"Interstate or Intrastate" Exemption - Mult-State Projects and Licensure/Approv. of Engine 3

[bridgesig]

My question is this: Are projects that are multi-state in size/scope exempt from state-specific licensing laws in each respective state, due to their nature of being "interstate" projects, and thus exempt from licensing laws because there is no "Federal Licensure" board. In other words, is there a "Federal/Interstate Exemption" for engineering rules in each respective state.

A little more context:

I work for a large multi-national corporation that is by nature "utility-based", and the subject of licensure, approval of drawings and reports is "ever-debatable". That's to say, despite our corporate headquarters (not US-based) desiring PE's in particular positions and insistence upon following state-respective licensing laws, local major operations simply does not understand and does not comply. Lets just say I either work in the oil & gas industry or the electric transmission industry, the projects that are undertaken are typically multi-state projects, are done under the guise of FERC and other Federal agencies (NERC, PHMSA/US DOT, etc.), that I am licensed, fairly new to my company, have worked in multiple-state consulting in the transportation (DOT - highways, freeways, roads, etc.) sector, and my company has significant operations in the State of Texas. The state of Texas, as you may be aware, has an exemption for Oil & Gas industry.

I recently had a much older, unlicensed, industry-experienced engineer (his experience has been limited to this particular industry), respectable technically, engineer, tell me that our company does not follow state licensing laws because our projects are multi-state and thus not subject to licensing requirements, following a "interstate commerce" line of logic. That is, he would state; because these are multi-state projects, "interstate commerce" dictates and elevates us to federal jurisdiction. Because there are no federal licensing requirements, we thus do not need to have our plans certified/stamped/sealed, etcetera. I don't buy into this arguement, but I dont have much to cite on it (federal court cases, state court cases, NSPE briefs, etcetera). Frankly, I was a bit flabbergasted when we reached this point in our "arguement", as I have never come across this perspective.

In researching this, I came across information from KY and ME, and a few other states that I cant recall off the top of my head, that specifically exempt their licensing laws from interstate projects. I have two thoughts/notes on this. One: If this was inserted by these states, wouldn’t that imply that there is no “federal exemption” allowed; that it was decided on a federal level, and that these states exempt themselves from this type of case in the interest of “workload management”. (?) That is, that they don't even want to bother with litigating/regulating these types of cases. Two: There was a federal decision on licensing laws that provides for an “interstate exemption”, and that these two states, amongst others, are ahead of the curve on acknowleding in their regulations or have zero qualms on compliance, and their regulations thus reflect accordingly.

Any insight would be greatly appreciated.

 

[IRstuff]

Seems like a weak argument, at best. State taxation of interstate commerce seems to be holding up fairly well, i.e, California is taxing anyone who is either selling or buying within the state, regardless of where the other end is. California only offers the following exemptions w.r.t. to out-of-state engineers:

6741. Exemption of nonresidents
Any person, firm, partnership, or corporation is exempt from registration under the provisions of this chapter who meets all the following:
(a) Is a nonresident of the State of California.
(b) Is legally qualified in another state to practice as a civil, electrical, or mechanical engineer.
(c) Does not maintain a regular place of business in this state.
(d) Offers to but does not practice civil, electrical, or mechanical engineering in this state.

TTFN
faq731-376

Need help writing a question or understanding a reply? forum1529

 

[bridgesig]

Thanks for the perspective, IRstuff. Thats interesting to hear, as many states are much more "restrictive" in those types of terms, in the sense that most states require registration in the particular state in which the project is located, no matter the engineers residency.

 

[hokie66]

IRstuff,
So the way I read that, you can offer engineering services in California, but once you have a project in the state, you have to be registered. Correct?

 

[racookpe1978]

That is what I read.

 

[TomDOT]

As a contracts class once told me:

"You follow the Federal laws to stay out of Federal prison, and you follow the State laws to stay out of State prison."

...even when the laws differ on the same topic, unless it is literally impossible to follow both, you have to follow both Federal and State laws.

 

[Ron]

States vary in their exemptions of certain industries. Don't assume that all states exempt oil and gas or transmission activities.
In states where such services are not "exempt", you are likely violating engineering laws and both the engineer and company can face repercussion.

There is no federal "exemption" except that on federal property, the agency has the prerogative to accept licensing from any state without regard to where the project sits. Most commonly they require licensing in the state in which the project is located, but there are numerous exceptions to this.

If the project is only federally funded or under the auspices of some federal device, the state laws likely prevail.

 

[bridgesig]

To Ron's point a bit:

http://www.nspe.org/sites/default/files/resources/industrial_exemption_table_2013_ncees.pdf