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 Develop regulations for a mandatory continuing education requirement for architect, professional engineer, and land surveyor licenses.
Stage Proposed
Comment Period Ended on 5/2/2008
spacer
Previous Comment     Next Comment     Back to List of Comments
3/6/08  12:11 pm
Commenter: John E. Pandolf, P.E. #0402 025669, NASA Langley Research Center

Degradation of Principles
 

It is with the utmost pride that I execute the duties of my profession every day.

As a professional, I'm already expected bt the state to act on solving problems based on proper education. Any other actions could be misconstrued as inappropriate via non-compliant actions on the part of the license holder.

It goes without saying that, "Ignorance is no excuse for the law". Laws of Engineering, physics, professional engineering practices...... or the laws of the board of the state of Virginia. There should be no reason to pursure redundant training when the requirements of the position already require extenstive academic accomplishments, personal endorsements and much credible work history.  The government is always looking to improve the quality of the professionals in the state of Virginia, but increased regulation is not always the way to that end. In this case: the requirements are vague, probably by design and such governing bodies usually will  tighten those requirements as suited in the future.

This is only another example of how the state, quietly tries to pass legislation and then later impose more constricting regulation that initially would be rejected, but when properly phased-in, has to be accepted by the mass public of professional engineers.

We should reject this legislation, until all the details are properly worked out and itemized. I would expect that if the state was really concerned about the longevity of the professionals knowledge, they would just have us all answer some questions every time we have our licences re-instated. I do not think that is necessary and I do not think the state believes that either. We are professionals, licensed and expected to deliver , not just the highest possible quality engineering product, but one that meets standardized state requirements already in law.

Micro-managing my annual training schedule, is only an admission, of the degradation of the credentials of the profession of state licensure. My job requires 40 hours a year profession related training. The state's board of regulation is not taking this into account, and I do not believe they took the time to think this program thru completely.

Shameful...... Even when the DPOR representatives were asked over the phone about this topic, they could not simply answer the new regulation related questions. I'm expected every day to know every aspect of my profession. Shameful our paid government officials are not of the same principles we are held to.

 

Regards

John E. Pandolf

 P.E. #0402 025669, NASA Langley Research Center

 

 

 

CommentID: 747