Minutes - January 2026 - Professional Engineers

DATE: January 8, 2026
TIME: 09:45 AM
LOCATION: 100 S. Charles St.
Tower 1
Baltimore, MD 21201
(Teleconference via Google Meet)
Access Using Video Conferencing
meet.google.com/vez-tjmx-mbr
Phone: +1 401-552-4499
PIN: 392138700

MEMBERS PRESENT:
Sallye Perrin, PE, Chair
Edward (Ed) Hubner, PE, Vice-Chair
Karl Rickert, PE
Kathryn Gunkel, PE
Lily Kuitcha, PE
Judi Miller, RA, Consumer
Tracey Clark, Consumer

MEMBERS ABSENT:
Dhrubajyoti (DJ) Biswas, PE

STAFF PRESENT:
Zevi Thomas, Executive Director
Raquel Meyers, Assistant Executive Director
Sloane Kinstler, AAG, Board Counsel
Hannah Belcher, Office Secretary

OTHERS PRESENT:
Sarah McDermott, Assistant Commissioner, O&P
Aajah Harris, Policy Director, O&P
Melissa Cannata from Amber Books
AbdulGafar Sulaiman
Tory Pierce
Brian T

Meeting Called to Order

Chair Sallye Perrin called the meeting to order at 9:47 am.

Approval of November 13, 2025, Meeting Minutes

December 11, 2025, meeting minutes approved without corrections.

Ms. Kinstler informed the Board that they were required to ratify the minutes. Ms. Perrin stated that this Board follows Robert’s Rules of Order to help streamline meeting procedures.

Review of Reciprocity and Exam Applications

Ms. Perrin noted that the Board now has fewer applications to review than in the past due to the rule change that took effect on October 1, 2025. Motion (I) was called to approve all reciprocity and examination applications. The motion was moved by Mr. Hubner, seconded by Mr. Rickert, and unanimously approved.

Ms. Perrin reported that 64 applications had been administratively approved because the applicants are Model Law Engineers (MLEs). She requested that the Board make a motion to formally approve these MLE applications.

Mr. Rickert asked whether anyone other than the Board had reviewed and approved of the MLE experience. Ms. Perrin confirmed that the experience is indeed approved by another party.

Mr. Thomas clarified that MLE applicants are evaluated based on the NCEES Model Law Agreement. These applicants already hold an EAC/ABET-accredited degree and have a minimum of four years of professional work experience, which is vetted by NCEES. Additionally, they are already licensed in another jurisdiction, making their qualifications comparable to the requirements of our jurisdiction.

Motion (II) was called to approve reciprocal applications that had already been administratively approved as MLEs. The motion was moved by Ms. Perrin, seconded by Mr. Rickert, and was unanimously approved. Mr. Perrin noted that the motion will be included for MLE reciprocities in the future.

Applications for PE Licensure by Reciprocity are as follows:

• Abdulkader, Alkadry (66126)
• Atansov, Stoyan (66164)
• Attallah, Jaser (59639)
• Carr, John (66125)
• Commuri, Sri Divya (66124)
• Drumheller, Samuel (66123)
• Ekwaneen, Ziad (66122)
• Islam, Rubaiet (66121)
• Lee, Morgan (54920)
• Maksud, Ui-Alam (61283)
• Mancuso, Paul (66118)
• Nguyen, Viet Anh (66119)
• Robichaux, Kristen (66120)
• Srivastava, Supriya (66117)
• Timble, Nitin (66115)

There were five Applications for PE Licensure by Reciprocity placed into the "Needs More Information" folder:

There were no applications for PE License by Reciprocity denied.

Transfer of Grades

Applications for PE Licensure by Transfer of Grades are as follows:

There was one Transfer of Grades application placed in the "Needs More Information" Folder:

There was no transfer of grades applications denied.

