Regulatory Requirements in Different Jurisdictions

[Forgot2Yield]

If you are registered as a PE or P.Eng in one country/state/province and completing work in a professional capacity to be used in another country/state/province that has very few regulations in comparison to the state/province that you are registered in (let's say little to none in comparison), then do your regulations in your licensed state/province apply (carry over) into your work done in this highly un-regulated jurisdiction? I would assume that they do not, and the only rules that apply are for the jurisdiction in which the work is being done.

 

[Forgot2Yield]

I'm speaking strictly from a legal sense here. I know it would not be ethically correct to not follow any rules or regulations just because they are not required in a jurisdiction, but if there was a particular rule that was required for a P.Eng registered in one state/province and it was not followed in work done for another state/province, then would they be open to legal repercussions? I would assume not.

 

[Heaviside1925]

OP,
Is this concerning a certain situation? If it is, providing more information would result in an answer better suited to that question.
As a broader question I know it would not be ethically correct there's your answer. If you are licensed, then there is a standard of ethical conduct you are required to maintain.

 

[BAretired]

I would not assume anything of the sort. If your professional association receives a complaint about your conduct or the quality of your work in an unregulated jurisdiction, I believe there would be a hearing of your Discipline Committee and a decision rendered regarding the complaint.

 

[Forgot2Yield]

Let me provide a better example. In BC it is required to have independent review done on structural designs. In Saskatchewan, it is not (last time I checked). If I am registered in BC and conducting work in Saskatchewan, do I need to have the independent reviews done?

 

[Forgot2Yield]

I posed this question to the practice advisory comity of egbc and was told they were not able to give me an answer on hypothetical questions.

 

[BAretired]

The practice advisory committee should answer the question. It is not hypothetical and it affects the cost of engineering work performed in Saskatchewan.

 

[JStephen]

I was imagining doing work in some third-world nation that basically didn't have any engineering laws.
In the US, if you're licensed in State A and State B, so long as you follow the rules in State B on your work in State B, you would never run into issues with your State A license from doing that work.
Where you could run into problems is if you face disciplinary action in State B for some reason, then State A can pile on and do the discipline also.
I've never dealt with Canadian licensing, so no clue if it works the same way.

 

[skeletron]

I'll take a swing at this based on my interpretation:

Check Clause 3.4.1.1 of the EGBC's QMG for "Documented Independent Review of Structural Design"
"...if a design is prepared in BC or is for a structure to be built or erect in BC, it must undergo an Independent Review that is compliant with the Bylaws before Documents are issued for construction or implementation.."

So, assuming that your assumption is correct and APEGS and the governing SK law does not require independent review, I think you would not need to complete independent review only if:
- you are operating a business in Saskatchewan (ie. you are a design office physically located in SK)
- you are providing design for a structural project in Saskatchewan

Therefore, you would require an independent review if either is true:
- you are operating a business in BC (ie. you are a design office physically located in BC), regardless of your project location
- you are providing design for a structural project in BC, regardless of your design office location

My interpretation is based on the limitation of the PGA or other governing provincial Acts. They don't cross borders so EGBC would be out of their jurisdiction to enforce a requirement for a project in SK designed by a firm physically located in SK.

However, as @BAretired kind of alludes to, any complaint in SK would likely have an effect in your other jurisdictions. Notice on most renewal forms that there is a box to check yes/no if you've had complaints in other jurisdictions.

 

[Forgot2Yield]

Skeletron, I had never heard that point about being physically located in bc brought up yet when I was looking into this. Where would I find a reference to the rules applying if you have a physical design office in bc?

 

[canwesteng]

It's in the quality management guide he referenced... if you are practicing in BC you should be aware of these requirements. I will say that this is something that is almost certainly followed by no one with multiple licensure, but it is the law of the land. That being said, if you are performing work in SK, you will need a SK stamp and CoA, so since none of the deliverables have your PTP or EGBC reg no I'm not sure how they enforce it.

 

[Brad805]

The new BCBC code also added a line to the schedules mandating the independent review is complete at the time of BP.

I think the rules of SK apply for work in SK. When it comes audit time in BC I do not plan to discuss files from other provinces.

 

[BAretired]

BP?

 

[Brad805]

Building Permit. Sorry, BA. I read your comment about this in another thread.

 

[BAretired]

Thanks Brad805.

 

[BAretired]

I will say that this is something that is almost certainly followed by no one with multiple licensure, but it is the law of the land.

Depends what you mean by "land". It is not the law of SK and, unless things have changed since I retired, it is not the law in Alberta. When it pertains to work outside BC, EGBC considers the question "hypothetical", so we don't know whether or not it is the law in BC.

 

[Forgot2Yield]

When it comes audit time in BC I do not plan to discuss files from other provinces.

Is this up to you? Are they not able to go through your project files and see for themselves? Seems unusual if you get to pick which project you show them. I feel like that would kind of defeat the purpose of an audit.

 

[Brad805]

I would argue that point with the reviewer. They are not going to be interested in SK work. I was randomly selected for a practice review many moons ago. They were only interested in BC work. At that time we practiced in AB as well. They did not ask anything about those projects. Your firm could outline your procedures in your Professional Practice Management Plan (PPMP) for both Provinces. This is a requirement in BC, not SK.

I watched an ethics video today on the EGBC site from 2020 today to complete my last CPD requirement for the year. They did partly cover this aspect near the end.

There is a video of the Audit process on the EGBC site outlining what you can expect. They are not spending days on end going thru your files and technical calcs. They have 18,000 members. They will need to be realistic about this unless they want their annual budget to explode.

A lot of work from AB engineers comes across my desk in BC. In many cases I am not sure if they are doing any reviews based on what I see. In many cases I have to ask for lateral loads.

 

[skeletron]

@matty54 and @Brad805:
I've been through an audit. They don't "go through your project files and see for themselves." I had full control of the system during the virtual audit and the questions I responded to were mainly dealing with showing example of X, Y, and Z.

Edit: I expect they view the question as "hypothetical" because you generally don't get flagged for not doing an IR unless something else is whacked out. Usually if an AHJ wants proof of the IR, they'll ask for the form now...they don't zip a complaint straight to EGBC.

 

[Brad805]

Thanks for sharing skeletron. I thought it might be virtual. They came to my office for my practice review and that would have cost them a few $$ for sure.