Legislature(1993 - 1994)
03/22/1994 01:37 PM Senate L&C
| Audio | Topic |
|---|
* first hearing in first committee of referral
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
SENATOR KELLY introduced CSSB 320 (OCCUPATIONAL LICENSING) to committee and invited the sponsor, SENATOR LOREN LEMAN, to present his bill to committee. SENATOR LEMAN explained SB 320 deals with some revisions to the statutes regarding architects, engineers, and land surveyors, and was brought to his attention by the Board of Registration. He explained there was a number of issues in the bill, minor, and mostly housekeeping in nature, but he preferred to let the chairman of the board, GEORGE DAVIDSON, testify on the changes. SENATOR LEMAN did note that he has proposed three amendments since the bill was originally introduced, which would delete Section 1 from the bill, first of all. This was because of the impact of changing terms from the statute would also inadvertently change some 30 or 40 other boards, which was not intended. SENATOR LEMAN explained the other change was to remove Section 3 in the original bill, which contained an issue that would create controversy in a relatively non-controversial bill. He further explained Section 8 in the original bill changes the definition of the term, "practice of land surveying." He said it reflected some recent board action, and the new definition reflects the new definition from the board regarding the practice of land surveying. MR. LEMAN suggested the adoption of the new committee substitute, and said that MR. DAVIDSON would speak to the changes, as well as a land surveyor, PATRICK KALEN from Fairbanks, who suggested some of the changes. Number 053 SENATOR KELLY questioned the educational requirements needed to be a land surveyor. MR. LEMAN suggested this could best be answered by MR. DAVIDSON, but a surveyor could have no education and eight years of experience to be qualified to take the exam to be a land surveyor. If you have four years of education, he said you would only need four years of experience to take the exam. He said there was no minimum amount of education currently required. SENATOR KELLY asked, in reference to page 2, Section 4 in the proposed committee substitute, where the amendment is in that section. SENATOR RIEGER pointed to an or on line 21, and SENATOR LEMAN explained the change. SENATOR RIEGER expressed curiosity about the definition of "practice of land surveying" in the last section in the bill, and asked if it triggered oversight by the board. He thought perhaps it precluded a person from doing certain things unless certified. He was also curious about the first addition of the teaching of land surveying courses at an institution of higher learning, in the e same section. He wanted to know what it does in relation to ability of a person to teach and a university's ability to recruit the person of their choice to teach land surveying courses. Number 110 SENATOR LEMAN referred to a previous bill regarding the teaching of higher level courses in engineering, to explain it would allow the people who teach to count that work experience toward the work which would permit them to qualify to take the exam. He gave an example to explain the inclusion. SENATOR KELLY then called on GEORGE DAVIDSON, who indicated he had brought a letter on behalf of the Architects, Engineers and Land Surveyor Board, which outlines the board's position. MR. DAVIDSON reviewed the bill as previously submitted, and then explained the board is experiencing difficulty with longevity, or continuity. He also explained the board represented about 5,000 architects, engineers, and land surveyors throughout the State, and although he is the senior member on the board, he has been on the board less than four years. Number 160 MR. DAVIDSON expressed concern the lack of historic memory in dealing with the membership, and he explained it was further compounded by only having one state employee. He further explained this position has changed regularly in the last year, and the board was currently working with their fourth staff person. He indicated a desire by the board to provide additional continuity by reducing the frequency found in changing board membership, and he gave an example of replacing members who have resigned. Under this bill, the term of a board member would still be under ten years, which he didn't think was excessive. MR. DAVIDSON explained the remainder of concerns were housekeeping in nature, and he offered to review the proposed changes. SENATOR SALO asked which part of the bill changed the time limit of board member terms. SENATOR KELLY explained the provision was not in the proposed committee substitute, and he said MR. DAVIDSON has suggested a different approach. Number 199 MR. DAVIDSON proposed that a board member, who has served less than two years of a four year term, is not be considered to have served a full term, and he explained how it would work. He described the makeup of the board as requiring one of the engineers appointed would be a mining engineer. MR. DAVIDSON said the board has had difficulty in filling that