use of PE in sig if Licensed in another state

[Tark62]

The Texas Attorney Generals office has issued advisory opinions, as well as other states, stating that any attempt by a state licensing board to restrict the use of the title "P.E." if a person is licensed as such in another state is a violation of FEDERAL antitrust laws and could subjugate the STATE LICENSING BOARD to CIVIL and CRIMINAL FEDERAL charges of RESTRAINT OF TRADE.

I don't think this is analysis is correct either. Maybe you can post a link to the Texas opinion.

I'm no lawyer, but my understanding of the law is as follows:

(1) If you are legally licensed in State A, but reside in State B, then State B cannot prohibit you from stating that you have the title issued by State A. It is, after all, the truth.

(2) But State B *can* require that you specifically disclose that your license was issued by State A, and that that it is not valid for use in State B. Because this is also the truth.

P.E. is a nationally recognized licensed, as are M.D. and CPA.

Sorry, but the PE and CPA titles are issued by individual states -- not on a national basis, and are only valid for use within that state. And the MD title is an academic degree -- not a license. Doctors are licensed on a state-by-state basis by medical boards.

 

[mudpuppy]

From the MI compiled laws:

OCCUPATIONAL CODE (EXCERPT)Act 299 of 1980

339.2014 Prohibited conduct; penalties.

Sec. 2014.

A person is subject to the penalties set forth in article 6 who commits 1 of the following:

(a) Uses the term "architect", "professional engineer", "land surveyor", "professional surveyor", or a similar term in connection with the person's name unless the person is licensed in the appropriate practice under this article.

(b ) Presents or attempts to use as the person's own the license or seal of another.

(c ) Attempts to use an expired, suspended, or revoked license.

(d) Uses the words "architecture", "professional engineering", "land surveying", "professional surveying", or a similar term in a firm name without authorization by the appropriate board.

Seems pretty clear to me. I guess if you want to try to take it to federal court with the argument that it somehow restricts INTERSTATE commerce (the only kind of commerce the federal gov't has authority to regulate), I guess you can. But I just don't see the argument here.

 

[mattsffrd]

my question is, if the PE test is the same for every state, why does it even matter? also, how hard is it to transfer a license? do you have to re-take the test in your new state?

 

[IlPadrino]

my question is, if the PE test is the same for every state, why does it even matter? also, how hard is it to transfer a license? do you have to re-take the test in your new state?

Simply put, licensing is a state issue and all states have education, experience, and examination requirements - so just because you've passed the exam (it's the same for all states) doesn't mean a specific state board is satisfied with the education and experience. Comity applications are essentially complete applications and no retest is necessary.

 

[kevo_55]

opcorn:

 

[Tark62]

Simply put, licensing is a state issue and all states have education, experience, and examination requirements - so just because you've passed the exam (it's the same for all states) doesn't mean a specific state board is satisfied with the education and experience. Comity applications are essentially complete applications and no retest is necessary.

States have different requirements for education. Some strictly require ABET engineering degrees, some accept related science or technology degrees, some don't require a college degree at all. Alaska won't license any PE candidate until they have taken and passed an approved college-level course on Arctic Engineering.

States have different requirements for experience. Some require more years than others. Some require experience under PEs, others don't. Some require discipline-specific experience, others don't. Some require more references than others.

Finally, passing PE exam results do *not* necessarily transfer between states (although in practice they usually do). In theory, there are a number of issues that can prevent a passing PE exam result from State A from being honored in State B, for example:

1. NCEES offers many different PE exams, but states don't necessarily use them all. For example, NCEES offers a "Naval Architecture and Marine Engineering" PE exam, which you can pass for PE licensure in New York. But that doesn't mean you automatically qualify for PE comity in Arizona -- where that exam is not used.

2. States can offer their own PE exams, in addition to those offered by NCEES. For example, Oregon and Washington offer their own "Forest Engineering" exams, which you can pass for PE licensure there. But that doesn't mean you automatically qualify for PE comity in the District of Columbia, which only uses NCEES exams.

3. States can require supplements to NCEES exams. For example, California and Guam use the NCEES Civil PE exam, like all other jurisdictions. But they won't license any Civil PE candidate, even if they have already passed the NCEES Civil PE exam, until they have also passed a supplemental exam on seismic issues.

