8765 ROS Exemptions?

[Ben Lund]

I've thoroughly enjoyed the last few threads I've read and they’ve made me read up on when filing a record of survey is mandatory.

Section 8762 “Records of surveyâ€￾of the Land Surveyor’s Act delineates when a record of survey shall be filed. Certain criteria that trigger the need to file a record of survey include: a field survey must be performed relating to land boundaries or property lines and the survey discloses at least one of five triggers outlined in 8762(b)(1)-(5).

Then Section 8764 “Record of survey – technical requirementâ€￾ explains in 8764 (g) that “The record of survey shall also show, either graphically or by note, the reason or reasons, if any why the mandatory filing provisions of paragraphs (1) to (5), inclusive, of subdivision (b) of Section 8762 apply.â€￾

Both of the quoted make clear when it is mandatory to file a record of survey by explaining 5 distinct triggers. Section 8765 “Record of survey – exemptionsâ€￾ explains when “A record of survey is not required of any surveyâ€￾ that meets the criteria established in 8765 (a)-(e).

My understanding is that Section 8765 cannot be rewritten to say “unless you meet the exemptions outlined in (a)-(e) you have to file a record of survey.â€￾

For example, 8765 (d) says in part, “A record of survey is not required of any survey: When the survey is a retracement of line shown on a subdivision map, official map, or record of survey…â€￾

My understanding is that this cannot be rewritten to say “A record of survey IS required when the survey is a retracement of lines NOT shown on a subdivision map, official map, or record of survey…â€￾ This statement would have to fall under 8762 (b) and almost does under 8762(b)(4) except a caveat of “the positions of which are not ascertainable from an inspection of the subdivision map…â€￾

Is my understanding correct?

[bryanmundia]

Ben, I think you are missing part of the point for the filing of a record of survey. I understand that there are certain "triggers" which REQUIRE a surveyor to file a record of survey. With that being said, I find it odd that surveyors in California haven't adopted a policy of filing a ROS no matter what.

With reading and participating in the past few posts I find it odd that we are talking about the minimums we can do as surveyors. I think it is important, especially in this time, that we as professionals build ourselves to a standard which is higher than just meeting the minimum requirements.

The best example I can think of is the speed limit. The posted speed is the MAXIMUM which is safe to drive on a particular road. However, that speed is not always the safest or best way to drive depending on the conditions. Right now the conditions in our economy are shaky or rainy and we must drive safely through the storm. By taking our time and driving ourselves to safety is key and those who excel at being safe and understanding are the ones who survive the storm. Those who drive too fast and recklessly are those who will be ticketed or worse seriously injure themselves and others.

Just because a survey you or anyone else prepares doesn't trigger a cause for a ROS doesn't mean you shouldn't file one. Think as a property owner, which would you rather have, a piece of paper showing a shiny tag on your corner or a plat which shows your entire property and documents any issues which may be available and pertinent at that point in time? Sure the cost is vastly different, however, with an explanation most property owners would only be more educated about the process. I know I would rather have the latter, both a plat and the education of knowing more about property ownership, no matter what the cost.

[bruce hall]

me when I said I needed to file a map cause I'd be setting pipes at the corners of the lot, "I don't care what you set at the corners, wood or iron and I don't want to pay for a map to the county cause I don't care if you file a map or not, just show me where my dirt is."

One of the other surveyors in HB did the survey who went along with this line of thinking. I guess I shoulda had Brian along with me to explain this. He'd a probably done a better job than me splainin this stuff.

[E_Page]

Gosh Bryan, I got lost in your metaphores! I'd better hit the gas, do about 85 and get out of that storm!

If I can paraphrase what I think your basic question is, it's this: "Why don't we file an RS for each boundary survey performed?"

It's often not a matter of the surveyor being cheap or trying to cut corners, but rather a matter of cost to the client and value to the client and the public.

I started my survey career in MI. At that time (and perhaps still), their version of an RS was known as an Act 132 drawing, which is very similar to our CR. It is a drawing on 8 1/2 x 14 stock, with a couple of simple certifications.

One of the differences between our RS and CR is where it is filed. The RS is at the Recorder's office where the general public is more likely to find it, and the CR is in the CS's office, where only other surveyors are likely to find it.

But to the client, the big difference is cost. It costs more for the surveyor to prepare an RS and respond to review comments. Depending upon the county, it may cost upwards of $2000 just for the review.

