Article by Structural Engineers Assoc. on SE exams 8

[akastud]

ARLORD,

The lady at the board told me that the board itself has a revision to the law which will show up on their website after the next board meeting because the law officially has to pass through the consent agenda, but they are taking SE applications now for people without the civil PE.

akastud

 

[steellion]

That's good. It just isn't logical that a Civil PE would count towards an SE but a Structural PE would not. I have faith that by the time this new test rolls out in 2011, most of these issues will be resolved.

 

[mrpid]

Jae,

There are a couple of states that I am aware that require the PE Licensure prior to SE Licensure which are Nevada and Oregon and unless akastud was told correctly, both require the PE civil exam then you would need the SEI and SEII (and WA SEIII for OR). California also requires PE Licensure prior to SE Licensure however they allow the SEI to substitute for the PE civil exam. In addition, CA requires you to pass a 2 1/2 hour surveying exam and a 2 1/2 seismic exam the day following the CE civil exam. I am a little fuzzy on this next part as I do not live in CA, but you cannot take the CA SE III exam until you have 5 years of experience under a CA SE, which makes this difficult for engineers out of state to obtain an CA SE License. (akastud may be able to clear this up)

I have recently contacted UT and was told the SEI will substitue the CE Civil, but until you submit the application you never know. Although I have not needed to check, I believe I saw somewhere that Arizona also requires the PE civil exam.

Steellion and StructuralEIT,

I agree with arlord. If you cannot sit for the SE I until fall 2010 then there is no advantage to taking the exam because you will still need the SE exams to register as an SE and may still need the PE civil in a couple of other states (that happens to be the boat I am currently in, and now find myself taking the PE civil this fall, which to me is ridiculus as I have passed the SEI and II and only practice structural engineering, but what are you going to do, the state governments have you by the short and curlies!) Also, I would have to wonder if NCEES will even offer the SE I in the fall of 2010!

I am attaching an article that adds to some of what JAE indicates in his spreadsheet, but does not cover the specifics of each state. (at least if I am attching properly)

 

[KootK]

I'm thoroughly confused by the supposed the need for a Civil PE en route to an SE in some states. I've investigated the SE requirements in numerious states (it sounds as though we all have).

In every state that I've investigated, the requirement is simply to have a PE (regardless of the test taken to obtain it). So far, I have yet to see anything explicit stating that one must pass the Civil PE test in particular.

I've obtained a PE license Washington state using comity from Wisconsin and the results of my SEI exam. I have since applied for my SE license in WA. I don't have it yet as, so far, I've only completed the SEII exam. However, they have approved me to sit both exams and made no mention of the fact that I haven't passed a Civil PE examination.

I'm writing the California mini exams this fall with the hope of becoming a licensed Civil Engineer there. I've applied requesting comity for my SEI exam and have been approved to take the exams. I took this to mean that my SEI PE exam was okay but now I'm starting to wonder. Unfortunately, getting a response to my question from CBPELS is taking quite a while.

MRPID:

1) How sure are you that California does in fact accept SEI in leiu of the Civil exam? I'm pretty anxious to get that figured out definitively.

2) Which states have you encountered that definitely do require the civil PE exam?

3) I'm pretty sure that CA only requires that your references be licensed SE's in California OR Washington. That gives you a little more flexibility.

 

[akastud]

mrpid,

California requires you to be in responsible charge for 3 years after obtaining your PE (which in CA can be done after 2 years). I am from AZ so I got my PE 4 yrs after college and had to work for 3 years in responsible charge to be eligible. You do have to have 3 references from licensed SE's, but CA allows these references to NOT be direct supervisors as other states have required of me. I had worked with one SE but I called 2 other SE's and had them "interview" me and examine some of my work and they filled out the reference sheet. I can tell you that I took the WA SEIII exam and it was really tough, but not impossible.

akastud

 

[JKStruct]

Kootenay Kid --

I am positive that CA will accept SE1 in lieu of their Civil PE. I know this because I just passed the Structures I in my home state, then applied to CA to take their seismic and surveying for my PE in CA, and they accepted (and I passed).

