According to an email I got this morning, the bill was
approved by the House yesterday but deregulation of geologists was
taken out of the bill and a geologist will continue to be included on
the Board of Technical Registration. Unfortunately, the bill includes the
following sentence (p. 7):
F. A GEOLOGIST MAY ENGAGE IN
A GEOLOGICAL PRACTICE WITHOUT BEING REGISTERED UNDER THIS CHAPTER.
There is concern about this language as it is very nebulous
and would make it difficult to enforce technical registration of geologists,
among other things. This bill now goes to the Senate where it is expected that the
sponsors will introduce education and experience requirements for
non-registered geologists.
Some in the community that this is the way the system works right now. You don’t
need a license to work for a mining company or be a professor of geology, work
for USGS, or consult for private clients, etc. This bill does not however
change the laws relating to the need to be registered to seal certain documents
such as Aquifer Protection Permits, UST reports, municipal requirements, etc.
But the difference seems to be that the under the current situation you need to be licensed to offer your services to the public. Does the proposed language addition remove that restriction?
Quit playing political games. License yes or no? Quit being politicians for once and do the right think for a change!
ReplyDelete