Name of File 6518-78-15.pdf cached at 14/12/2017 20:58:43 - with 2 pages. pdfPath: E:\k9.istructe.org\CMS\webtest\files\45\45803100-3b98-4d29-aa44-e9ee436a168a.pdf. thumbPath: E:\k9.istructe.org\CMS\webtest\files\pdfthumbs\45803100-3b98-4d29-aa44-e9ee436a168a_1.png. objDoc: 1 - True. objPreview.Log: . strFileName: 45803100-3b98-4d29-aa44-e9ee436a168a_1.png

Members/subscribers must be logged in to view this article

Verulam

Changing CPD Requirements Clive Shearer, writing from Washington State, USA, suggests some changes to CPD: First, I must thank Robert Horne for an outstanding contribution describing the path of many engineers of my generation. He must have read my resume! I am also fully in agreement with Messers Seaman and Bowden. Suggestion: (1) Scrap CPD as a blanket requirement. (2) Set up a body of peers to investigate public complaints about practising engineers: A review board: engineers who are found to be deficient in ethics, design approaches, noncompliant with Codes or standards shall be penalised. (There is a similar system in the USA.) For mild 1 transgressions, monitored CPD might be prescribed.