From a technical standpoint, whatever you are representing on your drawing can almost always be done with more detail and more clearly on the larger format RS. But with a view toward your client's interests (both technical and financial), and toward the benefit to the public, the professional must weigh whether or not the RS (1st) is required, and (2nd) adds substantial benefit to the client and/or the public over filing a CR.

If an RS is not required, and there is no substantial benefit to the public over a CR, then the professional should file the CR.

Conversely, if a RS is required, the surveyor should not ignore that fact or concoct flimsy reasoning to not file the RS just to save the client $, or because the client does not want a map.

[Ben Lund]

I appreciate the advice and I agree with what has been said. To clarify, I'm not arguing whether or not we should be filing a Record of Survey “no matter what” nor am I encouraging filing a Record of Survey only when it is mandated. I am trying to get to the heart of the meaning of certain sections of the LSA.

It is truly sad the vast majority of the public does not know of and understand the importance of the services we provide. My question stems mainly from the “Boundary Dispute” thread and what Ric said in post #49 and I want to know what is meant by these certain sections of the LSA.

[E_Page]

I was responding more to Bryans comment: "I find it odd that surveyors in California haven't adopted a policy of filing a ROS no matter what."

An RS is not always the best documentary vehicle for the job. it depends on the job.

[bryanmundia]

Evan, I know it may not be the BEST vehicle to explain your findings. However, I find it to be a more universal means of showing that you as a surveyor prepared a survey and this is what you found. Sure a corner record may suffice but wouldn't a ROS, especially here in Orange County, be a better means to show how you got there and what you did once you reached your target project area?

I know that the cost difference between a ROS and other recorded documents can be quite staggering but next time you step out and break open the legs ask yourself if what you are doing is something that any surveyor could do and achieve similar results. If the answer is yes, then maybe a record of survey is not necessary as long as it doesn't trigger any other reasons. But if the answer is maybe or no, then shouldn't you record a document explaining what you did? A record of survey is just as it says, a record of what and how you surveyed the property. I myself, although only having been in the surveying industry for around 10 years, have yet to see a corner record that is as good as a record of survey for the same area.

Not saying I am right or know it all in the surveying world, but I do know what I would do if I was in a situation where I was in doubt, and that is submit a Record of Survey.

[E_Page]

"Sure a corner record may suffice but wouldn't a ROS... be a better means to show how you got there and what you did once you reached your target project area?

If a CR will suffice, and your client has no preference for an RS, then no, it would not be a better means. part of protecting the public that we are charged with is not indiscriminatly and needlessly spending their money. Since we collect a higher fee for preparing an RS (more work), doing so where it is not required by law or necessary to show details that there is not room for on a CR can legitimately be seen as an unscrupulous business practice. Kind of like the proverbial mechanic who sells you new brakes needlessly since there is still 50% on your pads.

Each case is different. For most of my private surveys, a RS is either required or is the best document to file for other reasons. But for many, a CR will suffice just fine, and that's what I file.

Let's just say that you are preparing to submit a map in one of the high-priced counties, map check $2000. Let's say that it will conservatively be $1000 more in fees to you to prepare a RS and resond to comments as opposed to preparing and filing a CR.

Do you think that your client, once they find out that you caused them to pay $3000 more than they should have had to, might have an actionable complaint against you at BPELS? I've never heard of such a complaint, but I think it would be valid.

How would you feel if that mechanic convinced you that you needed a $3000 tranny rebuild and then later you found all you needed was your wheel bearings replaced for $300? Might you be likely to file a complaint with DCA?

I see only a little difference.

[Anthony Maffia]

"Do you think that your client, once they find out that you caused them to pay $3000 more than they should have had to, might have an actionable complaint against you at BPELS?"

Only if you call your client and say something like:
"Hi, sorry but I'll have to file a ROS instead of the corner record we agreed to. Please send me $3000 more."

[bryanmundia]

"Sure a corner record may suffice but wouldn't a ROS... be a better means to show how you got there and what you did once you reached your target project area?

If a CR will suffice, and your client has no preference for an RS, then no, it would not be a better means. part of protecting the public that we are charged with is not indiscriminatly and needlessly spending their money. Since we collect a higher fee for preparing an RS (more work), doing so where it is not required by law or necessary to show details that there is not room for on a CR can legitimately be seen as an unscrupulous business practice. Kind of like the proverbial mechanic who sells you new brakes needlessly since there is still 50% on your pads.

