PE Journal

Obama Celebrates Future Engineers

On October 18, President Obama hosted the White House Science Fair, where he celebrated America’s young people who are excelling in science, technology, engineering and math. (Watch the video.)

Among those in attendance were students from MATHCOUNTS, Engineers Week's Future City competition and the Junior Engineering Technical Society’s 2010 TEAMS Competition.

“I’ve had the Lakers here [at the White House]. I’ve had the Saints here, the Crimson Tide. I thought we ought to do the same thing for the winners of science fair and robotic contests, and math competitions,” Obama said to applause at the event. “Because often we don’t give these victories the attention that they deserve. And when you win first place at a science fair, nobody is rushing the field or dumping Gatorade over your head. But in many ways, our future depends on what happens in those contests—what happens when a young person is engaged in conducting an experiment, or writing a piece of software, or solving a hard math problem, or designing a new gadget. It’s in these pursuits that talents are discovered and passions are lit, and the future scientists, engineers, inventors, entrepreneurs are born.”

Obama also noted that engineering education is an excellent foundation for success. “This is an interesting statistic,” he said, “particularly at a time when young people are thinking about their careers: The most common educational background of CEOs in the S&P 500 companies—all right—the nation’s most successful, most powerful corporations—the most common study of CEOs is not business, it’s not finance, it’s not economics—it’s actually engineering. It’s engineering. So I want all the young people out there to think about that. Nothing can prepare you better for success than the education you’re receiving in math and science.”

PE Licensing and Nuclear Energy

NSPE Executive Director Larry Jacobson presented the below statement on August 31 to the Reactor and Fuel Cycle Technology Subcommittee of the Department of Energy’s Blue Ribbon Commission on America’s Nuclear Future. President Obama directed Energy Secretary Steven Chu to establish the commission to conduct a comprehensive review of policies for managing the back end of the nuclear fuel cycle. The commission will provide advice and make recommendations on issues including alternatives for the storage, processing, and disposal of civilian and defense spent nuclear fuel and nuclear waste.

NSPE Comments to the Blue Ribbon Commission

The National Society of Professional Engineers is grateful for the opportunity to comment before the Blue Ribbon Commission’s Reactor and Fuel Cycle Technology Subcommittee. NSPE supports investment in nuclear energy technology. Green and renewable, nuclear power will be an essential component to our energy future.

The nuclear energy industry has an excellent safety record, thanks in part to strict regulation, comprehensive safety planning, and rigorous training and qualification standards for employees. Nuclear power’s great potential, however, is accompanied by the risk of disaster. Though unlikely, an accident at a nuclear facility would cause serious harm to people, their livelihoods, and the environment.

NSPE believes that the nuclear energy industry should require a licensed professional engineer to supervise all engineering design, operations, and maintenance decisions. Licensure serves to maintain an acceptable standard of competence for the protection of the public’s health and safety.  When professional engineers make decisions, they are taking full, personal responsibility for those decisions. NSPE recommends that professional engineering services be used to help maintain the nuclear energy industry’s strong safety record and minimize the potential for disaster.

PE Magazine Interviewed on C-SPAN Radio

C-SPAN Radio interviewed PE magazine staff writer Ben Roode on August 12, following a meeting of a committee that is conducting a technical analysis of the causes of the Deepwater Horizon explosion and oil spill in the Gulf of Mexico.

The committee was formed by the National Academy of Engineering and the National Research Council at the request of the Department of the Interior.

The committee, which will recommend measures with the goal of preventing similar disasters in the future, is chaired by Donald Winter, former secretary of the navy. Winter is a professor of engineering practice at the University of Michigan, a retired top executive of the Northrop Grumman Corp., and member of the National Academy of Engineering.

Who's a Professional Engineer?

An article in the upcoming August/September issue of PE magazine highlights the ongoing confusion over the meaning of "professional engineer" and "professional engineering." Here's the text of the article:

NSPE Objects to NASA’s Use of ‘Professional Engineering’

The improper use of engineering titles by one of the federal government’s top engineering agencies recently prompted NSPE to take action.

In July, NSPE advised NASA Administrator Charles Bolden Jr. that the agency’s use of the phrase “Professional Engineering Positions” to recruit unlicensed individuals conflicts with state law. NASA has been using the phrase in its recruitment ads on the Web site USAJobs.gov.