position, which is presently filled by PHIL HOLDSWORTH, a long time mining engineer. He reviewed the board discussion on appointing engineers, and it was decided to request three engineers on the board to give the governor more flexibility on the position, such as a need for a petroleum engineer. MR. DAVIDSON, in reference to Section 3, included the word only to o indicate that board members would be removed only for misconduct, in an effort to allow the board to build up some historic memory. MR. DAVIDSON explained that changes in Section 4, with the deletion of lines 13 through 16 of the original bill, will allow for similar education and work experience for registration of a land surveyor as is required for engineers. He further explained there would be a need for a regulation change which would require 12 years of experience for registration as a land surveyor, and was requested by the land surveyors in the interest of consistency with engineers. He gave some examples of the impact of the changes. Number 240 In Section 5, MR. DAVIDSON proposed the deletion of some language on lines 22 to 26, which was put in years ago when the Council of Engineering Examiners was proposing another method of registration, but the alternate form of registration never took place. MR. DAVIDSON, in reference to Section 6, EVIDENCE OF PRACTICE, said the only change there was the addition of the word or between paragraph (2) and (3), which comes at the request of the attorney general's office. Without the or they are finding that people are e able to sneak through because they don't meet all of the terms of both paragraphs. It was felt that both paragraphs were separate criteria for evaluating evidence of practice. MR. DAVIDSON explained, in reference to Section 7, paragraph (9), line 14, it came at the request of the surveyors and land survey professors, and it removes the licensure exemption for land survey professors at postsecondary educational institutions. He said it would also increase the requirements and the quality of service from the school, while allowing the professors to get credit for their education to apply towards their license. SENATOR KELLY asked how they could be teaching if they were licensed. MR. DAVIDSON answered that a professor is allowed to work under the direction of other registered people. SENATOR SHARP asked if it was related to a problem several years ago when land surveyors were brought in from other places, who were not registered and couldn't teach until they were licensed. MR. DAVIDSON explained the proposal was for all professors in engineering, architecture, and land surveying, but was opposed by the University of Alaska as a restriction to recruiting. He said the change would only apply to the land surveyors at the request of the survey department at the University, and approved by the board. SENATOR KELLY asked about the language that allows land surveyors to go underground, as to why it was necessary. MR. DAVIDSON explained the circumstances under which it would be necessary such as for sewer lines. SENATOR KELLY asked who did the underground work before, and did they have to be a certified mining engineer. MR. DAVIDSON answered it was done by both civil engineers and land surveyors. Number 296 MR. DAVIDSON explained it had resulted from some of the boroughs beginning to enforce the exact letter rather than the customary practice, and he cited examples from Fairbanks. He thought PAT KALEN, a land surveyor from Fairbanks and instrumental in dealing with the court in this, would be able to respond more specifically. SENATOR RIEGER was bothered by Section 6, because although adding new descriptions to the practice of land surveying might broaden the scope of practice, he thought the flip side is that anyone who is not registered as a land surveyor is prohibited from doing any of the things in Section 6, unless they fall into the exceptions. He felt the legislation would force registration. MR. DAVIDSON pointed to the prior list of exemptions in Section 5 of the committee substitute as intended to protect those normal practices done by contractors, and he didn't believe the new language encompasses more work than currently being done by the surveyors, but makes them legal. SENATOR RIEGER and MR. DAVIDSON discussed the provisions in Section 6 in relation to both civil engineers and land surveyors. SENATOR RIEGER quoted the bill as saying a land surveyor may not practice land surveying in the state unless that person is registered. SENATOR KELLY suggested the committee return to his question, and asked to hear from ROBERT ERICKSON. Number 351 MR. ERICKSON presented some comments dealing only with Section 4, which SENATOR KELLY explained was Section 2 of the committee substitute, entitled GENERAL REQUIREMENTS AND QUALIFICATIONS FOR REGISTRATION. MR. ERICKSON read: "This testimony addresses concerns we have for Senate Bill 320, in particular AS 08.48.171, page 2, lines 13 through 16. (of the original bill.) The deletion of these four lines in the current statute will negatively affect some of our technical engineers, our term for surveyors, not land