4. States can reject PE exam results -- even passing results -- if they were taken before meeting appropriate experience requirements. For example, suppose you qualify for the PE exam with 4 years of experience in State A, and pass it. Now you want comity in State B, which requires 6 years of experience. State B may reject the State A result, because it was obtained too "early", and make you retake the exam after you get 6 years of experience.

 

[mattsffrd]

huh, interesting stuff...looks like i'm staying in Maine for the rest of my life, because i sure as hell aint taking this PE test again lol

 

[JoeBoone82]

huh, interesting stuff...looks like i'm staying in Maine for the rest of my life, because i sure as hell aint taking this PE test again lol

I'm not 100% sure about Maine, but you could probably still get your PE from several states without having to take the exam again.

 

[IlPadrino]

I'm not 100% sure about Maine, but you could probably still get your PE from several states without having to take the exam again.

Yeah... not likely to be a problem assuming you're in a major discipline - don't let Tark62 scare you off. Assuming you're really a Civil, the only problems would be California (extra Seismic and Surveying exams) and Alaska (extra Seismic) as I recall. Licensing by comity in the Northeast isn't too much a problem. And comity applications are likely to get easier if NCEES Records become the "standard".

 

[Tark62]

don't let Tark62 scare you off

I'm not trying to scare anyone off. As I stated above: in practice, PE exam results normally *do* transfer between states. This is particularly true for the major PE exam disciplines (Civil, Mechanical, Electrical, Chemical), which are used universally in all jurisdictions.

Exceptions do exist, for the reasons outlined above, but they are relatively uncommon. The biggest issues are primarily in the western states, which are most likely to have non-NCEES PE exams and supplemental PE exams.

 

[mattsffrd]

i've heard that in 2015 they're going to start requiring post-graduate schooling (30 or 60 hours or something) to take the PE, would that affect somebody who wants to transfer after that (assuming they could have before)? since they no longer meet minimum requirements for originally sitting for the exam?

 

[jrsc]

Tark62 is starting to remind me of YKW but he hasn't gotten too rude yet.

 

[Tark62]

i've heard that in 2015 they're going to start requiring post-graduate schooling (30 or 60 hours or something) to take the PE, would that affect somebody who wants to transfer after that (assuming they could have before)? since they no longer meet minimum requirements for originally sitting for the exam

NCEES has recommended that state boards increase the minimum educational requirements for licensure to the MS (or equivalent), effective in 2020 (it was 2015, but they pushed it back). However, this is currently only an NCEES recommendation, not a law.

The NCEES recommendation doesn't mean anything, *unless* state boards decide to adopt it as law. To my knowledge, no state has actually done this yet. So there is no way to know exactly how the NCEES recommendation might be implemented by state boards in the future. State boards might be willing to "grandfather" comity PE applicants who were licensed under the current rules. Or they might not.

Tark62 is starting to remind me of YKW but he hasn't gotten too rude yet

I could probably be more entertaining, but it's not my style

 

[mudpuppy]

i've heard that in 2015 they're going to start requiring post-graduate schooling (30 or 60 hours or something) to take the PE, would that affect somebody who wants to transfer after that (assuming they could have before)? since they no longer meet minimum requirements for originally sitting for the exam?

I don't have time to grab the quote right now, but I think Michigan says comity applications require the applicant to meet the requirements in MI at the time the original license was granted in the other state. So even if they implemented the BS + 30 rule, if you had a PE in another state before that you would be good to go in MI.

 

[Roy T.]

Beleive what you want - but I'm telling you... ALL states receive FEDERAL money for all sorts of public works projects. Not to get too political but state sovereinty is less and less every day. I can tell you (I have my sources) that the FEDS are looking very closely at state engineering licensing boards in light of new infrastructure money and anything that smacks of un-competitive or overly restrictive behavior on the part of states (such as undue burdens licensing trades and professions) will result in a loss of MONEY.

People can claim states are sovereign until they are blue in the face bu the fact remains - most states are BROKE and are wholly dependent on the feds for infrastructure money. The FEDS are going to have a BIG say in just how restrictive states can get in licensing engineers.

Why do you think every states in the country has a 21-yr drinking age? along with a whole host of other FEDERALLY mandated laws that on the surface have NOTHING to do with INTERSTATE commerce.

Comity will be much easier in the future. The Feds will require it - I know this for fact (a little birdie in DC whispered it too me). this is a good thing.

 

[Roy T.]

