The Transportation Corridor Agencies has filed a complaint against Vermont-based Smart Mobility alleging that "the company's engineers are unlicensed in California," and are breaking the law by "practicing civil and traffic engineering without legal authorization." Opponents of the TCA's plans to build the Foothill-South (241) toll road extension through inland San Onofre State Beach have used Smart Mobility's reports in the past to refute TCA claims that widening I-5, an oft-cited potential alternative to the toll road, would require the condemnation of hundreds of homes and businesses.
This complaint is not in any court of law, mind you. The TCA registered it with the (drumroll, please...) Board for Professional Engineers and Land Surveyors. Ta-dow. The complaint alleges that Smart Mobility is in violation of The Professional Engineers Act.
"The Professional Engineers Act, which regulates the profession. states that an out-of-state business may only practice engineering in California "if it has a branch office in California, has a part owner or officer in charge of the engineering work in California, who is registered in California and is physically present in California." (Business and Professions Code section 6738(a)(3))"
This is hysterical because TCA spokesperson Jennifer Seaton was quoted in the
Register and on
msnbc.com on January 25 making a claim that seems to contradict the TCA's position.
"There's no engineering behind this study," said Seaton, the toll road spokeswoman. "We're still confident our numbers are accurate."
No engineering, no violation, right?
While I wait for a response from Smart Mobility, a quick perusal of their website suggests that they do not in fact engineer as much as provide advice about engineering. Also, if they sit in Vermont and study a road in California, is that actually conducting engineering within the state? Any engineers or planners are welcome to comment.
January 30, 2008 22:37
There could well be something to this, but the TCA is playing a bit dirty and grasping at straws to take this path.
Civil Engineering is defined in Sections 6731 and 6731.1 of the State's Business and Professions Code. If Smart Mobility was doing alignment studies (alternative alignments in engin-speak), then it could be considered to fall under the category of Civil Engineering. That said, MANY out of state firms do study-level work for various agencies and nothing is ever said.
Now the part in the TCA release on their website about Caltrans saying about the Smart Mobilty report ...."The alternative presented in the SMI report does not meet Department standards, and in our view does no meet applicable engineering standards of care" is pretty damning about the quality of the report (I haven't seen it). Caltrans can be pretty anal about what they want to see in project reports, and it's often difficult for firms not dealing with Caltrans, especially out of state firms, to figure those wankers out. But for Caltrans to add the part about "applicable engineering standards of care" suggests to me that the report is possibly a piece of crap. That is an extremely bold statement from such a usually staid organization.
January 31, 2008 05:22
Isn't TCA's accusation kinda like the pot calling the kettle black?
January 31, 2008 12:42
This is a classic example of attorneys licensed to practice law in California per Business & Professions Code, who refuse to abide to their own professional standards and statutes mandated on attorneys, by representing multiple parties with potential adverse interests. Example: County of Orange, OC Sheriff, Diocese of Orange and private and public schools.
WOW... this takes alot of guts!