Differences between Qualified Person and Registered Geologist

Following up on a recent post I did about the requirements as a Qualified Person, local geologist Fleetwood Koutz (AIPG CPG) sent me elaboration and news and graciously agreed to let me share them here:

...being a Canadian QP for a Tech. or other Reports (a construct of the Canadian Securities Commissions) has nothing to do with AZ or US State Professional Geological Registration (ASBOG) alone. One needs to read the detailed criteria of a QP defined under the terms of Canadian National Instrument 43-101 as to required experience, professional education, good standing in a professional organization, independence etc. In fact there is a proposed revision in the CNI 43-101 Regulations to take effect in mid 2011 that will not allow one to claim to be a QP based on US state (or multi-state) geological registration alone. You must be a P. Geo., P.Eng. of a Canadian Province, a CPG of AIPG, a Registered Member of SME, CIMM, MMSA or AuIMM etc. The reason for the proposed change is that US State Boards of Technical Registration for Geologists usually decline to discipline PGs for malfeasance especially if the work is done in another state different than the PG is registered with or even in their own state for 43-101 reports. Cited is the lack of listings or examples of state PGs in bad standing, defrocked, fined, sanctioned, etc. This apparently does not apply to State US Professional Engineers. One should read the proposed Canadian Revised NI 43-101 Regulations on one of the 13 websites of the Canadian Securities Commissions (eg: www.bcsc.bc.ca). These revisions are now in the 90 day comment period ending July 23, 2010 - they are said to welcome both positive and negative comments from Yanks, Aussies, Boers and other Fellow Ex-Colonials.