Jump to content
Engineer Boards
​ ​
 photo CHPE_AnimatedWebBanner_650x1202_zps5704d467.gif

CAPLS

Senior Member
  • Content count

    447
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

93 Excellent

3 Followers

About CAPLS

  • Rank
    Principal in Charge

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Male
  • Location
    Sacramento

Previous Fields

  • Engineering Field
    Land Surveying
  • License
    RLS
  • Calculator
    HP
  • Discipline
    Sorely Lacking

Recent Profile Visitors

3,244 profile views
  1. Did the pass notice explain the next steps or what to expect?
  2. Yes, it could be possible. Within 60 days you should either hear of any deficiencies and how to correct those or that your technical review is completed. If you haven't heard either of these and its past 60 days, contact the Board through the proper evaluator by first letter of last name. See link: https://www.bpelsg.ca.gov/about_us/contact.shtml
  3. Yes. And you should have received the email from Prometric to schedule.
  4. Yes, the California Board will expect to hear from the reference as to what areas of expertise he/she has and whether he/she is authorized to practice civil engineering in the state where the projects were located as stated in your work experience. Be sure to focus on the civil aspects of water purification (if that's what you actually did).
  5. PM me with your contact info so I can look into it. Everyone submitting a re-exam form prior to July 1 should have already received notification to schedule. Please include the email address you provided to the Board and check your spam filters and junk folders.
  6. I answered WillH's questions as they related to CA since that is the state he was asking about. You bring up a good point however, that states do vary in how work experience is applied related to graduate school. In my response, I wasn't referring to any of his time in graduate school...and I don't think WillH asked about that...if I read that wrong, pardon me...I was referring to his professors being able to be accepted as references. They can serve as references in CA, but not for any of the claimed work experience unless they were also in practice and in responsible charge of that claimed experience.
  7. I can't tell you one way or the other if your experience under the Environmental PE in MA will be accepted or not for the civil engineer license. It really depends on the nature of that specific work experience and whether it falls under the definition of civil engineering in CA. Your reference (the Environmental PE) would need to provide documentation that supports he/she is authorized to practice civil engineering where the project in the experience occurred and whether he/she is competent by expertise to practice that branch of engineering. You would need to provide official transcripts from the university for the MS degree to be considered. Professors who are licensed can serve as references IF they are familiar with your work experience claimed in the application. They cannot verify the actual experience unless they were also the licensed individual in responsible charge of those projects for which you gained the claimed experience.
  8. CAPLS

    CA PE license after Oct 2017

    private message me your name and contact info and I'll check
  9. It is good to see that you recognize your own areas of expertise. Not everybody is willing to say that. However, the fact remains that once licensed, you are authorized to practice within the entire range of the practice that your license allows you to do and you must be considered as minimally competent to do that. This is a good discussion and I realize you may not be receiving the answers you are hoping for, but a good discussion nonetheless...at least for me.
  10. Again, I appreciate your feedback. I am not a board member on the board. I too am a licensee who went through the application and examination process just like everyone else. I also took advantage of the opportunities to work on the exam after I became I became licensed and I can assure you the process nor the determination of the competency level is arbitrary.
  11. CAPLS

    CA PE license after Oct 2017

    Guessing Industrial Engineer with a last name Avery and first name that begins with a 'P'
  12. CAPLS

    CA PE license after Oct 2017

    You are correct. California is a "discipline-specific" state, which means that while licensees can generically refer to themselves as a PE, the license is issued in a specific discipline of engineering. The Civil license is different from the Electrical, Mechanical, Chemical, etc. and all have different numbering. There are very few, if any, 4 digit civil engineers alive. You must be licensed in one of the lower population disciplines.
  13. I appreciate you chiming in and providing your constructive comment. Nothing personal, but I've seen many individuals with many, MANY years of education that couldn't actually practice that which they have considerable knowledge in. Its all about protection of the public. I disagree with you in that if the individual that has truly gained the requisite knowledge and work experience, as required, were to apply and sit for these exams, that person would most likely find the exam easier and the clarity as a part of their own self evaluation of their performance.
  14. engineeringforfun - I'm not taking your comments as a shot at me or the Board. I simply view what you are saying as a constructive observation, which is why I'm reading it. The licensing board is not the entity that makes anyone take the state exams, the Legislature is. Several events, related and not directly related, were occurring in the late 1970's and early 1980's that led to these state exams. The elimination of the authority of civil engineers to practice surveying; the recognition that the national exams do not sufficiently test for seismic-related factors in design or engineering surveying; and the insistence by professional societies for civil engineers to be able to retain a subset of surveying (topographic and construction staking), all of which led to the requirements to additionally test for engineering surveying and seismic principles. The Board is simply carrying out its duty to implement those requirements. If you wish to put the blame on anyone as to why California requires these two additional exams when other states do not, you should consider directing that towards the professional societies that demanded this authority and the Legislature for agreeing to it. Beyond that info, I would like to more directly respond to your comments about the diagnostic, the detail of information provided to you in that report, and your examples. If you were to compare the new published test plan for engineering surveying exam, you will see how closely it coincides with the language in the PE Act, Section 6731.1 which provides for the authority of what engineering surveying, licensed civil engineers are allowed to practice...(You may be saying, "yeah, yeah, I already know that. What does this have to do with giving us more information on the diagnostic?" Please bear with me on this, I'm trying to get there.) In other words, what services you can provide to your clients as a licensee. The Board doesn't have an expectation that a candidate will go and read books, take a seminar, practice solving examples, etc. in a sufficient amount to offer those services in a satisfactory manner to the public. The Board's expectations are that you have sufficient enough knowledge and actual work experience to adequately demonstrate competency in actually practicing those tasks for the public. Whether you have gained that knowledge and experience prior to applying for a license or whether you recognize your deficiency in your knowledge and experience level after failing an exam and then gain additional experience, it doesn't matter. You are expected to adequately demonstrate that you have a sufficient amount of experience to practice. Licensing is not an authority based solely upon one becoming knowledgeable or "book smart" in a subject. It's about the actual experience gained to demonstrate competency. And these exams are assuming that each and everyone one of you have the experience to actually practice. Let's use your example of getting "...100% on horizontal and vertical control layout, but 0% on a number of other categories; the diagnostic report doesn't tell me which areas I'm lacking competency in." towards this. If (and maybe you do, I've no idea of your actual real world experience) you had sufficient actual work experience in performing all the surveying listed in that test plan (and the laws), you would already understand that horizontal and vertical control layout is a concept/task inherent in every one of the test plan areas listed. And not a separate category. And therefore could likely appear in some percentage of questions in each of the areas listed. The Board expects you to possess a minimum adequate amount of knowledge and work experience in each of those areas to understand what all is involved in practicing/offering/performing those tasks and services to the public. The later pages in that test plan provide you with the detail that should help you understand what all is required to demonstrate that competence in each area. I can guarantee you that if you actually have/had the actual work experience in these tasks, you would virtually find the questions easy to answer and not as time-consuming as you may think. In many ways, its not up to the Board to "grow a crop" of new licensed individuals. It is for the individual to prove/demonstrate to the Board that you possess an adequate amount of competency to practice. The more you recognize your deficiency and gain the requisite experience to overcome that to pass the exam, then you are doing what you are supposed to do. I do wish you well and expect that you will eventually become licensed.
×