Revamping the PE liscensing Process? 9

[PSE]

Several posts, primarily within the Professional Ethics Forum, deal with either trying to define who an Engineer is, or liscensing. Is the only "true Engineer" a liscensed one? Given the relative diversity of potential engineering occupations (if not titles), should liscensing bodies (worldwide) expand, or re-define the scope of liscensure? In the US it seems (from my exposure) that the majority of Engineers do their jobs under the "Industrial Exemption" rule rather than persue liscensure. Some may not know how their work "fits" in with the current liscensing categories or simply find it more convienient. Should international "reciprocity" rules be established for liscensed individuals?

Regards,

PSE

 

[Binary]

Bob, I'm a "thread-junkie", just like you ;-)

1) Pushing for universally required licensure is not selfish. Doing it without considering how to structure it so that people already in the system don't have to start back at the bottom, is.

2) It's not impossible to get the PE without working with PE's. A scant few can. The odds of success seem very slight. Using the very few exceptions as the example and saying, "see, you can do it, too" is naive. Everybody's circumstances are different.

3) If a doctor doesn't complete a residency, it's either (a) incompetence, or (b) lack of effort. I'm not talking about either of those cases. I'm talking about the system. As an aspiring physician, you simply go through the (very arduous) process and come out on the other side with a license. The system is structured to create licensed physicians. I don't know whether you even need references from 3-5 licensed doctors in order to sit for the boards.

For engineers (outside of civil), this is not true. The system is not structured to create licensed people. To get licensed requires as much luck as competence (did you or did you not get the opportunity to work with PE's).

Do you really think that the only reason why folks like me and leanne and PSE are not licensed is because we're lazy or unable to pass the test? (That's a rhetorical question - I'm pretty sure you don't.) It's the system.

Changing the system is good but needs to address those of us who've been in the workforce for a long time.

It's simple to say "We need universal licensing." The hard part is *how* to transition there from where we are. I don't think I've read any suggestions about that.

Cliches become cliches for a reason and "the devil is in the details" certainly applies to this.

 

[BobPE]

no i dont think anyone is lazy once they understand the process....It is harder for exempt engineers, but not impossible...

I started out in engineering with the goal of obtaining a PE. So naturally I understood the process before taking a job and made sure that job would allow me to obtain my goals.

I gave you a good how on what to do to get licensed. Write your state board a letter and ask them how they will allow you to obtain the PE...

I dont think thre are devils in the details, its all spelled out. The devils are in bending the rules, that takes more work for exempt engineers than it did for me, you are right...I fit the rules to a T by design...but I started out in engineering wanting that.

BobPE

 

[PSE]

I have contacted my state board and the requirement is to have worked with a minimum of 3 PE's before being allowed to sit for the exam. I have no desire to leave my position in order to find PE's to work with.

Bob,

Regarding industry being selfish, you bet! They are in business for the purpose of making a profit. So am I. If the industry I work for is not willing to compensate what I feel is equitable, I will move on. My job is to make the company money. Ideally from their standpoint I will make them more money than what they spend on me.

I am not giving up on the licensing though I may end up retired by the time I would qualify .

 

[BobPE]

PSE:

taking from the questionable Bill Clinton, it depends on the defination of what "work" is....I have been able to comfortably be a reference for people that have given me subcontractd work from industry. I factored them into the project team at the beginning of the project and they performed project work under me. This was organized at the proposal stage, and initiated by me, I was on my soap box with them to get their PE's and they had the same problems you stated...It can be done, just look for the opportunities...there are PE's everywhere, you just dont see it since we are a modest bunch (me excluded for the purpose of getting the word out...lol). You have to ask since the only way you can tell is a business card or signed letter with a title....



BobPE

 

[leanne]

Work is a four letter word....

I think I'm developing an allergy...

 

[oxilume]

To Greg Locock,

Here is a true story that should make you feel comfortable.

I was passing in front of the kitchen table that a certain PE had the blue prints for a wastewater treatment plant he was designing layed out on.

I was looking over his shoulder and inquiring what municipality was letting out for bids a new wastewater treatment plant.

After he answered my question he picked up the phone and called one of his engineers and asked the following question?
"I thought we were going to use bleach for disinfection?"

I walked across the hall and picked up a gallon container of Clorox. I then went and placed it on his blue prints and pointed to the small print on the jug of chlorox:
"Ingredients: Sodium Hypochorite"

Next, I pointed to the phrase, Sodium Hypochlorite, printed on the blue prints next to the disinfection chamber.

Before the senior engineer on the other end of the phone had time to pull up his drawings, my in-law hung up the phone.

Here is my solution to all those Professional Civil Engineers who are designing wastewater treatment plants - With your PE stamp please guarantee your work in the form of a fine - for every pound of BOD, or ounze of TSS over the NPDES permit, you reimburse taxpayers!

Likewise, to drinking water treatment plant designers(PE) - if someone becomes ill due to the water, then you pay for the emergency room visit!

DO NOT POINT your finger at the WWTP operator.

If you were driving a high center of gravity SUV with tires that peel away, you wouldn't want the designer to point his finger at you - the operator?

