Public Meeting Notice  Board of Registration of Professional Engineers and Land Surveyors Meeting - 4.30.26

Microsoft Teams Need help?

Join the meeting now

Meeting ID: 215 336 855 746 79 

Passcode: MP68aK65 

Dial in by phone 

+1 857-327-9245,,493929223# United States, Boston

Find a local number

Phone conference ID: 493 929 223# 

For organizers: Meeting options | Reset dial-in PIN

In accordance with the provisions of M.G.L. c. 30A § 20, notice is hereby given that the Board of Registration of Professional Engineers and Land Surveyors will convene a Board meeting. 

If you need a reasonable accommodation to participate in the meeting please reach out to Cheryl Yebba at 617-701-8711. The Agency will make best efforts to accommodate requests received in a timely manner. 

Minutes of the April 30, 2026 Open Meeting 

1. The following attendance was recorded: 
   1. Board Members Present Remotely  
      1. Paul Tyrell, PE, PLS, Chairman  
      2. Azu Etoniru, PE, PLS, Vice Chairman 
      3. Nancy Gould, PE, Secretary 
      4. Kenneth Anderson, PLS  
      5. Edward Englander, Esq., Public Member  
      6. Paul Tsang, PE 
      7. Ronald Willey, PE 
   2. Board Members Not Present 
      1. Daniel Caron, PE  
      2. Joyce Hastings, PLS  
      3. Shallan Fitzgerald, PE 
   3. Members of the Public Present Remotely 
      1. DJB 
      2. ANS 
      3. CapeSurv 
      4. Vincent Leahy 
      5. Norberto Lopez 
      6. Byron Howell 
      7. Melissa Cannata 
   4. DOL Staff Members Present Remotely 
      1. Cameron Lease, Executive Director
      2. Eric Funk, Board Administrator 
      3. Charles Kilb, Board Counsel  
      4. Salvatore Ciulla, Prosecuting Counsel 
      5. Seth Henderson, Prosecuting Counsel 
2. 9:00 AM Open Meeting Called to Order 
   1. Discuss Meeting and Conference Call Protocol 
   2. Note recording 
   3. Edward Englander moved to open the public meeting. 
   4. Nancy Gould seconded the motion. 
   5. The motion passed by a roll call vote of 6-0. Members in favor: Paul Tyrell, Edward Englander, Kenneth Anderson, Nancy Gould, Ronald Willey, Paul Tsang. Members opposed: none. Members abstaining: none. 
3. Approval of Meeting Minutes 
   1. March 26th, 2026 Meeting 
      1. Full Board Vote to Approve Minutes 
         1. Edward Englander moved to approve the minutes. 
         2. Nancy Gould seconded the motion. 
         3. The motion failed by a vote of 4-0-2. Members in favor: Paul Tyrell, Edward Englander, Kenneth Anderson, Nancy Gould. Members opposed: none. Members abstaining: Ronald Willey, Paul Tsang. 
4. Discussion Items 
   1. Comments from Chair 
      1. Paul Tyrell shared a safety moment: last week was Worker Roadside Safety Week, there were a number of events. Even those who are not in the construction industry should be aware of safety issues when working on a construction site. 
   2. NCEES Annual Meeting
      1. Paul Tyrell announced that there are several individuals interested in attending, please let Cameron Lease know if there are specific events you are looking to attend. 
   3. NCEES Article
      1. Paul Tyrell shared an article that was included in the NCEES newsletter regarding enforcement triage. 
      2. Nancy Gould commented that she read the article, it was interesting, and the discussion of the Board handling professional versus personal differences was especially important. She pointed out that our complaint form does not require the complainant to cite specific regulations they believe the respondent has violated, which could be useful. 
      3. Paul Tyrell agreed but expressed concern about a potential reduction in complaints if the Board required a specific regulatory reference, as complainants might not be able to do the research to find that information. If a complainant is aggrieved and believe there is some violation, they should be able to share that with the Board and it falls to the Board to determine whether or not there has actually been a violation of our regulations. 
   4. UK MRA
      1. Paul Tyrell shared that the Board has made the necessary regulatory changes to allow us to join the UK MRA if we decide to. He asked if we had an active request to join the MRA. 
      2. Cameron Lease shared that, per the last meeting that he, the Chair, and Board Counsel had with NCEES about this, there are still questions that remain unanswered, so the Board is likely not ready to vote on any action today. 
      3. Paul Tyrell shared some more context: He, Executive Director Cameron Lease, and Board Counsel Charles Kilb, had a meeting with an NCEES representative regarding joining the UK MRA and the process for how applications are handled. NCEES created the agreement with the UK Engineering Council and is shepherding member boards through the process of joining. After that conversation, both the Board and DOL had some concerns and those have yet to be resolved. 
5. Board Counsel Legal Report
   1. Open Meeting Law 
      1. Charles Kilb explained that some of the members who requested this information aren’t present today, so it may be helpful to move the presentation to the next Board meeting. 
      2. Paul Tyrell agreed and suggested moving the meeting to next month’s meeting. 
   2. Charles Kilb reiterated that the regulatory updates discussed at previous meetings have been made, and are available on the Board’s website, and the Board can discuss future regulatory updates if desired. 
   3. Paul Tyrell said that he would like to be able to require licensees to take ethics classes, and would like DOL to explore that possibility. 
   4. Charles Kilb said that the Board can discuss that in the future as an agenda item. 
   5. Paul Tyrell asked for an agenda item and discussion of the efforts to digitize the State-Specific Jurisprudence Exam. 
   6. Cameron Lease said that this is still in progress and relates to the DOL’s new system update. 
6. Executive Director Report 
   1. NCEES Enforcement Exchange 
      1. Cameron Lease reported that 18 new Board complaints were filed from new Enforcement Exchange reports. 
      2. Paul Tyrell said that the Complaint Committee should discuss how to handle these complaints consistently. 
      3. Cameron Lease agreed. 
   2. Case Status Report 
      1. Cameron Lease said that the Case Status Report is being provided at each Board meeting under Investigative Conference and will be removed from the Executive Director report for future meetings. 
