|
05.11
Model Law Exemption to Professional Engineering Licensures is Under Review
By IEEE-USA Staff
A recent series of disasters and
product safety issues involving the failure of
engineered systems has prompted several
engineering organizations to ask whether
engineering licensure laws should be
strengthened to better protect the public health
and safety.
The 2010 Deep Water Horizon oil
spill in the Gulf of Mexico is one case in
point. Because of the magnitude of the
environmental damage caused by spill, the U.S.
Department of the Interior issued new
regulations on companies operating under federal
offshore drilling leases imposing a requirement
that a professional engineer certify compliance
with well casing and cement design
specifications, as well as mandating independent
testing of barriers and new installation
procedures.
The National Council of
Examiners for Engineering and Surveying (NCEES)
is currently reviewing the industrial exemption
to engineering licensure, with the goals of
enhancing public safety, promoting greater
uniformity in State law, and clarifying the
scope of the engineering licensure
requirement.
Comprised of representatives
from the engineering and surveying licensure
boards of all 50 states, the District of
Columbia and the U.S. territories, NCEES works
to advance professional licensure for engineers
and surveyors by promulgating model laws and
administering licensure examinations for the
states.
The current NCEES model law
imposes a licensure requirement on any service
or creative work that requires engineering
education, training and experience, the nature
of which involves “safeguarding life, health, or
property.” The model law also provides an
“industrial” exemption to the licensure
requirement for employees and subordinates of an
engineer or firm where the engineering work is
done “under the responsible charge of and
verified by an individual holding a certificate
of licensure.”
NCEES’s current review was
prompted in part by a study undertaken by the
National Society of Professional Engineers,
which
points to wide variation in actual state
law and practice regarding the industrial
exemption. At least eight jurisdictions do not
provide an industrial exemption. Among states
that do provide an exemption, some limit it to
the manufacturing or utility sectors only.
Where exemptions are provided, there are also
variations in how the exemption is defined.
As noted by NCEES President Joseph Timms in the
April 2011 issue of Licensure Exchange:
“Some states are very specific
about who is and who isn’t exempt; others are
fairly broad in their exemptions…for example,
according to the NSPE survey, Alaska,
Massachusetts and Wisconsin do not apply their
exemptions to buildings or structures built
primarily for public use. Georgia, New Jersey
and North Dakota do not allow an exemption when
the practice involves public safety or public
health.”
In 2010, NCEES charged its
Advisory Committee on Council Activities (ACCA)
to review the impact of the industrial exemption
on the ability of state licensure boards to
protect the health, safety and welfare of the
public and to recommend any necessary revisions
to the model law.
Chaired by Dr. John Steadman,
who is a past President of IEEE-USA, the ACCA
has recommended that the Model Law be amended to
include language to minimize public risk from
unlicensed or exempted practice, by adding the
following clarification to the definition of
engineering practice:
“Engineered Products and
Systems: Professional engineers shall be in
responsible charge of all engineering design of
buildings, structures, products, machines,
processes and systems that can materially affect
the health, safety, and welfare of the public.”
According to Steadman, “the
licensing of engineers doesn’t guarantee
competence, but professional engineers have met
minimum standards of technical competence and
are obligated by their license to practice
engineering in a way that protects the public.”
Steadman added: "It is in the
best interests of the engineering profession to
take every reasonable measure to protect the
public before tragic accidents cause harm to
persons, the environment or the economy. One
such measure is to eliminate the industrial
exemption, especially where there is a clear
public safety issue."
The ACCA has also recommended
that NCEES engage the engineering community to
advocate for regulatory action that would
require licensed engineers to be in responsible
charge of the design and maintenance of
engineered structures, systems, and components
that directly affect public health, safety and
welfare.
As the state licensure boards
consider these proposals during NCEES’s regional
“Zone” meetings in April and May, the NSPE’s
Licensure and Qualifications for Practice
Committee has gone a step further by proposing
that NSPE adopt a position statement
reinforcing the licensure requirement and
calling for the phase out of existing industrial
exemptions in state licensure laws. See:
http://community.nspe.org/blogs/licensing/archive/2011/03/22/industrial-exemptions-a-proposed-nspe-policy.aspx.
In its 2009 position on
engineering licensure, IEEE-USA encourages
professional licensure and calls for greater
uniformity in state law, but does not address
the industrial exemption. See:
http://www.ieeeusa.org/policy/positions/Engineeringlicensure1109.pdf
U.S. IEEE members interested in this topic are
invited to provide input to IEEE-USA’s Licensure
and Registration Committee by email to Vin
O’Neill at
v.oneill@ieee.org.
Comments may be submitted to
todaysengineer@ieee.org.
|
Comments
on this story may be
sent directly to