Licensing board approves most reciprocity and exam applications, denies one for insufficient experience and tables two for curriculum review

The board convened to review licensure and reciprocity applications and moved through a lengthy slate of approvals, a denial and two tablings related to educational qualifications.

At the start of the session the board approved the minutes from its Oct. 7 meeting by voice vote. Members then confirmed lists of exam passers and candidates, noting seven land surveying candidates who passed the CBT and numerous PE and reciprocity applicants on the agenda.

During consideration of Class 6A credit applications, the board debated whether one candidate met the nine‑year experience threshold. After members concluded the applicant lacked the qualifying experience, the board voted to deny the application for Joshua (surname recorded variously in the transcript as Woos/Wolfs/Wolf) for failure to meet the regulations’ experience requirement.

The board approved several individual applicants and test requests by voice vote: Steven/Stephen Esthelman was approved for Class 6A credit; Eric Laughlin was cleared to take the Connecticut exam for credit parts 1 and 2; and Sam Zook was approved for the Class 8 exam. A slate of Class 9 licensees (Adams through UberTali) and Juan Rojas for a Class 10 license were also approved after review of degrees and NCEES evaluations.

Members moved through numerous Class 1 credit and other reciprocity recommendations, approving applicants including Daniel Adams, Ludovic Joko, Filiposka, Gibbons, Haraghi, Kagan, McLaren, Mandelm, and others. The board accepted academic evaluations and experience summaries in most cases and carried motions by voice vote.

Questions about what counts as qualifying experience arose during review of Quinn Zacharias, who the board asked to clarify whether his time at Yale was as a student or as full‑time research staff; the board voted to table his application and request a statement of current educational status. That motion reflects a recurring theme in the meeting: where an applicant’s record indicates graduate study or research experience, members sought explicit documentation to determine whether that work counts as post‑degree professional experience under board rules.

The board also considered multiple Class 4 reciprocity applicants. Pegi (Paghee) Abu Arraj (fire protection), Chris Arlinson (26 years’ experience), Jesse Anderson IV, and several others were approved. In several cases members discussed inconsistencies in the board’s records where an applicant with a “technical” degree had been listed as “model law” and flagged this for administrative follow‑up.

A cluster of reciprocity cases prompted extended debate about educational breadth versus depth. Two reconsiderations — the transcript identifies applicants with variant spellings (Zvolto/Zisvolto/Volto and Judson Wibble/Wibbel) — were tabled so the board could review transcripts and curricula more closely. Members questioned whether a master’s plus a semester of additional coursework provides the breadth equivalent to a U.S. four‑year engineering undergraduate degree; the board unanimously voted to request transcripts and reexamine the curriculum before deciding.

One application, recorded in the transcript as Jeffrey VanGruw/VanGrode/Van Grove, was denied on the grounds that the candidate lacked a qualifying engineering degree and some of the listed experience appeared to be technical or inspection work rather than engineering practice.

No roll‑call tallies were recorded in the transcript; motions were carried by voice votes unless otherwise noted. The meeting concluded after motions to approve the remaining slate and to table the two reconsideration items; members offered holiday wishes and adjourned.

Clarifying details recorded by the board during the meeting (name/record inconsistencies and evidence requests) remain outstanding and will determine final outcomes for the tabled applicants once transcripts and curricula are evaluated.