Need a book? Engineering books recommendations...

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

Re: SECB Certification Program for SE's

[Subject Prev][Subject Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]

It is some what debatable how widely supported the idea is.  I was on the
NCSEA committee for a period of that point it was basically just
the committee and the NCSEA board that were really involved in the
discussions.  Since then I am not sure how they have proceeded with
getting support/advertising the (potential) effort.  I don't know if they
have talked with any state boards yet to get a feel to the potential level
of interest, which would only be part of the picture at the state
level...they will really need to get the state legislatures to "buy into
it" and change the laws as needed.

Personally, I see it as potentially being boardly adopted/used by state
boards...but I don't see that happening quickly.  There is the definite
possibility that it can certainly "lighten" the states administrative
burden, but it kind of also threatens the whole "turf" structure (after
all, many states have particular little rules/variations that to some
degree offer protection of their "turf" from outside engineers, whether
intention or not [California SE requirements at a decent example of
that...i.e. the required three California SE references]).  So, there will
be some resistance I would think on the part of some.  And that does not
even account for the just naturely slow way in which state legislatures
act, especially with not top priority things like engineering licensing.

I have not personally received anything (might be because I am not
currently a member of any NCSEA member SEA at the moment) and I don't see
anything specific about it on the NCSEA's website.  I personally support
the overall concept, but need to look at how they are planning on
implementing it (lost track since I left the committee).  There were
potentially directions that some on the committee wanted to take things
that I was not fond of at all (the whole two-tiered
certification/licensing approach that was mainly conceived and pushed by
some from California).  I liked the idea in which they were heading when I
left the committee...a base certification with specialty certifications
(such as high seismic design).  I am also curious to see if those that
were pushing for a Master's as the required eductaion prevailed (I am not
a fan of that concept...I would rather see undergraduate programs "fixed"
rather than require an additional year [and thus, an additional $10,000+
typically of tuition] of eduction).  So, for me, it is kind of a little
bit of "wait and see" (really is more about me needing to get off my lazy
butt and see where things ended up).


Adrian, MI

On Mon, 21 Jun 2004, Nels Roselund, SE wrote:

> I've received an announcement that NCSEA has voted to establish an
> independent national SE certification board [SECB] to help establish SE
> licensing in all 50 states; establish uniform standards for examinations,
> licensure and practice throughout the U.S.; and define education and
> training levels for SE Licensure.
> The letter is from SECB and requests prepayment of certification fees,
> projected to be $350; as initial capitalization for SECB.
> Is this a broadly supported effort?  Is it likely to be endorsed by State
> Boards of Registration?  Is this an program that all good SE's should
> support, ignore, or wait and see?
> Nels Roselund
> Structural Engineer
> South San Gabriel, CA
> njineer(--nospam--at)

******* ****** ******* ******** ******* ******* ******* ***
*   Read list FAQ at:
*   This email was sent to you via Structural Engineers 
*   Association of Southern California (SEAOSC) server. To 
*   subscribe (no fee) or UnSubscribe, please go to:
*   Questions to seaint-ad(--nospam--at) Remember, any email you 
*   send to the list is public domain and may be re-posted 
*   without your permission. Make sure you visit our web 
*   site at: 
******* ****** ****** ****** ******* ****** ****** ********