After over three years of work by the Joint ALTA/NSPS Work Group, the 2026 Minimum Standard Detail Requirements for ALTA/NSPS Land Title Surveys were adopted by the American Land Title Association and the National Society of Professional Surveyors in October 2025 with an effective date of February 23, 2026.
The joint Work Group, now chaired by Todd D’Amico, PS of Oklahoma, is comprised of roughly equal numbers of professional surveyors and title professionals. It met semi-annually — sometimes in person, sometimes virtually — over the course of developing the new standards. This article will outline the primary changes from the 2021 Standards.
Before continuing, it is important to point out that the final 2026 Standards differ from a version that was circulating as recently as October. The final version— and a red-lined version showing the changes from 2021—can be found at NSPS.us.com under the Resources tab (they may temporarily be found under the 2021 ALTA/NSPS Standards tab).
The Work Group collects comments and suggestions over the course of the revision process. Each and every one of those is reviewed and considered for inclusion. Some make the cut, others do not—perhaps most frequently because Work Group members feel some suggestions actually involve business practices, not standards.
Section 3.A. addresses the effective date of the new standards. The transition would seem to be an easy one, but the ubiquitous “update” and otherwise change-resistant clients can raise questions.
If a contract to perform a Land Title Survey is executed on or after February 23, 2026, the survey must be performed pursuant to the 2026 Standards with a couple of possible exceptions. During the transition period, surveyors may encounter situations in which they have entered into a contract to perform an ALTA/NSPS Land Title Survey prior to the effective date of the 2026 Standards (February 23, 2026), but the survey is not anticipated to be completed until after February 23, 2026.
In such cases, surveyors might want to protect themselves by discussing this with their clients, title insurers, and lenders, and including appropriate clauses in their contracts, for example, “This survey will be prepared using the 2021 Minimum Standard Detail Requirements for Land Title Surveys as established by ALTA and NSPS since said standards are still in effect as of the date of this contract. It is understood and accepted by all parties involved that said standards may no longer be current upon completion of the survey, but will still be used for the purpose of this survey.”
When it comes to “updates” and other similar requests of the surveyor, the answer may be more nuanced. As an aside, and notwithstanding the innocuous-sounding word “update,” there is actually no such thing as an “update.” An “update” is a new survey because the surveyor is certifying that the survey reflects the current conditions on the property and that it was performed pursuant to all of the requirements in the current standards. The only difference with an “update” is that the surveyor happens to have surveyed the property previously, so the client might realize a reduced fee or quicker turnaround depending on a variety of factors.
It is this writer’s opinion that if a contract to perform an “update” is executed after February 23, 2026, that work must be performed pursuant to the 2026 Standards. However, if that “update” is simply the continuation of a survey related to a conveyance that had been anticipated to close before February 23rd, but was unexpectedly delayed for a relatively short time (and until after February 23rd), the surveyor could arguably conduct that “update” pursuant to the 2021 Standards. This premise would not extend to “updates” unrelated to the initial conveyance or “updates” that take place substantially after February 23rd.
The 2026 ALTA/NSPS Standards have reworded and simplified the definition of Relative Positional Precision (RPP), and the way in which RPP is addressed has been restated. These changes were developed with input from several experts on the topic together with related resource material.
The new definition (“the length of the semi-major axis, expressed in meters or feet, of the error ellipse of the line connecting the monuments or witnesses marking adjacent boundary corners of the surveyed property at the 95 percent confidence level.”) describes what is essentially a two-dimensional standard deviation (2.448 SD at 95%) that can be estimated using a least squares adjustment.
The standards continue to suggest an alternative way to estimate RPP by computing the full covariance matrix of the coordinate inverse between any given pair of points (still at the 95% confidence level). This method implies a one-dimensional standard deviation (1.96 SD at 95%), although testing has shown that the difference from the 2.448 factor is likely not significant in most cases.
The 2026 ALTA-NSPS Standards have eliminated the requirement that the title insurer provide copies of the deeds of adjoining properties. This change was precipitated in part by the fact that in most suburban and urban areas, title companies typically do not provide those deeds anyway. More to the point, in virtually every state that has survey standards, including Indiana, the surveyor is charged with determining the relationship of the surveyed properties with its adjoining properties, so surveyors must obtain those deeds anyway.