surveyors, but construction type surveyors. I would first like to introduce myself and our organizations, then to specify the damage that maybe done. I am the business representative for Technical Engineers Alaska affiliated with Teamsters Local 959, and represent approximately 150 construction surveyors statewide, 23 members are registered land surveyors in the State of Alaska. Throughout the years, our members have enjoyed employment on projects throughout the state. The nature of the majority of these projects require working away from home. If a technical engineer wishes to test for a license, meaning a land surveyor, he must be able to submit evidence of more than eight years of any combination of education, experience, or training. Three years must be in responsible control of an operation related to land surveying. Operations of a construction survey nature do not count towards this three years requirement. In essence a technical engineer must leave the construction survey projects and spend at least three years land surveying. Historically, five years of land surveying on construction projects have given our applicants enough technical experience to pass the non legal parts of the examination. Most have had to utilize courses from the University to help them pass the legal questions put forth in the exam. While it would be acceptable to substitute a four year degree for the experience, this is often an unsuitable choice due to reasons of finance with tuition, supporting families and location. Quite often our work takes us away from computing distance to campus. We are of the understanding that if the eight years is struck from the statute, then regulations requiring 12 years will be promulgated. We're convinced that adding four more years of experience in order to take the examination, is unreasonable, and acts as a restraint on our members who wish to become licensed. If five years experience in the construction surveying does not enable you to have minimum qualifications, which all passing the examination purports to guarantee, it is unlikely that nine years would improve your qualifications. You can grasp the fundamental technical aspects of surveying, or you cannot, and surely it can be found within the current eight year requirement. Three years responsible control and 5 years of other experience. We ask this statute to remain as currently written." MR. ERICKSON concluded by offering to answer questions. SENATOR RIEGER referred to the first page of MR. ERICKSON'S testimony to ask about his remarks on "then regulations requiring 12 years will be promulgated." MR. ERICKSON referred to testimony from MR. DAVIDSON, but he explained that MIKE KENNY had talked to PATRICK KALEN, an instructor at the University of Alaska, and other people in the field on the board. MR. KENNY was told this was what was probably going to happen, to go from eight years to 12 years. It was clarified that MR. KALEN is a past board member. Number 403 SENATOR KELLY asked MR. DAVIDSON if he indicated there is an idea afloat to promulgate regulations requiring 12 years experience instead of eight. MR. DAVIDSON said that was the proposed amendment, and he reviewed the chart of requirements before registration in the regulations. SENATOR KELLY asked if this would limit membership in their profession, and MR. DAVIDSON said it would if they don't have the education. SENATOR KELLY next turned the network to Fairbanks, to hear testimony from PATRICK KALEN. MR. KALEN addressed two issues, beginning with the definition of land surveying as to conflict between the land surveyors and engineers. He explained it had been raised as an issue, and how it was resolved. The end results was to make it clear the board can certify as to the accuracy to the measurements that we take. We don't think it would limit anyone from taking those kinds of measurements for their own use, but they are not admissible in a court hearing. MR. KALEN explained it came from the MatSu Valley, and proposed by a land surveyor who had difficulty in testifying as to the accuracy of measurements. He further explained equal weight was given to the testimony of a realtor for different measurements. MR. KALEN, in his second issue about the eight year limitation in statute, said this had been requested by the land surveyors, because some things are different today than when the land surveyors were separated from engineering as a practice. He said they now have a four degree program available in Alaska, while at the same time surveying has become a great deal more complicated than previously. He gave some history on the four year degree programs in a dozen states, and he reviewed the results. MR. KALEN recognized there should be a route for those who are unable to get the degree and use the same rules as the civil engineers with 12 years of experience. SENATOR KELLY interrupted to ask if a person needs a degree in order to be a land surveyor. Number 453 MR. KALEN explained this was not correct, but there was a degree program available, and the board was interested in moving in the direction of legitimizing that degree to make it