BILL ANALYSIS Ó
SENATE COMMITTEE ON APPROPRIATIONS
Senator Ricardo Lara, Chair
2015 - 2016 Regular Session
AB 320 (Wood) - Engineers
-----------------------------------------------------------------
| |
| |
| |
-----------------------------------------------------------------
|--------------------------------+--------------------------------|
| | |
|Version: July 8, 2015 |Policy Vote: B., P. & E.D. 6 - |
| | 2 |
| | |
|--------------------------------+--------------------------------|
| | |
|Urgency: No |Mandate: Yes |
| | |
|--------------------------------+--------------------------------|
| | |
|Hearing Date: August 17, 2015 |Consultant: Brendan McCarthy |
| | |
-----------------------------------------------------------------
This bill meets the criteria for referral to the Suspense File.
Bill
Summary: AB 320 would extend title protection to "environmental
engineers", prohibiting anyone from calling themselves an
environmental engineer if they are not licensed by the Board for
Professional Engineers, Land Surveyors, and Geologists.
Fiscal
Impact:
One-time costs less than $50,000 to develop regulations
defining environmental engineering (Professional Engineers and
Land Surveyors Fund).
One-time costs of $60,000 to $150,000 for an occupational
analysis of environmental engineering to allow the Board to
delineate the scope of work for environmental engineers
(Professional Engineers and Land Surveyors Fund). The Board
indicates that costs would be lower if it determines that it
would be able to perform the analysis internally. However, if
the Board needs to contract for an external analysis, the
AB 320 (Wood) Page 1 of
?
costs would be at the upper end of the cost range.
Potential one-time costs from $100,000 to $200,000 if the
Board needs to develop a new test for environmental engineers
(Professional Engineers and Land Surveyors Fund). Once the
Board has defined the scope of work for environmental
engineers, it will determine whether an existing national test
is an appropriate test of the scope of work for environmental
engineers. If the national test is not appropriate, the Board
will need to develop a California-specific test.
Unknown costs to license environmental engineers by the Board
(Professional Engineers and Land Surveyors Fund). It is not
known how many individuals would seek title protection under
the bill, requiring the Board to issue a license. The costs to
issue additional licenses would be recovered through licensing
fees.
Unknown increases in state employment costs (various funds).
Under the current civil service system, state employee
compensation depends in part on licensing status. By extending
title protection to environmental engineers, the bill is
likely to result in existing individuals who would seek such
licensure (e.g. individuals with an environmental engineering
or similar degree) applying for and receiving salary
increases. The extent of this impact is unknown, as it will
depend on the criteria adopted by the Board for title
protection as an environmental engineer and the number of
state employees who meet those criteria. For example, the
California Air Resources Board indicates that it employs
almost 200 individuals under the category of Air Resource
Engineers, many of whom have degrees in environmental
engineering or a related field. If 10% of those individuals
become eligible for a salary increase under the bill, costs to
the Air Resources Board would be between $130,000 and $260,000
per year.
Background: Under current law, the Board for Professional Engineers, Land
Surveyors, and Geologists has the responsibility for enforcing
both "practice act" requirements and "title act" requirements.
Under the existing practice acts, the Board licenses civil
engineers, mechanical engineers, and electrical engineers. An
individual who has appropriate academic degree, several years'
AB 320 (Wood) Page 2 of
?
work experience, and who has passed an examination is eligible
for practice act licensure as a civil, mechanical, or electrical
engineer. The Board is responsible for issuing licenses and
regulating those professions, to ensure that licensees are
working within the statutory and regulatory requirements for
those professions and generally that the public is protected.
Under existing title protection acts, the Board issues licenses
to a large number of individuals who qualify for title
protection. If an individual has the academic background and has
passed any examination required by the Board, he or she can
apply for title act protection in one of the many
engineering-related fields. Importantly, however, there are no
regulatory requirements on the practice of those title protected
fields. Once an individual has received a license, the Board
does not engage in any oversight or regulation of that person's
professional practice. Rather, the purpose of title protection
is simply to ensure that no person, without a license from the
Board, is using a title that is protected. In essence, the role
of the Board in this area is to prevent unlicensed individuals
from using specific titles, rather than enforcing licensing
standards or professional responsibilities on those who have
title protection.
Proposed Law:
AB 320 would extend title protection to "environmental
engineers", prohibiting anyone from calling themselves an
environmental engineer if they are not licensed by the Board for
Professional Engineers, Land Surveyors, and Geologists.
Related
Legislation: AB 177 (Bonilla) would extend the sunset on the
existing Board for Professional Engineers, Land Surveyors, and
Geologists and the California Architects Board until January 1,
2020. That bill will be heard in this committee.
Staff
Comments: As noted above, the state currently enforces practice
AB 320 (Wood) Page 3 of
?
act requirements on the practice of civil engineering and
geology, amongst other fields. Under current law, the statutory
practice act requirements relating to those fields would
override any regulatory definitions of the practice of
environmental engineering adopted by the Board under this bill.
In practice, this means that any activities that are already
regulated under the practice of civil engineering and/or geology
would be prohibited from inclusion in title protection for
environmental engineers. According to the Board, it is not clear
what activities would remain that environmental engineers could
perform.
The only costs that may be incurred by a local agency relate to
crimes and infractions. Under the California Constitution, such
costs are not reimbursable by the state.
-- END --