The Myth of Mobility for Professional Land Surveyors

I think the author is whining about a 2 hour exam in the belief that it is not needed to prove that one has state-specific knowledge. I believe that there are enough differences between the states that such an exam is quite necessary. I don't think it's protectionism, so much as protecting the public from a lack of competence. You can be assured that the hacks would be thrilled to take advantage of an overly liberal system of portable credentials.

@peter-lothian yes, some safeguards probably need to be in place, however having five state licenses I can tell you they are all about same, and I reference the individual state laws if I don't recall something. A license is required I agree, BUT I think the point is being licensed as a PLS in multiple states is mostly testing the same things over and over and over and going through the application process multiple times. Honestly it takes 6-12 months at least to be able to get another state PLS AND you have to actually prove very little new, so what is the actual?ÿpoint? Turf protection comes to mind.

I guess I thought it a thought provoking article from a person who was on a BOR for a number of years.

SHG

I've sat for four additional state specific exams after my initial licensure (well, three states and a Federal District).?ÿ I have no problem with states requiring their own additional exam on top of the NCEES exams.?ÿ From a political (ohh, bad word) point of view, it's basic Federalism, and I think we could use more, not less local control.?ÿ From a practical point of view, I've never really had any problem with the exams themselves: just study for a month or two and take the d**n thing. Although I have heard horror stories of some people taking 5+ tries to pass the Delaware exam since it is (or was) predominantly drainage & sediment control.

What I do find odious is states that treat an experienced comity applicant from an adjoining state as if they were a new applicant. One state still made me fill out twelve separate experience forms for the previous twelve years of experience when I had been a PLS for that entire span of time.?ÿ One thing Delaware does get right is their comity application.?ÿ It's basically fill in name, address and SSN; then the form says if you're licensed in an adjoining state (or any state for more than five years) skip the rest of the form, sign and send in the application fee.

@james-fleming I am licensed in NJ and have been since 1993.?ÿ I'm thinking about taking my exam in PA but am not really interested in studying the drainage design methods as when I took that exam in the 90's I was well versed in drainage design in NJ, as I was designing drainage a road/highway construction projects under the supervision of a PE.?ÿ

NJ uses the rational method, PA was using the TR 55 outdated model which I was clueless on and I'm not sure what model Delaware uses.?ÿ I would love to be able to practice in both states and have nointerest in designing stormand sanitary systems, those things are better left to the Engineers.

What I question is, why are some states allowing Surveyors to do drainage design when, in most states, that falls under the statutory responsibility of an Engineer.

It is not surprising the author is an engineer. Patty is good people but is completely off-base here.

I hold five licenses in western states. I selected them because they were similar, but I recognize they have some significant differences. As an investigator I can tell you most of the issues I see relate to people extending practice across state lines. These are not 'technical' problems but violations causing real harm. I wish I could share details, it would curl your toe-nails.

Idaho was a take home exam for over a decade. We had more failures than you can imagine, mostly comity applicants. It is now a six hour proctored exam and yes, its includes PLSS questions. The failure rate has dropped in half. The handful of questions on the FS and PS simply don't cut it when testing (PLSS) competency. When I have multi (PLSS) state licensees ask what a closing corner is we have a problem. I wish that were an extreme example.

NCEES is, and has been for the last few years, working on a way to revamp the current PS exam such that it can be 1) more beneficial to the 55 boards that license land surveyors in the US and territories; 2) more adaptable to the practicing land surveyor who needs to be licensed in multiple states in terms of less duplication of examination efforts; 3) more practical for those smaller licensing board which either failed to update their state surveying exam for many years or simply did not have the resources to manage the development of a state exam in the proper way (Yes, Nevada was one of them); and 4) provide a better national exam platform for all boards to make a better determination for how they wish to proceed with adapting their state surveying exam.

I agree with thebonicman above that the author is a good person, very knowledgeable, and has good intent.?ÿ However, this article misses the point of licensing in multiple ways.?ÿ Boards that unilaterally decide that someone licensed in another country should just be handed a license simply by virtue of having a license in the former country and waiving exams is not putting the public welfare in the forefront of their decisions.?ÿ A licensing board has the responsibility that may at times not completely align with those of the professions that it regulates and the board needs to make the right choices.

Of course the license should be mobile.?ÿ Shouldn't be doing it anywhere if you can't do it everywhere.

Posted by: @duane-frymire

Of course the license should be mobile.?ÿ Shouldn't be doing it anywhere if you can't do it everywhere.

Even many PLSS states had different instructions from each other.?ÿ If you are retracing something old you need to know the territory.?ÿ

There are enough poorly done surveys discussed here that don't involve interstate licensing that I wouldn't trust someone from California to properly replace obliterated monuments in Iowa or vice versa without evidence they studied the other state.?ÿ And then there's Ohio.

On the other hand, there should be no need for a state to retest material that was on the national test.

And hydrology should be a separate endorsement on the license, not a requirement for someone who wants to just do boundary.

My $0.00

Because I'm not licensed yet, and on the path, why doesn't the consortium get the cojones to excise out the engineering parts, period (drainage plans etc ) and let that be an additional credential that can be added if you so wish to achieve. Like the CFM PEs will add etc.

Seems like it would be easy, although all the people that did suffer that process will be all butthurt and bellyache about how the new people have easier blah blah blah blah.

A revamp and reassessment is needed, and clawing back other elements of the profession too like legal descriptions writing, pushing back on planners and people that aren't licensed whom seem to make broad stroke approvals or disapprovals and the like.?ÿ

?ÿMy $0.02 and they really don't matter because I'm still only a upwardly path seeking tech, but not idle nor under the belief that this is going to self repair either.?ÿ

Meh.

I don't have a lawn, get off my rocks and dirt....

?ÿ

?ÿ

@bill93?ÿ

We were on parallel rant except you type faster and more efficiently....????????????

The state specific exams at least require the applicant to invest some time in familiarizing themselves with the various state rules and practices. I have seen many big problems and substandard practice by firms that send crews to an area they are not familiar with. Specifically, it is unbelievable the surveyors who come into our valley of 3-mile method original surveys and proceed to break down sections by the standard method.

I held license in three adjacent states and when called on to survey outside my home state I always had to renew my knowledge of state specific statutes. Things like fence law in Utah and riparian ownership in Wyoming come to mind.

@kscott This was my point when I lobbied for the change to proctored in Idaho. I am all too familiar with the effort getting ready for an exam. It is the best chance to push an applicant to the books for your jurisdiction. I gave everyone the map to ace the exam. Those who followed it and put in the effort were rewarded for it.

Every jurisdiction has its own history, laws, and customs. A clear path to licensure is a must but handing out license A for knowledge B is silliness...

This article is a perfect example about why State Boards should be separated between professional engineers and professional land surveyors.?ÿ Engineers are a wonderful group of professionals and I appreciate their contribution to society but the role of the land surveyor has changed so much since the time that the boards were first created that to truly safeguard the public State's should create separate Boards for each group.

Think about how much change YOU have seen in our profession since you first got into surveying. Can one Board truly govern the professional quality of the licensees of the future for the benefit of the public?

Texas recently combined its engineering board and land surveying Boards into one. It will be interesting to see if this turns out to be in the best interest of the in the future.

I am licensed in Louisiana (initial) and in Mississippi, Texas and Arkansas.?ÿ All great States with a wide range of different when it comes to land surveying laws and procedures.

@t-ford?ÿ

Amen.

Like doctors and nurses.

Plumbers and electricians

Cross over shouldnt be an oversight.

It's shouldn't exist at all.

They're different professional Licenses and should be treated and assessed as so.

Imnsho.

?ÿ