Here is is my question to PE's - Why hasn't a single univeristy in this country started a degree program for - Water/Wastewater Engineering? Next, that engineer can then sit for his Water/Wastewater Professional Engineer license only after "operating" a drinking water and/or wasterwater treatment plant for 5 years. Not designing, but actually operating the plant - from mixing chemicals to backwashing sand filters to conducting routine lab tests - free chlorine residual, TSS, pH, etc.

When a Civil Engineer (PE) is designing a bridge during the morning, letting out a bid for repaving an asphalt road in the afternoon, and working on the design for a wastewater treatment plant in the evening, then I think it is quite obvious what the PE stands for - Plenty of Expertise (Master of None). PE also stands for "Paper Expert." On the lighter side how about "Phantom Engineer." It is an illusion, when a PE spends millions of tax payers dollars designing a wastewater treatment plant when he doesn't know how to "Treat" water!

The PE licensing system needs to closely reflect the engineers "true" expertise.

For example, when a 4th year medical student graduates he can use the title, MD - General Practitioner (GP). Next, he goes into an internship such as general surgery. He takes his boards and becomes a "Board Certified" general surgeon or "cutter". He my then move on to another internship - Cardiac Thoracic - and become a Board Certified Cardiac Thoracic Surgeon. He may receive a fellowship and truely specialize, for example, in heart transplants.

Engineering disciplines are too broad. Engineers need to specialize, for example, water treatment, then become an expert in that speciality and next sit before a board of water treatment experts (thumbs up or thumbs down)to become certified.

Then, the board certified water treatment engineer leaves bridge building to a board certified bridge engineer. Likewise, the certified bridge engineer is not just a structural engineer. He/she would be a structural engineer first who is a board certified bridge engineer.

Sincerely,
Todd
toddforet@usa.net

 

[BobPE]

oxilume:

There is a degree for water and wastewater engineering.

Do you have your PE? If not, do a little research, you may surprise yourself. PE's are liable for plant performance.

I do kinda agree with you, if this is what you were saying. Taxpayer dollars should go to making sure that only PE's run any plant...Thre is too much liability in operating a plant, more than an operator should be responsible for. The states here in the US don't allow PE's to run plants though, we just design them, write the O&M manual so the operators understand how to run them, and performances test and troubleshoot them. I personally don't mind that since I do not want the responsibility of making an operator error and killing people.

Just my thoughts....If you want to start a lets bash PE's thread, start a new post under the ignorance category...

 

[oxilume]

Dear Bob,

I am not bashing PEs. On the contrary I'm a Naval Engineer. But not a licensed PE. After my tenure in the Navy as a Chief Engineer I sold water treatment chemicals for two of the largest water treatment chemical companies in the US. I 1994 I broke out on my own and I designed a different type of UV light for treating water.

The UV light system has truely evolved to an extremely high power system that can treat bacteria in opaque fluids. It will be tested by Virgina Tech BioEngineering Department for destruction of mycobacteria in metal working fluids.

It works extremely well for drinking water and wastewater. My first hurdle is to train the local PEs on how and why the system is better than other UV light systems

The information I was trying to pass along is simply this - the environmental industry has become very diverse with respect to the various engineering fields of expertise, that someone needs to get a grasp on "expertise"! It seems that every single CE that is a registered PE is selling himself off as an environmental expert - where is the formal training!

Oh one other thing - In the eyes of the EPA Criminal Investigator he guns for the person who signed off on the DMR. He can care less about the engineer who built the facility.

 

[electricpete]

This is my first time reading this thread. Lots of good stuff.

Binary made a statement: "The first PE's didn't have PE references so why should I need them? Why is it that only a PE is considered a worthwhile reference?"

It seems to me there is a very good reason for requiring PE's as some form of reference.
1 - The board knows the character of the PE. i.e. PE's has initially demonstrated their competence and character to the board. Then during their ongoing work career, complaints of bad performance due to technical incompetence or character flaw are reported to the board.
2 - The PE has something at stake in making a recommendation. If he knowingly falsifies the document by saying "yes, this person designed rocket ships", then he puts his own livelihood in jeopardy. Falsifying a reference is cause for losing one's licence.

Think about the practicality. What does it mean if Joe Smith non-PE signs a statement that you designed rocket ships and were darned good at it. The board doesn't know Joe Smith. He may be a highly reputable, competent and truthful person, or he may be the fry guy at McDonald's. How is the board supposed to know. With the volume of applicants, is it practical for them to investigate the character of the references?

I guess it's possible but certainly would require more manpower effort and $ to accomplish.

 

[HamishMcTavish]

BobPE, I think what oxilume's original post said was that if you are a PE it involves as much about what you do NOT know as what you do...

The professionalism bit comes from how you manage the gap. I would be horrified if someone asked me to sign off sparkie design work (i'm a clankie!).

On a slightly different note, does the body regulating PE license require the PE to commit to some form of continual professional development?

No more things should be presumed to exist than are absolutely necessary - William of Occam

 

[electricpete]

The requirement for documenting continuing professional development is state-specific. Texas does not require it although they allow you to document your continuing activities with the board to facilitate reciprocity with states that do require it.

 

[PSE]

I think that oxilume has raised another interesting idea. That of speciality certification. While ethically, PE's are "bound" to restrict their practice within their areas of expertise, it is up to the PE to determine what those limits are.

It reminds me of the conversation I had this past week while flying with my Father. We started talking about the various ratings he had earned. It struck me that a similar type of system would also be useful to the PE.

Regards