Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 15 of 23
Like Tree13Likes

Thread: Concerns for Utility Locators in California using GPR and EMI locators

  1. #1
    Senior Member UULC's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    Florida
    Posts
    1,115
    Years of Experience
    30+
    Rep Power
    57

    Default Concerns for Utility Locators in California using GPR and EMI locators

    This was off the LinkedIn and the CGA Group.

    https://www.linkedin.com/groupItem?v...26IgLZgdDArmw1

  2. #2
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Location
    around the corner
    Posts
    547
    Years of Experience
    21
    Rep Power
    30

    Default Re: Concerns for Utility Locators in California using GPR and EMI locators

    Any other links I'm not a member of linkedin

  3. #3
    Senior Member UULC's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    Florida
    Posts
    1,115
    Years of Experience
    30+
    Rep Power
    57

    Default Re: Concerns for Utility Locators in California using GPR and EMI locators

    Here is a copy and paste. It would do good to put your resume on LinkedIn.



    Concerns for Utility Locators in California using GPR and EMI locators

    Greg Summers Technical Sales Representative at Sensors & Software Inc. Top Contributor

    California Board of Professional Engineers, Land Surveyors, and Geologists are saying that Utility Locating companies cannot use GPR equipment or EMI locators to locate utilities in the state of California unless they have a licensed Geophysicist as a owner, partner, or officer of the Corporation.

    I have recently been advised of this by a client who has received a citation from the above Board. They are appealing this citation, but there is strength in numbers, so if anyone else has received similar citations, please let me know?
    1stCall likes this.

  4. #4
    Right Wing Conspirator GWJ_CAS's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    Dallas, Texas
    Posts
    387
    Years of Experience
    31
    Rep Power
    28

    Default Re: Concerns for Utility Locators in California using GPR and EMI locators

    Posted on LinkedIn in reply to the above:

    NULCA is joining in the objections to this rule and we are in support of the appeal to this unjust citation. We have spoken to other GPR manufacturers and are requesting letters or briefs in support of the locator's position.

    NULCA would appreciate Sensors & Software's participation in the objection to this issue. Please contact me or our Executive Director (executivedirector@nulca,org) with any questions.

    Greg Jeffries
    President - NULCA
    president@nulca.org
    UULC and 1stCall like this.

  5. #5
    Premium Member daman1's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Location
    Off the deep end
    Posts
    1,111
    Years of Experience
    17 years
    Rep Power
    53

    Default Re: Concerns for Utility Locators in California using GPR and EMI locators

    They don't say anything about why they won't allow GPR and EMI. Is it because they think it's harmful somehow? I tried to google reports on GPR and the environment and found only links saying GPR and EMI are harmless or environmentally friendly. This is California we're talking about so they are probably just operating on knee-jerk emotions and decided to sound wise and caring and require a geophysicist not realizing or caring that they'd destroy the industry in Cali. Typical.
    1stCall likes this.

  6. #6
    Right Wing Conspirator GWJ_CAS's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    Dallas, Texas
    Posts
    387
    Years of Experience
    31
    Rep Power
    28

    Default Re: Concerns for Utility Locators in California using GPR and EMI locators

    It is strictly a ploy by the geophysicists to force the industry to hire them or contract GPR services to them and they are using the board of engineers to further their cause by attempting to enforce a vague interpretation of the rules. The board is interpreting or is being coerced into interpreting that GPR usage is for the practice of geophyiscs.

    California Law regarding Geophysics defines the following;

    7802.1.
    “Geophysics” defined
    "Geophysics," as used in this chapter, refers to that science which involves study of the physical earth by means of measuring its natural and induced fields of force, including, but not
    limited to, electric, gravity, and magnetic, and its responses to natural and induced energy and the interpreting of these measurements and the relating of them to the physics of the earth.

    7804.1.
    Defines who may use geophysicist titles
    Only a person registered as a geophysicist under the provisions of this chapter shall be entitled to take and use the title "professional geophysicist." Only a person registered as a
    geophysicist and certified under the provisions of this chapter shall be entitled to take and use the title of a registered certified specialty geophysicist

    7805.
    “Responsible charge of work” defined
    The term "responsible charge of work" means the independent control and direction by the use of initiative, skill and independent judgment of geological or geophysical work or the
    supervision of such work.