I don't think this is analysis is correct either. Maybe you can post a link to the Texas opinion.
I'm no lawyer, but my understanding of the law is as follows:

(1) If you are legally licensed in State A, but reside in State B, then State B cannot prohibit you from stating that you have the title issued by State A. It is, after all, the truth.

(2) But State B *can* require that you specifically disclose that your license was issued by State A, and that that it is not valid for use in State B. Because this is also the truth.

Sorry, but the PE and CPA titles are issued by individual states -- not on a national basis, and are only valid for use within that state. And the MD title is an academic degree -- not a license. Doctors are licensed on a state-by-state basis by medical boards.

I'd look for the Feds to take over direct licensing of CPA's too in light of the banking fiasco. A CPA and an MD can use that title legally in any state in the country, as can a JD on their business cards and states can't say boo. Also, MD is a professional designation and doctors are licensed federally by the DEA to proscribe certain drugs already.

This is the beginning of the end of the states licensing of professions - heard it here first. The FEDS are taking over, anyone want to put money on this --- Tark?

 

[Tark62]

I'd look for the Feds to take over direct licensing of CPA's too in light of the banking fiasco. A CPA and an MD can use that title legally in any state in the country, as can a JD on their business cards and states can't say boo.

You can use an out-of-state legally and states can't say boo -- if you clearly indicate that it is an out-of-state title.

Otherwise, the states can nail you. See post 19 above, for example, to link to Nevada's current policy on out-of-state JDs. This policy flatly denies out-of-state JDs in Nevada the right to use that title, unless they clearly indicate that the title was issued out-of-state and that it is not valid for use in Nevada.

The US Constitution does not give the Federal government any power to license professions, so this power is delegated to the states by default. This could change, but only by a Constitutional amendment -- which would have to be approved by the states. I don't see it happening.

I grant that there is one exception: The Feds can and do license professionals if they deal exclusively with federally regulated issues. For example, attorneys are normally licensed at the State level, but patent attorneys are licensed by the US Patent and Trademark Office (a federal agency) because patent law is exclusively federal. However, this exception is not broad enough to cover general professional licensing, since most professionals are governed by state laws and regulations.

 

[Tark62]

[i can tell you (I have my sources) ... I know this for fact (a little birdie in DC whispered it too me)

OK. Please provide a link to your sources, preferably with a .gov domain. Does the little birdie have a web page?

 

[Roy T.]

You can use an out-of-state legally and states can't say boo -- if you clearly indicate that it is an out-of-state title.
Otherwise, the states can nail you. See post 19 above, for example, to link to Nevada's current policy on out-of-state JDs. This policy flatly denies out-of-state JDs in Nevada the right to use that title, unless they clearly indicate that the title was issued out-of-state and that it is not valid for use in Nevada.

The US Constitution does not give the Federal government any power to license professions, so this power is delegated to the states by default. This could change, but only by a Constitutional amendment -- which would have to be approved by the states. I don't see it happening.

I grant that there is one exception: The Feds can and do license professionals if they deal exclusively with federally regulated issues. For example, attorneys are normally licensed at the State level, but patent attorneys are licensed by the US Patent and Trademark Office (a federal agency) because patent law is exclusively federal. However, this exception is not broad enough to cover general professional licensing, since most professionals are governed by state laws and regulations.

"The US Constitution does not give the Federal government any power to license professions, so this power is delegated to the states by default. This could change, but only by a Constitutional amendment -- which would have to be approved by the states. I don't see it happening. "

Tark - please don't take this the wrong way but that is a profoundly naiive statement. The Federal Government has been dictating to the states the minutia of governance for 200 years - well outside of what the constitution allows for. Everything from clean air to labor laws to minimum wage to minimum drinking age to education - my GOD the list is endless. There is no such thing as "states rights" any more.

The Consitution also says that only Congress has the power to declare war... think about that one for a while.

You sound very young.

 

[IlPadrino]

The US Constitution does not give the Federal government any power to license professions, so this power is delegated to the states by default. This could change, but only by a Constitutional amendment -- which would have to be approved by the states. I don't see it happening.

Tark62,

I hate to encourage him, but I think he's right when he says this is a naive perspective. I'd think it easy for the federal government to require federal funds to be spent under the supervision of a federally-licensed engineer. Or they could go the speed limit route and pass a law (see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Speed_limits_...e_United_States

And while I am almost always against a larger federal government, there'd be lots of good argument for federally licensing engineers. After all, there might have been a New Yorker on the I-35 bridge when it collapsed.