vs. ) CASE NO. 83-430
Respondent. )
Pursuant to notice, a hearing was held before Arnold H. Pollock, Hearing Officer with the Division of Administrative Hearings, at 4:00 p.m. on April 13, 1983, in Orlando, Florida. The issue for determination was whether Petitioner was properly denied his request for examination for licensure as a professional engineer.
For Petitioner: Mr. Irving Joseph Armstrong, pro se
For Respondent: John J. Rimes, III, Esquire
On or before February 12, 1982, Petitioner submitted an application for certification of registration as a professional engineer to the Department of Professional Regulation in Tallahassee, Florida. On March 30, 1982, he was notified by Allen R. Smith, Jr., Executive Director of the Board of Professional Engineers, that his application had been received, but was not complete, lacking receipt of character references, employer verification, etc.
Somewhat later, on January 17, 1983, Mr. Smith again wrote to the Petitioner and advised him that the Board of Professional Engineers had reviewed his application file at their January 11, 1983, meeting and had decided to deny his request for examination. The basis for denial was that in the Board's opinion he did not meet the requisite experience criteria for admission to the examination, as outlined in the Florida Statutes and the Rules of the Board of Professional Engineers. The Board was of the opinion that Petitioner's experience to the time the application was submitted was more aligned to land surveying than professional engineering. The Board further suggested that he
could better meet the criteria by securing a bachelor of science degree in engineering and obtaining four years' engineering experience.
On January 25, 1983, the Petitioner submitted an Election of Rights, demanding a formal hearing pursuant to Section 120.57(1), Florida Statutes (1981).
At the hearing, Petitioner, in a joint composite exhibit, produced four notarized employer references which, he claims, when coupled with the information contained in the experience section of the application form, shows that he has sufficient experience to meet the ten years' experience criteria required by the Rules of the Board of Professional Engineers.
In his sworn testimony, Petitioner detailed the type of work he has been doing since he started in the engineering field. For example, his work in the surveying department for VTN engineers was not solely land surveying; it encompassed the preparation of calculation for roads, utilizing coordinate geometry for this and various other projects. He did right-of- way engineering, using mathematics and physical engineering science to plan right-of-ways for roads. When working with Granada Shops, Inc., from March, 1969, to April, 1970, he designed store fixtures and would take fixtures designed by architects and adjust them to make them structurally sound. He also did construction and design of non-load-bearing walls.
When working for VTN, Inc., from May, 1970, to February, 1975, he did work similar to that in his first period of employment with Metropolitan Dade County, such as design geometry for incline and bridge work, field inspection of pilings and beams as they came in from the manufacturer, and actually did part of the design work on the inclines and bridges referenced above. All this was done under the supervision of a professional engineer.
From 1975 to 1978, he worked as an engineering draftsman for Florida Gas Transmission Company, where he did surveying for the alignment of pipelines, but, in addition, did design work consisting of design layout of the pipeline, the size of pipes, elbows, etc. In this job, he was part of a team and actually accomplished a part of the design work in question.
From June, 1978, to April, 1981, he again worked as a designer for VTN, Inc., in Orlando, during which he did design and alignment and the planning of roads for subdivisions. He was actually involved in the design process, not merely acting as a draftsman for someone else's designs. He also did drainage studies for placement of roads over several square miles.
From May through September, 1981, he was in private land surveying practice in Orlando, but in October, 1981, went back to work with VTN, Inc., doing much the same type of survey and design work he did previously, as well as site planning under the supervision of a professional engineer. He is now a survey supervisor, no longer an assistant, and works right under the project manager, who is himself directly under the department head.
Eugene M. Bechamps, Chairman of the Board of Professional Engineers, personally reviewed the Petitioner's application when the Board had some question as to how much credit he should be given toward meeting the criteria for admission to the examination. In its analysis of an application, the Board looks for such things as the use of analysis and synthesis to make engineering judgments. The key word in this description is "judgment" versus merely following orders. Mr. Bechamps recognizes that Petitioner passed the land
surveying examination in the 1978-1979 time frame. The problem with his current application is in regard to the areas that are not land surveying. The alignment computation for highways or pipelines, for example, is the same for that used in land surveying and would not constitute additional engineering experience which would go toward meeting the criteria for admission to the examination.
In analyzing the documentation submitted by the Petitioner along with his application, Mr. Bechamps noted that the employer reference submitted by Metropolitan Dade County was somewhat discounted because of the lack of definition in the number of years in which Petitioner was alleged to have been engaged in the various aspects of his work. Mr. Bechamps did not see Petitioner's experience with Granada Shops, Inc., as engineering design experience. Of the five years that Petitioner worked for VTN, Inc. (the first time), since Petitioner had no engineering degree, the first two years were not counted; of the remaining three years, Bechamps felt that appropriate engineering experience could be given only for fifteen months' credit.