NSPE’s letter to Bolden notes that the term “professional engineer” means “licensed engineer” under every state and territorial law. NSPE Past President Sam Grossman, P.E., F.NSPE, wrote: “NSPE believes that the use of term ‘Professional Engineering Positions’ within the federal government to include unlicensed graduate engineers is both misleading and deceptive to the public and will greatly contribute to confusion over engineering titles both inside and outside of the federal government.”

The letter, which requests that NASA develop an alternate phrase to describe its jobs, was also sent to the director of the Office of Management and Budget and the director of the Office of Personnel Management.

NASA’s improper use of “professional engineering” stands in direct contrast to a recent directive from the Department of the Interior, according to NSPE’s letter. Following the oil spill in the Gulf of Mexico, the department issued a directive requiring a professional engineer’s approval before an oil lessee or operating company begins any new drilling operation or related activity.

“Clearly,” the letter states, “the Department of the Interior recognizes the important role licensed professional engineers play in protecting the public health and safety and has used the term ‘professional engineer’ properly to describe ‘licensed engineers’ (and not engineering graduates).”

According to NSPE Professional Policy No. 58 on employment practices, engineering titles should be conferred only upon those individuals who have earned them by virtue of: 1) licensure under a jurisdiction engineering licensure law, 2) graduation from an ABET-EAC program or an equivalent program, or 3) an official ruling under the Fair Labor Standards Act, as amended, which defines engineers as learned professionals.

‘Future City’ Winners Visit White House, Call Space Station

On Wednesday, February 17, the winners of National Engineers Week’s Future City Competition visited President Obama at the White House and took part in a phone call with 11 astronauts aboard the International Space Station and Space Shuttle Endeavour.

The winning team was from Davidson IB Middle School in North Carolina.

Watch the video of the phone call (video link is at bottom of this Web page).

Read more at the White House blog.

A Threat to Engineering Licensure

We all know how states throughout the country are struggling to close budget gaps, but in Connecticut an attempt to save money is posing a threat to the regulation of engineering practice.

On July 30, Governor Jodi Rell submitted a budget that included a proposal to eliminate the state Board of Examiners for Professional Engineers and Land Surveyors and 69 other boards and commissions as well as increase licensing fees. She believes that many of the boards are only advisory in nature and that several state agencies are capable of handling the boards’ duties. Rell is trying to close a two-year state budget deficit of $8.56 billion.

The Connecticut Society of Professional Engineers says the proposal, if enacted, would cripple the engineering profession and negatively impact many businesses and government agencies in Connecticut which depend upon the services of PEs to protect the public health and safety as well as build our economy.

For more details, visit the CSPE Web site.

Math Champs Honored at White House

President Barack Obama honored the top achievers from the Raytheon MATHCOUNTS National Competition at the White House on July 20. In the competition, held in Orlando on May 8, Texas placed first in the team competition and Missouri placed second (view the webcast). Obama praised the “mathletes” for their outstanding achievement and their commitment to academics, and he also recognized the volunteer coaches. The MATHCOUNTS winners presented Obama with an official MATHCOUNTS Handbook signed by both teams. NSPE is a founding sponsor of MATHCOUNTS. To read more about the meeting, visit the White House blog.

Pictured (left to right) are Pamela Wickham, Raytheon Corp.; Victor Wang, Missouri; Paul Turney, Missouri coach; Steven Chen, Texas; Lou DiGioia, MATHCOUNTS executive director; Max Schindler, masters round champion, Missouri; Bobby Shen, individual national champion, Texas; President Barack Obama; Yury Aglyamov, Texas; Lilly Shen, Texas; Jeff Boyd, Texas coach; Stella Schindler, Missouri; Runpeng Liu, Missouri; and Kimberly Gavaletz, chair MATHCOUNTS Board of Directors.

Credit: Official White House photo by Pete Souza

Senator, Governor Honor NSPE

U.S. Senator Ted Kaufman of Delaware and Tennessee Governor Phil Bredesen have both sent letters to NSPE congratulating the Society on its 75th anniversary.

Kaufman, the only Senator who has worked as an engineer, commended NSPE members for their “immeasurable accomplishments and contributions to the health, safety, and welfare of our nation.” He holds a mechanical engineering degree from Duke University and an MBA from the Wharton School of the University of Pennsylvania.

