I do not believe this will pertain to professional services on construction projects, such as surveying or materials testing, but all California surveyors who perform construction staking as a sub to public works projects, this should still be reviewed.
http://www.dir.ca.gov/Public-Works/SB854.html
Brad Luken
Also of importance is the fact that the rule reads that it only applies to contractors and subcontractors listed on the bid documents.
Per the state code, the threshold for listing sub-contractors on the initial subcontractor list is those performing work valued at 1/2 of 1% of the total bid or $10,000, whichever is greater. With that said, it is common for a contractor to list a subcontractor that falls under this threshold if the work contains requirements for special licenses or endorsements. This is to protect against bid protests.
For example a contractor bids on a project that involves painted structural steel (which requires special endorsements), but does not list a qualified sub-contractor.
The second lowest bidder will submit a bid protest claiming that since a sub-contractor was not listed, the contractor intended to perform work themselves, which they were not qualified to perform, therefore should be considered as a non-responsible bidder.
I guess my point is - you may be listed, even if you are only providing a small amount of work.
Different Subject:
Also pertaining to construction staking in California is the Board's 2013 opinion that all contracts that contain the requirement for land surveying services(construction staking), also must contain requirements that the prime contractor follow the "Little Brooks Act". This act requires all professional services contracted, by a state or local agency , be based upon competency and qualification based standards. In the Board's opinion allowing a prime contractor to hire their favorite surveying company was circumventing the Brooks Act.
I sent the Board an E-mail requesting additional information since the CALTRANS standard specifications contain many requirements for professional services that are regulated (surveying, engineering, geological engineering). The state specifications and boiler plate contracts do not require that the contractor follow the Little Brooks Act.
I did not get a response back to my request for additional information, so I do not know if they have re-considered their position.
EDIT: The real conflict is when the professional services are listed as a bid item, thus subject to competitive bidding rather than qualifications based selection. I have to assume that since that opinion was dated 2013, that there would have been additional information provided if indeed this was a wide spread circumvention of the Little Brooks Act.