Each case is different. For most of my private surveys, a RS is either required or is the best document to file for other reasons. But for many, a CR will suffice just fine, and that's what I file.

Let's just say that you are preparing to submit a map in one of the high-priced counties, map check $2000. Let's say that it will conservatively be $1000 more in fees to you to prepare a RS and resond to comments as opposed to preparing and filing a CR.

Do you think that your client, once they find out that you caused them to pay $3000 more than they should have had to, might have an actionable complaint against you at BPELS? I've never heard of such a complaint, but I think it would be valid.

How would you feel if that mechanic convinced you that you needed a $3000 tranny rebuild and then later you found all you needed was your wheel bearings replaced for $300? Might you be likely to file a complaint with DCA?

I see only a little difference.

Evan, look at you using metaphors. Well, to answer your mechanics question, the answer would be that I would get a second opinion because I have been educated enough to know what might be necessary to fix my car. I think if the public was given the same justice things might be a little different. You better be damn sure that if I was going to spend $3,000 on anything I would definitely do my research and get more than just 1 opinion. I think that is the right way to making a decision.

I will refer back to your earlier post stating where both a CR and ROS are filed. Again, if I was a property owner, I would want everyone and their mother to know what I owned and be able to easily back that up with a simple trip to the recorder's office. You better be darn sure I don't want the documents that I just spent my hard earned money on documenting my property corners and land which I own hidden at the county surveyors office being harder for the general public to get. (Your words not mine, I think CR's are just as easy to get as an ROS for the public).

I am all for saving the client money, but I am also for educating a client and letting them know that there is an alternative A and B and what exactly is the difference between the two and why there is such a difference in cost.

Now on another post, I never said that corner record's are inferior to an ROS, I simply said, that in my short career I have yet to see a CR that is as good as an ROS in the same area. They both have their appropriate purpose.

Lastly, I ask this. If the cost of filing an ROS was regulated would any of you be more apt to file one? I am just curious because it all seems to boil down to cost from the posts I have read instead of basing the decision on what might be the absolute best option.

[Ian Wilson]

Anthony M. wrote:

“Only if you call your client and say something like: "Hi, sorry but I'll have to file a ROS instead of the corner record we agreed to. Please send me $3000 more."

Put it in your terms and conditions that if a Record of Survey becomes necessary under §8762 of the Professional Land Surveyor’s Act the client agrees to an additional charge of $X for drafting the ROS and the client agrees to pay the fees for review and filing of the ROS.

Bingo! Covered!

Let’s face it. In most cases, the surveyor should have a good idea as to whether or not an ROS is going to be needed before they send the proposal/contract to the client. The only real surprise should come from material discrepancy between field conditions and record.

California does not have a statute defining what material discrepancy is. And for good reason: we are licensed as professionals, not certified as technician following a check list. An open pipe I tag is NOT a material discrepancy. Finding a properly tagged 1” IP instead of a properly tagged 1 1/4" IP is NOT a material discrepancy. Finding a pipe on its side is NOT a material discrepancy. (The first and last examples are reasons to file a CR, though!)

Finding an undisturbed pipe out of position along a line by 100’ IS a material discrepancy. In more than 20 years of surveying, I think I have come across two cases that I would call “material Discrepancies”.



Bryan M wrote:

Lastly, I ask this. If the cost of filing an ROS was regulated would any of you be more apt to file one? I am just curious because it all seems to boil down to cost from the posts I have read instead of basing the decision on what might be the absolute best option.

Yep, Bryan, it boils down to bucks in most cases. The ROS review fees have gotten ridiculous.

The ROS was supposed to be a way to get information into the public record quickly and easily. It’s become an expensive exercise in head banging in some cases. The attorneys have used Wheeler v County of San Bernardino as the reason for the extensive nature of the review.

The argument from the CS side is that the marked up paper that come through the door masquerading as survey maps are, in some cases, pretty poor. I thought that was a lame excuse until I got to see a few.

My opinion:

Having the information I the public record is a good thing.

The ROS does NOT benefit the client for whose project it is prepared nearly as much as it benefits the rest of the community.

The cost has become prohibitive.

The standards for mapping products have dropped like a paralyzed falcon from what they seemed to be when I started out over 20 years ago.

The system is broke, but I no longer think I know how to fix it.


.

[E_Page]

Bryan, you said: "Now on another post, I never said that corner record's are inferior to an ROS, I simply said, that in my short career I have yet to see a CR that is as good as an ROS in the same area. They both have their appropriate purpose.

