|
|||||||||||||||||
|
||||||
  Report submitted by Mr. Tim Lapham, PE, PS MSPS Mid-Michigan Chapter Member
This was the 80th Annual Meeting of NCEES There were over 250 delegates representing 67 licensing boards from throughout the nation and territories of the U.S. Also in attendance were representatives of 25 affiliated or interested organizations. Michigan was well represented at the meeting. From MSPS were our Executive Director, Mr. Self, our President, Mr. Amey, and myself as the POLC representative. From the Board of Licensing of Surveyors were Mr. Victor Lukasavitz and Mr. Sayed Hashimi. From the Board of Licensing of Engineers were Mr. David Mester, Mr. Abe Munfakh and Mr. Lukasavitz who serves as the surveyor representative to the Engineers Board. There were only two items discussed at this meeting that I believe may significantly affect surveying. The first item, which has an almost immediate impact on graduating surveyors, was a motion by the Computer Based Testing (CBT) Oversight Group to not perform CBT beta tests at this time. Previously the Fundamentals of Land Surveying Examination was scheduled to transition from a paper-and-pencil format to a computer-based format very shortly. CBT is now relegated to a long term process of development only after obtaining feedback from all stakeholders including potential licensees. Attached are two documents about this subject which will be available to interested individuals through the main office. The first is an analysis of the issues facing NCEES if the transition was made to CBT and how the general principles of testing and test validating would apply to the NCEES examinations. The second document is the report of the CBT Oversight Group with their recommendations which essentially postponed indefinitely CBT. The second item will not have any immediate impact but has the potential to lead to a much more fundamental change to this profession. This is contemplated changes to the model law and surveying examinations to either add examinations for photogrammetrists, geodesists and other surveying professionals or include these branches as a separate module or modules of the general surveying examination. This could be a very fundamental change to the way surveyors are licensed. Attached is a copy of the report of the Joint Task Force on the NCEES Model Law for Surveying. Representatives of a number of groups were included on this task including ACSM, ASPRS, NSPS and others. One MSPS member served on that Task Force, Bob Burtch, as a representative of ASCE. I believe that this activity has such a potential to change surveying as we know it that MSPS should assign a committee to monitor and review the activities in this arena. The leadership of this society can respond appropriately to any proposed changes only if they are aware of these changes. The next annual meeting of NCEES will be held on August 7 through 10, 2002 in La Jolla, California. Respectfully submitted, Timothy L. Lapham P.S., P.E. Joint Task Force on the Model Law c/o James R. Plasker 5410 Grosvenor Lane, Suite 210 Bethesda, Maryland 208142160 The above organizations represent important constituencies with a vital interest in recent changes to the NCEES Model Law for Surveying, particularly with regard to the inclusion of references to the use of Geographic Information Systems (GIS) and Land Information Systems (LIS). As a follow-on to our earlier report, originally transmitted to you by letter dated December 2, 1997, the original task force was expanded to address the GIS/LIS-related issues remaining at the conclusion of the previous task force effort. The expanded Task Force, with representation from each of the above seven organizations, has met continuously since September 1999 to address the issues of most significant concern. The enclosed "GIS/LIS Addendum to the Report of the Task Force on the NCEES Model Law for Surveying" is the product of approximately 60 hours of debate and collaboration. This report has gained the support of each of the organizations and, we believe, if NCEES acts positively on these proposals the broader professional community will also support the outcome. We have kept several NCEES members and staff informed during the task force deliberations, including Joe Phaneuf, Gail Oliver, Susan King, Rita Lumos and, until just recently, past-president Andrew Liston. In addition, task force member Karen Schuckman has recently discussed the status of the report with Dick Cottingham, and we understand the report will be forwarded to the UP&LG Committee for review. The Task Force is pleased that the previous recommendations made to NCEES were considered seriously and resulted in substantive positive changes to the Model Law. The Task Force has spent many hours and significant effort in developing this addendum to the original report, and trusts that the latest recommendations will receive similar consideration. Because a growing number of states are considering modification of their statutes to reflect the latest Model Law language in this area, we would appreciate a timely review of this material. The leaders of the above organizations continue to embrace your earlier-stated goal "that the effects of [the Model Law for Surveying] be beneficial for the public and practitioners," and pledge to you their commitment to work with NCEES in obtaining that outcome. We continue to enjoy a good working relationship with key members of NCEES, and believe that together we can reach that goal. Sincerely, GIS/LISAddendum Prepared by October 20, 2000 GIS/LIS Addendum This report summarizes the deliberations and recommendations of representatives