Skip to main content

Law Office of Ronald David Greenberg

Home
Site Map
Notice; disclaimer
About the firm
Contact the firm
Member Login
Curriculum Vitae
Publications (with links)
Publications (by date)
Posts
U.S. Navy tour of duty
Selected photos
Business Lwyr comment
Securitization comment
Work in progress
Selected references
Selected editorships
Startup businesses
Safire letter comment
Verbal skills importance
Business law importance
Humor importance
Experience importance
Work-life balance
Professional Engineering
Role of law importance
Pro bono activities
Army ballistic missile
Dedication
Professional engineering: 

Dual requirements for applicants -- education plus experience:

The N.Y. State Education Department, Division of Professional Licensing Services("Department") requires that "Each application must show that the applicant has been graduated from an engineering curriculum registered by the Department and completed sufficient practical experience in professional engineering of a grade and character satisfactory to the board to give a total of 8 years.  Each complete year of study in an engineering curriculum registered by the Department, or the equivalent thereof as determined by the Department, may be accepted in lieu of 2 years of experience toward the requirement of 12 years for admission to the full examination."

Education: 

My studies in the Applied Physics department (2 years) plus those in Engineering School (3years, 2 summers) satisfied the requirements of a 5-year program (1952-1957) for the Mechanical Engineering degree (BSME). My credit for a 5-year engineering program (5 years of engineering curriculum  x 2 years of experience accepted for each complete year of study in engineering curriculum = 10 years experience) would probably count as ten years toward the 12-year requirement.

Engineering experience:


My engineering experience is described in the following:
  • Laboratory instructor (mechanisms lab, Mechanical Engineering Dept., Univ. of Texas)  Sept. 1956-Jan. 1957;
  • Supply officer, U.S. Navy (U.S.S Tarawa (CVS-40),  ); duties (other than Disbursing officer (circa 6 months) and Ship's Store officer (circa 6 months)) in dealing with parts and repairs for a large combatant ship (e.g., ship's engineering, aircraft's maintenance, ship's maintenance, ship's gunnery), 1957-1959;
  • Mechanical engineer (e.g., machine design; refinery economics) not counting time credited for military leave (Navy) and educational leave (HBS and HLS), Esso Standard Oil, industrial  manufacturer (e..g., machine design, refinery economics), two summers at refinery, circa 1959, 1960;
  • Assistant researcher, Harvard Business School (programmer for HarBus 2 (business computer/simulation model); attended IBM programming school (2 weeks) on FORTRAN for IBM 7090 computer), circa 1961, 1962;
  • Lawyer/engineer-in-training (E.I.T.), legal department (large multinational corporation (Allied Chemical, industrial manufacturer (e.g., production, storage, and sale of chemicals; quantitative analyses of settlement of law suit (legal dept. memo; article submitted to a law review), 1964-1967
  • Lawyer/engineer-in-training (E.I.T.), law firm (Arthur, Dry, Kalish, Taylor and Wood, major client large multinational corporation (Uniroyal, industrial manufacturer (e.g., analysis of tires in tire blow-out cases) 1967-1969;
  • Stanford University, Stanford Graduate School of Business (e.g., diagrammatic analyses in course materials and class presentations via discussion/blackboard), 1978;
  • Harvard University, Graduate School of Business (e.g., diagrammatic analyses in course materials and class presentations via discussion/blackboard), 1981
  • Columbia University, Graduate School of Business (e.g., diagrammatic analyses in course materials and class presentations via discussion/blackboard (see examples below), 1970-1995;
  • Author, Quantitative Aspects of Legal Analysis, 1976 Ins. L.J. 589 (1976) (quantitative analysis in settlement negotiations), 1976;
  • Author, The Lawyer's Use of Quantitative Analysis in Settlement Negotiations, 38 Bus. Law. 1557 (1983) (quantitative analysis in settlement negotiations), 1983;
  • Author, Chapter 3, New York Lawyer's Deskbook, N.Y.State Bar Association (e.g., diagrammatic analysis of tax issues (see examples below), 1989-    ;
  • Author, Business/Corporate Law and Practice by Beane, D'Alessandro, Greenberg, Santucci, N.Y. State Bar Assn, circa 2000-    ;
  • Author, The Business Lawyer article: Belated Comment [draft of proposed article] (see "gallery 7" on Navigation Bar), 2013. 

My work experience --whether on a client's matter, on publications, or in teaching -- of over almost 50 years would seem to be engineering experience sufficient to fulfill the Department's 12-year requirement. The engineering experience in the positions described above would seem to be of the type that would be reasonably constitute the practice of engineering.  See, e.g., Melissa Korn, Hot New MBA: Supply-Chain Management, Wall St. J., June 6,2013, at B6 (noting that the "supply chain includes production, transport, distribution and other logistics, as well as the engineering and financial considerations involved in each if those elements." The degree "includes classes in transportation, contract management, and even packaging" with the supply-chain graduates "assigned jobs in areas including inventory management" and "supply-chain analysis, which addresses engineering, analytics and operaational efficiences.").    In addition, the use of engineering principles and diagrams in teaching, in publications, in keeping a heavy combatant U.S. Navy ship operative, and in analyzing clients' issues in technical industrial settings would seem to be engineering experience in an amount substantially more than the needed balance of 2 years to bring the total to at least 12 years' experience required by the Department.

