At Structures Congress 2007 in Long Beach, there were two interesting presentations given under the Business Practices track:

• Status of Structural Engineering Practice Acts Nationally, by Sam Rihani of Fairfax, VA, and
• The Structural Engineering Certification Program by Ronald O. Hamburger of San Francisco, CA.  

Below are some of the highlights from each of the presentations:

Licensure

Three types of Structural Engineering licensure exist today:

• Title Act: No limitations as to what a Professional Engineer can do structurally, except as limited via existing regulations of not practicing outside one’s area of expertise;
• Partial (or Limited) Practice Act: Limits practice in certain areas of structural engineering (or certain types of structures) to licensed Structural Engineers; and 
• Full Practice Act: Restricts structural engineering practice to licensed Structural Engineers.

Currently, eleven jurisdictions within the United States have some form of Structural Engineering licensure:

• Two states have full practice acts: Illinois and Hawaii
• Four states have limited practice acts: California, Nevada, Oregon and Washington
• Five states have title acts: Arizona, Idaho, Nebraska, New Mexico and Utah. It was reported that Nebraska and Utah are currently moving to a practice act.

For the remaining US states, being licensed as a Civil Professional Engineer, or even simply as a Professional Engineer, is all that is required to be able to practice structural engineering. It was mentioned that some states do not even require four year education from an accredited university to be licensed as a Professional Engineer. The speaker stated that pushing for separate structural engineering licensure is a local matter to be taken at the state level and mentioned that acheiving separate structural engineering licensure in all US jurisdictions is not likely to occur in our lifetime. The speaker stated that the practice of structural engineering involves skills and competencies not fully covered in most four-year civil engineering curricula.  

Certification

The Structural Engineering Certification Program (http://www.secertboard.org) is spearheaded by the National Council of Structural Engineering Associations (http://www.ncsea.com/). The speaker tried to reframe the debate as not being one vs. the other (licensure vs. certification) but as the two being complementary, with certification being a pre-requisite for licensure. The speaker mentioned that the program is making some headway and that many professional liability insurance companies are starting to use certification as a parameter in determining rates. One of the reasons cited against licensure (and thus in favor of certification) is that a separate SE licensure diminishes the value of the PE.

The Great Debate

Based on the two presentations, it appears that licensure vs. certification of Structural Engineers is a raging debate at the moment; with discussions happening even during the congress. It was reported that SEI has been on record for publicly supporting and encouraging separate structural engineering licensure, while ASCE Board remained silent until recently coming out in favor of certification.

 If you like to express your thoughts on this matter, please leave a comment below or post on our humble forum.

Comments (0)

Subscribe to this comment's feed