   3. New System Updates 
      1. Cameron Lease shared that DOL is moving into a new system, this is a massive project, about 7 boards have been moved into the new system thus far, which is called eLIPSE. The Board’s various functions will be moved into eLIPSE, and those functions are still being built. Cameron Lease and Eric Funk are in regular conversations with developers to build out the Board’s desired functions in the new system. The Board has requested demonstrations, which DOL does not have today, but all boards get a demonstration of the new system before they are shifted into it, so that will be provided but later on. The primary reason why this is on the agenda is to ask Board members who review applications if they would be comfortable eliminating the Board’s current reference questionnaire form and instead rely on the references within the applicant’s NCEES record. 
      2. Kenneth Anderson noted that the references don’t tend to pay attention to the actual numbers on the form and frequently fill it out incorrectly. 
      3. Cameron Lease said that DOL is aware of that and that it is one of the reasons to consider changing or eliminating the current reference form. 
      4. Paul Tyrell said he hopes the new system is an improvement from the current system. 
7. Review of Applications 
   1. Application Questions 
   2. Applicant Suitability Discussion (if required) 
   3. Application Review Report 
      1. Full Board Vote to Approve Application Review Report 
         1. Azu Etoniru moved to approve the Application Review Report. 
         2. Ed Englander seconded the motion. 
         3. The motion passed by a roll call vote of 7-0. Members in favor: Paul Tyrell, Ed Englander, Kenneth Anderson, Nancy Gould, Ronald Willey, Paul Tsang, Azu Etoniru. Members opposed: none. Members abstaining: none. 
8. Subcommittee Meetings and Reports 
9. Correspondence 
   1. 2025-000897-IT-ENF 
      1. Cameron Lease explained that the Board received an update from the Board of Architects that a complaint the Board filed with them has been resolved in the form of a Consent Agreement between the Board of Architects and the respondent. 
      2. Paul Tyrell remarked that the Board of Architects fine was a different amount than the Board typically imposes. 
      3. Charles Kilb explained that the Board’s fine are generally defined by statute, MGL c. 112 s. 61-65E. First time violations of our regulations carry a fine of $100, with the exception of an unlicensed practice violation which carries a fine of $1000. Subsequent violations carry a fine of $500, with subsequent increases after. The Board of Architects may have a Board-specific statute which governs their fines. 
      4. Cameron Lease said the Consent Agreement, which is a public document once executed, contained a stipulation that the respondent engaged in unlicensed practice, and the fine was $500, but the statutes say the fine can be “up to” $1000 for the Board’s regulations, so boards generally have the ability to impose a fine lower than the specified amount. 
      5. Paul Tyrell requested that Charles Kilb distribute the relevant statutes governing the fines the Board may impose. He asked how this complaint was referred from us. 
      6. Cameron Lease clarified that the Board received a complaint and identified a potential violation of Architect regulations within the details of that complaint and filed a Board Complaint with the Board of Architects regarding that. 
      7. Paul Tyrell asked Cameron Lease to flag this correspondence with Board Member Daniel Caron. 
      8. Cameron Lease said he would flag it. 
      9. Edward Englander asked whether this respondent was disciplined because he was licensed as an architect but was practicing surveying. 
      10. Paul Tyrell clarified that the respondent was a licensed engineer practicing architecture and the Board filed a complaint for that. 
10. Topics not reasonably anticipated 48 hours in advance of meeting 
    1. Paul Tyrell mentioned that a Board Member had a question regarding signing affidavits. The State Building Code requires signing of such an affidavit attesting that the building was completed to the specifications within the engineering drawings. This is relevant for Electrical, Mechanical, Fire Protection, and other engineers that operate within buildings, as opposed to Civil Engineers who generally operate outside buildings. A question was raised regarding which affidavit should be signed by someone who was the design engineer but did not facilitate the construction. Should the affidavit be modified and then signed? He remarked that he would prefer not to modify the affidavit because he is not sure the State Building Code allows for such a modification, but would rather write directly on the affidavit the necessary qualifications to it. Specifically, the qualification might say that the particular engineer was only in charge of ensuring compliance during construction but was not the engineer of record, which retains the State Building Code affidavit but qualifying the engineer’s responsibility which is required by our regulations. 
    2. Paul Tsang asked if the verbiage could be changed to reflect the engineer’s responsibilities. 
    3. Paul Tyrell said if the engineer was qualified to sign the State Building Code affidavit, he should do so, but then annotate it to reflect that his role was limited to the construction phase and not design phase. Such annotation is allowed under engineering regulations. The engineer can’t control whether the building official accepts the affidavit or not, but he must comply with the engineering regulations. 
    4. Paul Tsang said that makes sense. 
    5. Paul Tyrell said that a building official can require whatever they want, the engineer doesn’t control that, but it’s up to the engineer to decide if he is willing to do what the building code is asking for. 
11. Executive Session 
    1. CLOSED per M.G.L. c. 30A, § 21(a)(1), Individual Character Rather Than Competence 
    2. Edward Englander moved to close the public meeting and move into Executive Session. 
    3. Azu Etoniru seconded the motion. 
    4. The motion passed by a roll call vote of Members in favor: Paul Tyrell, Edward Englander, Kenneth Anderson, Azu Etoniru, Nancy Gould, Ronald Willey, Paul Tsang. 
    5. Applicant V. L.