My credit for a 5-year Mechanical Engineering program at the University of Texas would accord me with ten years of experience (i.e., 5 years of engineering curriculum x 2 years of experience accepted for each complete year of study in engineering curriculum = 10 years experience).  These ten years would leave a balance of approximately 2 years of work experience needed to reach the total 12-hour Department requirement to qualify for admission to the full examination.

In sum, I believe that a strong case can be made that the engineering content in my work experience is sufficient to be at least equal to, and most probably to be in excess of, by far, the 2 years of work experience needed to reach the total 12-hour Department requirement to qualify for admission to the full examination.

Opportunity loss of engineering experience at Army Ballistic Missile Agency: 

Although appointed Research Engineer by Army Ballistic Missile Agency (ABMA), also known as Redstone Arsenal (Cape Canaveral, Florida; Huntsville, Ala. (components of military’s space program transferred to NASA in 1960)) and accepted/assigned position in 1957 as Research Engineer (Aeronautical Instrumentation) in ABMA Missile Firing Laboratory at Port Canaveral, Florida (under Wernher von Braun, director of development operations division), and would have likely gained excellent experience at ABMA, my employment at ABMA was subject to the U.S. Navy's approval.  I requested that the Navy issue orders to me to report to the ABMA instead of to U.S. Navy Supply Corps School (Athens, Georgia) then to U.S.S. Tarawa (CVS-40).  The Navy denied my request.

See "gallery 4: Army Ballistic Missile Agency" on Navigation Bar
at ABMA letter (Dec. 3, 1956) (advising that I "have been selected for the position of Mechanical Engineer, GS-5");U.S. Civil Service Commission Rating Notice (Jan. 3, 1957) (("Eligible--Your numerical rating is 99 -- Provisional:  upon graduation, May, 1957"); ABMA letter on jurisdiction (Feb. 14, 1957) (advising that ABMA has "no jurisdiction in military assignments at this Agency" and "very few Navy personnel [are] assigned to ABMA" though “our understanding [is] that at the time you enter the service you are given your choice of assignments.  However, these requests are not always approved. (Emphasis added.)”). The ABMA letter on my Research Engineer Assignment (Apr. 24, 1957) confirmed my acceptance of a position at the ABMA and elaborated on the scope of my assignment:

     “Inasmuch as you have accepted a position with the Army Ballistic Missile Agency” *** “our intention is to assign you to the position of Research Engineer   (Aeronautical Instrumentation) in the * * * Missile Firing Laboratory” having "the basic function of test firing missiles being developed by this Agency” and “includes functions in the fields of * * *, measuring and tracking of missiles in flight, electronic and electrical design and development work in instrumentation, and acquisition and evaluation of data.”  “You are requested to report for duty to the Army Ballistic Missile Agency, Huntsville, Alabama, 3 June 1957.  A few days later you will be sent, at Government expense, from Huntsville to your duty station at Port Canaveral, Florida.”  “If this assignment is not satisfactory, please advise us immediately and we will arrange for you to be assigned to one of our laboratories here in Huntsville. (Emphasis added.)"  

The ABMA work as described in the above letters seems like it would have been quite interesting an challenging.  Working with Wernher von Braun would have been not only challenging but a great honor. Working in the Missile Firing laboratory seems like just what I would have enjoyed a lot.  This lab I would think would have put to use advanced mathematics, such as differential equations, a particular interest of mine
at the time (having a minor in applied mathematics and having enjoyed, very much, Professor Carter's course on Machine Design).  The engineering and mathematics involved with, for example, the designing of guidance systems for missiles, as well as, measuring and tracking of missiles in flight would also have been, for me, extremely rewarding work.

Although I was disappointed by not having received order from the Navy to report to the ABMA, I should make clear here that I have no regrets having served in the Navy.  Most important to me was that I wanted to honor by serving in the Navy the memory of Benjamin Ghetzler, who was lost when the Reuben James was sunk.  See "Dedication" on Navigation Bar. having enjoyed my time at the Supply Corps school in Athens and my tour of duty aboard the Tarawa. And though a Supply Corps officer ordinarily is not involved in dangerous activities, a Supply Corps officer is not entirely free from risk of bodily harm. For example, my first duty assignment was as Disbursing officer (whose main duty is to pay the ship's officers and crew). When the ship was not at sea, as a disbursing officer, I had the responsibility of picking up the payroll (around $1 million) from a local bank. I would carryout this duty by strapping on a 45 caliber revolver and be driven in a sedan to the bank with a contingent of marines in a jeep following the sedan armed with Tommy (sub-machine) guns to be stationed at the various corners surrounding the bank at the ready in case of an attempted robbery.  Although not counted as engineering experience, the Navy provided many other experiences that have enriched my life.  And I was honored to serve.


