Chief Tunnel Engineer on Subway Erred in Report, Boss Says : Metro Rail: Supervisor calls the incident an inadvertent lapse. Description of professional standing in state was misstated.

The chief tunnel engineer for the Los Angeles subway project erred by identifying himself as a “professional engineer” in a report assessing excavation problems in Hollywood, according to his boss.

Martin Rubin, board chairman of the Metro Rail engineering firm of Parsons Brinckerhoff, said he has conceded the error to officials of a state regulatory board that is investigating.

“We made a mistake,” Rubin said in an interview, referring to the signing of an Aug. 30 report by the engineer, Timothy P. Smirnoff. Rubin described the incident as an inadvertent lapse on the part of Smirnoff, who he said has begun the process of applying for a California license.

California law prohibits use of the “professional engineer” designation by anyone not holding a state license to practice civil engineering.

The Metropolitan Transportation Authority requested a month ago that Rubin and a representative of another engineering service firm seek rulings from the California Board of Registration for Professional Engineers and Land Surveyors on whether the firms’ engineers are required to hold California licenses.

The MTA’s request was in response to a Times article Oct. 26 reporting that neither Smirnoff nor another engineer who approved the substitution of wood wedges for metal struts as bracing for the tunnels in Hollywood held a California engineering license. Engineering studies have found that the failure of the wedges contributed to surface sinkages of up to 10 inches along Hollywood Boulevard. An independent analysis prepared for the MTA concluded that substitution of the wedges for the stronger, metal struts was “inappropriate.”

The Times article also reported that Smirnoff had identified himself as a “professional engineer” and that eight of 10 “resident engineers” assigned to oversee construction of tunnels and stations do not hold state licenses.

*

Some MTA board members are now questioning why so many of the engineers are unlicensed, when the agency has paid nearly $600 million for engineering services.

“I believe for a project of this type and size, the MTA should insist on registration, regardless of what the state board says,” said MTA board member Nick Patsaouras. “We are paying top fees, so I’m sure we can find qualified people who are also registered.”

An executive of the state board said Tuesday that his staff will try to determine by the end of January whether certain engineering responsibilities assigned by the MTA to Rubin’s firm and to the other engineering firm, Parsons-Dillingham, require California licensing. The “resident engineers” are employed by Parsons-Dillingham.

“The concern we have,” said Harold L. Turner, executive officer of the state board, “is whether engineering is being practiced without a license or without being” under the direct supervision of a properly registered engineer.

“The work of engineering a tunnel would obviously fall under the definition of civil engineering and would require registration,” Turner said in an interview.

He said it will take until later next year for his staff to determine whether the “actual work performed,” including the approval of the wood wedges by Smirnoff and the other engineer, Stephen J. Navin of Parsons-Dillingham, amounted to the unlicensed practice of engineering.

Representatives of Parsons-Dillingham have said Navin and the firm’s other resident engineers defer to Smirnoff’s group and have not practiced what the law defines as civil engineering. Speaking on behalf of Smirnoff’s group, Rubin said: “We have never done engineering without a license.”

*

Times staff writer Eric Lichtblau contributed to this report.