Licensing Laws / Unlicensed Practice

No state has control of the licensing qualifications or exam content of another state, nor does any state have knowledge of the content or answer key of the exams of another state.

Each jurisdiction (state) may define the practice of surveying as it sees fit and the citizens or visitors must respect the laws of the jurisdiction.

IIRC, there is a provision in the PE Act for a temporary license to practice engineering, but no parallel language in the PLS Act. The Board may, at its discretion, issue a PLS license without examination to a licensee of another state, but that's unlikely given what I stated in my 1st paragraph.

I'm not opposed to your idea of a national license for work which is not governed by state-specific law (const staking, topo, control). I've advocated a similar tiered licensing system within the state. A temporary license to cover work governed by the laws of physics and mathematics rather than specific and arcane common law or statute which is state-specific would be a good idea if there were a mechanism in place to limit the authority to such work. Currently, there is not, so you gotta live by the law as it exists.

For starters, there will likely never be a national surveying "license" for anything.

CFEDS is not licensure, but certification. The same with GISP. The difference between licensure and certification is very significant.

No national law license, engineering license, chiropractic license, barber license, etc. exists because the Tenth Amendment has been found in case law to reserve the power of licensure to the states in almost all matters not fundamentally interstate, i.e. FAA pilot's license, FCC ham radio license, etc.

As for construction staking, my state has no requirement of surveying licensure for that function. Should we? Probably, and it would be in the public interest but it won't happen because it will cost someone somewhere money.

>How is having a CA license or not having a CA license going to affect my performance?
>
>do I magically become unqualified when I cross an imaginary line in the sand?
>

It doesn't affect your performance.....they just have no way of KNOWING that you are qualified.

State regulated licensure exists for a reason.....otherwise, ANYONE could do surveys, and ANYONE could walk all the way across the USA doing survey work.

Why advocate to eliminate it or weaken it just due to your own personal circumstances?

What about the PLS in CA who didn't get the project? Ho do you think he would feel knowing someone from OR is doing work he should be doing?

maybe it's different in CA but... around here, different states have different rules.

>Some of the laws requiring a PLS are simply a protection of turf in my opinion. Sure boundary laws are state specific, BUT why do BOR's have laws that restrict every imaginable task that remotely looks like surveying?

> What about the PLS in CA who didn't get the project? Ho do you think he would feel knowing someone from OR is doing work he should be doing?

There's the mentality to answer that question... :o(

It would seem that the only reasons that you can't cross that magic line in the sand are 1) professional turf protection, 2) governmental turf protection, and 3) restraint on interstate commerce. It has nothing to do with the qualifications. You haven't paid the right piper.

Chances are, if you were an employee of the utility company, you'd be exempted from state governance, just like the BLM surveyor is.

No problem crossing into Utah. Construction staking isn't a licensed profession here.

JBS

So then how do survey brokers stay in existence? I hear that some states have banned them, but they sure keep popping up. I suppose that goes more in line with the recent threads about contracting, than crossing a state line to pound in a few hubs or transfer a NGS bench mark across that majic line.

And what if it is reservation land within that state where your project is located? Alledgedly, state laws don't apply.

That brings up an additional fine line. Can you survey from an adjacent state you are not licensed in to get an elevation or position to use for a project that is in the state you are licensed in?

Common sense would say yes. Some bureaucratic administrator might say no.

I did that once on the OR/NV border, working on an Airport control survey in an Oregon town right on the border, I used a BM about 1/2 mile south of the border as part of my control as well as some BM's on the Oregon side, this was prior to having a NV PLS ticket. Who knows, but if someone saw me they would probably want to hang me.

SHG

Good discussion guys, I appreciate it.

We are NOT discussing state specific boundary law here; topo, control, stakeout and everything else.

The example I gave was made up, I don't do construction staking, more of a specialized provider of ground support and data processing for airborne sensor data.

>No state has control of the licensing qualifications or exam content of another state, nor does any state have knowledge of the content or answer key of the exams of another state.
>
Are there ANY states that don't use the NCESS national exam to test for basic competency? How is a coordinate or a slope stake different in CA than ME? I see this as the same difference as driving in ME using my CA drivers license, I have obviously passed a minimal competency driving test in CA to get that license.

>Why advocate to eliminate it or weaken it just due to your own personal circumstances?
>
I am advocating that a PLS who has passed the NCESS national exam should be qualified to perform those tasks tested on the national portion of the exam, why be tested on the same stuff 50 times?

I am quite certain this isn't just about my personal circumstances, times have changed, especially in the mapping industry, $1M+ sensors don't pay for themselves in small geographic areas, in addition a lot of the contracts cover large geographic areas crossing political boundaries.

I realize laws are different from state to state, and they seem to be more restrictive west of the Mississippi, out here on the left coast if I fly an airplane overhead with a GPS receiver coupled to the sensor/IMU and process the data, I just practiced land surveying without a license in at least a few western states. There are guys doing it, when I talk to mappers they are shocked that they can't process the data, and yes they do fly everywhere in the USA and to Canada and anyplace else they can keep their several millions of dollars of equipment busy. I would say most folks doing this type of work are highly skilled at what they do and provide a quality product. It is nothing to fly across several states to collect data, fly home and land without ever touching the ground in the "foreign" state.