Bredesen also recognized NSPE as well as the Tennessee Society of Professional Engineers for their important role in promoting the competent and ethical practice of engineering.

NSPE was founded on September 3, 1934. Visit the NSPE Web site to learn more about NSPE’s anniversary and the history of the organization.

The PE Degree

Through my travels throughout the U.S. as NSPE president, I’ve been involved in numerous discussions over the “B+30” proposal to increase the amount of education required to become a licensed professional engineer. The viewpoints run the gamut, due in part to a great deal of misunderstanding about what is being sought.

At issue is not the educational experience and competence of every individual who will graduate with a degree in engineering, but the need for a professional degree in engineering (a PE degree). Statistics show that only 1 in 10 engineering graduates will pursue licensure. The other nine pursue careers in a multitude of fields that don’t require a license. This shouldn’t be a debate about changing the engineering curriculum for all. It should be a debate about the level of education that we should require to become a PE.

We need to reframe the argument and the debate around a professional degree in engineering for those who want to pursue a PE license. That in my mind is the essence of the proposal from the National Council of Examiners for Engineering and Surveying. If you look at the educational requirements for virtually all other licensed professions comparable to a professional engineering, the requirements are substantially more than a bachelor’s degree. Shouldn’t PEs demand the same rigor in our requirements?

The debate shouldn’t be about whether 30 course hours beyond a bachelor’s degree or even whether a master’s degree in engineering is adequate, but whether a traditional master’s degree is enough! Like a JD in law, a degree specifically designed to train those who will practice law, we need a PD in engineering, specifically designed for those who will practice as professional engineers.

Proclamation on Energy

NSPE is one of 21 engineering societies that have joined together to issue a proclamation to the Obama administration and the U.S. Congress, outlining critical national energy goals that need to be met. Included in the proclamation are calls for:

• A balanced national energy portfolio that combines traditional energy sources with renewable energy sources such as wind, geothermal, solar and biomass to support reliable, abundant, and economically viable energy for the future of the nation;
• Policy objectives that encourage energy conservation, reward energy efficiency, and foster energy breakthroughs, like electric vehicles; and
• A robust and modernized electric transmission system.

The Obama administration has recently issued its own solutions to address our current and future energy needs, but will they work and will their stated goals be met? President Obama has highlighted the need for a better energy plan for our future and now is the time for us to act.

This proclamation is a good start in articulating a logical and obtainable set of goals for our energy future, but we can’t stop there. All engineers must stand up and be heard if we are to lead the way and truly achieve energy independence to secure our energy future while safeguarding our precious natural resources.

National Energy Policy: Our Next Big Goal

I had the opportunity recently to attend several symposiums on energy policy and our energy future. Discussions ranged from carbon sequestration for coal-fired power plants to renewable energy viability, the rebirth of nuclear power, energy conservation, and our dependence on cheap foreign sources of oil. As you can imagine, the views crossed the entire spectrum of thinking on how we will meet our energy needs 20 years from now and what do we do to meet the demand while addressing the obvious environmental concerns.

Two things became quite clear to me. One, we need to move toward energy independence within the next 20–30 years. This can and must be achieved through a combination of energy conservation, alternative (renewable energy sources), an increased reliance on nuclear power, and carbon sequestration so we can justify burning our abundant supply of coal for power. We also must develop a “smart electric grid” to make this all work and leverage efficiencies wherever we can find them. The important message here is that it will take all of these energy sources to achieve this goal. We cannot meet our current and future energy needs through conservation measures and renewable energy sources alone, as some have advocated; however, energy conservation should be one of our priorities as we set the goals for our energy future. We also can’t continue to rely on foreign oil. We need to tap our own sources and wean ourselves of gas guzzling, low-mileage automobiles.

Second, whether or not you believe in global warming, we all must acknowledge that we can do much better for our environment than our current practices. We can and must be more environmentally responsible with our energy consumption and what we emit to the atmosphere.

Why does it matter to you and me? We cannot achieve this goal without professional engineers. We will lead many of these initiatives to develop new and innovative ways to produce and deliver energy. Right now, we must also step outside our comfort zone and engage in the public discussion about our energy future. Our message needs to be clear and concise. “We need to achieve energy independence, it will take a commitment to advance all energy alternatives and as engineers we can deliver on this goal.”

Future City Competition Featured on "News Hour"

Last night's "News Hour with Jim Lehrer" featured a excellent story about the National Engineers Week Future City Competition. If you missed it, be sure to check out the story online.