Applications for the Principles and Practices of Engineering Exam as follows:

• Anthony, David A.
• Boone, Alexander
• Bradford, Christopher
• Bridges, Terrell
• Carter, Lisa N.
• Chernisky, Peter D.
• Chiem, Chau B.
• Craver, Austin J.
• Diaz Molina, Carmen W.
• Erenso, Adam S.
• Gabre, Assaye
• Gharamaleki, Farhad A.
• Hall, Ryan
• Hamad, Mohanad Z.
• Norton, Dalton R.
• Owens, Regan
• Pandey, Rupa
• Patterson, Whitney
• Pleszkoch, Michael
• Prather, Samanatha L.
• Rozek, Matthew
• Rufe, Regis A.
• Sahbaz, Mehmet
• Schooley, Patrick E.
• Sung, Alexander
• Tison, Miranda D.
• Weir, Joseph
• Yan, Chang
• Yang, Yue

There were six exam applications placed in the “Needs More Information” folder:

• Dunne, Steven
• Gu, Michael
• Kim, Woon
• Nicholson, Andrew
• Olaore, Olusegun
• Soretire, Vincent

There was no denied exam application.

Old Business

1. Finance Report
   Ms. Perrin requested a follow-up on the financial report that was presented at the Joint Chairs’ Group. Mr. Thomas noted that, in the absence of a Financial Director, there are currently no figures available to share. The department is undergoing personnel changes and will provide an update to the Board once the necessary approvals have been obtained.
2. MDSPE Taskforce
   Mr. Rickert noted concerns regarding individuals being hired through online platforms such as Fiverr and Upwork who are not licensed professional engineers in Maryland. He noted that the Board is expected to meet with MDSPE to discuss this matter. He has submitted a proposed advisory warning letter to be sent to licensed professionals as soon as possible and inquired about its status. He expressed further concern that delays in notifying Maryland engineers could result in projects being approved without review by a licensed engineer, which could pose a safety risk for the public.
   
   Ms. Perrin deferred to Mr. Thomas about the status of the letter. Mr. Thomas noted he is in receipt of the letter and thanked Mr. Rickert for taking the lead on this initiative. He spoke with Board Counsel about this matter, and the letter will be forwarded to O&P Communication Coordinator to schedule an eblast to all Maryland PEs.
   
   Motion (III) was called to approve the recommendation of Mr. Rickert to send an e-blast to MD licensed professional engineers concerning this matter. The motion was moved by Ms. Gunkel, seconded by Mr. Hubner, and unanimously approved.
3. Engineering License Numbers
   Ms. Perrin informed the Board that she spent the weekend attending the NCEES Education Committee meeting. During the meeting, she spoke with a representative from the Florida board, where an idea was proposed to remove license from that state’s agency websites. She indicated that she would like the taskforce to consider a similar idea in Maryland.
   
   Ms. Gunkel stated that one purpose of the online license number is to allow employers or clients to verify that an engineer is registered in Maryland. She raised the concern that if some of the numbers are blocked, it could make verification more difficult. Ms. Perrin acknowledged this being one of the challenges. She also noted that her stamp includes her license number on drawings and questioned how that information is being protected.
   
   Mr. Rickert suggested that a person could use an engineer’s name to confirm their registration through the existing database. Expanding on this idea, one possibility could be allowing someone to look up an engineer by name and include a way to send them an email, for example to inquire about a job opportunity. Mr. Hubner proposed an alternative approach: creating a database where each set of stamped and sealed drawings is registered, with password protection or similar security measures.
   
   After a brief discussion, it was recommended that the taskforce explore potential solutions to this topic. Ms. Perrin proposed this topic as meeting items during either the upcoming Zone and the Annual Meetings.
5. Law changes under 305(d)
   Mr. Hubner requested clarification regarding the change to Section 305(d) under the new law, which took effect on October 1, 2025, specifically concerning applications submitted before that date. He asked whether applicants had 60 or 90 days to submit their applications. Ms. Perrin confirmed that they have 90 days.
   
