The Nevada Connection – October 2019

During 2019 the board updated its laws and regulations, Nevada Administrative Code 625 and Nevada Revised Statutes 625, to better align with current practices.  Changes to regulations became permanent on January 30, 2019, and changes to law became effective July 1, 2019.  

Extensive outreach was undertaken to engage professionals and professional societies. Professionals were sent a survey to determine potential impacts and solicit input on the changes. Public workshops were held in southern and northern Nevada to solicit input. Professional societies were regularly updated on regulation and law changes at the board’s Professional Association Liaison Committee meetings, held every other month. And, in some instances, board members met specifically with affected professional organizations to discuss changes and receive input. There was also opportunity to provide input through the Legislative Counsel Bureau process for the regulation changes, and for changes to the law, through legislators during the recent legislative process.

Changes to the regulations become permanent when the Legislative Counsel Bureau took final action on January 30, 2019.  Below is a summary of the regulation changes—

NAC 625.260 clarifies upper point of reference in determining the 45-foot height limitation for civil engineers who perform structural design.  And, adds the requirement that structural engineers design facilities and structures designated as essential facilities assigned a IV Risk Category in accordance with the International Building Code—hospitals, fire stations, hospitals, etc. 

Why the change?  Requiring essential structures to be designed by structural engineers is intended to enhance public health, safety, and welfare.  Significant portions of Nevada’s population reside in areas with high seismic activity, areas that are classified by the USGS as the two highest levels of hazard.   During a catastrophic seismic event, essential facilities include buildings such as hospitals, fire stations, and schools would be occupied by the public and first responders.

NAC 625.545 adds the requirement for a professional to contractually disclose to a client whether the professional maintains professional liability insurance. 

Why the change?  Adding this requirement requires the professional to contractually disclose whether they carry professional liability insurance, allowing the client to make a better informed decision in hiring a professional.

NAC 625.610 updates language related to stamps, seals, and signatures.  Including language associated with electronic submittals and digital signatures.

Why the change?  The change adds flexibility in obtaining a professional stamp/seal.  Licensees no longer need to coordinate with the board in procuring their stamp.  And, the change adds clarity to electronic submittals and digital signature requirements. 

NAC 625.630 updates language to eliminate the “brick and mortar” requirement.  Firms are no longer required to have a full-time engineer in each office that provides services.  A firm still needs a professional in responsible charge, but can have multiple offices with a single professional in responsible charge. 

Why the change?  The intent of the change is to reduce barriers to trade and competition and also enhance the economic opportunities of Nevada small businesses.  A firm still needs a professional in responsible charge, but can have multiple offices with a single professional in responsible charge. 

Changes to the law became effective July 1, 2019.  Below is a summary of the law changes—

NRS 625.203, NRS 625.285, NRS 625.386 sections 1.b. and 2.b. were removed from law as they are outdated and no longer applicable. 

Why the change?  The statutes were part of the “donut-hole-law”, a period of time when the laws transitioned from allowing the alternative pathway to licensure, experience without a degree, to the sole pathway of requiring a degree.  Because the statutes timed out and are no longer valid, the expired laws needed to be removed.  Also, because education acceptable to the board has been a requirement for licensure since 2010, it was timely to update the EI and LSI requirement.  It was necessary to remove the experience pathway to certification, since this is no longer an experience pathway to licensure. 

NRS 625.460 was modified to add enabling language to issue cease and desist orders.

Why the change?  With the change, the board now has statutory authority to issue cease and desist orders against unlawful practice by an individual or firm.

NRS 625.407 removes the “brick and mortar” requirement.

Why the change?   Firms are no longer required to have a full-time engineer in each office that provides services.  A firm still needs a professional in responsible charge, but can have multiple offices with a single professional in responsible charge.  The change benefits communities by increasing opportunities for new businesses and increasing competition and also benefits Nevada engineering and land surveying businesses.  For example, an engineering firm in Elko in now enabled to open offices in Reno or Las Vegas since they would no longer be required to employ a full-time engineer in each office. 

NRS 625.520 removes the board’s statutory obligation to protect the term “engineer”, when it is used outside the realm of engineering practice. 

Why the change?  Relaxing protections to the term “engineer” is necessary in balancing rights to free speech.  For instance, when people or companies use terms such as Tire Engineer or Facilities Engineer, the titles are clearly not related to the practice of engineering.  The board is no longer obligated by law to pursue/protect the term engineer in those instances. 

NRS 329 was changed to limit survey corner records to a maximum of six survey corners. When recording more than six survey corners, a surveyor must now create a record of survey. 

Why the change?  The number six was chosen arbitrarily, but some number, a small number, was needed to preclude the increasing practice of using survey corner records for large numbers of corner records.  When large numbers of survey corners are included in a survey corner record, it creates a muddled survey record, and creates challenges to deciphering the survey information.  A survey corner record is just a written description and diagram of each survey corner, independent of all the other corners in the record.  It does not include a drawing that depicts the relationship amongst all of the survey corners being recorded.  Whereas a record of survey includes a drawing/map of all the survey corners along with all other required information for a record of survey.

Click here to review the updated laws and regulations. Please incorporate the law and regulation changes into your practice as applicable.