Examples of engineering work: 


(1) Footnote 383 below examines limits when boot plus liability in excess of basis are received by the transferor:     
fn.re.lim.bt.liab

Source
: Tax Implications of Forming a Corporation (chapter 3), N.Y. Lawyer's Deskbook (2d ed. 2010-2011 (21st annual rev.)); N.Y. State Bar Assn. (ISBN 1-57969-300-8; Libr. of Congr. Card Cat. 89-64413); winner of Amer. Bar Assn. Constabar Award. Copyright © N.Y. State Bar Assn. 1989, 1991, 1992, 1993, 1994, 1995, 1996, 1997, 1998, 1999, 2000, 2001, 2002, 2003, 2004, 2005-2006, 2006-2007, 2007-2008, 2008-2009, 2009-2010, 2010-2011-2012.  All rights reserved.

Comments:  Footnote 383 above examines the limiting relationships on the federal income tax rules on gain realization and gain recognition applicable to a transferor of property to a corporation:

      (1) gain recognized by a transferor on amount of  boot received [I.R.C. § 351(b) ];

      (2) gain recognized by transferor on amount of liabilities on property transferred in excess of property's basis [I.R.C. § 357(c)];

      (3) gain realized by transferor on the transfer [I.R.C. § 1001(a)];

      (4) gain recognized (re boot and excess liabilities) by transferor on the transfer [I.R.C. § 1001(c)].

These relationships are discussed in the above excerpt arithmetically, geometrically, and algebraically.  Also, the limits are described  in a geometric diagram or figure on another page of chapter (see diagram below).  Thus,  (1) plus (2), or (4), cannot exceed (3), which is the familiar limitation that gain recognized (immediate plus postponed) is limited to the gain realized.

See also curriculum vitae at publications (chapters in books) on Navigation Bar.   Click here for information on Deskbook


(2) Geometric drawing depicting limiting relationships: 

The following diagram (Fig. 3.1) depicts in a geometric drawing what in footnote 383 above was discussed arithmetically, geometrically, and algebraically: that the gain recognized to the transferor by reason of boot (BT) plus liability in excess of basis (E) cannot exceed the total gain realized (GR) to the transferor on the transfer of property to the corporation.
lim.excess.basis.boot
Source: Tax Implications of Forming a Corporation (chapter 3), N.Y. Lawyer's Deskbook (2d ed. 2010-2011 (21st annual rev.)); N.Y. State Bar Assn. (ISBN 1-57969-300-8; Libr. of Congr. Card Cat. 89-64413); winner of Amer. Bar Assn. Constabar Award. Copyright © N.Y. State Bar Assn. 1989, 1991, 1992, 1993, 1994, 1995, 1996, 1997, 1998, 1999, 2000, 2001, 2002, 2003, 2004, 2005-2006, 2006-2007, 2007-2008, 2008-2009, 2009-2010, 2010-2011-2012. All rights reserved.




Materials required related to admission to the full examination: 

The following materials on my Application for Professional License in New York, some partially completed, are reproduced in whole or in part below: (1) Application for Professional License (Form 1); (2) Circular in Professional Engineering and Land Surveying and for Engineer-in Training; (3) Certificate of Educational Preparation and Good Moral Character for Professional Engineering and/or Land Surveying (Form 2-E); (4) Endorser Reference Form (PE and LS); (5) Examination Filing Dates.  These materials were intended to be completed and submitted to the Department  when I believed that I had sufficient work experience to satisfy the Department's requirements.  The materials were acquired circa 1967 with the intention of submitting them to the Department within a reasonable time.  My accepting the position at Columbia Business School resulted in my deciding to postpone, not abandon, the eventual completion of the Application for Professional License.

      (1)  Application for Professional License (Form 1) (in part): 


application






  (2) Circular in Professional Engineering and Land Surveying and for Engineer-in Training (in part):



circular on exam







      (3) Certificate of Educational Preparation and Good Moral Character (Form 2-E): 



certificate







      (4) Endorser Reference Form (PE and LS) (in part):  


reference




 



     (5) Examination Filing Dates: 











Memberships in engineering and scientific organizations: 

      (1) Texas Society of Professional Engineers (TSPE) (1957-     (life member))







I also have been a member of New York Society of Professional Engineers (EIT) (1964 (circa)-     (life member)) and National Society of Professional Engineers (EIT)  (1967-     (life member)).  See also "curriculum vitae" at SELECTED HONORS on Navigation Bar.

      (2) Other memberships: I have also been a member of: American Society of Mechanical Engineers (1967-     (life member)); American Association for the Advancement of Science (1971-     (emeritus));  New York Academy of Sciences (1979-     (emeritus))See also "curriculum vitae" at SELECTED HONORS on Navigation Bar.