NOVEMBER 2002 TPGNov02.qxd 10/21/02 9:51 AM Page A …96.93.209.186/StaticContent/3/TPGs/2002_TPGNov.pdf · 2. Donald Jackson, editor, Letters of the Lewis and Clark Expedition, With

A publication ofThe American Institute of Professional Geologists

NOVEMBER 2002

Volume 39, Number 10

The ProfessionalGEOLOGIST

The ProfessionalGEOLOGIST

PEER REVIEWED“BROKEN MASSES OF ROCK AND STONES”:

LEWIS AND CLARK AS GEOLOGICAL TRAILBLAZERS

PPEE EE R RR R EVEVII EWEWEE DDCCAATCTC H 22 - SH 22 - SEECC RR ETS OETS ON GN G ETETTTII NNG TG THHAAT FT F II RRSSTTGGOOOOD JD JOOB IB I N TN THH E EE E NNVVII RROONN MM EE NNTTAAL IL I NN DDUUSSTTRRYY

GG EEOOSSCC II EE NNCC E TE TEEACAC HH II NNG AG ANN D TD THH E TE THH RR EE E R’SE R’S

AAII PG OPG OFFFFIICC EE R ER E LELECCTTIIOON RN R EESSUU LLTSTS

NNOOMM II NNAATTIIOONNS RS R EEQQUU EESSTTEE D FOD FORR2003 A2003 AII PG NPG NAATTIIOONNAAL AL AWWAARR DDSS

TPGNov02.qxd 10/21/02 9:51 AM Page A

TPGNov02.qxd 10/21/02 9:51 AM Page B

The Professional Geologist (USPS 590-810 and ISSN 0279-0521) is publishedten issues annually by the American Institute of Professional Geologists,8703 Yates Drive, Suite 200, Westminster, CO 80031-3681. PeriodicalsPostage Paid at Arvada, Colorado and additional mailing offices.

POSTMASTER: The Professional Geologist, AIPG, 8703 Yates Drive, Suite200, Westminster, CO 80031-3681.

Subscriptions for all Members and Adjuncts in good standing are includ-ed in annual membership dues. Subscription prices are $40.00 a year forMembers’ additional subscriptions and $60.00 a year for non-membersfor 10 issues (for postage outside of the U.S.add $10.00).Single copy priceis $4.00 for Members and $6.00 for non-members. Claims for nonreceiptor for damaged copies are honored for three months.

Entire contents copyright 2002 by The Professional Geologist. Originalmaterial may be reprinted with permission. Deadline for articles andadvertisements is six weeks preceding publication.Advertising rates avail-able upon request. Opinions and views expressed by the authors aretheir own and do not necessarily reflect those of the American Instituteof Professional Geologists, its staff, or its advertisers.

2002 EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE

PRESIDENT - Lawrence A. Cerrillo, CPGIngenuity Enterprises International, Inc.O: (303) 674-6484/Fax: (303) 989-0181/[email protected]

PRESIDENT-ELECT - Richard M. Powers, CPGBCI Engineers & Scientists, Inc.O: (863) 667-2345/Fax: (863) 667-2662/[email protected]

PAST-PRESIDENT - Robert H. Fakundiny, CPGNew York State Geological SurveyO: (518) 474-5816/Fax: (581) 486-3696/[email protected]

VICE PRESIDENT - James D. Shotwell, CPGRMT, Inc.O: (512) 327-9840/Fax: (512) 327-6263/[email protected]

SECRETARY - F. Lynn Kantner, CPGConsultantO: (614) 836-2201/Fax: (614) 836-2201/[email protected]

TREASURER - Madhurendu B. Kumar, CPGLouisiana Department of Natural Resources–Office of ConservationO: (225) 342-5501/Fax: (225) 342-8199/[email protected]

EDITOR - Virginia T. McLemore, CPGNM Bureau of Geology & Mineral Res.O: (505) 835-5521/Fax: (505) 835-6333/[email protected]

ADVISORY BOARD REPRESENTATIVES

Robert N. Braunstein, CPGBGES, Inc.O: (907) 696-2437/[email protected]

Ira S. Merin, CPGURS Corp.O: (703) 713-1500/Fax: (703) 715-1512/[email protected]

Barbara H. Murphy, CPGClear Creek AssociatesO: (602) 294-9600/Fax: (602) 294-9700/[email protected]

Dave A. Sadoff, CPGAIG Consultants, Inc.O: (415) 836-7261/Fax: (415) 836-3167/[email protected]

NATIONAL HEADQUARTERS8703 Yates Drive, Suite 200

Westminster, CO 80031-36817:30 AM - 4:30 PM MDT; M-F

(303) 412-6205 • Fax (303) [email protected] • www.aipg.org

EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR - William J. Siok, CPG - [email protected]

PUBLICATIONS/WEB SITE - Wendy J. Davidson - [email protected]

MEMBERSHIP SERVICES - Catherine A. O’Keefe - [email protected]

OFFICE ASSISTANT - Jessica R. Valero - [email protected]

LIFE AND HEALTH INSURANCE - GeoCare Benefits Insurance PlanPhone: 800-337-3140 or 805-566-9191http://www.geocarebenefits.com/Email: [email protected]

PROFESSIONAL LIABILITY BROKER - The Novick Group (301) 770-0880

ALAMO RENTAL CAR - (800) 354-2322 - Member #BY-218167

AVIS RENTAL CAR - (800) 222-2847 - Member AWD #L123443

AIPG FOUNDATIONKel Buchanan, CPG

HB Engineering GroupP.O. Box 2391

Reno, NV 89505-2391(775) 786-4515/FAX (775) 786-4324

[email protected]

NOVEMBER 2002Volume 39, Number 10

The Professional

GEOLOGIST

PEER REVIEWED ARTICLE“Broken Masses of Rock and Stones”:Lewis and Clark as Geological Trailblazers . . 2-6John W. Jengo, CPG-08139

UPDATE - AIPG HISTORY BOOK. . . . . . . . . . . . . 7

AIPG Bylaws Amended . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7

PEER REVIEWED ARTICLECatch 22 - Secrets on Getting That FirstGood Job in the Environmental Industry . . . . 8-9Jim Jacobs, CPG-07760

AGI/AIPG Intern Articles . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10-13Evelyn Kim, Sarah Riggen, David Viator

Geoscience Teaching and the Three R’s . . . . . . 14Drew Diefendorf, CPG-03598

AIPG CPD Program Guidelines . . . . . . . . . . 17-20

AIPG 2003 National Officers . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 23

REQUEST FOR NOMINATIONS . . . . . . . . . . . . . 27

Mine Employees Benefit fromEconomies of Scale . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 30

AIPG National Scholarship Program . . . . . . . . 31

AIPG Store and Order Form. . . . . . . . . . . . . . 32-33

NEW! AIPG MEMBERSHIP POSTCARD . . . . . . 35

DEPARTMENTSNEW Medical Insurance Program 7

PRESIDENT’S MESSAGE—Twilight Zone 15

EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR’S COLUMN—Continuing Professional Education 16

AGI GOVERNMENT AFFAIRS MONTHLY REVIEW—August 21-23

PROFESSIONAL ETHICS AND PRACTICES—Column 79 24-25

LETTERS TO THE EDITOR 26

PROFESSIONAL SERVICES DIRECTORY 28-30

IN MEMORY 34

AIPG MEMBERSHIPS AND REQUIREMENTS 35

NEW APPLICATIONS AND MEMBERS 36

FRONT COVER - San Juan Mountains, Colorado.Photograph by Daniel R. Heidenreich, CPG-10085.

TPGNov02.qxd 10/21/02 9:51 AM Page 1

2 The Professional Geologist • NOVEMBER 2002

The year 2003 will mark the start of the bicentennial ofthe most renowned scientific exploration ever undertaken inNorth America, the Lewis and Clark Expedition (formallyknown as the Corps of Volunteers for North-WesternDiscovery). The expedition to explore the Louisiana Purchaseand the lands beyond, lead by Captains Meriwether Lewis andWilliam Clark in 1803-1806, is an enduring story of adven-ture, teamwork, and peerless leadership. The outcome is wellknown, the loss of only one man over a 28-month long, 8,000-mi trek to the Pacific Ocean and back,using keelboat,pirogues,canoes, horses, and on foot. Lewis and Clark’s scientific dis-coveries in the fields of geography, botany, zoology, andethnology have been justly celebrated; they measured thewidth of the continent, produced a map considered to be a car-tographic masterpiece, and established American claim toOregon,Washington, and Idaho; they described 178 plants and122 animals that were new to science, including Western sig-nature species like the ponderosa pine, the prairie dog, thecoyote, and the grizzly bear; and they recorded priceless eth-nological baseline data of native American cultures, theShoshoni and Nez Perce among others, which were stilluntouched by white man’s subsequent influence, disease, anddebasement. These are but a few of the accomplishments ofthis singular Expedition. Although the fame of the Expeditioncomfortably rests on the aforementioned achievements andthe vivid images of an untouched, and now largely vanished,wilderness, what about geology? Are there useful, perhapseven insightful, observations of Western geology in the jour-nals of the first American explorers of the West?

INSTRUCTIONS

Exploration of the American West was a dream of ThomasJefferson’s long before he became president in 1801 and whenhe was ready to finally implement his far-ranging, ambitiousplan, he authored a most remarkable set of instructions, calledthe “blueprint for discovery” by scholar Paul Russell Cutright

1.

Reviewing this masterly conceived document, ten years in themaking and numbering over 2,300 words, it becomes quite evi-dent that geology was less of a priority than the disciplines ofgeography, zoology, botany, ethnology, and meteorology. Theonly substantive instruction connected to the geological sci-ences was in the list of objects Jefferson considered worthy ofnote; “the remains or accounts of any [animals] which may be

deemed rare or extinct; the mineral productions of every kind;but more particularly metals, limestone, pit coal, & saltpeter;salines & mineral waters…” and “volcanic appearances”.

2This

is because the facets of geology that appealed to Jefferson werepaleontology and mineralogy, for purely Jeffersonian reasons.Paleontology held an enlightenment fascination with Jefferson(in fact, Jefferson is considered to be the father of Americanvertebrate paleontology), and mineralogy was utilitarian,practicable, and potentially of great use in the settlement ofJefferson’s expanding“empire of liberty”by like-minded agrar-ians.

THE JOURNALS AND GEOLOGY

Despite Jefferson’s implicit instructions, it is remarkablethat any geological information was recorded at all by Lewisand Clark or in the four other journals by enlisted men thatare extant (Charles Floyd, Patrick Gass, John Ordway, andJoseph Whitehouse), especially given the important prioritiesof the Expedition. For example, Lewis was responsible for doc-umenting the discoveries in botany, zoology, and ethnology,recording meteorological information, tending to the men’sinjuries and illnesses, tribal diplomacy, sharing the decisionmaking and survey/map making duties with Clark, and ofcourse, guiding the Expedition to their North Dakota winterencampment in the winter of 1804-05, then ultimately takingthe 33-person party across the continent and back over thenext 18 months. Yet, there is much to be gained by revisitingthe Lewis and Clark journals for geological observations.Throughout the Expedition, the captains carefully noted theoccurrences of a wide array of rock types; limestones, gravels,sandstones, shales, silts, and clays; recorded the appearanceof important minerals, fossils, salts, and beds of coal; madeinspired sedimentological inferences on river processes andwhat caused “ancient beds of the river” to form over time; spec-ulated on the mechanisms that caused the “confused andbroken masses of stone” they viewed as they entered the RockyMountains; and dutifully noted the tremendous geomorphicalchanges in the land as they progressed westward.

Space considerations limit a comprehensive discussion ofall the sedimentological, mineralogical, and stratigraphicobservations recorded by Lewis and Clark, so only an impor-tant portion of the journey will be reviewed in detail; thepassage through the Missouri River Breaks and White Cliffsin north-central Montana from May 25nd through May 31st,

PEER REVIEWED

“Broken Masses of Rock and Stones”:Lewis and Clark as Geological Trailblazers

John W. Jengo, CPG-08139

1. Paul Russell Cutright, Lewis and Clark: Pioneering Naturalists, (Urbana: University of Illinois Press, 1969), 506 p.2. Donald Jackson, editor, Letters of the Lewis and Clark Expedition, With Related Documents, 1783-1854, second edition, 2 volumes

(Urbana: University of Illinois Press, 1978), Vol. 1, p. 63.


