California: PLS license required to create topography / point cloud from UAV?

[JADAstudio]

Not sure where to post this kind of thing...

TL/DR: In California it may be illegal to create a point cloud or toposurface from UAV or terrestrial LiDAR source captures without a Professional Land Surveyor's license. I appeal to Autodesk to use it's considerable influence to create some legal space in which those of us without a PLS can operate.

...

The Spring 2017 Bulletin of the Board for Professional Engineers, Land Surveyors, and Geologists contains the following (pages 3, 7):

"Simply put, when the operator creates a topographical survey or overlays a boundary on an orthogonally rectified photo and provides the finished product to a private client or public agency, the operator must be authorized by law to perform land surveying. Persons who offer to do more than flying the UAV and obtaining the photography would be violating the law if their services also include orthogonally rectifying the photography to the surface of the Earth or preparing a map that shows any of the items contained in PLS Act Sections 8726(a), (b), and (f) and 8775.1 or Section 6731.1(a) and (b) of the PE Act, unless that work is performed by, or under the responsible charge of, a person authorized to perform land surveying."

The Board's interpretation is very clear and I understand the need to protect clients and the general public (and the income stream of their constituents) but there must be some room for those of us without a PLS to provide aerial UAV and terrestrial LiDAR data capture and presentation services to clients. But who would advocate for this? Certainly writing a single letter to the BPELSG isn't going to carry much weight. Is this something Autodesk is equipped to address?

Or should we be required to hire a licensed surveyor for even the most preliminary of site captures?

[dgorsman]

It is the internet, where the term "legal" kind of goes out the window, so...

That looks like you can still operate the drone provided other regulations guiding their use are followed.  The PLS restriction comes into play when you do legally certifiable (now there's a turn of phrase...) things with the acquired data.  That could mean UAV operators can still work as long as the data processing is done by others who *do* conform to the legal requirements.  Something else that comes to mind is using it in for other means e.g. production work on a movie where they composite FX into the images.  I'm not certain a PE would be mandatory for that use, even if they reconstruct the ground surface to interact with the FX components.

Ultimately I would sincerely hope any business doing surveying work, drone or otherwise, would have the appropriate PE on staff.  Offering services without that is a bit sketchy.

[JADAstudio]

---

@dgorsmanwrote:

Ultimately I would sincerely hope any business doing surveying work, drone or otherwise, would have the appropriate PE on staff.  Offering services without that is a bit sketchy.

---

Absolutely. I'm not a PLS and I don't have any interest in selling surveying services. I recommend hiring a surveyor for nearly every project I'm involved with.

However, as an architect I'd like to be able to take "3D pictures" with my UAV and show that information as preliminary context for my work. Very frequently that means an orthophoto or topographic contour lines derived from the aerial photos. The survey board's interpretation indicates that I run the risk of disciplinary action if I even do that much, which feels unnecessarily restrictive to me.

I don't know... am I on the wrong side of this?