Otherwise, one change resulting from the reformatting is—given the purpose of an ALTA/NSPS Land Title Survey—to make it clear that the surveyor must be provided a copy of the most recent title commitment or other title evidence satisfactory to the insurer. This requirement is invoked by the wording of the last paragraph in Section 4.
Surveyors may also encounter rare situations in which the title company is unable or unwilling to provide the research otherwise required pursuant to Sections 4.B. and 4.C. Or perhaps the surveyor requires other research in order to properly complete the survey (the standards give the examples of highway and railroad plans which are typically not in the public records).
Some may argue that this is an additional burden on surveyors, but nothing in the ALTA/NSPS Standards or otherwise can relieve surveyors of conducting whatever research is necessary to complete a proper survey. If, by virtue of the ALTA/NSPS Standards or otherwise, surveyors can convince another party (e.g., the client or title insurer) to provide the research, good for them, but if not, they have to do it themselves.
In some states, surveyors, either by law or normal standard of care, may need to conduct their own easement research. This situation is addressed by Sections 3.B. and 3.C. of the 2026 ALTA/NSPS Standards. No matter what title evidence is relied upon, surveyors should note what evidence was provided on the face of their plat of survey or in their Surveyors Report.
The introduction to Section 5 says the work must be performed using “practices generally accepted by the surveying profession for purposes of an ALTA/NSPS Land Title Survey.”
In recognition of the rapidly changing technical environment (e.g., applications, software, drones, AI, LiDAR), the 2026 Standards have been reworded in several places (introduction to Sections 5 and 6) to avoid trying to specify which procedures and tools are acceptable and which are not. Trying to dictate that would obviously result in conflicts and confusion as new procedures and tools are developed. The new phrasing allows the profession to collectively determine through the always shifting normal standard of care what is acceptable, rather than by dictates in the ALTA/NSPS Standards.
Section 5.B.iii. was the only place left in the ALTA/NSPS Standards that placed a higher burden on surveyors with the phrase “visible evidence” rather than everywhere else in the standards where the burden is “evidence observed in the process of conducting the fieldwork.” For 2026, the former has been replaced with the latter thus eliminating that higher requirement. Also, for better clarity, this section now specifies what was always the intent: “vehicular access” is to be included.
“Regardless of proximity to perimeter boundary lines” has been added to Section 5.C.i.. Previously there was confusion that, pursuant to Section 5.C.ii., evidence of possession or occupation needed to be shown only if it was within 5 feet of the perimeter boundary. That is not what the standards intended, and this new wording clears up any confusion.
Some may claim that the undefined distance increases surveyor liability. But others may recall reading about the court case in which Curtis Brown served as an expert witness in which a surveyor was held liable for not providing detail on a line of occupation that was 230 feet from the perimeter boundary.
Title companies, lenders, and clients need to know about potential claims against the property regardless of how far they are located from the perimeter of the property. There could, of course, be situations where a line of possession or occupation is so far from the perimeter boundary or, for example, hidden from view in thick woods, that the surveyor misses it. The defense in such cases might well be the normal standard of care: Would the competent surveyor, surveying in that same area and under similar circumstances, have observed that line or not?
New headings were developed for the subsections in Section 5.E. because the joint Work Group felt it would be helpful to all involved if the intent of each item in this section was more clearly expressed.
Section 5.E.iv. was changed in 2016 and 2021 and has been again with the 2026 Standards. The 2016 change was made to address a conundrum. Prior to the 2016 Standards, if a client did not request Table A item 11(a) or 11(b), the surveyor had no responsibility to locate and show evidence of utilities. But if that utility evidence could be considered evidence of an easement, the surveyor did need to locate and show it pursuant to Sections 5.E.i. through iv.
The joint Work Group felt that most evidence of utilities could also be considered evidence of easements, so to eliminate future problems and questions in that regard, locating and showing observed evidence of utilities was made mandatory starting in 2016.
Starting with the 2021 ALTA/NSPS Standards, utility locate markings (typically paint or wire flags) must be located and shown. The joint Work Group felt that utility locate markings should be treated as evidence of utilities and easements just like valves and manholes. In response to a question often posed: No, this item does not require a utility locate request.
In the 2021 Standards, the wording of Section 5.E.iv. regarding how far from the boundary line evidence of utilities needed to be located was confusing. Was it 5 feet or 10 feet? This has now been clarified that the 10-foot requirement applies only to utility poles.
