I think I piped in on this before. I don't understand how a measurement changes over time. If the original measurer confirms that the roads are the same, what difference does it make when the measurement was performed? This question applies to measurements of entire courses as well as to segments. It seems easy and logical to change the rule to something better than it was when a simple submittal was the only requirement, without ignoring actual historical measurements. The word of the original measurer and a request, by the original measurer for recertification, accompanied by the original measurement data should be sufficient. The integrity of the course certification program is diminished when race directors perceive that remeasuring an unchanged course is performed simply to generate money for the measurer. The rationale that a new map will be a better map falls into the same busy-work for extra money category, certainly as far as race directors are concerned.
I voiced my opinion on this last time this question was addressed. The RRTC decided then to establish a lifetime for measurements. I didn't agree, but followed the rule. Now it seems this may be addressed again. If so, the accuracy of historical measurements and the review of a course by the original measurer should be given further investigation.