Need a book? Engineering books recommendations...

Return to index: [Subject] [Thread] [Date] [Author]

RE: CE licensing a different problem

[Subject Prev][Subject Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
I haven't been following the Cardenas assembly bill very much (I tried to go to the web site and the search engine couldn't locate the document), but I HOPE the title act will not be watered down to let every civil engineer call him/herself a structural engineer. It would be a true slap in the face for all of us who took and passed the exam.

I also believe the title of structural engineer implies a lot more than just issues applicable to high rises and essential facilities. Present company excepted, but I know a lot more about structural engineering than a lot of civil engineers (and architects) I have to compete with. I don't mind telling you that, when I am competing with a civil engineer on a project with a new (potential) client, I inform the client what was involved to allow me to use the title structural engineer and that the civil engineer either couldn't or hasn't. I also believe that private sector clients have a right to request these credentials for their design professional. I realize you have citied some statistic that approximately 43% of the SEAOC membership are CEs. But what about non-SEAOC members? What numbers are the SE licenses up to now? 4000? 5000? What are the CE numbers up to? 60,000? 70,000? There has to be a reason only 100-200 pass the SE license every year when 1000-2000 pass the CE license.

Let's raise the bar, not lower it.

Regards,
Bill Allen

-----Original Message-----
From:	Dennis S. Wish PE [SMTP:wish(--nospam--at)cyberg8t.com]
Sent:	Sunday, October 05, 1997 10:25 AM
To:	'seaoc(--nospam--at)seaoc.org'
Subject:	RE: CE licensing a different problem



 [Bill Allen]  
So, Dennis, what would you think of a SEAOC committee reviewing your work so that you could use the title "structural engineer"? This sounds like a way for SEAOC to generate some income.


Bill, I would not expect this until the title act is reformed which is what many of us are suggesting. Even if the title act is changed to allow CE's to use the term Structural Engineers, I would be pleased to see BORPELS or SEAOC establish a committee to review every CE's declaration in order to verify if they have been practicing in the field of structural engineering. 
One other thing that could help is to let an applicant for CE declare his specialty and have his references required in this area only. When he/she takes the exam, they should be allowed to choose from two exams - one covering land the other specific to structures. 
I don't however, feel that it is necessary for the engineer to be tested on specialty area's such as those specific to high-rise and essential facility. This is best left to the "expert" or specialist license title.

Dennis Wish PE

<<application/ms-tnef>>