Lastly, I ask this. If the cost of filing an ROS was regulated would any of you be more apt to file one? I am just curious because it all seems to boil down to cost from the posts I have read instead of basing the decision on what might be the absolute best option."


In your first statement you are essentially saying "I didn't say that", and then are simply saying it over again before closing the sentence. You seem to be saying that the best of the CRs are still worse than the worst of the RSs.

I've seen some pretty poor RSs that either don't give much info or that I've found to give incorrect info. I've seen a a lot of CRs that show very well what was done, are easy to follow, and are more than adequate records to follow. The quality of the document prepared is dependent upon the person preparing it, not on the document format.

Knowing Ian, and having read a lot of posts by Bruce and by Ken, I get the impression that they are all very careful and competent surveyors who consider each aspect of each project fully.

If you want to make the decision from a purely technical (and technician's) point of view, then yes, the RS is almost always the way to go. But the professional MUST take cost into consideration. A competent professional does not needlessly cost the client more.

A RS does not give the boundary you mark any more validity or authority than if it is filed on a CR. Most neighbors interested in your survey aren't going to know enough to go to the Recorder's office to get a copy either. A good title company is more likely to pick it up, but that's about it. The CRs are not really less accessible, they are just in a place that few but a surveyor would think to look.

When you're going to educate the client, it's probably easier to educate him or her where the map will be filed than it is to convince them of the extra benefit the cost of the RS will bring them. By the way, what would you tell them in this regard?

Like Ian said, I have it covered in my contract. I also explain in my proposal letter when a RS is required, when a CR may be filed or may be required, and when no map is required. I also explain that while they can always choose to file a more expensive document, when it is required, it is a matter of law as dictated by the conditions encountered during the survey.


As to the metaphors, I was just trying to speak your language, man ;-) I guess for that one to have worked, you would need to know less about automobiles. The point is that we are licensed not only for our ability to work the equipment, do the math, and make the map, but also for our knowledge of what is required for a particular project. We are charged with using that knowledge responsibly to the benefit of our client and to the protection of the public.

The CR would not exist, and competent surveyors would not use it if it did not adequately protect the public and adequately serve the needs of many clients.

[bryanmundia]

Evan, I guess a better way to explain my point is that I have yet to receive a CR that gives me as much data as a ROS in the same area. I understand that the ball swings both ways and I have been witness to ROS which are horrible ad I have come across CR's which are wonderful, but both in areas which do not have both a CR and ROS that both just rock my socks off.

I understand why each are available avenues for us as professionals and why each get used. I guess my issue is that I have the question of why. I mean I understand you need to make a profit in order to run a business but in business I have also been taught to under promise and over deliver. This rule of thumb makes the client happy and gives you a good name as a business.

I want to go on the record and say that I am playing somewhat devil's advocate here because I am more of a believer in filing something versus breaking the law and filing nothing. I also want to go on a say that I have only been in the profession for around 10 years and I know that there is always going to be something I can learn either on my own or from other professionals. I in no way will ever try to demoralize or offend someone on this forum on purpose.

I will close by saying, words are great and I take everyone's opinion into consideration but give me some proof and I will respect your opinion that much more. So to those out there, show me an ROS and CR which are on the same block/map and prove to me that I am wrong, I will be the first to say that you are right and I have learned something valuable that has substance.

[E_Page]

Ah, now I understand a little better. Any given area or location is going to be more prone to either requiring an RS for most if not all surveys, or it is going to be more established and prone to only requiring CRs.

In an area where RSs are more the norm, any CRs filed are likely to be done so to accomplish something less than the marking of a line. More likely they are for the perpetuation of a single monument like a block corner and don't need to show as much as an RS because of their purpose.

The exception will be the surveyor who is cutting corners and filing a CR where an RS is more appropriate.

But your perspective is also showing through quite clearly with this statement: "I mean I understand you need to make a profit in order to run a business but in business I have also been taught to under promise and over deliver."

That says, again, pretty clearly that you view the CR as only a shortcut document that is inferior to an RS, but is allowed as a concession to private surveyors so that they can cut costs and make more profit. That's actually a pretty disdainful attitude that prevents you from considering a correct perspective for use of a valid document.

