Project Background
Several years ago, I was tasked by an employer to take over an ALTA survey that was already in progress. This was not a simple project, it involved a large energy development spanning several thousand acres and consisting of numerous parcels. To add another layer of complexity, these parcels were to be leased rather than purchased in fee, which introduced some unique considerations, particularly when it came to monumentation.
From the beginning, our proposal tried to account for the unknowns. With so many boundary corners, we included assumptions and clarifications around setting monuments, knowing there was no practical way to determine how many would ultimately need to be set. Even so, once the field reconnaissance was complete, it became clear that the remaining budget would not come close to covering the cost of setting all missing corners. Because of how the proposal had been structured—and with Table A, Option Item 1 checked by the client, I found myself facing a difficult decision.
Digging into the Standards
Around that time, I attended a local state surveying chapter meeting where the state board delivered a continuing education presentation on ethics. One point stood out: among the most common violations they encounter is surveyors failing to set monuments on ALTA surveys. That statement immediately brought my project to mind.
I discussed the issue with colleagues after the meeting but left without the clarity I needed. So I began digging deeper. I reached out to the state board and connected with a few subject matter experts who had been involved in writing the ALTA/NSPS standards. They pointed me to Section 3, Subsections B through D, which focus on standards of care and boundary determination.
“B. Other Requirements and Standards of Practice - Many states and some local jurisdictions have adopted statutes, administrative rules, and/or ordinances that set out standards regulating the practice of surveying within their jurisdictions. In addition to the standards set forth herein, surveyors must also conduct their surveys in accordance with applicable jurisdictional survey requirements and standards of practice. Where conflicts between the
standards set forth herein and any such jurisdictional requirements and standards of practice occur, the more stringent must apply.”
“C. The Normal Standard of Care - Surveyors should recognize that there may be unwritten local, state, and/or regional standards of care defined by the practice of the “prudent surveyor” in those locales.”
“D. Boundary - The boundary lines and corners of any property or interest in real property being surveyed (hereafter, the “surveyed property” or “property to be surveyed”) as part of an ALTA/NSPS Land Title Survey must be established and/or retraced in accordance with appropriate boundary law principles governed by the set of facts and evidence found in the course of performing the research and fieldwork.”
An important distinction emerged: because these parcels were being leased rather than purchased in fee, they could be treated similarly to easements. In the state where this project was located, minimum standards addressed boundary surveys but did not specifically address easements. Based on guidance from both the state board and ALTA experts, I learned that monumentation of every corner may not be required in this scenario under state standards.
However, the inclusion of Table A, Option Item 1 changed the situation. That option typically requires monumentation unless alternative arrangements are made. Therefore, the key path forward was clear: I needed to have a direct conversation with the client.
Key Takeaways
I share this experience to raise awareness and encourage dialogue. Through conversations with colleagues, I’ve found that many surveyors are not fully aware of these nuances and exceptions—I certainly wasn’t before this project. As someone licensed in multiple states, I’ve also seen how differently jurisdictions can classify and regulate surveys, such as through distinctions like route surveys, forest surveys, or rural versus urban standards.
Understanding these differences is essential, especially during the proposal phase. I hope this perspective helps others navigate similar situations, and I welcome your thoughts and experiences. My goal is simply to contribute to greater awareness and support continuous improvement within our profession.
Author: Daniel Neer, P.S.
Daniel is a Project Manager with approximately 20 years of experience in the surveying industry. Licensed in nine states—including Ohio, New Mexico, Kentucky, Pennsylvania, Indiana, Maine, Connecticut, Vermont, and New Hampshire—with additional licensure pending, Daniel brings a broad and diverse perspective to every project. He previously owned and operated a successful surveying company and has extensive experience across a wide range of project types, from residential boundary and topographical surveys to large-scale ALTA surveys and complex linear projects for pipeline and transmission infrastructure. His background also includes industrial high-precision layout and construction projects ranging from commercial facilities to large healthcare and manufacturing environments.