NOVEMBER 2002 • The Professional Geologist 3

PEER REVIEWED1805

3. Imagine yourself as a mid-19th century geologist, plan-

ning to enter and geologically survey this region of the Westfor the first time and the only written account that exists arethe journals of Lewis and Clark. What could you learn fromthe captain’s journal entries before you embarked?

May 25, 1805: “…The Country on either hand is highbroken and rockey; the rock is either soft brown sandstone covered with a thin strata of limestone, or a hardblack rugged grannite, both usually in horizontal stratasand the Sandy rock overlaying the other. Salts and quartsstill appear, some coal and pumice stone also appear;” -Lewis.Here is a clear description of the lithology of the rocks that

would be encountered throughout the Missouri Breaks andWhite Cliffs region, sandstones and limestones of variablethickness, interbedded with layers of coal. Lewis misinter-preted the presence of granite, however; but clearly recognizedthe general horizontal nature of the rocks. To early geologists,this would have been a definitive indication of relatively unde-formed sedimentary rocks, some of a continental origin asindicated by the coal deposits. Lewis and Clark did not havethe knowledge or directive to have speculated on the age ofthese rocks. It would be left to geologists over the next centu-ry to conduct wide-ranging correlations to other stratathroughout the West to ultimately determine the rocks in thisregion to be primarily Cretaceous in age, a period of timebetween 135 and 65 million yrs ago.

May 26, 1805: “…the black rock has given place to avery soft sandstone which appears to be washed awayfast by the river, above this and towards the summits ofthe hills a hard freestone of a brownish yellow colour

shews itself in several stratas of unequal thicknesses fre-quently overlain or incrusted by a very thin strata oflimestone which appears to be formed of concretedshells…” - Lewis.Here is a straightforward account of the variability of the

different rock types that the Expedition was passing throughand also a fairly rare reference to a fossil occurrence, Lewis’s“concreted shells”. Geologists can easily visualize from Lewis’snarrative the impossibly dense, tightly packed,cemented massof fossil oyster shells that comprise a shell hash deposit.

May 26, 1805 “…The country which borders the riveris high broken and rocky, generally imbeded with a SoftSand Stone higher up the hill the Stone is of a brownishyellow hard and gritty those Stones wash down from thehills into the river and cause the Shore to be rocky &c.which we find troublesom to assend…” - Clark.Here Clark describes the end result, as he will on subse-

quent days as well, of the active erosion and mass wastingthat is occurring along the Missouri River, which he obvious-ly perceives as quite an impediment to the Expedition’sprogress. One can glean from this passage the degree to whicherosion is occurring and to geologists, it would have suggest-ed a relatively young stage of canyon formation and an activeeroding river channel. In fact, the presence of glacial ice in thePleistocene did force the Missouri River to cut this new chan-nel well to the south of its former preglacial course in the MilkRiver Valley.

May 27,1805:“…the bluffs are very high steep rugged,containing considerable quantities of stone and borderthe river closely on both sides;…great quantities of stonealso lye in the river and garnish it’s borders, whichappears to have tumbled from the bluffs where the rainshad washed away the sand and clay in which they wereimbeded. The bluffs are composed of irregular tho’ hori-zontal stratas of yellow and brown or black clay, brownand yellowish white sand, of soft yellowish white sandstone and a hard dark brown free stone, also of largeround kidneyformed and irregular seperate masses of ahard black Iron stone, which is imbeded in the Clay andsand…some coal or carbonated wood still makes it’sappearance in these bluffs, pumicestone and birnt hillsit’s concommutants also are seen…” - Lewis.Lewis provided a lot of perceptive detail here, particularly

the thickness and color variability of the rocks that are nowdefined as the Judith River Formation. It is easy to visualizefrom his description the resistant layers of sandstone alter-nating with layers of vulnerable siltstone and shale, whicherode to varying degrees to produce the stark, badland topog-raphy of the Breaks. Lewis notes the continuing presence ofcoal seams,but he makes clear that these beds are a less promi-nent feature than the sandstone and shale lithologies. Lewisalso makes the astute observation that the “kidneyformed andirregular” masses of ironstone (a term still used today todescribe a very hard and iron-enriched sedimentary rock) areimbedded within the larger rock units.

The rocks that comprise the Judith River Formationdominate the river side view throughout the Missouri RiverBreaks, including here at BLM river mile 97. This badlandtopography was concisely described in the journals ofMeriwether Lewis and William Clark as “high broken androcky”. Photograph by John W. Jengo.

3. Gary E. Moulton, editor, The Journals of the Lewis and Clark Expedition, April 7-July 27, 1805, (Lincoln: University of Nebraska Press,1987), Vol. 4, pp. 193-233. All quotations or references to journal entries in the ensuing text are from Moulton, Journals, Vol. 4, by date,unless otherwise indicated.



PEER REVIEWEDMay 28, 1805: “…here the hills recede from the river

on both sides, the bottoms extensive particularly on theStard. Side where the hills are comparitively low andopen into three large vallies which extend for a consid-erable distance in a Northwardly direction;…” - Lewis

May 29,1805:“…at this place the hills again approachthe river closely on both sides, and the same seen whichwe had on the 27th and 28th in the morning again pres-ents itself,…” - Lewis.The captains recorded no geological observations over these

two days. It would be many years later before the structuralcomplexity of this area would be determined, including thetrend and displacement of the faults that pervade this region.Yet, the identification of this break in the cliff-dominatedMissouri River valley would have altered geologists to look forunusual structural changes or perhaps the influence of otherfactors that resulted in a major tributary (the Judith River)entering the Missouri at this point.

May 30, 1805:“…the banks and sides of the bluff weremore steep than usual and were now rendered so slip-pery by the late rain that the men could scarcelywalk…the earth and stone also falling from theseimmence high bluffs render it dangerous to pass underthem…” - Lewis.In this passage, it is easy to appreciate the proximity of the

sheer rock cliffs to the water line and how the Expeditionencountered different types of rocks at the water’s edge in dif-

ferent sections of the river. To geologists, this would have sug-gested that there was either a rather steep river gradientcutting through different,perfectly horizontal rocks or the pos-sibility that the rocks along the river were slightly inclined.But there isn’t anything definitive in Lewis’s description thatwould indicate one scenario was more likely than the other.Only subsequent geological mapping would indicate that theserocks do indeed dip at such an angle that older rocks arerevealed the further one progresses upstream.

May 31, 1805: “The hills and river Clifts which wepassed today exhibit a most romantic appearance. Thebluffs of the river rise to the hight of from 2 to 300 feetand in most places nearly perpendicular; they are formedof remarkable white sandstone which is sufficiently softto give way readily to the impression of water; two orthre thin horizontal stratas of white free-stone, on whichthe rains or water make no impression, lie imbeded inthese clifts of soft stone near the upper part of them;” -LewisA most memorable description of the Virgelle Sandstone

Member of the Eagle Sandstone, the inspiration for Lewis’sfamed “seens of visionary inchantment” passage. Here Lewisconcisely describes the variably resistant layers of this uniquesandstone. The Virgelle Member’s distinctive color is nowbelieved to be a result of a unique confluence of events dur-ing the deposition of this rock millions of years ago; blanketsof volcanic ash fell on ancient barrier islands and off-shoresandbars, supplying an unusual white clay cement that boundthis sandstone together.

“the earth on top of these Clifts is a dark rich loam,which forming a graduly ascending plain extends backfrom ½ a mile to a mile where the hills commence andrise abruptly to a hight of 300 feet more.” - Lewis.Geologists would have recognized from Lewis’s description

that there was an obvious change in lithology from sandstone(which forms steep cliffs) to shale (which weather to form longslopes) in the White Cliffs area. What Lewis described turnedout to be a significant enough change in rock type that geol-ogists would eventually subdivide the Eagle Formation intomembers to distinguish between these noticeable variations.

4

“The water in the course of time in decending fromthose hills and plains on either side of the river has trick-led down the soft sand clifts and woarn it into a thou-sand grotesque figures, which with the help of a littleimmagination and an oblique view at a distance,are madeto represent eligant ranges of lofty freestone buildings,having their parapets well stocked with statuary; col-lumns of various sculpture both grooved and plain, arealso seen supporting long galleries in front of those build-ings;…some collumns standing and almost entire withtheir pedestals and capitals; other retaining theirpedestals but deprived by time or accident of their cap-itals, some lying prostrate an broken othes in the formof vast pyramids of connic structure bearing a sereis ofother pyramids on their tops becoming less as they ascend

Meriwether Lewis may have had this view (at BLM rivermile 55.8) in mind when he described the Missouri RiverWhite Cliffs being overlain by“a dark rich loam,which form-ing a graduly ascending plain extends back from ½ a mileto a mile where the hills commence and rise abruptly…” AsLewis noted, the creamy white color of the Cretaceous-ageVirgelle Sandstone Member of Eagle Sandstone (fore-ground) is in marked contrast to the overlying dark-coloredrock layers and the maze of shonkinite dike walls (back-ground). Photgraph by John W. Jengo.

4. Robert M. Lindvall, Geology of the Eagle Buttes quadrangle, Chouteau County, Montana, Department of the Interior, United StatesGeological Survey, 1962. The Virgelle is now the bottom member of the Eagle Sandstone. Overlying the Virgelle Member are the mid-dle member, which is predominately shale, and the upper member, which is a massive, thick sandstone. The author is indebted to Dr.Robert N. Bergantino, a recognized expert of Lewis and Clark geology, for providing a copy of this essential, out-of-print map.



and finally terminating in a sharp point…the thin stratasof hard freestone intermixed with the soft sandstoneseems to have aided the water in forming this curiousscenery. As we passed on it seemed as if those seens ofvisionary inchantment would never have [an] end…” –LewisIn this justly famous and vivid passage can be found as

good a portrayal of the end product of erosion that you’ll everread. Through Lewis’s lucid description, it is evident that thissandstone is weakly cemented and quite vulnerable to perco-lating water, the principal agent of erosion, to varying degrees.Although Lewis briefly mentions the presence of “hard free-stone”, the role of the protective concretions within theVirgelleMember sandstone is not mentioned. It is the variable distri-bution of these roughly circular, iron-rich concretions, whichprotect the underlying creamy-white, weakly-cemented sand-stone from the myriad of erosional forces, that are responsiblefor the columns, pillars, pulpits, pedestals, toadstools, andother unique features of the White Cliffs.

“…for here it is too that nature presents to the viewof the traveler vast ranges of walls of tolerable work-

manship, so perfect indeed are those walls that I shouldhave thought that nature had attempted here to rivalthe human art of masonry had I not recollected that shehad first began her work

5. These walls rise to the hight

in many places of 100 feet, are perpendicular, with tworegular faces and are from one to 12 feet thick, each wallretains the same thickness at top which it possesses atbottom. The stone of which these walls are formed isblack, dence and dureable…these are laid regularly inranges on each other like bricks, each breaking or cov-ering the interstice of the two on which it rests. thus thepurpendicular interstices are broken, and the horizontalones extend entire throughout the whole extent of thewalls…” - LewisThese ‘walls’, technically termed dikes

6, are composed of an

igneous rock called shonkinite, named after the town Shonkin,located some 30 mi southwest of the White Cliffs. These shon-kinite

7dikes were formed when igneous material at great

depth, possibly as deep as 100 mi below the earth’s surface,advanced upward to fill vertical fractures within the EagleSandstone and other formations some 52 to 48 million yrs ago.The dikes are resistant to erosion, thus, they emerged to formfreestanding walls as the other rocks in the White Cliffs areaeroded at a faster rate. The brick analogy Lewis used todescribe the characteristic jointing pattern of the shonkinitecan scarcely be refined

8.