This premise is entirely wrong. An RS takes more effort. The private surveyor most often charges fees based upon the amount of effort it takes to complete a task. That effort is most often expressed in hours. The hourly rate has a profit margin factored into it. Therefore, typically, the greater the effort, the greater the profit. So if I want to maximize my profit, I am going to push for a RS every time whether it's required or not.

The decision whether to file an RS or a CR is never about profit for the responsible professional. It is always about 1) legal requirements, 2) how is the client best served, 3) benefit to the public, with a basic rule being "when in doubt, file an RS".

But get this in your head: prepare RS = more profit, prepare CR = easier, but less profit.

The money considerations are for the client, not the surveyor.

[bryanmundia]

Evan, actually I think of a CR just like any other surveyor. The fact is that a CR is used for the simple fact that an original monument has been destroyed or obliterated and the need for that monument to be replaced is desired. I also know that an ROS has the ability to do the same and also establish those lines which are not shown on a subdivision map or other ROS.

I don't see a CR as a way to cut corners or cost. I would imagine that retracing some surveys to set a monument might be just as hard if not harder than an ROS in an a particular area. I understand that an ROS requires more "effort" by the surveyor, but honestly, how much more work is it if you are already doing the boundary survey for the client? I said work, not money, I know that there is sometimes a substantial difference in cost, but effort between a boundary survey and ROS is really to me, not that much more work.

I am not saying that a CR has no place in the surveying industry. I have prepared my fair share and have done the same with an ROS from a boundary survey. I think maybe I don't hear on this forum enough that I went beyond the minimum requirements of the law. I mean when you prepare your proposal for a project, do you give a quote for both a CR or ROS if both can legally be prepared or do you just give them the minimum price for the least amount of work and be on your way?

[E_Page]

In my proposals, if it is not obvious from the preliminary research that an RS will be required, I generally give 3 estimates and explain the differences with typical letter content being as follows:

"Thank you for contacting Homestead Land Surveying, Inc., to provide the professional land surveying services that you require.

There are three possible scenarios for your project. The required documentation and corresponding level of effort is prescribed by state law depending upon what we find in the field.

If all of the corner monuments are found and do not significantly differ from record data, no official documentation needs to be prepared or filed. If that is found to be the case, the only documentation will be a short written report of what was found in the field for your reference only. Our fee for this will be $800.

If it is necessary to replace any of the property corner monuments and there are no significant discrepancies from record data in terms of the nature of monuments found or their dimensional relationships to each other, then a Corner Record must be filed per CA Business & Professions Code. Our fee for this scenario would be $1700.

If any circumstances are encountered that would trigger the statutory requirement for a Record of Survey per CA Business & Professions Code (most common of these is a dimensional discrepancy between record information and field measurements), our fee would be $3250."

Obviously, there are more costs anticipated in terms of level of effort beyond drafting. Never, NEVER do I give a lowball price based on a CR level of effort and then come back asking for more to do an RS. But then, I've been doing this long enough to know that things are often not as easy as they initially seem to be. If you cover the contingencies up front, and let the client know they exist, then it shouldn't come as a shock to them later when you show them what you've found and what is then required.


But it's also not just about meeting the minimum requirements of the law. There are occasionally times when an RS is not required, but is the best documentary vehicle to adequately show what should be shown. If a RS is not required, but I choose to file one anyway because I want to, unless I've convinced the client that it is better to file a RS, even though not required, I'll eat the cost difference.

If the CR adequately conveys the information you wish to show, if the client understands what you are depicting in terms of his property, if a subsequent surveyor can fully understand what you did and follow your footsteps, then the CR is the proper document to file.

If you think that a RS gives a surveyed line or point a higher standing than one shown on a CR, you need to re-educate yourself on that. It doesn't. If you are trying to get the surveyed lines and points on to a document that imparts constructive notice, then perhaps you should be arguing that all boundary surveys be filed as one-lot parcel maps.

Yeah, that's a bit ridiculous, but once you look at the CR v RS argument ("why don't we file RSs on all surveys"), you may come to see it as a similar argument.

[bryanmundia]

Ken, great answer and explanation.

[Ben Lund]

Ken, great post and I appreciate the input!

Imagine a questionnaire that has you answer a bunch of questions and determines (depending on your answers) if you need to file a record of survey.

One question says: Is the survey a retracement of lines shown on a subdivision map, official map, or record of survey? (8765)

Your answer is: NO, the survey is a retracement of an easement line not shown on a subdivision map, official map, or record of survey.

