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 --