“These walls pass the river in several places, risingfrom the water’s edge much above the sandstone bluffs,which they seem to penetrate; thence continuing theircourse on a streight line on either side of the river throughthe gradually ascending plains, over which they tower tothe hight of from ten to seventy feet untill they reach thehills, which they finally enter and conceal themselves.these walls sometimes run parallel to each other, withseveral ranges near each other, and at other times inter-scecting each other at right angles, having the appear-ance of the walls of ancient houses or gardens.” - LewisFrom Lewis’s deliberate narrative, one can easily gain a

sense of the density, pattern, and spacing of these dike wallsand an appreciation of the discordant and salient nature ofthe dikes as they freely cut through the rocks they intruded.Because an intrusive igneous body must be younger than allthe country rocks intruded by it, often referred to as the prin-ciple of cross-cutting relationships, it can easily be concludedfrom Lewis’s studied account that the dike walls were formed

PEER REVIEWED

The striking columns, pulpits, minarets, pedestals, toad-stools, and other unique features of the White Cliffs,immortalized in Lewis’s fames May 31st,1805 journal entry,owe their creation to caps of iron-rich concretions that par-tially protect the underlying weakly-cemented sandstonefrom erosional forces. Photograph by John W. Jengo.

5. I have run across passages in early geological books that are strikingly similar to Lewis’s lyrical phrasing. For example, W.O. Crosby’sGeological Collections book, published by the Museum of the Boston Society of Natural History in 1892, contains this phrase on page213, “The sides of dikes are often as parallel and straight as those of built walls, the resemblance to human workmanship being high-tened by the numerous joints which, intersecting each other along the face of a dike, remind us of well-fitted masonry.”

6. Lewis’s description reads like a veritable definition of a dike, including its uniform thickness, its scale relative to other igneous fea-tures, and its characteristic steeply inclined to vertical nature.

7. Lewis thought the walls were “composed of a large portion of earth intermixed or cemented with a small quantity of sand and a con-siderable portion of talk or quarts.” Shonkinite is classified as a mafic silicate and is actually notable for its lack of quartz. It has aunique mineralogical composition, principally blocky crystals of glossy black augite and orthoclase (potassium) feldspar, with otherminerals such as biotite, microcline, olivine, and nepheline, and is considered to be rare. In all fairness to Lewis, there are a multi-tude of minerals that have a quartz-like appearance in the field.

8. The jointing of the rock must have been a memorable feature as most of the “walls” depicted on maps 53 (Clark’s finished map) and60 (Clark-Maximilian Sheet 24) were drawn as rectangles subdivided by numerous lines, resembling how one might depict a row ofbricks (in Gary E. Moulton, editor, The Journals of the Lewis and Clark Expedition, Atlas of the Lewis and Clark Expedition, (Lincoln:University of Nebraska Press, 1983), Vol. 1).



PEER REVIEWEDwell after the deposition of the other rocks in the White Cliffsregion. Geologists would eventually determine that the WhiteCliffs area dikes were part of a much larger complex associ-ated with the Highwood Mountains

9and are present in such

a density that they qualified to be aptly termed a‘dike swarm’10.

Lewis’s graceful description of the walls disappearing into thehillsides and the mental image that presents cannot beimproved upon.

The next day, June 1st 1805, the explorers would pass outof this canyon of the Missouri River and their attention wouldsoon focus on discerning their route over the Rocky Mountains.So we take leave of the Expedition to sum up the insightsgained from their travel through this high, broken, and rockycountry.

CONCLUSION

The detailed geological and physical descriptions of theMissouri River Breaks and White Cliffs, paraphrased and bet-ter punctuated, survived nearly intact in the 1814 publishedversion of the Lewis and Clark journals and thus, were avail-able to any early geologist fortunate enough to find or borrowa copy. It would be a half-century later before geological explo-ration of the Missouri River Breaks and White Cliffs area wouldbegin in earnest.The pioneering geologist of theAmericanWest,Ferdinand Vandiveer Hayden

11, explored the Missouri River up

to Fort Benton in 1854-1855 and beginning in 1856, he wouldbegin to publish a series of papers describing its geology in theProceedings of the Philadelphia Academy of Science. It seemsassured that Hayden was familiar with the captain’s journalobservations as he specifically refers to their description of theregion in his 1860 paper “A Geological Sketch of the Estuaryand Fresh-water Deposits of the Bad Lands of the Judith” pub-lished intheTransactionsof theAmericanPhilosophicalSociety,a most appropriate venue considering that Jefferson and Lewiswere members of this venerated society. Hayden remarks thatthe captains gave an “accurate description of the physical fea-tures of this remarkable region”, particularly in the region ofthe “Stone Walls”

12. Hayden, by naming the Judith River

Formation in 1871 after Clark’s Judith River, also ensured thatthe captain’s legacy would live on in the geological literature.

It may never be known how much preliminary knowledgeHayden, or his colleagues in the U.S. Geological Survey of theTerritories, gained from the journals of Lewis and Clark priorto their initial forays into Montana and other regions of theWest. And it must be recognized that the captains were notgeologists, were believed to have carried only one geological

science related book13, and entertained no speculations on the

age of the rocks or their areal extent. But one gets the feelingthat had the captains been tasked by Jefferson with additionalgeologically focused responsibilities, they would have done adiligent and splendid job, because the hundreds of individualgeological observations that they did record throughout theExpedition are revealing, useful, and astonishingly percep-tive. Any geologist preparing for a survey and mappingexercise, such as the one Hayden embarked on in 1854, wouldhave been grateful for any advance knowledge of a heretoforecompletely unmapped (in a geological sense) region of theWest.In the case of the Missouri River Breaks and White Cliffs,Lewis and Clark revealed in their journals a tantalizing geo-logical preview, including:• sequences of generally horizontal, hard rock strata, princi-

pally sandstone, shale, and limestone (some fossil-bearing)of unequal thickness, forming the canyon walls of thisstretch of the Missouri River;

• the presence of interbedded,thin layers of coal and the abun-dance of ironstone, which yield important clues about theoriginal sedimentary setting of these rocks;

• that different rock lithologies cropped out along the riverover many mi, perhaps revealing a subtle dip of the for-mations;

• a spectacularly white, cliff-forming sandstone, comprised ofa unique lithology that eroded into spectacular shapes,heretofore not observed in the journey up the Missouri;

• the profusion of cross-cutting dike walls of uniform thick-ness, densely jointed, discordant, and both more resistantand younger in age than the country rock; and,

• a river channel filled with rocky debris, indicating a rela-tively immature (i.e., young) erosional history.This is as applicable a descriptive sketch of the stratigra-

phy, geomorphology, and geological setting of the MissouriBreaks and White Cliffs today as it was 200 yrs ago, yet anoth-er testament to the singular observational, descriptive, andcognitive abilities of Meriwether Lewis and William Clark.

John W. Jengo, C.P.G.-8139, is a Principal Hydrogeologistfor a national environmental consulting firm located in south-eastern Pennsylvania but still travels a portion of the Lewisand Clark Trail each summer.

Peer Reviewed by AIPG Associate editors: Kerry Hanlon,CPG-09866; Robert Stewart, CPG-08332; Ray Talkington,CPG-07935.

9. Although not as renowned as other dike features in the United States, photographs of shonkinite dikes from this region of Montanadid make their way in early geology textbooks, such as Branson and Tarr, Introduction to Geology, 1935.

10. The number of “walls” depicted on the expedition-related maps varies. Three eastern walls and one western “rock” are shown on theLewis and Clark rough draft (Moulton, Atlas, map 41), five eastern walls and one western “rock” are shown on the finished map copy(Moulton, Atlas, map 53), while four eastern walls and one western wall feature appear on the Clark-Maximilian Sheet 24 (Moulton,Atlas, map 60). This by no means represents the true number of dikes (they actually number in the hundreds) although the variableorientation of the depicted “walls” on these maps does hint at their spatial complexity. The most consistent feature is the “rock” depict-ed along the western shoreline of the Missouri, which may correspond to today’s Citadel Rock.

11. Ferdinand Vandiveer Hayden (1829-1887) was a trailblazing American geologist and explorer of the West as head of the U.S. GeologicalSurvey of the Territories, which focused on Nebraska, Wyoming, Colorado, Idaho, and Montana. His pioneering work in the GreatPlains and Rocky Mountains laid the foundation for the creation of the U. S. Geological Survey.

12. Ferdinand Vandiveer Hayden, Transactions of the American Philosophical Society, 1860, pp. 123-138.13. Paul Russell Cutright, “Contributions of Philadelphia to Lewis and Clark History”, WPO Publication #6 (Portland, Ore.: Lithco, 1982,

p. 13. The book was Richard Kirwan’s Elements of Mineralogy (London, 1784).



AIPG NEWS

JOB TARGETEMPLOYERS — Posting job opportunities in the CareerCenter gives access to a pool of highly qualified, targetedcandidates. Even after posting their ads, employers retainfull control over them. That means updating, removing, orrenewing an ad at any time, all with a few mouse clicks.Wondering if anyone's seeing an ad? No problem.JobTargetlets employers see how many times their ads have beenviewed, and how many responses they've gotten. The fea-tures don't end there. All online responses to an ad arestored in their own folders, where the employer can storeall communications as well as any notes taken on a par-ticular candidate. Privacy, convenience, and a way to com-municate directly with the rest of the geologic community;benefits that job seekers and employers alike can find onJob Target.

A new service provided by AIPGGo to the AIPG National web site www.aipg.org.

NEWMEDICAL INSURANCE

PROGRAMAvailable to

AIPG MEMBERSGeoCare Benefits Program

Dear Member:Finding just the right insurance coverage to fit your

family's changing needs can be difficult.But the GeoCareBenefits Insurance Program helps make it easy.GeoCarebenefits is our new name for the valuable insurance ben-efits and services available to members and theirfamilies.

GeoCare Benefits offers you and your family the qual-ity, value, and service you've come to expect from ourGroup Insurance Plans, and much more. Like new,increased Term Life benefits, with up to $750,000 eachin coverage for you and your spouse. And aComprehensive HealthCare Program that's designed toprovide you with outstanding coverage, at truly afford-able group rates. Or, our Medical Savings AccountQualified Plan—ideal for you and your family if you areself employed or work for a company with fewer than 50employees. And our Discount HealthCare ServicesCard—it's a great way to save on prescription drugs,dental care, eye care, and more.

Please take a few minutes to review the informationon this web site. We're confident you'll find the cover-ages offer you and your family the benefits you need, atan exceptionally affordable group rate.

Sincerely,

Susan M. Landon, CPG-04591Chairman AAPG Insurance Committee

For more information:Life and HealthGeoCare Benefits Insurance Planhttp://www.geocarebenefits.com/Phone: 800-337-3140 or 805-566-9191FAX: 805-566-1091Email: [email protected]

U.S. Mail:GeoCare Insurance ProgramAdministratorP.O. Box 1246Carpinteria, CA 93014-1246

UPDATEAIPG HISTORY BOOK

Richard Proctor has nearly completed writing the Historyof AIPG. We are planning to put a pdf version of the bookon the AIPG webpage for anyone to download, however wealso would like to print a limited number of copies in softor hard cover during our 40th Anniversary year in 2003.However AIPG does not have any funds for publication ofthis book and we do not see the publication as a money-making venture. Therefore, we are soliciting contributionsfrom corporations and individuals to cover the cost of print-ing. Each sponsor will be recognized in the publication. Thisis a very important work describing the history of our organ-ization and needs to be distributed as widely as possible.We already have two companies that have pledged $500.Your contributions will be greatly appreciated.

AIPG Bylaws AmendedAn electronic ballot was sent to the AIPG members last week via elec-

tronic means. The text said:

"The AIPG Executive Committee has decided that the application processfor non-CPG categories of membership should be simplified to encouragenew members and to permit prospective Members to join on-the-spot at stu-dent meetings, sister society meetings, and other professional gatherings.To facilitate this, the Executive Committee voted to amend AIPG Bylaws tocombine the membership categories Registered Member and Member.

To effect this amendment, Bylaws Articles 2.53, and 2.54 require modifi-cation. The amendments will not affect rights or privileges of any members inany category, and are designed to merely simplify the application process."

The total number of ballots received was 778. "Yes" votes to combine thetwo membership categories were 757. "No" votes were 21.

The Tellers Committee has certified the vote.



PEER REVIEWED

Catch 22 – Secrets on Getting That FirstGood Job in the Environmental Industry

Jim Jacobs, CPG-07760

Although everyone has a resume, new hires and sea-soned geologists from other geology fields (petroleum andmining) are always calling to find out about how to break intothe environmental job market. I get several calls every week.What follows is one opinion on how to break into the envi-ronmental job market without any experience.

The environmental industry is still vibrant based on thenumber of calls received from new graduates wanting careeropportunities. Environmental issues, including water avail-ability and treatment, are an important national challenge.These issues will only grow in importance as the populationgrows and clean water resources diminish. There are manybooks on preparing resumes. Using an Internet search enginesuch as Google, type in key words “environmental jobs”, “geol-ogy career”, and hundreds of web sites will be available. Thequestion is how to make your resume stand out, get a suc-cessful interview, and ultimately the job offer?

The Catch-22 problem exists where many companies won’thire new workers without some experience. But how does anewly graduated environmental professional or the seasonedgeologist with several years of experience in another field ofgeology get that first environmental job without experience?Here are a few ideas that might help:

Resumes – The resume is a sales brochure indicating yourlevel of written communication skill. Keep it brief; one to threepages. Use many bullets and include dates of previous jobs,colleges, or activities. Spelling and grammar are important,especially on resumes. Resumes should highlight your provenactivities such as problem solving, leadership, team building,reliability, and organizational ability. Computer and Internetskills are always a plus. Technical training can be given to anygood employee, however, companies cannot train new hires inreliability or honesty. For more information, there are dozensof books on resume preparation in the local library or book-store.

Internships while in school – For college and university stu-dents, try to get that environmental internship while at schoolto make contacts and get some experience. Even if there is nomoney involved, the contacts could be well worth the effort.

Join Associations – For students and seasoned geologistsalike, there are many good professional and technical associ-ations one can join. The local and national meetings of theAmerican Institute of Professional Geologists provide excel-lent networking opportunities. The AIPG national meetingsare excellent gatherings of high-level geologists. For students,some associations may have a reduced student membership

rate. These meetings offer great contacts, friendships, as wellas the chance to hear a good professional or technical talk. Forthose wanting a job in a new area, these meetings are the bestplace to meet the professionals who practice in a particulartechnical area or location. Sometimes even the food is good.Many times, the students are given free passes to participatein these meetings.The AIPG website (www.aipg.org) has infor-mation on local AIPG sections and on the profession. ForCalifornia, check out the California Council of GeoscienceOrganizations (www.ccgo.org) for a listing of prominent geol-ogy societies and job listings. For other states, job hunters cancall members in their state AIPG Section to get names andcontacts for other local or state geology societies.

Get there first – I get resumes from environmental profes-sionals throughout the nation and abroad asking for a job. Ifyou want a position in a certain location, it would be good toset up an interview when you are in the area, if you don’talready live here. Some larger firms are willing to pay forinterview expenses and travel costs, but small firms may wantto see some commitment to the environmental field and localarea before shelling out hundreds of dollars in interviewexpenses.

Read Up – Many local libraries have trade and technicaljournals from the environmental field. Groundwater,Environmental Pollution, Water Well Journal, PollutionEngineering, and dozens of others contain important infor-mation about the environmental field. Type these names intoyour internet searh engine for more information.

Take the Training – Employers are required to pay for thetraining costs and wages during training. Combine the wagesand the training costs, an employer could spend a few thou-sand dollars on a new untested employee. Many largeenvironmental companies are willing to take the risk.However, in a crowded job market, to make a new hire moreattractive to any environmental employer, pro-active job seek-ers could spend their own money and take the OSHA 40 hrHazardous Materials training. Make sure the class is widelyrecognized as accredited before spending any money. Call thelocal EPA and OSHA office and get their recommendations onaccredited classes. Call some prospective employers and findout which vendors they recommend. Some employers mayrequire all employees to take their 40-hr class.

Why should a job seeker take the class on his or her nick-el? First, it shows commitment to the environmental field, butmore importantly, it will allow the job seeker a better under-standing of the environmental industry, the safety concepts,the terms and the equipment. The training, required by CFR



PEER REVIEWED1910.120 is given by many vendors and is sometimes offeredas a for credit class at some colleges and universities. In fact,some vendors provide the training over the web. The costsrange is from $100 for training provided by equipment oper-ators unions, community colleges, or city education extensionprograms to $400 to $800 for private firms.The Internet class-es are about $400 to $500. Does a job seeker need to have the40-hr OSHA hazardous materials training class prior to theinterviews? No, but having two similar job candidates, whowould you hire?

Having the training will allow a general familiarity withthe environmental field. The interviews will be much better,as the potential hire will be able to speak the language of theenvironmental professional. For the environmental company,the risk of hiring any new employee is huge – what if theemployee doesn’t work out and quits within 3 months. TheOSHA Hazardous Materials training means large costs forthe company: the cost of the training, the salary of the work-er during the training and the delay in being able to use anew hire in the field until the training is completed. Havingthe training means the new employee can be billable in thefield right away, making the company very happy.

Bring in a Clean Driver’s Record - Get a driver’s license forthe state as soon as possible. Bring a copy of your driver’srecord with you during the interview to show a clean driver’srecord during the interview. Keep your driver’s record clean.There is a steep insurance surcharge for new employees hav-ing numerous accidents or tickets for driving under theinfluence of drugs or alcohol.

Medical exams – Certainly, new hires don’t need to havemedical exams before an interview. However, a new hire hav-ing an occupational medical exam before the interview is readyto work. A graduating student might be able to get an occu-pational exam at the college or university health clinic at anominal cost. A seasoned geologist changing fields might usehis health insurance for an annual occupational medical exam,usually covered by insurance. Without the exam certificate,the new company may have to wait up to 30 to 60 days toobtain an appointment for an occupational medical exam. Themedical certificate should state that he or she is healthy, canwear a respirator, and can work in the field. Again, most com-panies will provide their own medical exam, but if someonecomes in with the forms already filled out, it shows a will-ingness to be prepared and get to work.Again,with two similarapplicants, who would you hire?

Supporting Paperwork – Bring personal reference lists, let-ters of recommendation, and transcripts from all colleges anduniversities with you to the interview. For new hires, profes-sors are a good choice, as well as summer job or internshipsupervisors. Having the paperwork available and ready in theinterview shows preparation and understanding of the hiringprocess.

Practice – Go to as many interviews as possible.This is truefor the new graduate as well as the seasoned geologist whohas not been to interviews for many years. Practice the ques-tions and answers before the interview.Show up neatly dressedand groomed, with copies of the above items. Good verbal skillsare a requisite for most environmental jobs.

Interviews – Whether you are fresh out of school or a sea-soned geologist with 30 years of experience in the oil business,honesty, ambition, communication skills and people skills canbe more important in an interview than technical skills. Goodattitude is everything in the interview and is contagious.

Summary – Getting a job in any field without experienceis always difficult. Being prepared for an interview will helpnew hires and seasoned geologists with their job search,regardless the environmental company they ultimately join.Although there are no guarantees that having all of theseitems will get you a job, interviewers may be impressed andappreciate your skills, dedication, and commitment to give youan opportunity. Best wishes on your job search and check outthe local and national AIPG meetings and events! If you haveany questions, please email me at [email protected].

Jim Jacobs, CPG-07760, is Chief Hydrogeologist for FAST-TEK Engineering Support Services. His specialty is in-situremediation of metals, hydrocarbons and solvents. He has over20 years of experience. He is president of the CCGO and activewith AIPG and other organizations.

Peer Reviewd by AIPG Associate Editors: Amanda Veazey,MEM-0121, Scott Tiller, CPG-10016, Dale Rezabek, CPG-09285.

UPDATEAIPG WEB SITE

AIPG Store

Free Publications to Members

The AIPG web site has added several items to theAIPG Store. You can find the AIPG Store on thehome page in the left index of the web site at<www.aipg.org>. At the AIPG Store you will findsmall, yet exquisite geode pairs. The matched geodepairs are $9.95 + shipping. There also are new pensand pins. We will soon be listing new golf shirts, cof-fee mugs, travel mugs, and caps.

The member portion of the web site is where youcan find the following publications for free:

• Education for Professional Practice (1991)• Organization and Content of a Typical

Geologic Report (1993)• Student Chapter Organization Manual

(Revised 2002)• Reflections on a Geologic Career -

4th edition (2002)These publications are in pdf format, so you can

print them out yourself, free of charge.

Bookmark the site and check back often!



AGI/AIPG Intern Articles

DOE’s Accelerated Cleanup Initiative:More Than Just a Quick Fix?

Evelyn Kim, AGI/AIPG Geoscience &Public Policy Intern

The end of the Cold War has left a legacy of aging nuclearweapons plants run by the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE).Now retired, these facilities pose a serious environmental andhuman-health threat. Laden with high- and low-level nuclearwaste, these sites suffer an array of environmental problems,such as growing accumulations of radioactive waste, leakingtanks containing nuclear and hazardous waste, improperlydisposed chemical waste, radioactive air emissions, andground-water contamination. Mandated by various federaland state environmental statutes, environmental cleanup andrestoration as well as waste management are now DOE’s pri-mary mission at these facilities. Such federal mandatesinclude the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA)and the Comprehensive Environmental Response,Compensation, and Liability Act (CERCLA or Superfund),where enforcement of these laws fall under both federal andstate jurisdiction. In addition to having to meet an assortmentof local, state, and federal environmental standards and pro-cedural requirements, the facilities are subjected to lawsuitsby states and citizens. DOE’s Office of EnvironmentalManagement (EM) oversees the cleanup efforts for all 114DOE nuclear weapons development sites. As costs continueto escalate into hundreds of billions of dollars, both Congressand the administration are posing a growing number of ques-tions over DOE’s management abilities, the effectiveness ofthe environmental requirements, and the nation’s ability topay for the program as currently envisioned.

Review Leads to Reform

The major activities under the EM cleanup program includeenvironmental restoration, waste management, developmentof new cleanup technology,and stabilization of surplus nuclearmaterial and facilities. Although DOE completed activecleanup at 74 of the 114 sites in the beginning of fiscal year(FY) 2002, the larger and more substantial sites still presenthuge challenges. Since the implementation of the EM pro-gram in 1989, the federal government has spent $60 billion.Estimates for future costs climb as high as $300 billion withlong-term cleanup schedules extending up to 70 yrs.Concerned that little actual risk reduction being accomplisheddespite the high expense, Secretary of Energy SpencerAbraham requested a top-to-bottom review to analyze anddetermine the fundamental problems of the EM program.This

Introduction

Summer interns with theAmerican Geological Institute’sGovernment Affairs Program wrote the following three arti-cles.These internships were funded through a matching grantfrom the AIPG Foundation, whose support AGI gratefullyacknowledges. The interns were selected following a highlycompetitive national competition targeted toward geosciencestudents at both the undergraduate and graduate level.During the course of the summer, the interns attended con-gressional hearings, met with policymakers on the Hill andat federal agencies, and conducted background research onissues of concern to the geoscience community.A major respon-sibility was to update information on geoscience andenvironmental legislation on AGI’s Web site <http://www.agi-web.org/gap/>. These articles are the result of that work.

DOE’s Accelerated Cleanup Initiative:More Than Just a Quick Fix?

Evelyn Kim, AGI/AIPG Geoscience & Public PolicyIntern, American Geological Institute, 4220 King Street,

Alexandria, VA 22302Finding a Role for Science in Homeland Security

Sarah Riggen, AGI/AIPG Geoscience & Public PolicyIntern, American Geological Institute, 4220 King Street,

Alexandria, VA 22302Energy from Federal Lands:Opening Up For Business

David Viator, AGI/AIPG Geoscience & Public PolicyIntern, American Geological Institute, 4220 King Street,

Alexandria, VA 22302

From left to right Evelyn Kim, David Viator, and SarahRiggen.



AGI/AIPG INTERN ARTICLES (continued)review, released on February 4, 2002, concluded that the EMprogram had failed to live up to expectations and expressedthe need for reform. The review stated that the program “triedto solve the wrong problem and used the wrong set of indica-tors to measure success.” Overly optimistic cost estimates andprogram inefficiencies — such as only one-third of the EM pro-gram budget being used for the actual cleanup and riskreduction work — were among several internal weaknessesbrought to light in the report. As a result, the review prompt-ed the proposal for an $800 million cleanup reformappropriations account to accelerate EM cleanup efforts—themain focus being on reducing risk to public health, workers,and the environment.