   Mr. Hubner noted that if an applicant submits and we request additional information, they may receive extra time. However, at this point, the 90-day period has expired. In fact, 90 days have already passed before this review period, yet the Board is still reviewing applications from individuals submitting for the first time. Currently, there should be no applications under Section 305(d) without an FE exam, as the 90-day window has closed, unless additional information has been requested. Ms. Perrin agreed with Mr. Hubner. Mr. Hubner asked the staff to clarify whether the actual due date is three months or four months.
   
   Mr. Thomas deferred to Ms. Belcher for further clarification. However, he explained that there is a distinction between the Board’s policy for processing an application and the timeline for refunding an applicant. This may be the source of some confusion, as an application may need to be closed for administrative reasons even if the applicant still has time to complete it.
   
   Ms. Belcher informed the Board that exam applicants have up to 120 days to complete their applications, while reciprocal applicants have up to 60 days. Mr. Hubner noted that, according to the statute, reciprocal applicants must have a completed application at the time of submission. He asked staff to review the statute regarding reciprocal applications, as this topic had been extensively discussed at the previous meeting. He emphasized that reciprocal applicants do not receive a 60-day completion period under the statute. Staff were asked to review and provide a follow-up to the Board by the next meeting.
   
   Ms. Perrin inquired about the number of applicants who have not yet taken the FE exam. Mr. Thomas stated that he would provide the Board with that information. For clarification, the Board is currently not accepting applications from individuals who have not taken the FE exam. The number of such applicants should decrease as the staff continue processing the remaining applications.
   
   Ms. Perrin requested that this item be added to the agenda as an action item. She also suggested moving the Complaint Committee report to the end of the agenda, following the Counsel’s report.

New Business

Mr. Hubner requested that Chemical/Architecture/Petroleum/Mining/Industrial shared drive folder, architecture, be assigned to him in his capacity as an architectural engineer. He also suggested confirming that Ms. Gunkel is comfortable reviewing petroleum, mining, and industrial applications in addition to chemical applications. Ms. Gunkel noted that she has not yet had the opportunity to review applications in those areas; however, she agreed with Mr. Hubner. She stated that if she receives such an application for review, she will consult with Mr. Hubner for assistance.

Correspondence

– None.

Executive Director’s Report

Mr. Thomas informed the Board that the list of attendees funded by NCEES will be submitted this week. Registration opens in February, and those who are funded will receive a registration link. Ms. Gunkel inquired whether she or Ms. Kuitcha would be funded as new Board members. Mr. Thomas confirmed that both names will be submitted and will receive confirmation from NCEES. An email will be sent with next steps for those funded to attend the Northeast Zone meeting, which will be held May 14–16 in Columbus, Ohio.

He also reported during the Board for Professional Land Surveyors meeting the previous day, that Board discussed the prospects of Maryland hosting the Zone meeting in 2028. In addition to being part of the Northeast Zone, that meeting is scheduled to be a combined event with the Central Zone. An exploratory team is being sought to identify potential cities in Maryland. He noted that, given the state would be hosting two zones, the Board should consider the scale of the venues required, as well as the fact that these meetings typically include amenities in addition to the formal sessions. Ms. Perrin noted that the last meeting was held in Annapolis and suggested downtown Baltimore as a potential location. She highlighted amenities such as attending a ball game, the nearby aquarium, and the variety of venues and activities available downtown. Ms. Perrin also noted that downtown Baltimore offers ease of travel, including access via the light rail, making it convenient for attendees. Mr. Thomas will inform the Board for Land Surveyors of the PE Board’s recommendations.

Lastly, Mr. Thomas announced that Ms. Shavon Cooper, who has served as the Board Operations Officer for the past few months, is no longer with the agency. He advised that any questions regarding applications should be directed to himself or Ms. Meyers, and that Ms. Belcher should be contacted regarding reciprocal applications. The agency will start the recruitment and interview process in the coming weeks.