    7835.1.
    Preparation of geophysical documents; signing and sealing requirements
    All geophysical plans, specifications, reports, or documents shall be prepared by a professional geophysicist, registered certified specialty geophysicist, professional geologist,
    registered certified specialty geologist, or by a subordinate employee under his or her direction. In addition, they shall be signed by the professional geophysicist, registered certified specialty
    geophysicist, professional geologist, or registered certified specialty geologist, or stamped with his or her seal, either of which shall indicate his or her responsibility for them.

    7872.
    Acts constituting misdemeanor
    Every person is guilty of a misdemeanor and for each offense of which he or she is convicted is punishable by a fine of not more than one thousand dollars ($1,000) or by
    imprisonment not to exceed three months, or by both fine and imprisonment:
    (a) Who, unless he or she is exempt from registration under this chapter, practices or offers to practice geology or geophysics for others in this state according to the provisions of this
    chapter without legal authorization.

    (b) Who presents or attempts to file as his or her own the certificate of registration of another.
    (c) Who gives false evidence of any kind to the board, or to any member thereof, in obtaining a certificate of registration.
    (d) Who impersonates or uses the seal of any other practitioner.
    (e) Who uses an expired or revoked certificate of registration.
    (f) Who shall represent himself or herself as, or use the title of, professional geologist, or any other title whereby the person could be considered as practicing or offering to practice
    geology for others, unless he or she is qualified by registration as a geologist under this chapter, or who shall represent himself or herself as, or use the title of, professional geophysicist, or any
    other title whereby the person could be considered as practicing or offering to practice geophysics for others, unless he or she is qualified by registration as a geophysicist under this chapter.
    (g) Who manages, or conducts as manager, proprietor, or agent, any place of business from which geological or geophysical work is solicited, performed or practiced for others, unless
    the geological work is supervised or performed by a professional geologist, or unless the geophysical work is supervised or performed by a professional geophysicist or geologist.
    (h) Who violates any provision of this chapter.
    1stCall likes this.

  7. #7
    Premium Member daman1's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Location
    Off the deep end
    Posts
    1,111
    Years of Experience
    17 years
    Rep Power
    53

    Default Re: Concerns for Utility Locators in California using GPR and EMI locators

    That's as loose an interpretation as I can think of. If they are challenged I don't see how they could support the theory that only a qualified geophysicist is capable of safely and accurately operating GPR. There's zero evidence of environmental hazard. I think they were hoping to quietly get this rule in place and are hoping no one would notice. Even the California courts would have trouble finding in their favor but nothing surprises me anymore when it comes to the courts. I think I'm gonna add California geophysicists to my extensive poop list. I'm sure they'll be heartbroken.

  8. #8
    Administrator TheCableVine's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    Idaho
    Posts
    2,942
    Years of Experience
    16
    Blog Entries
    2
    Rep Power
    134

    Default Re: Concerns for Utility Locators in California using GPR and EMI locators

    Quote Originally Posted by UULC View Post
    Here is a copy and paste. It would do good to put your resume on LinkedIn.



    Concerns for Utility Locators in California using GPR and EMI locators

    Greg Summers Technical Sales Representative at Sensors & Software Inc. Top Contributor

    California Board of Professional Engineers, Land Surveyors, and Geologists are saying that Utility Locating companies cannot use GPR equipment or EMI locators to locate utilities in the state of California unless they have a licensed Geophysicist as a owner, partner, or officer of the Corporation.

    I have recently been advised of this by a client who has received a citation from the above Board. They are appealing this citation, but there is strength in numbers, so if anyone else has received similar citations, please let me know?
    Is this the full copy of the article? If not do they cite a regulation or law? Many news articles these days don't answer the questions most people would ask.
    "Change does not always equal progress."

  9. #9
    Right Wing Conspirator GWJ_CAS's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    Dallas, Texas
    Posts
    387
    Years of Experience
    31
    Rep Power
    28

    Default Re: Concerns for Utility Locators in California using GPR and EMI locators

    California is apparently hanging its hat on their interpretation of this specific part of the rule:

    7802.1.
    “Geophysics” defined
    "Geophysics," as used in this chapter, refers to that science which involves study of the physical earth by means of measuring its natural and induced fields of force, including, but not
    limited to, electric, gravity, and magnetic, and its responses to natural and induced energy and the interpreting of these measurements
    and the relating of them to the physics of the earth.
    UULC likes this.

  10. #10
    Administrator TheCableVine's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    Idaho
    Posts
    2,942
    Years of Experience
    16
    Blog Entries
    2
    Rep Power
    134

    Default Re: Concerns for Utility Locators in California using GPR and EMI locators

    I don't think they are concerned with the safe operation of the equipment or its effects on the environment, but instead are concerned with the accurate reading of the data.