from seven organizations whose constituencies maintain a vital interest in the modification and promulgation of the Model Law for Surveying by the National Council of Examiners for Engineering and Surveying (NCEES). The seven organizations include: American Congress on Surveying and Mapping (ACSM) Collectively, these organizations represent, at the National level, the general body of GIS/LIS practitioners in the United States, and in particular those GIS/LIS practitioners directly involved in surveying and mapping. Four of these organizations (ACSM, ASCE, ASPRS and NSPS) are also currently members of the NCEES Professional Organizations Liaison Council (POLC). The representatives to the task force, listed in Appendix A, met 3 2 times by teleconference during the period September 20, 1999 through October 19, 2000. In addition, several subgroups met face-to-face on multiple occasions to address specific issues. The task force was supported by, and gratefully acknowledges, the U.S. Geological Survey in providing access to a telephone conference bridge to facilitate those meetings. The teleconference meetings alone consumed in excess of 60 clock-hours and an estimated 650 personal hours. In addition there were many presentations by task force members that addressed the developing task force recommendations and sought feedback for inclusion in the process. These public presentations often included debates among members on both sides of various issues, and many of the resulting presentation materials were further promulgated via the Internet (see http:// www.asprs.org). In addition, several members authored articles for publication in prominent GIS magazines serving the broader community in order to ensure wide awareness and ultimately acceptance of the developing recommendations. There was a conscious effort by all members of the task force during these meetings and presentations to understand and appreciate the varying perspectives on the issues and practices among the represented disciplines. The end result of these debates is a broad-based consensus on a series of recommendations for NCEES concerning the responsibilities of the professional surveyor with respect to the use of Geographic Information Systems (GIS) and Land Information Systems (LIS). Changes made by NCEES to the Model Law for Surveying, circa 1995-1996, incorporated the use of photogrammetric and GIS/LIS techniques and technologies within the definition of the practice of land surveying. Prior to that time the Model Law had been silent on these techniques, although a few states included photogrammetric practice within the scope of their licensing or registration acts and at least one state (California) specifically referenced the use of GIS/LIS tools in their regulations. Based on an April 1997 agreement, five organizations issued an initial report dated December 1, 1997 that addressed the photogrammetric-based issues and made a series of recommendations to NCEES. That report was specifically limited to the photogrammetric issues and purposefully set aside the GIS/LIS issues until a broader coalition of partner organizations could participate in addressing the concerns. During the period 1998 - present, many of the 1997 Task Force Report recommendations concerning photogrammetric practice have been satisfactorily acted upon by NCEES and for that the task force is grateful. In mid - 1999, the task force expanded its membership to include the National States Geographic Information Council (NSGIC) and the Urban and Regional Information Systems Association (URISA) and turned its attention to the issues related to the use of the GIS/LIS tools in geospatial practice. The GIS-related concerns included a general perception that the language of the current NCEES Model Law on Surveying can be interpreted to over-reach the legitimate professional jurisdiction of the practice of surveying with regard to the creation and maintenance of maps and databases in Geographic Information Systems. In addition, there was recognition by all task force members that GIS/LIS tools are potentially being used by non-registered practitioners in areas of practice that clearly fall within the long-established responsibility of the licensed surveyor. The goal was to recommend modifications to the Model Law that would remove potential ambiguities and clearly identify those activities requiring the services of a registered professional while continuing to safeguard the public health, safety and welfare. The issues addressed by the GIS/LIS task force included: Preamble Paragraph: The existing preamble paragraph to the Definition of Surveying in the Model Law is overly broad, and could be interpreted in a manner to require many long-recognized layperson activities to be within the sole purview of the registered professional. Definition of Practice Subsections: The subsections to the Definition of Surveying as originally developed in the 1995 revision to the Model Law, and as subsequently revised in response to the recommendations of the 1997 Task Force Report, make specific reference to the tools of GIS and LIS while remaining silent on the use of numerous other tools utilized by both registered professionals and the laypersons. Exclusion of Practice: Within the current practical use of GIS/LIS tools, techniques, and technologies, there exist functions which are of low regulatory interest to the jurisdictions and which should not be included in the application of the current definition of surveying within the Model Law. Conversely, these tools also provide the capability for many users, including those not currently licensed, to accomplish tasks