part of the requirement toward becoming a land surveyor. He further explained how this was hampered by the limitation in statute which makes it impossible for the Board of Registration to formally recognize education. SENATOR KELLY asked if this was being requested, and MR. KALEN explained why it wasn't presently counted toward land surveying experience. He explained this made it difficult for the board to evaluate applicants because construction surveying is not land surveying, but he thought the education component would broaden the options of getting a degree to count towards registration. He also thought they were providing a better route, and he outlined the complications in surveying since the eight year limitation was put into statute. He hoped the committee could adopt the changes. SENATOR KELLY asked it it was in regulation. MR. KALEN said he was correct and explained how it was directed in regulation. They clarified the provision. SENATOR RIEGER wondered why, by regulation, the board can count education towards the experience necessary, but can't count teaching of surveying courses at an institution of higher learning as experience towards the required time. MR. KALEN opined it was a hold over from a time when land surveying was split from engineering, and wasn't really considered, but he referred to the definition of architects and engineers which considers teaching as experience. Also from Fairbanks, SENATOR KELLY invited BILL MENDENHALL to testify. MR. MENDENHALL introduced himself as the current land surveyor member of the Board of Architects, Engineers, and Land Surveyors, and recently replaced MR. KALEN. He supported the testimony from MR. KALEN, and explained they had both worked closely with the Alaska Society of Professional Land Surveyors, all of whom felt there should be a greater emphasis on formal education. He said this followed the national trend, and he cited some states as recently requiring a four year surveying degree. MR. MENDENHALL explained the board had urged people to get more formal education, and he reviewed the information from the Alaska Administrative Code which would allow someone with four years of education and four years of experience to take the exam. If a person had a two year surveying degree, such as an associates arts degree, and eight years of experience for a total of ten, that person could take the exam. MR. MENDENHALL explained, for a person with no formal education, that person would need 12 years of experience to take the exam. The present law would not allow, since about 10 years ago, for land surveyors only, but it would permit a land surveyor to eight years total experience and education. He felt this should be upgraded to give a higher status for requirements for surveying, and he claimed it had been reviewed by many people, and endorsed by the Society of Professional Land Surveyors. He reminded the committee that a person with no formal education still has the option to take the exam, but just requires more experience. MR. MENDENHALL said this was patterned exactly after the requirements for professional engineers. In the State of Alaska, a person with a four year degree in surveying and four years of experience may sit for the exam. A person with five years of education or more, a master's degree, and three years experience may sit for the exam. A person with mo formal education in engineering must have 12 years of experience to sit for the exam. He claimed they were just trying to apply the same rules to the land surveyors as has long been applied to the professional engineer category. SENATOR LINCOLN expressed some confusion over Section 2 of the committee substitute which deletes the requirement of eight years of experience with any combination, but leaving in the submission of evidence satisfactory to the board on education, experience, or training. In the previous testimony, she questioned whether eight years of experience was being substituted for 12 years. Number 543 MR. MENDENHALL explained, before that could be done, there would have to be hearings on the administrative regulations, and he didn't know what would happen beyond this. He reiterated the present Alaska statute says that surveyors can't be required to have more than eight years combination of education and experience. He said they would like to have that provision removed to allow the board to strengthen the requirements in the future. He claimed the proposed legislation would not accomplish this, but would just make it possible to be done through the administrative code after a proper hearing. SENATOR LINCOLN thought it seemed ambiguous to leave it to the satisfaction of the board, but does not speak to exactly to the number of years, the degree, or experience. She felt it was left in limbo. MR. MENDENHALL quoted the regulation regarding the engineers and architects are also right now in limbo. He suggested nothing could be done because of the current wording in statute. There being no further testimony on SB 320, SENATOR KELLY said staff would work on the legislation for a future date.
| Document Name | Date/Time | Subjects |
|---|