I guess since I am in the mapping data acquisition business I might see more of this than the small boundary surveyor who works in a county or two. Mobile mappers, aerial LiDAR and digital cameras, even static scanners come at such an investment in dollars that you need to cover large areas. Clients are demanding the type of data products this technology produces. The situation right now is everyone pretty much ignores the PLS laws (I am trying not to, thus PLS licenses in FIVE states, only two of which I have ever or ever intend to practice boundary surveying), wouldn't it be better to say OK, if you have a PLS from any of the 50 states on staff, you are good to go for NON boundary tasks?

SHG

These have been around for a while

Shelby, is this a start?

NSPS Construction Staking Standards

NSPS Topographic Survey Standards

lest we forget our red headed step child - GIS. That ole Uncle NSPS again

NSPS has model standards for just about everything we do, maybe even how much flagging to tie on a lath (allthough not sure on that)...

The problem is the ones that don't follow certain guidelines don't even know they exist, or don't care. Which brings up that other term they test for in every state "minimum competency", whatever that means.

Personally, I'm not an advocate of any national license. Period. It's bad enough when you apply the concept of "local standards", even within your own state, but they are very real and we'd all better recognize that. Bring a M & B guy into a PLSS state and it WILL get screwed up. And vice versa. No thanks. The public is not protected in any way shape or form.

$0.02

These have been around for a while

> Personally, I'm not an advocate of any national license. Period. It's bad enough when you apply the concept of "local standards", even within your own state, but they are very real and we'd all better recognize that. Bring a M & B guy into a PLSS state and it WILL get screwed up. And vice versa. No thanks. The public is not protected in any way shape or form.
>
> $0.02

So how is topo, control, mapping, stakout and probably a host of other activities that BOR's regulate any different between the M&B state and the PLSS state?

All NGS, and USGS etc. activities that myself and everyone relies on as a basis for our work are about 100% done by unlicensed individuals, right? If they are licensed, it certainly isn't in every state where they do these activities. Yes, I realize these activities are exempted in state laws, why is that? Are we harmed? Why can't I as an unlicensed person in your state do the same thing? I am not even advocating that, simply that once licensed in ANY state by taking the national NCESS exam I should be qualified to practice NON boundary tasks in all 50.

What I am advocating is there is no appreciable difference to what the BOR's regulate as surveying (outside of boundary law including planning and zoning and all that goes with real estate transactions), once you show some sort of competence by being licensed somewhere I can't see how the public is harmed. Sure a state board may not be able do much to you, BUT those are usually pretty minor damages compared to what will happen if something really goes wrong, some state board sanction will be the least of your worries, somebody will be lawyering up and taking every dime you or your E&O carrier have.

For as many regulations as surveyors seem to operate under and are consequently restricted in what they can do OR think they can do (as evidenced by the several threads here in the last day) we are about one of the least respected "professions" on the face of the earth. I think really we are not much more than semiskilled technicians that have tried to legislate ourselves into professionalism with all kinds of restriction of trade and business practices that do nothing for us but try and protect our turf, they certainly for the most part don't make us more professional. Professionalism is earned and I don't think we have done a very good job of earning that as a whole.

SHG

These have been around for a while

> For as many regulations as surveyors seem to operate under and are consequently restricted in what they can do OR think they can do (as evidenced by the several threads here in the last day) we are about one of the least respected "professions" on the face of the earth. I think really we are not much more than semiskilled technicians that have tried to legislate ourselves into professionalism with all kinds of restriction of trade and business practices that do nothing for us but try and protect our turf, they certainly for the most part don't make us more professional. Professionalism is earned and I don't think we have done a very good job of earning that as a whole.

Sad but true. But we don't need an education. HA!

These have been around for a while

> For as many regulations as surveyors seem to operate under and are consequently restricted in what they can do OR think they can do (as evidenced by the several threads here in the last day) we are about one of the least respected "professions" on the face of the earth. I think really we are not much more than semiskilled technicians that have tried to legislate ourselves into professionalism with all kinds of restriction of trade and business practices that do nothing for us but try and protect our turf, they certainly for the most part don't make us more professional. Professionalism is earned and I don't think we have done a very good job of earning that as a whole.

Can't say I disagree with that notion, as much as that truth bothers me. Also, the NGS & USGS monuments are rarely property controlling. But many states have regulations regarding "measuring the surface of the earth", for just about any reason. Besides, just because you can measure contours does not necessarily mean you know what property they are on. Thats where our handy little seal comes in. Maybe not so much on a construction site, but only after it's already been surveyed for design.

So, if a person has passed the National NCEES exam then they should be allowed to go to any state and perform non-boundary work, contrary to many states rules? Sorry sir, I have a tough time with that.

For that matter, I could then let my license lapse and just go do topo's & construction staking under my clients direction. Sad part is that I'd likely be busier and make more money farming out my robot & GPS - with me attached.

So you speak of not doing our part to uphold professionalism, well that would certainly maintain that trend. Then again I fully support a 4 yr degree & CEU requirement in every state. Maybe then we can talk of a national "license".