    Here is some interesting reading.

    Another interesting read

    I found this statement in very small type at the bottom of the National GPR website:
    *National GPR Service, Inc. services offered in the State of California may only be retained by appropriately licensed individuals registered with the Board for Professional Engineers, Land Surveyors, and Geologists.
    My question is this: What gives this Board of Engineers the authority to regulate GPR usage? Are they overstepping their authority? Couldn't they also regulate the use of Utility Locators since utilities are below ground if they have that power?
    UULC likes this.
    "Change does not always equal progress."

  11. #11
    Premium Member daman1's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Location
    Off the deep end
    Posts
    1,111
    Years of Experience
    17 years
    Rep Power
    53

    Default Re: Concerns for Utility Locators in California using GPR and EMI locators

    Quote Originally Posted by TheCableVine View Post
    I don't think they are concerned with the safe operation of the equipment or its effects on the environment, but instead are concerned with the accurate reading of the data.

    Here is some interesting reading.

    Another interesting read

    Sounds like they could if the appeal is denied and a precedent is set.

    I found this statement in very small type at the bottom of the National GPR website:

    My question is this: What gives this Board of Engineers the authority to regulate GPR usage? Are they overstepping their authority? Couldn't they also regulate the use of Utility Locators since utilities are below ground if they have that power?
    That's why this appeal is so important. If denied, a precedent will be set.

  12. #12
    Mke
    Mke is offline
    Senior Member Mke's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    Republic of Washington
    Posts
    1,531
    Years of Experience
    16
    Blog Entries
    34
    Rep Power
    76

    Default Re: Concerns for Utility Locators in California using GPR and EMI locators

    Steve, they don't feel that they are overstepping any boundaries. Most true geophysicists feel they are smarter than most. They feel that they are better to interpret data then un-trained labor spraying paint. This is the ploy I think our industry should take. With this situation, you can see how a professional board can bite off on laws like this

    Mke
    daman1 and 1stCall like this.

  13. #13
    Administrator TheCableVine's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    Idaho
    Posts
    2,942
    Years of Experience
    16
    Blog Entries
    2
    Rep Power
    134

    Default Re: Concerns for Utility Locators in California using GPR and EMI locators

    Quote Originally Posted by Mke View Post
    Steve, they don't feel that they are overstepping any boundaries. Most true geophysicists feel they are smarter than most. They feel that they are better to interpret data then un-trained labor spraying paint. This is the ploy I think our industry should take. With this situation, you can see how a professional board can bite off on laws like this

    Mke
    I agree with you. But, the labor should be trained to read the data. That's all they are doing. They aren't determining the stability of the ground for foundations or anything of the like. They are just identifying underground structures. You can be trained to do that with the proper instruction. No degree required.
    UULC and 1stCall like this.
    "Change does not always equal progress."

  14. #14
    Mke
    Mke is offline
    Senior Member Mke's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    Republic of Washington
    Posts
    1,531
    Years of Experience
    16
    Blog Entries
    34
    Rep Power
    76

    Default Re: Concerns for Utility Locators in California using GPR and EMI locators

    Steve,

    Utility Scans are not designed for interperting the stability of the ground, but the original intent on GPR was to determine the stability of the earth for any particular excavation of structure. That is where the Geophysisist is getting their leg to stand on with this. I liken this to "Patent Trolls". Patent troll - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

    I used to be into paintball pretty heavily. There was a company who patented the genaric term Electronic Paintball Marker. They sat on this patent for a couple of years untill most of the companies had a electronic marker in the market. That is when they released all the "Cease and desist" letters claiming they are infringing on their genaric patent. Their pattent pretty much covered anything that used a battery to work the marker. It didn't matter how the battery was used, as long as it assisted in the operation of the marker. They successfully put quite a few companies out of buisness due to the fee for the use of the patent.

    This law does the same thing. They are trying to sneak this in, in order to control a part of the market they don't have. The bad part is the board that is attached with the Geophysisist is alot stronger then anything the locators can throw together. The only saving grace is that the companies will fight this due to the added expense of having a staff Geophysisist that does absolutely nothing for locating.

    mke

  15. #15
    Junior Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Location
    El Cerrito, CA
    Posts
    15
    Years of Experience
    7
    Rep Power
    6

    Default Re: Concerns for Utility Locators in California using GPR and EMI locators

    Does anyone have an update on this? We just received a letter from the Board for Professional Engineers, Land Surveyors and Geologists stating that we are performing geophysical services without holding the appropriate license. Wondering how to best respond to the charges.

Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •