INGENIEUR
Generally, Engineering Technologists expect better
recognition from the industry and they think BEM
can assist in this respect. They wish to be treated
as engineers and asked for a more simplified
route by BEM to enhance their professional status
and career path. A large percentage, namely 86%
of Engineering Technologists preferred BEM to
create a new route specific for them to become
Professional Engineering Technologists (PET).
We understand that the Focus Group of
Development Construction Permit (FGDCP)
has been considering allowing PEPCs to
issue Kebenaran Merancang (KM) or Planning
Permission for certain categories of building. Do
you think PEPCs are ready for this? What advice
would you like to give to PEPCs who choose to
submit KM for the client?
I think it is a good sign and gesture from the
Industry and Government to recognise the role
and competency of engineers in this new frontier
of KM submission which has been the domain of
Planners.
However, I must caution PEPCs to tread
on this new entitlement carefully, seriously
and professionally. I am sure the Planners
will be watching carefully whether PEPCs are
up to the mark to submit KM in a competent
manner. What it means is that the submitted
KM should not have too many errors or not
complying with the relevant policies such as
the Town and Country Planning Act, Act 172,
planning guidelines etc.
However, PEPCs should not be discouraged
by this. The fact that you can be the submitting
person is because you have input in the
respective categories of development projects
for KM. (There are nine sub-categories that
PEPCs can submit KM as of today). PEPCs can
always engaged Planners to handle the parts that
PEPCs are not familiar with until such time they
are familiar with them.
In the process of ensuring the professionalism
of Professional Engineers in delivering the
satisfactory services to the industries, what
concrete steps have BEM taken so far?
We have been stringent and have taken action when
required. On the complaints received, there were 66
new cases but 43 had no prima facie. In 2018, 13
cases were recomended for hearing and 23 are still
under investigation. Eight were found guilty.
On the Certificate of Completion and Compliance
(CCCs) that are issued by Professional Engineer
with Practising Certificate (PEPC), can we have
some statistics on the numbers issued by PEPC
and how many complaints were received over
the last few years?
As of April 2019, 5,640 CCCs were issued. Of
these 389 were late submissions and 345 had
errors. Based on the statistics, complaints were
only on one per cent of certificates issued. This is
not significant. I urge all parties to uphold integrity.
Let it come from within yourselves so that we can
be on par with developed nations.
Status/Decision of Investigating
Committee In 2018
Hearing By Disciplinary
Committee in 2018
Appeal To Appeal Board
in 2018
No
Case Recommend For
Hearing Processing Guilty Not Guilty Upheld Reject
9 13 23 9 - 1 -
N.B. The above figures include cases brought forward from previous years and may not
necessarily include all prima facie cases concluded by PPC but not endorsed by the Board by
year end.
6
10
VOL
2019
VOL 78
55 APRIL-JUNE
JUNE 2013