Board Counsel’s Report

Ms. Kinstler did not have a report. She thanked the Board for allowing her to sit in at the meeting. Ms. Perrin thanked Ms. Kinstler for filling in for Matthew Venuti, Board Counsel while he is on paternity leave. Ms. Kinstler stated that Mr. Venuti should return before the next meeting.

Executive Session

Ms. Kuitcha requested to discuss a matter in executive session. Ms. Kinsler requested that the members state the necessity for entering an executive session. Ms. Kuitcha noted it’s a broad question regarding documentation required for reciprocity and timing for application discussed earlier. Ms. Kinstler deferred to Mr. Thomas whether this is appropriate for Executive Session. Mr. Thomas inferred that the inquiry maybe an administrative matter and that he would contact Ms. Kuithca after the meeting. Ms. Kuitcha agreed it may be administrative.

Ms. Kinstler reminded the Board members of the Open Meetings Act, which governs all public bodies, noting that closed sessions are permitted only under specific circumstances. For this Board, those circumstances typically include discussing licensee examination content, matters involving a particular licensee or applicant to protect privacy and reputation, potential or pending litigation with counsel, receiving other legal advice, or discussing certain financial information relevant to the Board. While the Board may certainly discuss the issue during the open business meeting, she discouraged holding the discussion in a closed session.

Ms. Kuitcha thanked Ms. Kinstler for the clarification. Ms. Perrin then asked Ms. Kuitcha to discuss her concerns. Ms. Kuitcha explained that she had a question regarding applicants who are taking upwards four months to submit all required documentation. She believed that applicants are required to take the exam within six months of application approval but wanted to confirm, noting that several individuals had asked this question.

Ms. Perrin noted that once an application is approved through NCEES and transmitted to Pearson VUE (CS), there is a specific timeframe in which the exam must be taken. Ms. Kuitcha clarified that the six-month clock begins with approval of the application and that this applies to new PE applicants. Ms. Perrin confirmed that this understanding is correct.

Ms. Kuitcha requested clarification regarding the NCEES Council Record for reciprocal applicants. Ms. Perrin explained that individuals maintain a permanent record with NCEES, even after licensure, and that the record can be transmitted to other states to satisfy reciprocity requirements, as it generally contains all required documentation. Mr. Hubner agreed, noting that applications submitted through NCEES are easier to review because they are standardized and clearly formatted, making it easier to focus on the required criteria. He added that while the NCEES record is helpful, it is not required.

After a brief discussion, Ms. Kuitcha thanked Ms. Perrin and Mr. Hubner for the information and stated that she would follow up with Mr. Thomas after the meeting.

Complaint Committee Report

Mr. Rickert reported on the status of complaints discussed by the Complaint Committee January 8, 2026

11-PE-26 Closed. Not in Board’s jurisdiction, Contractual dispute
10-PE-26 Closed. Not in Board’s jurisdiction, Refer to Federal Trade Commission
05-PE-26 Closed. Consent Order signed and fine paid

The Complaint Committee reviewed applications for reinstatement, one application for reciprocity with a conduct topic, and one NCEES conduct. The Committee acknowledged the conduct and agreed to hold NCEES conduct until investigation is complete. The reinstatement applicant must complete 32 PDHs prior to reinstating PE license. There are also several pre-charges for which the Complaint Committee is working with the litigation attorney to resolve.

Motion (IV) was called to accept the Complaint Committee Report, moved by Ms. Miller, seconded by Ms. Gunkel and unanimously approved.

Application Approved Administratively for Reciprocity

There were 64 applications, supported by NCEES Model Law Engineer records, that were administratively approved for licensure by reciprocity.

Other Business

1. 1. The next Board meeting is scheduled for February 12, 2026.
2. 2. Happy New Year!

Adjournment

Motion (V) was called by Ms. Perrin, seconded by Ms. Miller and unanimously carried to adjourn the meeting at 10:40 a.m.