Article by Structural Engineers Assoc. on SE exams 8

[JAE]

This is a recent article published in my state's recent SEA newsletter. I'm posting this in response to the recent thread on questions regarding the SE exam changes coming via NCEES and thought it might help others out there who have questions regarding this topic.

[blue]
Structural Engineering Exam being revised by NCEES

In April 2011, the National Council of Examiners for Engineering and Surveying (NCEES) will be introducing a new 16 hour Structural PE Exam. The exam will replace the current Structural I and Structural II exams which will be offered for the last time in October of 2010.

The new 16-hour exam is a result of recommendations to NCEES by a Structural Exam Task Force (SETF) which was appointed by NCEES and composed of structural engineers from various states. Their purpose was to evaluate the Structural I and II examinations, analyze member board use of the examinations and recent performance, and consider the additional needs of those jurisdictions with issues of high-seismic activity.

Currently, NCEES offers two 8-hour structural exams, and some licensing boards also require state-specific exams. The SETF recommended to NCEES that these tests be combined into one 16-hour exam that would be accepted by all states including those with high seismic activity. As a result, the NCEES adopted the motion to move forward with modernizing the format of the SE-I and SE-II examinations to a single structural engineering examination with two 8-hour components that will be put into use by April 2011.

To determine the new exams content, NCEES sent out a Professional Activities and Knowledge’s (PAKS) survey to state boards. They asked them to have their structural engineers fill out the survey to determine the content needed for the exam. According to Tim Miller, NCEES Director of Exam Services, “We’ve gone through a deliberate and rigorous process to develop the specifications, and the state boards that currently license structural engineers have been included in this process.”

The new exam will be offered in two components on successive days. The 8-hour Vertical Forces (Gravity/Other) and Incidental Lateral component is offered on Friday. The 8-hour Lateral Forces (Wind/Earthquake) component is offered on Saturday. The morning sessions will be multiple-choice questions covering a comprehensive range of structural engineering topics. The afternoon sessions will be essay format and focus more closely on a single area of practice in structural engineering. Examinees must choose either buildings or bridges and work the same topic area in both the Vertical Component (first day) and the Lateral component (second day).

Since the exams are broken into two different 8-hour components, the exams may be taken and passed in different exam administrations. However, to pass the exam, the examinee must pass both the Vertical and Lateral Components. To date, there is no information available as to how long you have to pass both of the exam components.

The cost to take the exams is expected to be $400/book and scoring plus $100/administration for a total cost of $500/component. Therefore, the total cost at this time to take the new exam is expected to be around $1,000.00 for both components.

With this in mind and knowing that the licensing exam will change in April 2011 to one 16-hour exam, all professional engineers practicing structural engineering should think about the future and act accordingly.

After October of 2010, the only option to become licensed as a Structural Engineer (S.E.) in many states will be to take and pass the new 16-hour exam offered by the NCEES. Although the expected cost of the exam is slightly higher than the current SE-II exam, there may be additional benefits to taking the exam if you plan on trying to get reciprocity in states which currently have their own state run SE-III exams such as Washington.

For example, Washington has decided to eliminate their state SE-III exam after October of 2011. Therefore, if you wait to take and pass the new 16-hour structural exam, you will get reciprocity in that state without having to travel to take their state SE-III exam. If you have not passed their state SE-III exam prior to that date, your only choice will be to take the new 16-hour exam.

Therefore, professional engineers who are practicing structural engineers should keep in mind the cost of the application fee, the process, and reciprocity in other states while evaluating their options for licensure as a Structural Engineer (S.E.) [/blue]

 

[Lion06]

Ouch!!! $1000 for the test? I'm not eligible to take the SEI until October 2010, so I might as well wait and take the new test in April of 2011. Is there any concerns of the initial test having bugs or being overly difficult before the bugs get worked out and/or it's properly "normalized" (for lack of a better word)?

 

[JAE]

I'm sure any first time test may have some level of awkward questions/answers that don't always mesh - but I'm not familiar enough with NCEES's process of "testing the test". It appears, though that they've been pretty thorough about getting all the US State boards involved early.

 

[JedClampett]

I'm a little confused by the paragraphs on reciprocity. Are they trying to say that there will be no reciprocity for SE's in the future unless you've passed the new exam? Usually the way it's done is that reciprocity is a state specific decision and if you've passed any SE exam, whatever vintage, you can apply.

 

[JAE]

I spoke with the writer and at this point there is no set policies or laws in place in each state on this as it hasn't been adopted formally yet.

But the implication is that if state A changes in the future from a PE doing structural to requiring an SE to do all the structural (like Illinois currently), then from that point on, the 16 hour exam would be required.