Since most of Petitioner's experience with Florida Gas Transmission Company was in land surveying and drafting, no experience credit was given. The preparation of drawings was the only possible area where engineering experience could be given, but insufficient evidence was presented by the Respondent to give credit for this. The Board granted seventeen months' credit for the second period of VTN, Inc., employment. No engineering experience could be given for the period of private practice as a land surveyor since none was claimed.
With regard to the third period of employment with VTN Inc., since the job title connotes surveying, no credit was given. However, this could be changed. Even if the full eighteen months' credit were given for this period, his combined total of fifty months' good engineering experience credit would still be less than one-half of the 120 months' experience required by the statute.
According to the Executive Director of the Board of Professional Engineers, the term "engineering surveying" as contained in the statute is that surveying that is not land surveying, but instead other surveying necessary to support an engineering project; i.e., elevation surveying, topographical surveying. Land surveying alone is not sufficient, even with an engineering degree, to support the experience necessary for certification.
I find, therefore, that Petitioner does not have a bachelor of science degree in engineering, nor does he have ten years of acceptable engineering experience. At best, even if the Petitioner is given the benefit of the doubt on all questionable areas, he can be credited only with fifty months of acceptable engineering experience. The amount required in the absence of an educational background is 120 months.
CONCLUSIONS OF LAW
The Division of Administrative Hearings has jurisdiction over the parties and the subject matter of this proceeding. Section 120.57(1), Florida Statutes (1981).
Petitioner was denied the opportunity to sit for the examination as a professional engineer because he failed to meet the experience or educational criteria necessary under the terms of the statute.
Sections 471.013(1)(a)1, 2, and 3, Florida Statutes, set forth the criteria to be used in determining whether an individual shall be qualified to practice in the State of Florida as an engineer. This statute states:
(1)(a) A person shall be entitled to take an examination for the purpose
of determining whether he is qualified to practice in this state as an engi- neer if the person is of good moral character and:
Is a graduate from an approved engineering curriculum of
4 years or more in a school, college, or university which has been approved by the board and has a record of 4 years of active engineering experi- ence of a character indicating compe- tence to be in responsible charge of engineering;
Is a graduate of an approved engineering technology curriculum of 4 years or more in a school, college, or university within the State University System, having been enrolled or having graduated prior to July 1, 1979, and has a record of 4 years of active engi- neering experience of a character indi- cating competence to be in responsible charge of engineering; or
Has, in lieu of such educa- tion and experience requirements, 10 years or more of active engineering work of a character indicating that the applicant is competent to be placed in responsible charge of engi- neering. However, this subparagraph does not apply unless such person notifies the department before July 1, 1984, that he was engaged in such work on July 1, 1981.
The board shall adopt rules providing for the review and approval of schools or colleges and the courses of study in engineering in such schools and colleges. The rules shall be based
on the educational requirements for engineering as defined in s. 471.005. The board may adopt rules providing for the acceptance of the approval
and accreditation of schools and courses of study by a nationally accepted accreditation organization.
The statute is implemented by Rules 21H-20.02(1) and (2), Florida Administrative Code, which basically reiterate the terms of the statute.
Here, Petitioner needs either an engineering degree plus four years of experience, or no engineering degree and ten years of experience. In the instant case, since Petitioner does not have an engineering degree, he needs to have ten years' experience. At best, the most experience with which Petitioner could be credited is fifty months, far short of the required ten years.
It is, therefore, quite clear that even under the most liberal interpretations, Petitioner falls far short of the requisite education and experience requirements set forth in the statutes and the rules to sit for an examination as a professional engineer in the State of Florida.
Based on the foregoing Findings of Fact and Conclusions of law, it is, therefore,
That a final order be entered finding that Petitioner does not possess the requisite criteria necessary to admit him to the examination for licensure as a professional engineer in the State of Florida.
RECOMMENDED this 13th day of May, 1983, in Tallahassee, Florida.
ARNOLD H. POLLOCK, Hearing Officer Division of Administrative Hearings The Oakland Building
Filed with the Clerk of the Division of Administrative Hearings this 13th day of May, 1983.
Mr. Irving Joseph Armstrong 5069 Susannah Boulevard
John J. Rimes, III, Esquire Assistant Attorney General Department of Legal Affairs The Capitol
Mr. Allen R. Smith, Jr. Executive Director
Mr. Fred Roche Secretary