that affect the health, safety or welfare of the public and therefore are clearly within the purview of the licensed professional. The task force debated at great length the difference between the licensure of practice and the arbitrary control of the use of tools utilized in a practice. As is true with many sophisticated techniques and technologies, a layperson and a licensed practitioner may be able to accomplish what appear to be similar functions utilizing a common tool-set, and often the purposes for those activities may appear to parallel each other at a high level. Historically the guiding principle as to when an activity or function must be restricted to a licensed practice is when the public health, safety or welfare is at stake. Thus, it is critical that GIS/LIS-related functions be carefully analyzed to determine whether practice restrictions should apply, not based simply upon the tool or technique used but rather based upon the service, product, or advice delivered. Among the criteria the task force used to distinguish between the use of GIS technology for survey purposes versus uses of GIS-based techniques and technologies for other lay purposes were the following:
Preamble Paragraph The task force spent considerable time and effort reviewing the preamble paragraph, particularly concerning its breadth of coverage. While to the best knowledge of the task force no jurisdiction has utilized the current language of the paragraph to attempt to require registration of lay-person GIS practitioners, the existing language is viewed as potentially threatening by the GIS community - a fact that none of the members of the task force disagreed upon. It was casually observed that if the current preamble paragraph were to be interpreted literally, even the weather reporter on the nightly televised news would need to be registered. As such, it was agreed that the existing language needed to be sharpened to reflect the intent to require registration for only those activities clearly within the purview of a professional surveyor and that have the potential to affect the public health, safety and welfare in their conduct. Definition of Practice Subsections The task force debated the issue of licensing the use of tools, versus the specific acts of professional practice, at considerable length. It was quickly acknowledged that the existing definition of the practice of surveying treated the tools of the practice in a disparate manner. For instance, while the Model Law calls out GIS/LIS tools explicitly, it makes no similar reference to the Global Positioning System (GPS); in reality there is just as much potential for a layperson to encroach on the practice of surveying through the use of GPS as there is with GIS. In addition, modem technologies are being developed very rapidly and it is therefore difficult for a Model Law that addresses new technologies in detail to be kept current. For example, remote elevation data acquisition technologies such as Light Detection and Ranging (LIDAR) are not currently addressed in the Model Law, and would not likely have even been recognized when the last major revision to the Model Law occurred just five years ago, in 1995. Among the possible alternatives discussed by the task force was the possibility of including a comprehensive list of geospatial technologies as part of the definition subsections of the Model Law. However, it quickly became obvious that such a list was meaningless, and even if it could be compiled it would quickly become outdated. Consistent with the overall philosophy of focusing the Model Law on areas of practice and limiting the references in the Model Law to specific tools, the task force therefore recommends that the definition of surveying used in Section 5.b.2 of the Model Law avoid explicit reference to tools and incorporate the changes to the subsections as outlined in Appendix C of this report. Inclusions and Exclusions of Practice The task force reviewed recent efforts to implement the GIS/LIS language of the 1995-version of the Model Law in several states, including both North and South Carolina. In both of those instances, it was widely recognized that GIS technology has many potential uses not directly related to the health, safety and/or welfare of the public; likewise GIS technology forms the foundation for numerous analytical activities underlying many other professions. The task force therefore believes it is important that representative examples be incorporated into NCEES- documents, policies and/or processes that clearly illustrate those GIS-related activities that require the responsible charge of a Professional Surveyor or Land Surveyor and those that do not carry that requirement. These clarifications could be promulgated by NCEES as policy or guidance to the member Boards; however, the task force recommends that NCEES incorporate the Inclusion and Exclusion clauses outlined in Appendix D of this report directly within the Model Law itself. The effects of this recommendation would be to draw a clear distinction between those GIS/LIS- functions that affect the public health, safety and welfare from those that do not. The task force recognizes that this recommendation varies slightly from the recommendation of the 1997 Task Force Report [see Appendix G of the earlier report]; however, the current recommendation reflects the fuller debate of the broader coalition addressing the GIS-related issues and is therefore grounded in a more extensive analysis. Each of the seven organizations has contributed significantly to the development of these recommendations and is willing to assist NCEES in their full