How they handle grandfathering or equivalency in bringing the older PE's into an SE sphere is probably up for grabs, but the consensus I've heard is that to become "like Illinois" and require SE for ALL structural design a state would almost have to provide some sort of grandfathering/equivalency means of converting those with PE/SE-1 and/or SE-2 exams under their belt.

 

[SteelPE]

What if you have a license in your original state and try to apply to a state like Illinois after they require the 16 hour test…. but you fail (thinking positively). What would that do to your license in your original state?

I agree, some sort of grandfathering is going to have to be required.

Very confusing.

 

[hawkinjc]

What is the possiblity of someone being 'Grandfathered' in as a SE with taking just the SE1? Or would it be the SE1 with X years experience? I am starting to lean towards taking the Civil PE this October in leiu of the SE1 because of the new SE test format. I would hate to skip out on a chance to be 'grandfathered' in with the SE1. It seems as of now that taking the SE1 has no advatages over the Civil PE.

 

[Jack1977]

I am not against the new 16 hour SE exam, My point is NCEES could arrange things better for those people who already passed either SE1 or SE2, now that the new 16 hour SE exam is a combination of SE1 and SE2, then why not allowing those people who passed SE1 take only 2 afternoon session (which is supposedly to be SE2 format test) to make up an equivalent new 16 hour SE exam, and allowing those people who passed SE2 take only 2 morning session (which is supposedly to be SE1 format test) to make up an equivalent new 16 hour SE exam?

 

[SLTA]

Is there a list somewhere of which states currently require an SE and which require only (!!) a PE?

 

[jberg]

I believe the states that require a SE are:

California, Hawaii, Idaho, Illinois, Nebraska, Nevada, New Mexico, Oregon, Utah, and Washington.

Joel Berg

 

[KootK]

How very timely. I just got a letter in the mail from the state of Washington last night warning me about this very change. Thanks for initiating / reviving the discussion JAE.

I love the idea of having a more uniform SE examination / licensing process. However, this change is going to screw me pretty badly. I took SEII in WA last fall with the intent of taking their SEIII next fall. I was then going use the SEIII result to get both my California and Vancouver BC SE license by comity. Now, the situation is far murkier.

I'm sure that, at this point, nobody knows the answers to the following questions. I'm going to ask anyhow though, just in case:

1) Will California accept the NCEES SE exam in lieu of the Western States Seismic exam as they currently do for the WA SEIII exam?

2) Will Vancouver Canada accept the NCEES SE exam in lieu of the IStructE exam as they currently do for the WA SEIII exam?

Woe is me...

 

[JAE]

jberg,

Nebraska does not require an SE. They have a title act where you must pass the SE-1 and SE-2 to "call yourself a Structural Engineer". But there is no practice act in place. Utah has a title act as well I believe.

I believe Illinois and perhaps Hawaii have full blown SE practice acts (i.e. you must be an SE to do ANY structural engineering)

California has a PE/SE combo where only certain structures (tall buildings, schools, hospitals, etc. must have an SE)
I think Washington is like that too.

I have a spreadsheet that outlines all the different states and their policies. I'll see if I can post it.

 

[jberg]

I did not realize that some of those states do not require engineers involved in structural engineering to be licensed as SE's.

Thanks for the insight,

Joel Berg

 

[KootK]

JAE,

I, for one, would LOVE to see your spreadsheet.

KK

 

[JAE]

Here it is.

 

[KootK]

My goodness. That is so very helpful. Thanks JAE. I found an Structuremag article on US licensing but it's not as thorough and only updated to 2005.

 

[PMR06]

Great summary JAE! I'm sure this will be very helpful for those of us who have already passed only the SE1 and are contemplating the SE2 exam, and future SE designation fiasco.

 

[KootK]

Anybody know if you have to be a civil engineer in Oregon before you become a structural engineer (like CA, WA, & ID)? I can't seem to tell from their website.

 

[Whiffle]

Browse around SE Certification Board website for more licensure info.

http://www.secertboard.org/

The SECB is a certification one can get to be a "structural engineer" in the those states that don't acknowledge the difference. There is definately a push right now to get more states to recognize structural engineers seperately.

Concerning grandfathering, Utah just passed a bill to recognize structural engineers. To be "grandfathered" in you had to have 3 years of structural engineering experience as a P.E. No SE exams involved.

http://le.utah.gov/~2008/bills/sbillamd/sb0200.htm

Correct me if I'm wrong.

BTW - Thanks for the spreadsheet JAE.

 

[DWHA]

I have a question for some of the older engineers out there. What do you feel the probability is that as of April 2011 the switch will actually take place? I ask this because I am eligible to sit for the exam as of April 2010. I work in Illinois, so this directly influences my licensing. If I am confident that the change will actually take place in April 2011, I will probably not sit for the exams in April 2010.