramer
  • Alejandro Coronado
  • Kevin Vaughn

Upcoming Events
June 18:  YMG PE Info Session
June 18-20: URM Seismic Resilience Symposium
June 25: Seattle Chapter Spring Social
August 15-17:  2019 NW Conference

From the Editor
JUN 2019

Equilibrium publication Team:
John Gunn, Editor
Darrell Staaleson, Past Editor
Zohrah Ali
Allison Tran
Blaine Sanchez
Lisette Terry
Shivang Gupta

Equilibrium will be taking a break over summer and will return in September!

1.        All members are welcome to submit articles to Equilibrium. To help you with your writer's block, here are a few topics: Write “Engineer's Notes from Afield,” summarize an interesting technical design you worked on, write about how you have been successful and increased productivity with an accounting procedure or marketing technique, write about your experiences doing community service, or share some construction site photos and talk about lessons learned.

2.        “A Picture and a Paragraph.” Please use the article submittal form provided and the picture needs a caption along with the names of the people in the photo.

3.        Please submit your articles in Word format using the Article Template. [ Article Template ]

4.        Please send your articles to jmg485@cornell.edu .

June Puzzle:
What is the name and value of the unit of currency smaller than a penny that is still used in accounting in the US?
Bonus: What year was the unit first used?
Clue: The unit is used to express gasoline prices.

Look on the SEAW Facebook Page for a picture clue!

The first SEAW member to respond on our SEAW Facebook Page or at the next dinner meeting – with a correct and full answer - will get a cash prize.

May Puzzle:
What is the current name of the hospital featured in Grey’s Anatomy?
Bonus: What was its original name?
Clue: The hospital is named after two deceased characters.


The current name of the hospital is Grey Sloan Memorial, and its original name was Seattle Grace.

Catherine Cai was the first to answer correctly!

Structural Engineers Association of Washington 
info@seaw.org  | 206.338.7376|  www.seaw.org