As with the introduction to Section 5, the introduction to Section 6 also uses the phrase “practices generally accepted by the surveying profession” for the same reasons as explained above.
Offsite easements that benefit the surveyed property are now properly identified in the 2026 ALTA/NSPS Standards as appurtenant easements. Such easements may be included as part of the survey—treating them as a fee parcel rather than simply graphically showing them—pursuant to optional Table A item 18. But surveyors should be wary of, for example, cross parking and access easements that may cover large areas, and discuss those with the client.
Section 6.C.viii. clarifies how surveyors are to address easements identified by the surveyor that are not listed in the title commitment. The 2021 Standards outlined what to do if the title insurer could not provide evidence that the easement had been released; the 2026 Standards recognize that easements can be terminated or extinguished in a number of ways, not just by release.
A new subsection of Section 7 has been added to address one of the most common requests of surveyors which is for them to certify to “ATIMA” and/or “ISAOA.” These are acronyms that mean “as their interests may appear” and “its successors and/or assigns.” The lender’s title policy defines “insured” in a way that should eliminate the need for such wording, but if the lender demands that the title company put it in their policy, the title company may want to surveyor to certify to the same.
Surveyors should seek advice from their attorneys on to whom they should be certifying, but they should likely avoid certifying to successors and assigns of the client/buyer. Successors and assigns of the lender are probably not an issue.
The introductory paragraph to Table A has been revised. This paragraph was modified in 2021 to make its original intent (from the 1988 Standards) clear: not only is the very selection of a Table A item negotiable, but the exact wording of the item is also negotiable as is, of course, the fee. It is permissible for the surveyor and client/lender to negotiate a modification to the wording of any item.
Any such modification, however, must be explained in a note placed on the face of the plat/map pursuant to Section 6.D.ii.(g). Of course, surveyors need to decide for themselves what fee to attach to any given Table A item.
For 2026, the joint Work Group felt that it was worth reminding all parties involved that the law must be followed. For example, in a number of states monumenting the boundary is mandatory, therefore Table A item 1 is not optional in those states. The same could apply to some other Table A items.
Table A item 15 has been modified to revert back to its original intent which was to provide a means by which imagery, rather than ground surveying, could be the basis for showing some features on an ALTA/NSPS Land Title Survey.
The limitations (the boundary and features in close proximity to a boundary or other title or relevant setback line are not included) and the requirements (written agreement with the client, lender and title insurer and appropriate notes on the face of the plat/map) should be carefully reviewed before agreeing to this item.
The Work Group recognized two important trends that needed to be addressed in the 2026 Standards.
One is that those reviewing surveys are, more often than not, not well-versed in doing so. They could use assistance in their review. Second is that across the country, a table summarizing potential title problems shown on the survey is widely provided by surveyors, especially those routinely involved in large, geographically broad transactions.
Given those trends and the fact that the joint Work Group (comprised, as noted above, of both surveyors and title attorneys) agreed that surveyors should provide benefit to their clients, not just deliver a survey and walk away, Table A item 20 was developed.
The bulleted items required to be included in the table are lifted directly from Sections 5 and 6 of the Standards. In other words, these items are already required to be located and shown on a Land Title Survey. Table A item 20 merely has the surveyor tabulating that information.
Importantly, (1) this new item includes multiple qualifications and limitations, and (2) as an optional item, its exact usage can and should be negotiated. Due to the limitations and qualifications included as part of this item, the liability on the surveyor would appear to lie in not locating or showing the condition in the first place, not in failing to list the condition in the table.
Summary
Surveyors are encouraged to study the new 2026 Standards themselves, both the “clean” version and the “red-lined” version showing the changes from 2021. Additionally, a new set of Frequently Asked Questions is, or will very shortly, be available on the NSPS Website to replace the FAQs addressing the 2021 Standards. Finally, there are many programs on the 2026 Standards already scheduled at state surveying society conferences around the country and virtually; seek one out if you want more information!
Gary Kent chaired the joint ALTA/NSPS Work Group from 1995 to 2025 and he continues to be very actively involved in the joint Work Group. Over the years, he has presented programs on the ALTA/NSPS Standards in all 50 states, and he is currently scheduled to present numerous such programs virtually and in 15 states.