Signs of Commitment

The major facilities involved in this accelerated cleanupprogram are the Savannah River Site in South Carolina, IdahoNational Engineering and Environmental Laboratory(INEEL), the Hanford Site in Washington State, Oak RidgeNational Laboratory in Tennessee, Los Alamos and SandiaNational Laboratories in New Mexico, and the Nevada TestSite. Together, they comprise $759 million of the $800 millionslated for the new accelerated cleanup account.All have signed“Letters of Intent” this year with DOE to participate in theaccelerated cleanup program. Based on the signed agreementsbetween the sites, the states, DOE, and the EnvironmentalProtection Agency, cleanups are expected to be completed ear-lier than planned with the help of additional funding from theaccelerated cleanup account:• The Savannah River Site’s budget is to increase by $216

million for completion 20 yrs ahead in 2025;• The INEEL budget is to increase to $704 million for com-

pletion 30 yrs ahead in 2020.• Hanford, the first to join the accelerated program, agreed

to a $433 million increase, totaling $2 billion, for comple-tion 35-45 yrs before the original 2070;

• The Oak Ridge budget is to increase by $105 million, total-ing to $520 million, for completion 5 yrs ahead in 2016;

• The Nevada Test Site budget is to increase by $33 million,totaling to $94 million, for completion 10 yrs ahead in 2010;

• The Sandia budget is to increase by $8-25 million for com-pletion in 2006, and the Los Alamos budget is to increaseby $54-$114 million for completion in 2015.

Allocating Unallocated Funds?

On July 8, 2002, the White House Office of Managementand Budget (OMB) approved a $300 million boost to the $800million dollar budget request for the accelerated cleanup pro-gram account, bringing the total to $1.1 billion if approved byCongress. The accelerated cleanup account would comprise aportion of the $6.7 billion EM budget request for FY 2003.Although some may view DOE’s efforts as progressive, othershesitate at the idea of allocating over a billion dollars of tax-payers’ money for plans lacking an itemized budget plan.Among those sharing such concern is Senate Energy andNatural Resource Committee Chair Jeff Bingaman (D-NM),who at a recent hearing expressed his discomfort at the ideaof allotting money without spending specifics. He thought the

new funds “could be viewed as an incentive to encourage stateregulators to relax cleanup standards.”

Most recently, the Senate Appropriations Committee reject-ed the budget proposal for a separate accelerated cleanupaccount, sharing Bingaman’s concern with DOE’s spendinghistory. The committee report accompanying the Energy andWater appropriations bill claimed that the DOE created the$800 million account to “lure” sites to renegotiate agreements,and as a way to obtain a large sum of unallocated funds. Thedecision to reject the proposal of a separate account for theaccelerated cleanup program means that Congress maintainscontrol of the purse strings. Instead of giving a lump sum toDOE, the committee recommended an almost equivalentincrease, but provided detailed report language on how thismoney is to be used. DOE remains optimistic that the accel-erated program account will survive.

Meeting targeted cleanup completion dates will remain inquestion as long as DOE and Congress continue to debate overwho is in charge. Meanwhile, efforts to change the status quoand accelerate cleanup do not appear to be going anywhere,anytime soon.

Evelyn graduated from Smith College in May with a bach-elor’s degree in geology. She will begin working this fall withLimno-Tech Inc., an environmental consulting firm, inWashington, D.C.

Finding a Role for Science inHomeland Security

Sarah Riggen, AGI/AIPG Geoscience &Public Policy Intern

The terrorist attacks of September 11th have changed U.S.operations, attitudes, and priorities on many levels. Nationalsecurity has been a prominent issue throughout much of thepost-9/11 politics and legislation in Washington.Action on thissubject is worth following, as the implications of related leg-islation will have unavoidable implications for many sectors,including the geosciences.

The piece of legislation that will likely have the greatestimpact is the Homeland Security Act of 2002, which was pre-sented by President Bush to Congress on June 18th. This actcalls for one of the most extensive restructuring of the feder-al government to date. At the heart of the changes is thecreation of a Department of Homeland Security (DHS). Themission of the new department is to “prevent terrorist attackswithin the United States; reduce America’s vulnerability toterrorism; and minimize the damage and recover from attacksthat do occur.” Various programs currently spread out amongtwelve federal departments and several other independentagencies will be consolidated into the DHS. They include pro-grams from the Department of Agriculture (USDA), theDepartment of Health and Human Services (HHS),the FederalEmergency Management Agency (FEMA), and theEnvironmental Protection Agency (EPA).

A White House statement explains why the administrationhas chosen such a dramatic change in government structure,“History teaches us that critical security challenges require



clear lines of responsibility and the unified effort of the U.S.government. History also teaches us that new challengesrequire new organizational structures.”The act also seeks revi-sions to the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) and flexibilityto shift money appropriated to the DHS within the agency, asthe Bush Administration considers flexibility to be essential.

While the Senate and the House have moved at very dif-ferent paces, both chambers have recognized the importanceof the president’s homeland security proposal and have takenconsiderable action on it. During July, 12 House committees,including the Science Committee, took up discussion of thebill (H.R. 5005) and passed their sections of it out of commit-tee.The full House passed H.R. 5005 on July 26th by a 295-132vote, and the Senate bill (S. 2452) was passed out of the loneSenate committee handling the legislation, the GovernmentalAffairs Committee, on July 24th by a 12-5 vote. It was theprincipal topic Senate floor debate following theAugust recess.

House Science Committee actions on H.R. 5005 are of par-ticular interest, as committee members amended thelegislation to address a number of science-oriented concernsand sought to strengthen the role of science and technologywithin the DHS. Committee Chairman Sherwood Boehlert (R-NY) has led efforts to see that science and technology play askey a role in the new department as they do in the nation’ssecurity. To guarantee that role, members of the ScienceCommittee voted unanimously at a July 10th markup of thebill to approve two key amendments to H.R. 5005, both ofwhich were subsequently incorporated into the final bill. Anamendment offered by Boehlert and Science CommitteeRanking Democrat Ralph Hall (TX) called for the appointmentof a DHS Undersecretary for Science and Technology respon-sible for the coordination and organization of all research anddevelopment pertaining to homeland security. The otheramendment was offered by Rep. Lynn Woolsey (D-CA) andwould establish a Homeland Security Institute in response toa recently released National Academy of Sciences report call-ing for a body to provide independent technical and policyanalysis to the DHS. The manner with which these amend-ments were made is worth noting, as the majority of decisionsmade were bipartisan — the result of compromise and work-ing together to gain full agreement.

Other amendments to H.R. 5005 included the creation ofan office to aid in the transmission, from scientists to policymakers, of information and ideas on products to increasenational security; the establishment of a certain number offlagship, research-based universities to partake in homelandsecurity research; and the transfer of the Hazard SupportSystem, a satellite wildfire detection program, from theNational Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) toFEMA. An amendment introduced by Rep. Steve Israel (D-NY) establishes an advisory committee for the Undersecretaryof Science and Technology. Rep. Don Young (R-AK) introducedan amendment that would ensure that FEMA, which is slat-ed to become part of the DHS, continues to carry out all of itsresponsibilities – including natural disaster relief – in addi-tion to its focus on homeland security issues. Establishing abalance between the continuations of traditional responsibil-ities along with the performance of additional homelandsecurity needs was an issue for several of the agencies anddepartments that will be folded into the DHS. Some agencies

have expressed concern that the additional layer of bureau-cracy will be detrimental to their research goals; howeverothers aim to ensure that homeland security-related researchis given adequate priority.

The administration’s request for a broad Freedom ofInformation Act (FOIA) exemption for the DHS has produceda strong partisan response in both the House and Senate withRepublicans supporting the president and Democrats express-ing concern that the exemption would create an even largerloophole allowing non-sensitive information to be kept quietunder the disclosure law. Of particular concern was the poten-tial for industries to be able to withhold information on theirrisk management plans, part of the Clean Air Act. H.R. 5005has maintained the original exemption, but an amendment toincrease the freedom of the DHS to make additional exemp-tions failed. S. 2452 also includes a provision requiring theDHS to comply with all environmental, safety, and health reg-ulations. This provision is not present in the House version.

There is now widespread agreement among members of con-gress and the administration on the importance of researchand development in the new department for the types of usesalready mentioned as well as many others. In recognition ofthis, the DHS is expected to begin with a budget of up to $2billion for science and technology in the next fiscal year.Therefore, the science community should be attuned to theestablishment of the DHS and continue to support their casefor the value of science to national security.

Sarah graduated this May with a bachelor’s degree in geol-ogy from the College of William and Mary. She now works innorthern Virginia for ICF Consulting.

Energy from Federal Lands:Opening Up For Business

David Viator, AGI/AIPG Geoscience &Public Policy Intern

The availability of cheap and abundant energy is a key eco-nomic health issue for the U.S. and has been prominentlyfeatured in the legislative agenda on Capitol Hill this year.Both President Bush and congressional leaders have offeredtheir views on energy matters, the president through hisNational Energy Policy report and Congress through yet-to-be-finalized energy legislation. Concerns over domestic energysupply have resurfaced in part due to changing internationalrelations precipitated by the terrorist acts of last September11th.

Federal lands are a major factor in the nation’s domesticenergy production of petroleum and natural gas, especiallythe outer continental shelf (OCS), lands managed by theBureau of Land Management, and the national forest system.Like so many geoscience issues, the production of energy fromfederal lands is linked to a range of contentious issues suchas global warming, land access, and the globalization of ener-gy markets. Stakeholders in these energy issues vary fromindustrial producers and financial backers to local consumersand environmentalists. The geoscience stake includes energy

AGI/AIPG INTERN ARTICLES (continued)



AGI/AIPG INTERN ARTICLES (continued)exploration, resource development, remediation, and wastedisposal.

Access: To Open or not to Open

Ever since taking office, President Bush has pushed to openresource-rich federal lands in order to boost domestic energysupplies and reduce dependence on foreign oil. The adminis-tration’s National Energy Policy urged the Department of theInterior to “examine land status and lease stipulation imped-iments to federal oil and gas leasing, and review and modifythose where opportunities exist.” Similar language can befound in the House version of comprehensive energy legisla-tion (H.R. 4). Areas targeted for development include portionsof the OCS, lands in the Rocky Mountains, and the northernreaches of Alaska. The opening of federal lands does not sitwell with all stakeholders, however, as opponents in the envi-ronmental community view such development as tantamountto environmental destruction. A major theme in theRepublican-controlled House is that the federal governmentshould not act unilaterally in making decisions regarding pub-lic lands, but instead should take into account the wishes ofthe states, local residents, and other stakeholders.

One of the most contentious pieces of federal real estate tar-geted for development is Alaska’s Arctic National WildlifeRefuge (ANWR). Alaskans and most Republicans are in favorof opening, but most Democrats as well as some Republicansare not. Debate over drilling in ANWR is the most prominentexample of how intractable federal lands debates can become.In the short term, the fate of ANWR and related provisions onenergy from public lands will be decided in the ongoing House-Senate conference to determine the final version of H.R. 4.

OCS Policy: From Traditional to Alternative EnergyResources

The outer continental shelf is host to some of the most oil-and gas-rich federal lands.The Minerals Management Servicewithin the Department of the Interior handles managementof the OCS. Moratoria have prohibited the issuing and devel-opment of oil and gas leases in most of the OCS, leaving onlyportions of the Gulf of Mexico, California, and Alaska avail-able for current usage. Florida and California are pushing toextend the moratoria in their offshore lands — turning theirattention from economic development to environmental con-servation.

In May, Florida and the Bush administration agreed to a$235 million deal in which the federal government would buyback portions of Florida’s Gulf of Mexico OCS oil leases (aswell as some mineral rights in the Florida Everglades). Thisbuyback of the land located in the natural-gas-rich DestinDome Unit near Pensacola, is a reflection of a larger trend tohalt oil and gas development by repurchasing leases sold priorto the moratorium. To end gridlock in domestic productionstemming from litigation, the administration has been forcedto buy back many leases. On the heels of the Florida buybackagreement, California appealed to the administration to sim-ilarly purchase leases off of its southern coast. Discussion overthe California leases is ongoing despite the administration’sinitial refusal to offer a deal.