All-
Where I'm confused about all of this is what the states will do to people who have passed Stuctures I, but not Structures II...how will grandfathering work. I've already passed SE1. Will I have to take the whole 16 hour test? Just the Sat. part? I don't know. I guess one option is to just take Structures II in April '10 and be done with it.

 

[akastud]

In my opinion Str II was easier than Str I.

 

[KootK]

Thanks for the response JK. I wasn't looking forward to having to be ready for the Civil exam in 8 weeks (in addition to the minis).

 

[mrpid]

Thanks akastud! I had read different things, but was not quite sure.

KootenenayKid,
It sounds like JK answered the first part of your question, but as far as states that I am aware of that require the PE Civil are NV and OR. (Although as stated above NV may have since changed). Both of these states were states I contacted and was told yes after having read on their websites that the PE Civil is required. I have not applied for registration as why pay the fee and then learn that you may not get registered. I am sitting for the CA minis this fall and have decided to take the civil while I am there, but I will concentrate on the minis, because I can always take the civil in any state and living on the east coast, want to make sure I pass the survey/seismic exams.I believe once I pass these three exams then I can get registered in all 50 states at least as a PE and as an SE in a few.

I do like the states creating a distinction between Civil Engineers and Structural Engineers (and maybe the new NCEES exam will help in this regard), but all these different tests seem to be over the top. And going through the Cuomo Surveying Study book thinking I seen this before in the college days, but certainly not anything I feel I need to know to be a Structural Engineer! Although others may disagree.

 

[dik]

Almost worthwhile to move to a third world country to avoid this...

Dik

 

[JAE]

Like the Bahamas!!!

 

[KootK]

FYI: I've been in contact with the Oregon licensing board. I was told that they do indeed consider the SEI exam to be equivalent to the civil PE exam for comity applications. However, they made it clear that they handle it on a case by case basis and are not willing to commit to it in writting. So yeah, Oregon here I come...

 

[archeng59]

For those of us that took the SE1 exam instead of the CE exam to become licensed structural engineers for buildings, we are getting the shaft as it were with regards to the new combined exam. I took the SE1 with the intent of taking the SE2 sometime in the future to become an SE. Now, my SE1 exam will be considered equivalent to the CE exam for all practical purposes in every state. If I want to become an SE, I need to take the combo exam. Is that how everyone sees it?

 

[neffers]

archeng59...you still have a few more chances to take and pass the SE II exam...

neffers

 

[KootK]

Yup. That's how I see it. I'm just grateful that SEI IS considered equivalent most places. I wan't even sure that would be the case.

I'll probably just end up taking the new combined exam. My money says it'll be easier than SEII & SEIII taken in combination. For now, I'm applying for SE licensure in all of the jurisdictions in which I qualify before the exams change over. Basically throwing money at the probem.

I feel for newly minted structural engineers as well. A whole lot of them are going to want to get started as PE's, not SE's. And they won't have any choice but to take the civil exam. I felt much more comfortable obtaining my PE by taking an exam that was relavant to my work history.

 

[archeng59]

I agree with KootenayKid about feeling more comfortable taking the SE1 instead of the CE because my experience was with buildings, not bridges and other civil structures.

 

[EIT12]

I am new to this forum and have been reading everyone's thoughts regarding the new SE2 exam starting 2011. Like most of you, I too have passed the SE1 exam about 8 years ago and gave up on the SE2 exam due to the constant changes in the codes. I've decided to take the Civil PE exam instead and eventually retake the SE2 exam at a later time.
In the light of the SE exam change, I'm afraid, I now have to do it sooner than later.

I am asking those of you out there fortunate enough to pass the SE2 exam recently for some suggestions as to what to focus on. I will be selecting the building questions.

Any recommendation on reference materials with good example problems on the wind and seismic 2006 IBC?

 

[nuche1973]

JAE,
Thanks for the information