Licensure Mobility

Do you practice in a number of states and wish it was easier to maintain your licenses, or are you about to work in a new state and don't look forward to the anticipated hassles of getting licensed?  Then you need to look into the NCEES Model Law program for designation as a "Model Law Engineer".

NCEES has created the Model Law program, which allows registrants to submit their qualifying information to a central registry. Once you achieve "model law engineer" status, you will find it substantially easier and quicker to receive licensure in a number of states that recognize the "model law engineer" program and fast-track requests for licensure by comity.

I know some of you are asking why we don't simply have a national license and get rid of the requirement to go from state to state to obtain a license. While this would be substantially easier for each of us, the 10^th Amendment to the US Constitution and subsequent US Supreme Court rulings deem licensure of engineers and other professionals (doctors, lawyers, architects, etc.) as a states right.  Each state has the right and responsibility to set the standards for licensure in their state.

Since it's unlikely that we'll repeal the 10^th Amendment, the NCEES Model Law program is the next best thing.  You can check it out at www.ncees.org

Giving Back

Was one of your New Year’s resolutions to give back to your community or your profession in some way this year? Have you done it? Frankly, it’s rather easy to give back. Opportunities are all around you. Your time and unique skills as an engineer are sorely needed, whether in your child’s classroom, in your community, or with a program offered by your NSPE chapter, state society, or national headquarters.

Why give back? Beyond the instant personal satisfaction you get from contributing, you honor your profession and yourself. Do you want to give back, but don’t know where to go? NSPE and its partners in Engineers Week have just what you are looking for. EWeek offers a wide range of volunteer opportunities that reach a diverse cross-section of our youth and young adults. From Introduce a Girl to Engineering Day to the Future City Competition, you can find a program that reaches a group you’re interested in and fits your available time commitment. Go to the “Get Involved” section of the EWeek Web site to see the list of programs where you can help. Or contact your chapter and/or state society office to find out what’s going on in your community.

When you’ve given back, take the time to log in your volunteer hours through the Million Hours Campaign. As part of our legacy project for Engineers Week 2009, NSPE has pledged one million volunteer hours in our community this year. Help us reach our goal. Logging in your volunteer hours is quick and easy, but you can be sure the satisfaction of volunteering will last much longer.

Price Is Right? The Qualifications Should Be Too

The procurement process known as qualifications-based selection is under attack in several states and at the federal level (see a recent example from Syracuse, New York). In the arguments I hear against QBS, it strikes me how little opponents really understand the concept and why we need to use QBS for the procurement of professional services.

In 1972, the enactment of the Brooks Act codified the longstanding federal practice of selecting architects and engineers based on qualifications rather than solely on the lowest price. It is a competitive contract procurement process where consulting firms submit qualifications to a procuring entity (owner) who evaluates and selects the most qualified firm. They then negotiate the project scope of work, schedule, budget and consultant fees. The price of services only comes into play if the procuring entity (owner) cannot reach a satisfactory negotiated fee with the selected firm.

Most opponents of QBS infer that it isn’t competitive, isn’t fair, inflates fees, and results in lesser services. None of these inferences are true, but we as professional engineers are slow to defend QBS. As a professional engineer in private practice, my firm is frequently compared competitively (through qualifications) with other firms for projects. In some cases price is a consideration in selection, after the initial screening of qualifications. Rarely is price the deciding factor and we rarely propose on projects where it is the deciding factor, but sometimes we do submit a “bid.”

What owners fail to understand in these cases, and what we sometimes fail to explain to them, is that engineering services are not simply a commodity, like a fire truck or a health care plan, where you can compare features against price and make an economic decision. Every engineer approaches problems in a different way. A hundred engineers will come up with a hundred different solutions for a complex engineering problem. The smart owner will select the engineer who, through experience, has the best qualifications, not simply take the solution from the “lowest bidder.” When you have a serious medical issue, you seek out the most qualified doctor, and when you have a serious legal issue, you seek out the most qualified lawyer. After you find the most qualified, you then make an economic decision concerning affordability. Professional engineering is no different.

NSPE has aggressively defended QBS at the federal level and assisted its state societies in defense of QBS at the state level. Every engineer needs to take an active role in defending QBS and “practicing what we preach” in our business and professional lives.