OCS energy activities have primarily consisted of tradi-tional oil and gas operations, although the potential exists foralternative energy sources. In July, House Energy and MineralResources Subcommittee Chair Barbara Cubin (R-WY) intro-duced H.R. 5156, a bill to amend the Outer Continental ShelfLands Act to provide an administrative framework for themanagement of future activities. The legislation encouragesalternative energies such as wind, wave, and solar power bystreamlining the permitting process for new projects.Permitting authority for these projects would, for the firsttime, be placed solely within the Department of the Interior.This streamlining of the permitting process is an end goal forboth the administration and H.R. 4.All parties generally agreethat alternative energy sources, while currently contributingonly marginally to total energy production, will play a largerrole in the future.

The Emergence of Natural Gas

Electricity in the U.S. is generated from three main sources:coal, natural gas, and nuclear. Coal is currently the premierenergy source for electricity generation, accounting for over50% of the total in 2000, but natural gas is coming on strong.Over 90% of new and proposed power plants will use naturalgas. This jump in natural gas-powered plants is expected topush demand for natural gas upwards of 50% in the next 20years. But looming on the horizon is a growing gas supply anddemand imbalance due to the fast-growing demand and stat-ic production. In order to begin correcting this imbalance andmeet this demand, the Bush administration has proposedincreased development in gas-rich federal lands in the RockyMountains, Alaska, and the OCS. The Department of theInterior has adopted both long- and short-term plans toincrease domestic production. According to Cubin, at one ofthe many hearings on energy and public lands that she chairedthis summer: “this country has sufficient gas resources to fuelour economy for decades, but public policies are preventingthem from being produced.”

The emergence of natural gas is not necessarily a deathknell for coal, however. Coal has the advantage of being wellestablished in the nation’s existing power plants. But the abil-ity of coal to effectively hold its own could hinge on thedevelopment of “clean coal” technology that dramatically cutsCO2 emissions, coal’s main liability. Provisions for developingsuch technology are expected to be part of the final energy bill.Many in Congress see coal playing an important role for yearsto come, in part as the transition fuel for future technologiesand as a part of a stable multi-source approach to energy pol-icy.

No matter what shape the final version of H.R. 4 ultimatelytakes, Congress will no doubt struggle with public land access,and all its trappings, for years to come. The need to developenergy resources on federal lands will depend on the complexinteraction of market forces, science and politics that willdetermine the energy sources of the future. The U.S. energypicture will both shape, and be shaped, by the role of publiclands.

David has returned to Louisiana State University to com-plete his Master’s degree in geology.



GEOSCIENCE TEACHING AND THE THREE R’S

Years ago, while rummaging through my parents’ atticin Upstate New York, I came across a trunk containing someof my grandfather’s memorabilia. Among the items found wasa copy of a geology text that he used in public school in themiddle 1890s. This piqued my curiosity about the teaching ofgeology in elementary and high school. I was surprised to learnthat geology was a basic part of the curriculum in New York’spublic schools until the beginning of twentieth century. In fact,it was a core science — influenced in no small part by the sci-entific advances, popularity and controversies of many of thegreat nineteenth century scientists such as Lyell, Hall, Powelland Darwin.The demise of geology as a core science took placeearly in the twentieth century when it was replaced by theteaching of the “traditional” sciences of physics, chemistry andbiology.

The evolution and devolution of geology as a core sciencebecame more apparent while I was working at Oak RidgeNational Laboratory in the 1990s. To introduce visiting fam-ily and friends to the culture and history of East Tennessee,I would take them to the Museum of Appalachia in NorrisTennessee. A recreated “Southern Mountain Pioneer Farm-Village,” the museum includes a typical one-room schoolhouse.On one of my visits I noticed a diploma from a local publicschool hanging on the schoolhouse wall. I was surprised andpleased to see the “required” inclusion of geology in the courseof study. At my request I received a photocopy of that diplo-ma from John Rice Irwin, the founder and director of theMuseum of Appalachia. The text of the document reads:

Tennessee Common School Diploma

This is to Certify, that Thomas Elbert Gibbs , of District No.2 , School No. 1 , County of Anderson___, has Completedthe Course of Study in the Common Branches required byLaw to be taught in the Public Schools of the State, viz:

Orthography, Reading, Writing, Arithmetic, EnglishGrammar, Geography, United States History, ElementaryGeology of Tennessee, and Elementary Principles ofAgriculture.

Witness our Signatures:

Given at Andersonville , in the County of Anderson ,State of Tennessee, This thirteenth day of May , A.D.18890.

This diploma, however, significantly predates that hot sum-mer in 1925 when science education in Tennessee receivednational attention in the “Trial of the Century.” Perhaps shar-ing this document will shed some light on the importance andtradition of the teaching of geoscience in public schools in thepast, as our profession argues for its survival in the future.For the curious — orthography, as a course of study, refers tothe technique of correct spelling and sounding of letters in theEnglish language. Some also may recognize a weakening inthe teaching of most of the other common branches of studylisted in the document. So much for the use of the hickorystick!

Drew Diefendorf CPG-03598

RocKWorks2002: RockWorks CommandLanguage users can now create 3D Fence

Diagramsin 3D Analyst™

ROCKWORKS 2002 for Windows™Integrated Geological Data Management,

Analysis, & Visualization

GOLDEN, Colo. - RockWare, developer and reseller of earthscience software tools releases RockWorks™ 2002,an extensivePC-based software for creating boring logs, cross sections,fence diagrams, solid models and contour maps and more.

A key feature in the new version allows the user to export 3Dfence diagrams as shapefiles with z values for use in ArcGIS 3DAnalyst through the RockWare Command Language:

ht tp ://www.rockware.com/cata log/pages/ rock-works2002/RCL/index.htm

RockWorks features include; OpenGL 3D Graphics, a newdata management system, a new borehole manager andmany other tools make it the most complete subsurface mod-eling package on the market today.

"This program is de rigueur for anyone who has subsurfacedata," said Jim Reed, Vice President of Research andDevelopment at RockWare. "We've made technology former-ly only available for tens of thousands of dollars attainable foreveryone, and RockWare's customer service is the best thereis."

RockWorks runs in Windows98/NT/2000/XP and is availablewith both single-user and network licenses.

Quality Seismic Software is No Longer ExpensiveROCKWARE VISUAL SEISMIC 2.0 for Windows™

2D, 3D and 4D reservoir visualizationand interpretation

GOLDEN, Colo. – Rockware, developer and reseller of earthscience and GIS software tools releases RockWare VisualSeismic™ 2.0 (RVS) a PC-based 2, 3 and 4 Dimensional Seismicvisualization and interpretation system.

At an introductory price of $1299,RVS has visualization capa-bilities that meet or exceed those of products costing tens ofthousands of dollars more. And with the ability to adjust thecolor and opacity of any seismic object to highlight amplitudeanomalies allows the user generate prospects in seconds.

“I see RVS as a needed tool by independents and consult-ants that can’t afford the yearly MAINTENANCE costs of mostseismic software packages, much less the price of a license.”said Dean Jacobsen, President of RockWare,“ For the larger oilcompany,RVS will be used by geologists and geophysists want-ing particular features unavailable in other software, knowingthat RVS will work on their home PC.”

RockWare Inc., located in Golden, Colorado, was foundedin 1983,and is a leading developer and reseller of over 200 earthscience and GIS software solutions. RVS trial software is avail-able for download at www.rockware.com.

PRESS RELEASEContact: Jacinda Nettik,

Business Development [email protected], Phone: 303.278.3534 x107

www.rockware.com


TheYear 2002 is nearly history.Themonths have passed quickly, and littletime remains as I enter the twilight zoneof my term as president. I would like totake the remaining time to encourage allof you to become more active, not only inyour section, but also in your communi-

ty and state affairs. It is primarily at thelocal level that we have an opportunityto let others know what geologists do andhow large a role we play in the life ofevery citizen.

At our recent annual meeting, mem-bers of the advisory board, representinga variety of states, presented excellentideas on how to get members more activeby having an active section. It oftensounded like a chicken and egg situa-tion, but bottom line is it only takes afew enthusiastic persons to get thingsmoving. Witness Ray Lewis of theBaltimore Ravens and the hurt they puton the Denver Broncos. Those sectionsthat were most active also were veryactive in their community and stateaffairs.

The second thing I would like to doduring these remaining three months isencourage everyone to get behind

President–elect Rick Powers’ member-ship program as it evolves. The twoprograms Rick has proposed, memberand corporate, will go a long way toincreasing our membership and addingstrength to our ranks. I am sure you willbe hearing more about these from Rickin the very near future.

Lastly, I would encourage everyone toget on board the CPD program. Begin bykeeping track of the time and energy youinvest in all the outside activities.Chances are most of these will qualifyfor CPD credits. Although currently avoluntary program, consideration isbeing given to making it a standardrequirement for all CPGs.

Like any investment, you can onlybenefit from what you put into it. Let’smake apathy an unheard of word. Makeit a great day!

PRESIDENT’S MESSAGE

Twilight ZoneLawrence A. Cerrillo, CPG-02763


To sponsor a student membership, simply complete the form below, provide the name of the student along with your own,and return with the appropriate payment of $20 to AIPG, 8703 Yates Dr. #200, Westminster, CO 80031-3681. If you do notpersonally know a student to sponsor, but are interested in the program, the AIPG Executive Committee has compiled alist of students, and one will benefit from your generosity.

Full-time students pursuing a career in geology are immediately rewarded when becoming an AIPG member. Each willreceive the journal The Professional Geologist, free access to the members only portion of the AIPG National Web site, anddiscounts on all AIPG publications.

AIPG STUDENT SPONSOR APPLICATION

STUDENT

Name(If left blank a student will be assigned.)

University

Dept.

Address

City, State, Zip

Phone

Fax

E-mail

SPONSOR

Name

Company/Agency

Dept.

Address

City, State, Zip

Phone

Fax

E-mail

Return to form and $20 to: AIPG, 8703 Yates Dr., #200, Westminster, CO 80031-3681, or fax to (303) 412-6219.

Office Use:Date Received:_____________ Amount Received:_____________ Authorized Sig.:______________________________________


For those members who haven’tbeen close to the internal AIPG deliber-ations about establishment of an AIPGcontinuing professional developmentprogram (CPD), you will be happy toknow that AIPG now is among the ranksof professional societies with a CPD pro-gram. The Executive Committee isextremely pleased to announce thatAIPG has officially implemented such aprogram. You may recall that there havebeen numerous articles within the pagesof TPG during the past few yearsexplaining, promoting, and detailing aCPD program for AIPG.

First and foremost, AIPG offers agreat debt and many thanks to TomFails, CPG 3174, whose dedication andforesight regarding this most funda-mental of professional issues resulted inthe establishment of a voluntary (for thetime being) CPD program. Tom believedand believes that a CPD program is sim-

ply a credible means of adding additionalsignificance to an already meaningfulcredential, as well as a means for allpractitioners to merely maintain cur-rency with technical, legal, and generaldevelopments pertaining to the profes-sion. All AIPG members are indebted toTom’s persistence. Thank you sincerely,Tom!

The CPD program is for the momentvoluntary. The consensus among thosemany interested members who debatedthis issue, and advice from representa-tives of foreign sister societies with CPGprograms, is that the AIPG CPD pro-gram should become mandatory for allnew CPGs once the bugs have beenworked out. More discussion will ensue.In the pages that follow, please find textexplaining the details of the program aswell as the forms necessary for partici-pation.

The AIPG CPD program wasapproved by the National ExecutiveCommittee on September 24, 2002, andwas made retroactive to January 1,2002.This means that all who elect to partic-ipate in the program are invited tosubmit an annual report for CPD activ-ities during 2002.

Please note that as you begin partic-ipation in the CPD program, there willundoubtedly be numerous questions,suggestions, and other comments. Whileworking with the new CPD program,please send your inquiries and recom-mendations to the National ExecutiveCommittee, AIPG Headquarters.