implementation. While only four of the organizations are currently members of POLC, one additional organization (URISA) has previously made application to join and is currently considering reapplication. All seven of the organizations are committed to assisting NCEES in clarifying the licensing and/or registration of GIS specialists. Consideration by NCEES of the recommendations outlined in this report will be an important step in that process. List of Appendices Appendix A: Task Force Participants ACSM David W. Gibson, PSM - Associate Professor and Geomatics Program Director, University of Florida, Gainesville, Florida. Past-chair, Florida Board for Professional Surveyors and Mappers; survey consultant to NCEES. ASCE Steven D. Johnson, PLS -Associate Professor of Civil Engineering (Geomatics Area), Purdue University, West Lafayette, Indiana. Past Chair, ASCE Geomatics Division. ASPRS Doug Fuller, CP, CMS - Contract Administrator, AeroMetric, Inc., Sheboygan, Wisconsin. Pastmember, Board of Directors ASPRS; Past-director, ASPRS Professional Practice Division. MAPPS G. Michael Ritchie, PLS, PE, CP - President and CEO, Photo Science, Inc. of Kentucky, Lexington, Kentucky. Presidentelect, MAPPS; member, Board of Directors, American Consulting Engineers Council. NSPS M. Greg Johnson, PLS, PE - Supervisor, Land Engineering, Georgia Power, Inc., Atlanta, Georgia. Member, Board of Directors, NSPS NSGIC Gene Trobia - Arizona State Cartographer, Phoenix, Arizona. Member, Board of Directors, NSGIC. URISA Task Force Facilitator Credential Abbreviations Although the task force is not aware of any jurisdiction that has utilized the current language of the preamble paragraph within the definition of surveying section of the Model Law for Surveying to attempt to require registration of lay-person GIS practitioners, the existing language is broadly viewed as potentially threatening by the GIS community - a fact that none of the members of the task force disagreed upon. It was casually observed that if the current preamble paragraph were to be interpreted literally, even the weather reporter on the nightly televised news would need to be registered. As such, it was agreed that the existing language needed to be sharpened to reflect the intent to require registration for only those activities clearly within the purview of a professional surveyor and that have the potential to affect the public health, safety and welfare in their conduct. The 1999 NCEES Model Law preamble paragraph (Section 2.b.5) follows: The term "Practice of Surveying or Land Surveying," within the intent of this Act shall mean providing professional services such as consultation, investigation, testimony evaluation, expert technical testimony, planning, mapping, assembling, and interpreting reliable scientific measurements and information relative to the location, size, shape, or physical features of the earth, improvements on the earth, the space above the earth, or any part of the earth, and utilization and development of these facts and interpretation into an orderly survey map, plan, report, description, or project. The practice of surveying or land surveying includes, but is not limited to, any one or more of the following: While the task force considered a number of alternatives to the existing paragraph, including an much more abbreviated version that is currently utilized in some sates, including California, the task force agreed to recommend the following replacement language: The term "Practice of Surveying or Land Surveying" within the intent of this Act shall mean providing, or offering to provide, professional services involving both (1) the making of geometric measurements of, and gathering related information pertaining to, the physical or legal features ofthe earth, improvements on the earth, the space above the earth, or any part of the earth; and (2) utilization and/or development of these facts into survey products such as graphics, digital data, maps, plans, reports, descriptions, and/or projects. Professional services include acts of consultation, investigation, testimony evaluation, expert technical testimony, planning, mapping, assembling, and interpreting gathered measurements and information related to any one or more of the following: The current (1999) version of the Model Law [Section 2.b.5] makes specific references to the tools of land information systems (LIS) and geographic information systems (GIS). [See subsections (d) and (h) below.] The task force debated the issue of licensing the use of tools, versus the specific acts of professional practice, at considerable length. It was quickly acknowledged that the existing definition of the practice of surveying treated the tools of the practice in a disparate manner. For instance, while the Model Law calls out GIS/LIS tools explicitly, it makes no similar reference to the Global Positioning System (GPS); in reality there is just as much potential for a layperson to encroach on the practice of surveying through the use of GPS as there is with GIS. The 1999 NCEES Model Law lists the following subsections within the definition of surveying:
