Virginia Regulatory Town Hall
Agency
Department of Professional and Occupational Regulation
 
Board
Board for Architects, Professional Engineers, Land Surveyors, Certified Interior Designers, and Landscape Architects
 
chapter
Board for Architects, Professional Engineers, Land Surveyors, Certified Interior Designers, and Landscape Architects Regulations [18 VAC 10 ‑ 20]
Action General Review
Stage Proposed
Comment Period Ended on 2/28/2014
spacer
Previous Comment     Next Comment     Back to List of Comments
1/8/14  5:58 pm
Commenter: Mike Peele, Georgetown University

18VAC10 - 20 - 25m, 18VAC10 - 20 - 130 , 18VAC10 - 20 - 220
 

I believe that increasing the requirements for references, and instituting a time frame places an unreasonable requirement on applicants.

Civil engineers make up a large majority of both examinees and licensees.  From my experience and what I've seen on message boards, engineers, who are anything other than Civil Engineers, have a hard time finding any PE references to begin with. 

With the new Computer Engineering examination and licence, it will be nearly impossible for Computer Engineers to find any references. 

Do references have any legal liability of the referred person's failures?  No, they don't. I propose to eliminate requirements of PE references completely, and optionally, replace them with a background check. 

-130 and -220 do not specify any legal reason for providing references other than to "demonstrate the applicants competence and integrity".  Competence requirements should be met by the degree, passing of the FE, passing the PE, and integrity by a background check.

 

At a miniumum, I believe that Engineers and Architects should be able to be references for each other, in particular since the work often overlaps, and legally, each one can do a portion of the others work.

 

CommentID: 29912