A crucial aspect of the AIPG CPD pro-gram is recognition that many state

registration regulations mandate CPDto maintain licensure. During the devel-opment of the AIPG CPD program, thecommittee led by Tom Fails consciouslyincluded elements which would simul-taneously fulfillAIPG and state programrequirements. Since AIPG views its cer-tification as complimentary toregistration, in the near future require-ments for AIPG certification willundoubtedly include successful writtenexamination and mandatory participa-tion in the CPD program.

In the meanwhile, please avail your-selves of the opportunity to gain AIPGrecognition for your continuing educa-tion activities.


Continuing Professional Education

William J. Siok, CPG-04773

EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR’S COLUMN

UPDATEUtah Geologist Licensure

The Professional Geologist application for Utah geologist lisensure is on theinternet now. Go to the website at www.dopl.utah.gov to find the application.The rules are effective September 4th and are available now.

Lynn J. Bernhard II, Bureau Manager, Utah Department of Commerce,Division of Occupational and Professional Licensing,Office:801-530-6621,Cell:801-230-0959, Email: [email protected], Web: www.dopl.utah.gov.



1. Program Title: AIPG Continuing ProfessionalDevelopment Program (CPD Program).

2. Purpose Statement for AIPG’s CPD Program:To provide an opportunity for all Members and CPGs toparticipate in an individually-designed professionaldevelopment program within a supportive structure pro-vided by AIPG. Screening and verification of AnnualReports and Triennial Applications will allow AIPG torecord that the individual successful participant has pro-vided a verified record of qualified continuing professionaldevelopment activities for a stated period.

3. Participation: Open to participation by all Members andCPGs, new and old, on a voluntary basis. There will be nopenalties for CPGs who do not participate or who do par-ticipate but do not complete their CPD Programsuccessfully; they will remain as Members or CPG’s ingood standing.

4. Length of CPD Program Period:The CPD Program is three(3) years in length. There is an annual reporting require-ment to ensure that participants do not fall behind.

5. Successful Participants:Upon successful completion of theAIPG CPD program, the member’s accomplishment willbe recorded in the AIPG database and the successful com-pletion will be noted in the AIPG directory.

6. Point Counts: PDPs (Professional Development Points).20 PDP per year required; 10 in Continuing Education(CE) and 10 in Professional Participation (PP), with

Technical Contribution PDPs substitutable for either CEor PP requirements. Compliance with CPD requirementsrequires 60 PDPs for the 3-year CPD Program Period.

7. Requirements for successful completion of AIPG CPD pro-gram are 30 CE PDPs and 30 PP PDPs in a 3-year CPDProgram Period.

8. Logbook: The Logbook will be maintained by the appli-cant and submitted electronically or in hard copy at theend of the 3-year CPD Period.

9. The CPD Process requires the submittal of 3 AnnualLogbooks and Annual Reports to AIPG through eachSection Screening Committee.

a. The applicant submits the CPD logbook to the SectionScreening Committee.

b. Section Screening Committee reviews materials sub-mitted and proposes Approval, Disapproval or a Flagfor Close Scrutiny to National Screening Committee.

c. AIPG will periodically report names of successful par-ticipants.

d. Appeal Process is available.e. Successful participants will be identified in the AIPG

directory.10. The CPD program, approved by the Executive Committee

on September 24, 2002, is retroactive to January 1, 2002.11. All CPD program documents are on the AIPG website at

http://www.aipg.org/StaticContent/3/CPD/CPD.htm

AIPG CPD Program Guidelines



The AIPG CPD ProgramThe CPD Program provides a guide and framework

for a continuing, self-determined, personal developmentplan, which includes continuing education, profession-al practice and participation in the affairs and activitiesof professional geoscience organizations. Many CPGshave been involved in these activities throughout ourcareers.The CPD Program involves setting rational andmeaningful annual personal goals and planning a per-sonal CPD Program. Selected activities are evaluatedand recorded as they are completed, with points (PDPsor Professional Development Points) claimed in aLogbook.

There are two categories of activities – ContinuingEducation and Professional Participation. Points basedupon contact hours and activity value are assigned toeach qualified activity using Logbook guidelines. Thegoal is to obtain 10 PDPs each in Continuing Educationand Professional Participation in each year of the 3-yearCPD Period, but considerable flexibility will be avail-able. PDPs also can be earned by authoring talks andpublishing peer-reviewed papers, posters, monographsand books on geoscience subjects. Teaching short cours-es and leading field trips earn PDPs as well, if on anon-paid basis. At 3-year intervals, the Logbooks, sup-porting data would be submitted to AIPG. Applicantswho had accumulated 60 or more approved PDPs dur-ing the 3-year CPD period, half each in ContinuingEducation and Professional Participation, would havetheir records amended to show successful completion ofthe AIPG CPD requirements for the 3-year CPD Period.Up-to 10 points (in excess of 30 points in each catego-ry) could be carried forward into the first year of thenew CPD Period.

It is difficult for some participants to attend shortcourses and Section activities because of distance, con-tinuous travel, graduate school, etc. They lackopportunities to earn CE and/or PP PDPs. Flexibilityhas been built into the CPD Program to help so-affect-ed Members and CPGs earn substitute points.

The whole idea is to help Members and CPGs con-tinue, maintain and improve their technical educationand training, competence and competitiveness, and toparticipate actively in the activities, affairs and leader-ship of AIPG and of their national/regional geosciencetechnical societies. AIPG will provide, upon request, awritten credential verifying successful participation forone or more three-year periods in an individual programof Continuing Professional Development, based uponcontinuing education and participation in professionalaffairs.

QUALIFYING ACTIVITIES

I. CONTINUING EDUCATION. A wide variety of educa-tional activities can earn points for the CONTINUINGEDUCATION (CE) requirement. They include:BS/post BS Formal Education for credits, CEUs or in com-pany training courses, including those:

• in geosciences, other physical sciences, engineering,math and computer sciences;

• in other relevant disciplines, including business, man-agement, law, accounting, etc.; classroom and internetcourses for credits or CEUs are equally acceptable ifcompleted successfully.

PDPs are also awarded for non-credit SupplementalEducation on a contact hour and discipline basis for activ-ities including:

• geoscience short courses/field seminars;• auditing of formal education courses, as above;• auditing of geoscience talks or papers, especially at geo-

science conventions/conferences;• in-house company geoscience courses;

PDPs are awarded on a contact hour and discipline basis.NOTE: Courses taken as requirements of other geo-

science organizations, state boards or state-requiredregulation reviews will earn PDPs as well.II. PROFESSIONAL PARTICIPATION

Similarly, a very wide variety of activities, many designedto increase participation by CPGs in the affairs, activitiesand leadership of AIPG and the geoscience technical soci-eties or in community affairs will earn PDPs for thePROFESSIONAL PARTICIPATION (PP) requirement.They include:

• professional practice, defined-as “full-time” employ-ment or personal practice in a geoscience discipline orassociated geoscience-dependent work;

• participation in the activities and leadership of AIPG(Sections and National), and of national, regional, stateand local geoscience technical organizations, StateBoards and ASBOG;

• active volunteer work in geology-related outreach activ-ities and/or non-technical community service activities;

Professional Participation PDPs may be earned for a widevariety of service activities, making the AIPG CPD Programvery flexible and adaptable.III. TECHNICAL CONTRIBUTION.PDPs can be earned for

TECHNICAL CONTRIBUTION (TC) activities such as:• presentation of non-peer reviewed talks or publication

of peer-reviewed papers, monographs and books on geo-science subjects;

• preparation and presentation of geological courses orfield trip planning and leadership on an unpaid basisby both academics and non-academics;

PDP allocations, up-to 30, are generous as these activitiesrepresent the ultimate in geologic professionalism. TC pointsmay be applied against either CE or PP PDP requirements inany given year, and could be carried-forward until totally used.



AIPG Continuing Professional Development Program



AIPG Continuing Professional Development Program



AUGUST 2002

• Supplemental Appropriations Bill Sets Stage for FY 2003End Game

• Interior Appropriations First on Deck• Johannesburg Hosts Global Sustainable Development

Summit• Senators Urge Delay of President’s New Source Review

Reforms• President Bush Proposes Healthy Forests Initiative• NASA Accepting Comments on Solid Earth Science Vision• Georgia County Revises School Policy to Placate Evolution

Critics• List of Key Federal Register Notices• New Material on Web Site

Supplemental Appropriations Bill SetsStage for FY 2003 End Game

Shortly before leaving for the August recess, Congresspassed a fiscal year (FY) 2002 supplemental appropriationsbill (H.R. 4775) that would help to fund a range of activitiesrelated to homeland security.With President Bush’s signatureon August 2nd, the Defense and Homeland SecuritySupplemental became Public Law 07-206. The majority of thesupplemental went for defense-related expenses, but it alsoincluded funding for a range of smaller geoscience-related pro-grams.The U.S.Geological Survey (USGS) received $20 millionfor high-resolution mapping and imagery of U.S. strategiccities and $6 million for the Earth Resources ObservationSystems (EROS) Data Center to initiate the conversion of allarchived data on outdated types of media to disk-based stor-age. The National Weather Service received $7.2 million for asupercomputer to serve as backup for the system that is thefoundation of weather forecasts. Also within NOAA, theNational Ocean Services received $29.2 million to address crit-ical mapping and charting backlog requirements. NOAA’sNational Environmental, Satellite, Data and InformationService received an additional $2.8 million to support the back-up capability for critical satellite products and services. Alsoincluded in the supplemental was a provision to extend thecontract for the Eisenhower National Clearinghouse forMathematics and Science Education program for one year.Now that this bill — requested by the president nearly fourmonths earlier — has been signed into law, Congress willreturn from the August recess to focus on the FY 2003 appro-priations bills that were put on the back burner while thesupplemental was finalized.

Interior Appropriations First on Deck

Congress has its work cut out for it. Upon returning fromrecess, legislators will face all 13 of the annual appropriationsbills with less than 20 working days left in the current fiscalyear. But that October 1st deadline has lost some of its mean-ing in recent years — Congress has repeatedly resorted totemporary continuing resolutions to keep the government run-

ning into the new fiscal year while debate continues on appro-priations. The Senate has placed the Interior bill on itsschedule for September 4th, the last step needed before thebill — already passed by the House — can go to a conferencecommittee. In other geoscience-related appropriations, itseems as if funding for NSF and NASA (the VA/HUD andIndependent Agencies bill) will be held up until after the endof the fiscal year, possibly even until a lame-duck session afterthe November elections.The earliest the HouseAppropriationsCommittee may take its version up is the second half ofSeptember.The committee also has yet to act on the bills fund-ing NOAA (Commerce) or the Department of Energy (Energyand Water). With the mid-term elections coming up and thecontrol of both chambers up for grabs, neither party will beeager to stick around during prime October campaigning time.Additional information on geoscience-related appropriationsis available at http://www.agiweb.org/gap/legis107/approps-fy2003.html.

Johannesburg Hosts Global SustainableDevelopment Summit

A decade ago, President George H. W. Bush attended theEarth Summit in Rio de Janeiro, Brazil, signing the climatetreaty that established global warming as the dominant inter-national environmental issue.The latest global environmentalsummit kicked off this month in Johannesburg, South Africawith climate issues framed in the broader context of sustain-able development. The current President Bush will not attend— Secretary of State Colin Powell heads the U.S. delegation.Although no major international agreements are likely toresult from this summit, many hope these negotiations willlead to reaffirmation of those commitments borne out of Rioand to the development of new partnerships that can help nar-row the gap between industrialized and developing countries.This idea of partnerships is supported by the Bush adminis-tration as it aims to shift the emphasis from politicaldeclarations to encouraging communication between govern-ments, non-governmental organizations, businesses, and thescientific community to achieve sustainable developmentgoals. The opening session of the summit began with discus-sion on proposals to make renewable energy technologiesaccount for 15% of the total global energy production by 2010.The U.S. and Saudi Arabia reportedly tried to tone down thisproposal, claiming such efforts lack compatibility with eco-nomic concerns. The ten-day summit is expected to concludeon September 4th.

