In July 2007, Connecticut Governor M. Jodi Rell signed into law PA 07-183 (originally SB 1301), an act that expanded licensure requirements for heating, piping and cooling professionals to cover any engineer or maintenance professional who operates such equipment. While the law was initially designed to ensure that individuals who operate Heating, Ventilation and Air Conditioning systems (HVAC) are properly licensed, when legislators added the word "operating" to describe building engineers, it immediately impacted all building engineers, including those who don't do HVAC work at all and those who only do preventative and basic maintenance work on such systems. As a result, sources say, there is broad non-compliance with present law by owners and property managers throughout Connecticut.

BOMA and other industry groups were not part of the process that saw this law passed in 2007, but seeing its flaws, BOMA, through its Southern Connecticut and Hartford chapters, has been examining steps to modify it. Since reversing the legislation is no longer practical, BOMA is pursuing two measures with its membership, including PMI and United Services:

"BOMA feels that a permanent extension of the OE-Type license, with appropriate revisions, is necessary to ensure the continued employment of our engineering staffs and the families they support," says BOMA Southern Connecticut President Steven Werner. "In addition, the available pool of S-Type license holders is extremely low as the time commitment to acquire an S-Type license can be counted in years. Finally, the increased payroll costs owners and management companies would have to absorb for new, highly-skilled S-Type license holders would be an enormous burden."

In a November 11 BOMA meeting with Richard Hurlburt, Director of the Connecticut Department Consumer Protection (DCP) [Occupational & Professional Licensing Division], Mr. Hurlburt indicated that some changes to the provisional OE-type license could be made by the DCP Commissioner under his regulatory authority and suggested that BOMA work with as many interested groups as possible to write to the Commissioner requesting the desired revisions. The idea of creating a new license category for building engineers also arose at this meeting and the Building Engineer License Task Force was formed. United Services President Paul Senecal is a member of that task force. BOMA hopes to accomplish the new license category in consultation with Mr. Hurlburt and possibly with the assistance of hospital and university groups who have been similarly affected by the new law.

Among the numerous problems identified by BOMA regarding the provisional OE-type license is the actual training for and content of the examination engineers must pass to obtain the license. As it stands now, there is no training course for the examination. Further, the test content is more specific on certain tasks - such as knowledge of high-pressure steam systems - than a typical building engineer or generalist needs. For example, it does not reflect what PMI and United Services technical staff need to know to do their jobs. "We support licensing of maintenance technicians and we support the requirement of bringing in specialized technicians when necessary," says United Services President Paul Senecal, "but we don't believe that the testing requirements for getting the OE2 license are reflective of a generalist."

BOMA is committed to taking actions that will enable its members to operate buildings as they have been and make a license both practical and attainable for building engineers. Both PMI and United Services are heavily invested in BOMA's activities pursuing remedies to the current law. "We work with many generalists and we want to make sure we understand the requirements for them and any changes in requirements," says Senecal.

Most of us recognized it long ago: The US economy is in a recession. Throughout the past year, PMI acknowledged the troubling signs and worked to help clients battle the effects of the economic downturn and soaring energy and supply costs. Now in 2009, PMI is reaffirming its commitment to clients and has already taken steps to control costs.

"We value our relationship with clients and try to keep a pulse on their needs and make adjustments accordingly," says PMI President Michael Diamond. "In this challenging economy, we know we have to strive to control costs and do our part to help our clients to be successful."

Here are some compelling examples of PMI's efforts to keep down client costs:

• PMI has not asked for wage increases from any clients that do not have collective bargaining agreements - that approximates to 80% of PMI's total business. With those clients that are under collective bargaining agreements, PMI has worked to minimize costs by reducing work scope where possible. Due to this contractual stipulation, PMI is working to keep the impact minimal.

• While PMI is facing a minimum wage increase of $0.35 per hour per employee (about 4.5%), the company is absorbing this overhead increase in full, refusing to pass any residual effects on to clients.

• To further save money while maintaining current staffing levels, PMI is not increasing any management salaries.

• Due to fuel cost increases in 2008, many PMI suppliers instituted surcharges for deliveries of supplies and other related products. These surcharges are above the price of the normal delivery and are adjusted as fuel prices fluctuate. Despite the ongoing volatility of the energy market, PMI is absorbing all delivery surcharges imposed by suppliers, again rejecting the notion of passing on these costs to clients.

• Even further, while last year's energy cost increases caused a rise in the price of plastic liners, PMI has been covering those costs with no effect on client contracts.