In addition, the task force recognized that modem technologies are being developed very rapidly and it is therefore difficult for a Model Law that addresses new technologies to any significant degree of detail to be kept current. For example, remote elevation data acquisition technologies such as Light Detection and Ranging CALENDAR) are not currently addressed in the Model Law, and would not likely have even been recognized for such recognition when the last major revision to the Model Law occurred just five years ago, in 1995. Among the alternatives discussed by the task force was the possibility of including a comprehensive list of geospatial technologies as part of the definition subsections of the Model Law. However, it quickly became obvious that such a list was meaningless, and even if it could be compiled it would quickly become outdated. Consistent with the overall philosophy of focusing the Model Law on areas of practice and limiting the references in the Model Law to specific tools, the task force therefore recommends that the definition of surveying avoid the explicit reference to tools and incorporate the changes to the subsections as follows: (a) Determining the configuration or contour of the earth's surface or the position of fixed objects thereon by measuring lines and angles and applying the principles of mathematics or photogrammetry. (b) Determining the size and shape of the earth, or any point on the earth, by performing geodetic surveys utilizing angular and linear measurements through spatially oriented spherical geometry. (c) Determining, by the use of principles of surveying, the position for any survey control (nonboundary) monument or reference point; or setting, resetting, or replacing any such monument or reference point. (d) Creating, preparing, or modifying electronic or computerized data relative to the performance of the activities in the above described items (a) through (c). (e) Locating, relocating, establishing, reestablishing, laying out, or retracing any property line or boundary of any tract of land or any road, right of way, easement, alignment, or elevation of any of the fixed works embraced within the practice of engineering. (f) Making any survey for the subdivision of any tract of land. (g) Determining, by the use of principles of land surveying, the position for any survey monument or reference point; or setting, resetting, or replacing any such monument or reference point. (h) Creating, preparing, or modifying electronic or computerized data relative to the performance of the activities in the above described items (e) through (g).
Inclusions and Exclusions of Practice' Introduction A literal reading of the definition of Surveying as outlined in the 1999 NCEES Model Law includes any graphical representation of any physical or cultural feature on the surface of the earth, within the earth, or in the air above the earth. All media and data storage, either in hard copy form or electronic form is included in this definition of surveying. This interpretation of the definition of surveying is overly broad and requires further explanation, particularly with respect to the creation of geospatially-referenced data bases and the use of modem spatial data technologies, including geographic information systems (GIS), land information systems (LIS) and the Global Positioning System (GPS). The ability for registered professionals outside the traditional field of surveying and mapping to locate and map geospatial features has expanded dramatically with the availability of these advanced technologies. A distinction must be made in the use of electronic systems between making or documenting original measurements in the creation of survey products, versus the copying, interpretation, or representation of those measurements in such systems. Further, a distinction must be made according to the intent, use, or purpose of measurement products in electronic systems to determine a definitive location versus the use of those products as a locational reference for planning, infrastructure management, and general information. In order to protect the public, it is imperative that allied professions clearly understand those practices that constitute surveying as defined in the registration act as well as those practices that' are considered outside the domain of surveying. This document is intended to provide clear examples of work that are both included in, and excluded from, the practice of surveying. This interpretative material is intended to provide guidance rather than be exhaustive in its content. Because it is important that other professionals, as well as the lay public, clearly understand the GIS/LIS-based activities that fall within or outside the practice of surveying, the task force believes the following material should be promulgated by NCEES in a manner that receives wide and continuing attention. While distribution as a policy or guideline may satisfy that need, the task force recommends that the following clauses be incorporated directly within the Model Law for Surveying: A. Activities Included within Surveying Practice Activities that must be accomplished under the responsible charge of a Professional Surveyor or Land Surveyor (unless specifically exempted in Section B. below) include, but are not limited to, the following:
B. Activities Excluded from Surveying Practice A distinction must be made in the use of electronic systems between making or documenting original measurements in the creation of survey products, versus the copying, interpretation, or representation of those measurements in such systems. Further, a distinction must be made according to the intent, use, or purpose of measurement products in electronic systems to determine a definitive location versus the use of those products as a locational reference for planning, infrastructure management, and general information. The following items are not to be included as activities within the definition of surveying:
|
|
About MSPS | What's New | Education/Licensing | Events | Legislation | Membership This page copyright © 2002-2005, Michigan Society of Professional Surveyors |