arctan(x), post: 356627, member: 6795 wrote: Any chance you could share the language used? I've been asked to certify a lease plat and I haven't actually surveyed the land. I've just made a document shading the sections of land specified in the lease document.
So I'm supposed to certify that I've read the lease document and that the graphical representation I've made of the land is the same.Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-N920A using Tapatalk
What's your email addy?
Andy Nold, post: 356630, member: 7 wrote: Yeah, I don't think I have ever certified a strictly topo. I've certified boundary with topo on it.
I've done lots of small topo's that were well within the boundaries of a larger tract for say cell site, et cetera.
We sign and seal elevation certificates with no boundary, don't we?
I'll cut to the chase... if it was me, I wouldn't sign it. I wouldn't explain, I would just politely say I cannot sign it. If they needed something signed and sealed by me, I'll give them a proposal and ill do the work
Andy Nold, post: 356596, member: 7 wrote: I have been asked to sign and seal a drawing showing a river crossing. No boundary information is present in the drawing other than the natural monument, the river.
When I sign and seal something, it is my assertion that the something meets the minimum technical standards for a boundary survey. If the drawing has no boundary info and I sign it, am I lying?
What do they think my seal and signature means? Is it just like sealing wax and ribbons that make the document look more officially?
I hear you loud and clear.
People have come to me to get their drawings legit and I had to tell them there was only one way for that to happen, give me the raw data and coord files and let me have their folder to examine the project and let me decide if it will float or sink.
There have been no takers and the word spread and nobody that knows me asks that of me.
I've seen the documents that have been notarized and have the fancy embossed seal of gold and everything that has been written and drawn is bogus.
When it is not a survey and does not require a surveyors seal, don't sign it.
Surveyors sign their own surveys and those they wish to take credit for. We do not sign something that we know nothing about.
0.02
A Harris, post: 356672, member: 81 wrote: I hear you loud and clear.
People have come to me to get their drawings legit and I had to tell them there was only one way for that to happen, give me the raw data and coord files and let me have their folder to examine the project and let me decide if it will float or sink.
There have been no takers and the word spread and nobody that knows me asks that of me.
I've seen the documents that have been notarized and have the fancy embossed seal of gold and everything that has been written and drawn is bogus.
When it is not a survey and does not require a surveyors seal, don't sign it.
Surveyors sign their own surveys and those they wish to take credit for. We do not sign something that we know nothing about.
0.02
I'm pretty sure Andy made a survey of the crossing, so it's not someone else's drawing but his data. It's just not "boundary" surveying. It is compliance with the RRC and GLO rules for permitting pipelines and other utilities that cross the rivers for permits though. 🙂
Kris Morgan, post: 356693, member: 29 wrote: I'm pretty sure Andy made a survey of the crossing, so it's not someone else's drawing but his data. It's just not "boundary" surveying. It is compliance with the RRC and GLO rules for permitting pipelines and other utilities that cross the rivers for permits though. 🙂
That may be so, I did not read into his statement that it was his drawing.
I am so far away from construction surveying and may do something that the RRC and/or GLO will see once every 5 years.
My understanding is that for decades the RRC have taken many drawings without signature for industry permits and locations and from what I've heard, they have been suggesting that a surveyor sign and seal the drawings now rather than the signature of the contractor or other non professional. It would be reasonable to think many of the signatures were graduates with a degree in Petroleum Technology or Engineering.
The BOR stresses that any drawing that we the licensed surveyor produce and send out of the office for delivery are to be signed and sealed or have the PRELIMINARY DRAWING - NOT FOR RECORDING quotation.
When I am not the draftsman, I want to see the draftsman's signature on the drawing. If they are not willing to be identified and sign it in the block that says Drawn By, they can go back into the field.
The act of placing a signature is saying we are accountable for what is on the drawing. The surveyor's signature is a certification. There is no need for all the other verbiage.
Send one down the chute with the PRELIMINARY DRAWING statement and let everyone know that you will certify to something after you have gone out and located where it was built.
😉
I certainly agree with your thoughts Mr. Harris.
For what it's worth, on January 12, 2016 the RRC adopted the rule that requires the plat for certain horizontal wells to be signed by a surveyor or civil engineer.
I think their commentary on the rule leaves the door open to enforcement by the TBPLS if an engineer attempts a plat with boundary information but I suppose we'll see what happens. I know of one civil engineer in west Texas who has been providing well plats.
15 The remaining individuals, most of whom identified themselves as professional land surveyors,
16 and two associations (the Texas Society of Professional Surveyors and the Texas Board of Professional
17 Land Surveying) expressed general support for the proposed rule changes, but objected to the inclusion
18 of professional engineers within proposed å¤3.86(g)(6) regarding plat requirements.
19 The Commission disagrees with this objection. Professional engineers are included in
20 å¤3.86(g)(6) because they are qualified to certify downhole data provided to the Commission. Further,
21 Section 3.86(g)(6) does not alter the scope of authority granted to professional land surveyors or to
22 professional engineers. That scope of authority is established by relevant statutes and rules, and is
23 enforced by the authorities created to regulate those professions. The authority granted to either
24 profession is not affected by the Commission's acceptance of certifications related to work performed
25 pursuant to that authority. Therefore, the Commission makes no change in response to these comments.
