Thanks to a 1996-1999 stint as an engineered wood products engineer, I once was licensed in 35 states plus DC. And some of that was before the NCEES Records and before the model law commonalities. I am now down in my sort of retirement to 10+DC. Unless you really have a purpose to have many or all 50 states, then the current state by state licensing with comity/reciprocity is still best. And of course, you have to watch out for the higher structural licensing requirements in California, Illinois, Nevada, Washington and I think Hawaii. California Civil also has a surveying test section. I have Civil P.E & the old Structural I P.E. Did me fine for wood, mostly repairs and hurricane engineering east of the Mississippi. But my former Illinois Civil P.E. wouldn't let me even seal/sign a repair for a garage. I still basically maintain my licenses along the eastern seaboard, with NC being my home state. Maryland requires an extra seal note/certification (as did Minnesota). Florida not only requires Rules and Laws pdh's every renewal cycle, if you do building permit related engineering, you have to have pdh's every time the Building Code updates. I would say that 99% of Engineers don't need a national license. And for the Safety, Health and Welfare in a given state, each state might have special emphasis. Florida and NC have Hurricanes. NC Bldg Code was one of the first that had a section on docks, piers, wharfs and waterway structures. Do you make a national license that truly covers all of the structural intricacies, that only a California or Illinois SE can qualify for, and may never need to have more than their own state or a handful of others? Or do you make a National P.E. tha is basic Civil, but does meet the California or Illinois Codes. (From what I understand, Illinois SE existed before Illinois P.E., and CA only licenses in Civil, Mechanical, Electrical and SE. The real issue in my mind is not National Licensing; its the term "Engineer". Again, most engineers are probably fine with their home state and a few surrounding states. It is only when you start doing things outside your region, that all of a sudden you have to worry about if you are overstepping some state definition of an "Engineer" needing to be duly licensed in that state. Its awkward as professional adults to have to qualify that yes we are an engineer, but no we are not an engineer if we are in California, or Nevada, Or Illinois, etc. Architects have their AIA. We have our limitations. P.E.'s should, by definition of their state licensing, understand the limits of their licensing and experience and fields (I also have P.E. Discipline Licenses in Naval Architecture and in Mechanical Engineering.) It should be okay to not have to qualify who or what an Engineer is. I liked a Michael Lindburgh statement from PPI License prep on oone of his old cassette courses. He stated we are engineers, just not yet Professional Engineers. What is wrong with just someone with a degree in engineering doing engineering being an "engineer" without it being misconstrued as them trying to sneakily indicate that they are Professional Engineers. Ding them if they say P.E. if they are not, but I think it benefits all engineers if we don't always try to squash the contributions of non-licensed engineers. Airplanes and automobiles have a lot of engineering, and medical devices (I wear an insulin pump with continuous blood glucose monitoring). We trust those, and don't require P.E. Licenses for that. So as my career winds down, and I wouldn't change it, keep the state licensing requirements, loosen up how/who can be called an engineer, and enjoy where engineering can take you.
------------------------------
Bruce Marek P.E., M.ASCE
Owner
Marek Yacht & Design
Wilmington NC
------------------------------
Original Message:
Sent: 05-15-2021 01:00 PM
From: William Hayden
Subject: Q. Might there be problems with "One-Size-Fits-All" Universal Licensing?
Being a sample of one (1), in my professional engineering licensing since about 1971 or so,
the only P.E. license that I had sought, and completed that state's exams for, granted my first P.E. license.
I was so very proud, I framed it and hung it right in front of my office desk[1] on a column next to my work area.
At the time, only partners were "allowed" to do such things. "Yes," I know, save your comments.
Since that time, I was granted P.E. licenses across at least 6 or 7 other states by requesting comity. Each was granted without any additional work on my part.
If a state had requirements or wanted more information, they simply may ask.
For example, I learned that the State of California required an additional exam related to engineering knowledge of earthquakes.
Q. What's wrong with just continuing that system?
[1] To be clear, at that time only partners could wear a suit jacket and had real desks. All the rest of the senior PMs had the traditional "Green Top" drafting tables. This is by no means a complaint, just a historical fact of how executive mgt. thought at the time. Now many of our offices have policies for face jewelry. And "Yes," I am like so dated!
------------------------------
William M. Hayden Jr., Ph.D., P.E., CMQ/OE, F.ASCE
Buffalo, N.Y.
"It is never too late to be what you might have been." -- George Eliot 1819 - 1880
Original Message:
Sent: 05-14-2021 08:57 AM
From: Yance Marti
Subject: Q. Might there be problems with "One-Size-Fits-All" Universal Licensing?
You can always choose a way to frame a question to make something look bad. "One Size Fits All" has very cheap and negative connotations and probably isn't an accurate description of the way licensing is or the way it should be. I have always seen licensing as "Minimum Qualifications" for practicing as an Engineer. If you pass the exam, you have the basic knowledge to legally practice. It doesn't necessarily mean that you know everything and can stop learning. Professional societies like ASCE, APWA, and NSPE drill into their members heads that you need to keep learning. The requirement for continuing education credits every year helps to maintain that need to know more.
I was under the impression that NCEES creates the exams for all states. Which means the standards are pretty much the same.
Do you want to cringe? Read this thread:
https://engineerboards.com/threads/easiest-state-to-pass-pe-exam-in.13210/
------------------------------
Yance Marti P.E., M.ASCE
Civil Engineer IV
City of Milwaukee
Milwaukee WI
Original Message:
Sent: 05-11-2021 10:29 AM
From: William Hayden
Subject: Q. Might there be problems with "One-Size-Fits-All" Universal Licensing?
After just receiving the noted message below, I thought others might be interested.
Stay Healthy! Cheers, Bill
<>==========================================<>
The Problem With One-Size-Fits-All 'Universal Licensing'[1]
Making it easier for professionals to practice across state lines is appealing,
but if it isn't done right, it can endanger the public's health and safety.
Professions like architecture, certified public accounting, engineering, landscape architecture and surveying require rigorous and ongoing education, examination and experience. Universal licensing could undermine the trust and confidence needed for successful interstate practice.
[1] https://www.governing.com/now/the-problem-with-one-size-fits-all-universal-licensing
------------------------------
William M. Hayden Jr., Ph.D., P.E., CMQ/OE, F.ASCE
Buffalo, N.Y.
"It is never too late to be what you might have been." -- George Eliot 1819 - 1880
------------------------------