It is anticipated that the topics shown below will be discussed at the aforementioned meeting:  

1. Open Meeting Called to Order 
   1. Discuss Meeting and Conference Call Protocol 
   2. Note recording 
2. Approval of Meeting Minutes 
   1. March 26th, 2026 Meeting 
      1. Full Board Vote to Approve Minutes
3. Discussion Items 
   1. Comments from Chair 
   2. NCEES Annual Meeting 
   3. NCEES Article 
   4. UK MRA
4. Board Counsel Legal Report 
   1. Open Meeting Law
5. Executive Director Report 
   1. NCEES Enforcement Exchange 
   2. Case Status Report 
   3. New System Updates
6. Review of Applications 
   1. Application Questions 
   2. Applicant Suitability Discussion (if required) 
   3. Application Review Report 
      1. Full Board Vote to Approve Application Review Report
7. Subcommittee Meetings and Reports 
8. Correspondence 
   1. 2025-000897-IT-ENF
9. Topics not reasonably anticipated 48 hours in advance of meeting 
10. Executive Session 
    1. CLOSED per M.G.L. c. 30A, § 21(a)(1), Individual Character Rather Than Competence
11. Investigative Conference 
    1. CLOSED per M.G.L. c. 112, § 65C
12. Adjournment
    1. Full Board Vote to Adjourn Public Meeting