CANDIDATE FOR AIPG NATIONAL SECRETARY
Candidate for AIPG National Secretary
Bill Brab CPG-11693
Richmond, Kentucky
Part of my research for writing this article included look- ing back through previous TPG articles for examples of what my predecessors had written when their nominations were awarded, and what I found were some excellent parallels with my values and thoughts for what makes Geologists and AIPG unique in the professional realm among geologists. There are many admirable qualities across all ages and disciplines of our respective areas of geological expertise, but there are also equal or greater occurrences of faults (no pun intended) amongst our peers and within our profession that rival any schoolyard or debate stage we can envision. One of the reoc- curring topics that many articles centered on was the need for continuing education (CE), especially after we leave academia and build our careers.
I am reminded of the frequent stories that arise during our Kentucky Section Executive Committee Meetings regarding the difficulties that were encountered with getting the legisla- tion passed for Professional Geologist Registration. A singular topic resurfaces every year or two and usually coincides with the election of a new officer within our ranks. As the new officer is getting acclimated to their new duties and begin- ning to become familiar with the role, the question comes up when discussing Professional Licensure as to why Kentucky does not require CE. Seasoned section members that were active during and involved with submitting and getting the Bill before legislators recall having to yield the CE require- ment in the proposed legislation to a small, but powerful, few geologists in an effort to prevent blockage of the bill. Why the resistance to CE?
Fast forward to 2015 when the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) published the Federal Register guidance con- cerning the disposal of Coal Combustible Residuals (CCR) waste, there is some poignant language in this document (Federal Register 2015) that should concern any geologist:
“EPA is not convinced that hydrologists or geologists licensed by a state are held to the same standards as a pro-
fessional engineer licensed by a state licensing board. For example, it is unclear whether geologists are subject to the rigorous testing required by professional engineers or that state licensing boards can investigate complaints of negligence or incompetence...”
As an active appointed member of the Kentucky Board of Registration for Professional Geologists and having served as a Subject Matter Expert (SME) for the Council of Examiners that certify the ASBOG Exams, I can attest the Exam portion of registration and certification is of a comparable standard to that of the Engineering Board(s). The credentials granting cer- tification are present and solid; however, one key criterion that would hold professional geologists accountable when compared to other professions is actively and continuously opposed and blocked by those within our own ranks. This selected action in essence destroys our credibility and undermines our expertise in our respective disciplines. This EPA document is a citable example showing that geologists are often considered less credible than our respective engineers because of something as fundamental as the CE requirement. We are not seen as peers because are not held to rigorous standards.
Another resurgent topic that resonates with me is the need to increase AIPG membership to thrive as an organization. This requires both retention of enlisted members and efforts to bolster new membership through student chapters and new or young professionals in the active workforce. Efforts to maintain our existing numbers and at the same time attract new members has been problematic, languished attempts throughout my tenure as an active member of the organiza- tion have repeatedly shown what’s being done isn’t having the desired return. The primary solution is to globally target outreach and do more of it; however, there are underlying issues that complicate this even further which need to be carefully considered and addressed to maximize any efforts to increase outreach.
A recent AIPG focus on Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion (DEI) comes to mind as I ponder solutions to improve outreach. Specifically, I cannot help but notice the dominantly monotone demographic that represents our profession. Currently, there is excellent momentum by AIPG and other geological organi- zations, but coordinated and pragmatic efforts will be key to transitioning this into mainstream common practice. We as concerned advocates can issue statements and write letters easily enough, but advocacy requires both persistence and widespread support from more than a select few within our organization. Improvement requires that we work in both the professional realm with geologists already in the workforce and in partnership with academia to inform and enroll current students and recent graduates needed to fill the opening in both the AIPG and our workforce, regardless of gender, race, ethnicity, or background.
Students and young professionals need guidance, mentor- ship, and networking opportunities to assimilate into the profession and, optimistically, the membership. There is sig- nificant support and efforts covering these growth resources,
Continued on p. 28
24 TPG •
Apr.May.Jun 2021
www.aipg.org
Page 1 |
Page 2 |
Page 3 |
Page 4 |
Page 5 |
Page 6 |
Page 7 |
Page 8 |
Page 9 |
Page 10 |
Page 11 |
Page 12 |
Page 13 |
Page 14 |
Page 15 |
Page 16 |
Page 17 |
Page 18 |
Page 19 |
Page 20 |
Page 21 |
Page 22 |
Page 23 |
Page 24 |
Page 25 |
Page 26 |
Page 27 |
Page 28 |
Page 29 |
Page 30 |
Page 31 |
Page 32 |
Page 33 |
Page 34 |
Page 35 |
Page 36 |
Page 37 |
Page 38 |
Page 39 |
Page 40 |
Page 41 |
Page 42 |
Page 43 |
Page 44 |
Page 45 |
Page 46 |
Page 47 |
Page 48 |
Page 49 |
Page 50 |
Page 51 |
Page 52 |
Page 53 |
Page 54 |
Page 55 |
Page 56 |
Page 57 |
Page 58 |
Page 59 |
Page 60 |
Page 61 |
Page 62 |
Page 63 |
Page 64