Then the questionnaire says: You must file a record of survey because you no not qualify for one of the exemptions outlined in 8765.

[Ian Wilson]

The record maps referred to in §9762 are:

1) Subdivision map
A Final Map or a Parcel Map, as defined by the Subdivision Map Act.

2) A Record of Survey, as defined by the PLS Act, §8762 et seq.

3) An "Official Map", as defined by Division 3 of the Subdivision Map Act (§66499.50 et seq. - Government Code)

The confusion over the "Official Map" comes up regularly. Assessor's Plats do not qualify as an "Official Map".

As far as “establish” is concerned, this one usually ends up rely on Wells Lamont.

Essentially, a non-surveyor is “allowed” to rely on the expertise of a land surveyor and accept the boundary shown them by a land surveyor as being the position for that line. You may well be on the hook for “establishing” the line is you tell the client/adjoiner that you think the line is “about here”.

You are absolutely right in that surveyors do not have to set monuments, hubs, nails or paint spots to have “established” the line. The trigger for an RS based on setting a hub, pipe, rebar, concrete nail, PK, paint spot, etc. is covered under §8762(b)(5), “…points or lines set during the performance of a field survey…”

If “establish” meant setting, why would the legislators have included BOTH sections 4 and 5 as separate subparagraphs and not filtered into the same subparagraph?

.

[Ben Lund]

Thanks Ian, well said.

[coast]

I've noticed that it sure gets quiet around here after Dave posts.

Maybe it's all that talk about tort issues and other legal issues that no one else wants to talk about, much less think about, until it's too late.

Seems that basic business law ought to be a topic at meetings, conventions, and here at this Forum.

[mpallamary]

As an added thought, remember that although a fancy document, on its face an ROS doesn't impart constructive notice. Its application and use need to be evaluated.

In addition, if you allow yourself to be in the position where you are arguing with your client about the need or necessity to file an ROS, you are not doing a very good job contracting. You should consider including a standard passage in your contract (Written as required by state law) as follows:

1. Records of Survey. Client acknowledges and agrees that if Consultant provides surveying services, which require the filing of a Record of Survey in accordance with Business and Professions Code Section 8762, all costs of preparation, examination and filing of such Record of Survey will be paid for by Client as extra services.

I have attached the Stearns / Title Insurance case for your consideration.

[Jim Frame]

"Client...agrees that if Consultant provides surveying services, which require the filing of a Record of Survey...all costs...of such Record of Survey will be paid for by Client."

From the client's perspective, the above is a blank check. With very few exceptions, my clients want to know how much they're on the hook for *before* they sign the contract. It's not a minor detail to them; it's a prerequisite to executing a contract at all.

As a practical matter, the closest I ever get to an open-ended contingency like the one above is a line item in the scope that sets forth a fixed fee for the preparation and filing of a Record of Survey should one be required. I generally include an assessment of the likelihood that a ROS will be necessary. For projects in which I judge the likelihood to be very high, I include the ROS as a mandatory scope item with a fixed fee.

I've run into a handful of boundary projects over the years for which I simply couldn't get even a ballpark estimate prior to getting into the job, and was able to convince the client to proceed at T&M. The most memorable -- it still kind of gives me the willies when I think about it -- was one in which the client was willing to proceed, but wanted a magnitude number just to have something to wrap his head around. After a lot of research, recon and estimating I told him "around $20k." When I hit the $20k mark I reassessed and told him $28k. When I hit $28k I told him that we were getting close, but there were still a bunch of unknowns to be resolved. I felt so bad about the having to survey the world to tie down his boundary that after $30k I only charged him half my usual rate. The final bill ended up a little over $34k, and -- a bit to my surprise -- the client was happy with the results.

.

[mpallamary]

I hope this helps.
Something to consider.

[GWinglovitz]

Is a Record of Survey needed in this case?

A surveyor is contracted to perform a field survey of specific physical improvements on a parcel (i.e. dirt road, gates) and plot these improvements in relation to the boundary of the parcel on an exhibit that will be delivered to the client. The boundary of the parcel shows on a previous Record of Survey. The exhibit will show dimensional ties from the boundary to the physical features. No monuments will be reset.

I'm leaning to the side of the above triggers the "establishment" of the boundary by showing dimensional ties to the boundary thus a Record of Survey would be required.

Further, if the dimensional ties were not shown on the exhibit would a Record of Survey be required???

Thanks and I look forward to your opinions.