Senators Urge Delay of President’s NewSource Review Reforms

Back in June, the Bush Administration released plans toreform the U.S.Environmental ProtectionAgency’s (EPA) NewSource Review (NSR) permit program.According to the admin-istration, the proposed NSR changes are an attempt at moreefficient implementation of the Clean Air Act, allowing elec-tric power companies, refineries and other smokestackindustries to upgrade and expand their capacity without

Monthly review prepared by Margaret Baker, David Applegate, MEM-0002, AGI GovernmentAffairs Program, and AGI/AAPG Summer Intern Evelyn Kim.

AGI GOVERNMENT AFFAIRS MONTHLY REVIEW



AGI GOVERNMENT AFFAIRS MONTHLY REVIEW (continued)enduring complicated regulatory process. This move sparkedheated debate as opponents claimed that the president’s pro-posal provides industries too much leeway and underminescurrent NSR enforcement legal proceedings. Early this month,a group of 44 Senators,mostly Democrats, signed a letter push-ing for delays of NSR reforms by requesting the administrationconduct a study on the full potential effects of the reforms onair quality and human health. In response to the Senate let-ter, a coalition of industries led by the National Association ofManufacturers and Nation Petrochemical and RefinersAssociation, wrote in support of Bush’s proposed NSR revi-sions,arguing that the current sluggish economy cannot affordany threats to critical investment decisions. Sen. JoeLieberman (D-CT) and other letter-signers have asserted thatthey will use the EPA’s FY 2003 appropriations bill to preventthe agency from spending funds on the NSR revisions duringthe coming year.

President Bush Proposes HealthyForests Initiative

On August 22nd, President Bush announced his newHealthy Forests Initiative during a visit to fire-scorched south-western Oregon. With this year’s fire season considered theworst in modern history, Bush argued that a federal responseis needed to expand catastrophic wildfire prevention effortsin priority forests and rangelands. Bush’s initiative aims toreduce regulatory red tape that hinders active forest man-agement, to encourage Congress to pass legislation expeditingforest thinning projects, and to streamline NationalEnvironmental Policy Act regulations for wildfire manage-ment. Environmentalists are worried that the proposal is anattempt to open more national forest for the timber industryby making logging projects easier to approve and reducing theability of citizens and environmental groups to appeal proj-ects. Logging companies and a number of western lawmakersshowed their support for Bush’s initiative and publicly blamedenvironmentalists for locking up federal forests, thereby cre-ating unnaturally dense growth that in turn fuels catastrophicwildfires. A U.S. Forest Service press release on the initiativecan be found at http://www.usda.gov/news/releases/-2002/08/0352.htm.

NASA Accepting Comments on SolidEarth Science Vision

NASA is accepting public comments on a long-term visionand strategy for the agency’s solid Earth science activities.The plan was developed by an external Solid Earth ScienceWorking Group, initiated in 2000 and chaired by Sean Solomonof the Carnegie Institution of Washington.According to NASA,the document “will serve as a guide in developing a strongerand more focused NASA Solid Earth and Natural HazardsProgram.” The draft can be viewed and downloaded athttp://solidearth.jpl.nasa.gov and comments can be sent [email protected] through September 30th.

Georgia County Revises School Policy toPlacate Evolution Critics

Responding to pressure from parents opposed to the teach-ing of evolution, the Cobb County school board voted onAugust

22nd to consider a revised science education policy that wouldadopt a “teach the controversy” approach to this subject. Thenew policy states that “discussion of disputed views of aca-demic subjects is a necessary element of providing a balancededucation, including the study of the origin of the species.Thissubject remains an area of intense interest, research, and dis-cussion among scholars.” The policy would replace an earlierone adopted in 1995, which acknowledged that “some scien-tific accounts of the origin of human species as taught in publicschools are inconsistent with the family teachings of a signif-icant number of Cobb County citizens” and pledged respectfor those family teachings. Located just to the northwest ofAtlanta,Cobb County represents the second-largest school dis-trict in the state. The day before the school board vote, theAmerican Civil Liberties Union sued the county to discontin-ue another related policy adopted earlier this year thatrequires disclaimers be placed in biology textbooks. Modeledafter ones adopted several years ago in Alabama, the dis-claimers read: “This textbook contains material on evolution.Evolution is a theory, not a fact, regarding the origin of livingthings.This material should be approached with an open mind,studied carefully, and critically considered.” The board’s finalvote on its revised policy will take place September 26th. Inthe interim, the board is accepting public comments. More athttp://www.ncseweb.org.

List of Key Federal Register Notices

A recently added feature of the AGI Monthly Reviews is asummary of Federal Register announcements regarding fed-eral regulations and notices of interest to the earth sciencecommunity. Entries are listed in chronological order and showthe federal agency involved, the title, and the citation. TheFederal Register is available online at http://www.access.gpo.-gov/su_docs/fedreg/frcont02.html.

Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA). Finalrule on Modified Base (1-percent annual-chance) FloodElevations (BFEs) in several communities to be used to cal-culate flood insurance premium rates for new buildings. Vol.67, No. 149 (2 August 2002): p. 50362-50367.

FEMA. Notice and request for comments on a proposal ini-tiative for a competitive grant program for pre-disastermitigation. As part of a preliminary exploration of the issues,FEMA is soliciting ideas from all interested parties on theprocess for implementing the grant program on competitivebasis. Vol. 67, No. 151 (6 August 2002): p. 50890-50891.

FEMA. Request for comments on information submitted tothe Office of Management and Budget on an Internet surveyon National Earthquake Hazard Reduction Program publica-tions. Vol. 67, No. 155 (12 August 2002): p. 52483.

U.S. Geological Survey (USGS). Announcement of anincrease in prices for 1:24,000- scale, 1:25,000-scale and1:63,360-scale primary series quadrangles from $4.00 to $6.00per quadrangle to go into effect on September 1, 2002. Vol. 67,No. 163 (22 August 2002): p. 54448-54449.

USGS. Announcement of a meeting of the NationalCooperative Geologic Mapping Program (NCGMP) AdvisoryCommittee on September 17-18. Vol. 67, No. 164 (23 August2002): p. 54669.



AGI GOVERNMENT AFFAIRS MONTHLY REVIEW (continued)EPA. Final rule approving the State of Massachusetts’ Air

Quality Implementation Plans for the States of Massachusetts,Montana, and Missouri. This rule will be effective October 28,2002, unless EPA receives adverse comments by September27, 2002. Vol. 67, No. 167 (28 August 2002): p. 55121-55132.

EPA.Announcement that Mobile Sources Technical ReviewSubcommittee of the Clean Air Advisory Committee will meet3 times a year. The theme of the first meeting is “Fuel Cellsand Biodiesel Fuels.” Preliminary agenda available at the sub-committee website in early October.Vol.67,No.167 (28August2002): p. 55132-55133.

Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC). AdvisoryCommittee on Nuclear Waste (ACNW) will hold a public out-reach session to discuss stakeholders’ concerns and views onthe proposed repository site at Yucca Mountain. Vol. 67, No.168 (29 August 2002): p. 55439.

New Material on Web Site

The following updates and reports were added to theGovernment Affairs portion of AGI’s web site http://www.agi-web.org/gap since the last monthly update:• Climate Change Policy Overview (8-9-02)• Energy Policy Overview (8-9-02)• Geotimes Web Extra: Congress Chastises Bush Budget for

USGS (8-9-02)• Overview of Fiscal Year 2003 Geoscience Appropriations (8-

7-02)• Natural Hazards Mitigation Policy (8-7-02)• Geotimes Political Scene: Climate Policy That Makes a

Difference (byAGI 2001-2002 Congressional Science FellowDavid Curtiss; 8/02)

• Clean Air Act (8-7-02)• Summary of Hearings on Clean Air Act (8-7-02)• Science Education Policy (8-7-02)• Homeland Security Impacts on Science (8-6-02)• Summary of Hearings on Climate Change (8-6-02)• Outer Continental Shelf Leasing and Royalties (8-5-02)• Most Recent Energy Hearing Summaries (8-5-02)

Sources: Atlanta Journal-Constitution, E&E News, EPA,Greenwire, House Appropriations Committee, Library ofCongress, NASA, National Center for Science Education,Senate Appropriations Committee, Washington Post, andWhite House Office of Management and Budget.

This monthly review goes out to members of the AGIGovernment Affairs Program (GAP) Advisory Committee, theleadership of AGI’s member societies, and other interested geo-scientists as part of a continuing effort to improve communi-cations between GAP and the geoscience community that itserves. Prior updates can be found on the AGI web site under“Government Affairs” <http://www.agiweb.org>. For additionalinformation on specific policy issues, please visit the web siteor contact us at <[email protected]> or (703) 379-2480, ext. 212.

American Geological Institute Government AffairsProgram, 4220 King Street, Alexandria VA 22302-1502, (703)379-2480 ext. 212 (703) 379-7563 fax, [email protected]://www.agiweb.org.

AIPG 2003 NationalOfficers

2003 PRESIDENT-ELECT(2004 President)

Robert G. Corbett, CPG-04502Normal, Illinois

[email protected]

2003 VICE PRESIDENTBruce K. Darling, CPG-09636

Austin, [email protected]

2003 and 2004 TREASURERMark B. Sweatman, CPG-08698

Brighton, [email protected]

2003 EDITORVirginia T. McLemore, CPG-07438

Socorro, New [email protected]

ADVISORY BOARDREPRESENTITIVES

Lawrence C. Weber, CPG-07120Nashville, [email protected]

Dennis Pennington, CPG-04401Maple Green, Pensylvania

[email protected] H. Murphy, CPG-06203

Phoenix, [email protected]

Robert A. Levich, CPG-06477Las Vegas, Nevada

[email protected]

INCUMBENT OFFICERS

2003 PRESIDENTRichard M. Powers, CPG-06765

Lakeland, [email protected]

2003 PAST-PRESIDENTLawrence A. Cerrillo, CPG-02763

Evergreen, [email protected]

2003 SECRETARYLynn M. Kantner, CPG-06205

Groveport, [email protected]


Are Computers are Killing Geology?(column 77, Aug-Sep ‘00)

Bobbie Timmons (CPG) commented, “Kudos (and givingQuail, er...Quayle equal time and as I was reared [as opposedto raised] ) on the ‘place’ of computers. Exposing my age andhow I was reared/taught, ‘taint nothing that beats the valueof some ‘good old field work.’ A lady friend of mine in Longmontasked me a few years ago: ‘Can’t you do a lot of what you doby computer?’ Bless her dear unknowing heart, she didn’t havea clue as to what I usually do and since she worked for a legalfirm, that further added to the mystery! Have often told sim-ilar inquisitive entities that someday I am going to take acomputer out to a job site, set it down by the drilling rig whenthey commence drilling and then I’ll come back at the end ofthe workday and see what the COMPUTER has to tell me,including why the cores haven’t been boxed, identified, etc. Myson correctly stated, a number of years ago, that the hallowedcomputer is simply another ‘tool’ without deity status.”

Censorship or Suppression of ScientificInformation that Might be of Use to Terrorists

(column 78, Oct ‘02)

Ted Nield, who writes the “Media Monitor” column in theGeoscientist, the newsletter of the Geological Society ofLondon,commented on a speech give in May by Prime MinisterTony Blair. “While ‘science does not replace moral judgment’[Blair] said, neither should our fear of consequences ‘stop sci-ence trying to tell us the facts.’ Science challenges our moraljudgment, but we must rise to it, not shrink behind some tim-orous and slavish adherence to the letter of the precautionaryprinciple.”

Nield makes a good point. Scientists should try to dissem-inate what they know, not only to each other, but also to thegeneral public. Nevertheless, in doing so, one should be cog-nizant of the consequences,particularly in separating fact fromopinion. Conclusions that are subject to dispute shouldacknowledge the dispute. Furthermore, as stated in column55, one must be careful to distinguish between presenting ascientific opinion and a personal view regarding a proposedpublic policy. Opponents of your position will attempt to make

you appear to be a shill for the other side; don’t make it easyfor them by giving them a conflict of interest issue.

The piece in the last issue (column 78) under this headingaddressed another moral issue in disseminating information.If the information you disclose provides a terrorist with infor-mation required to carry out an attack,should that informationbe disclosed? Who really needs to know the information? Suchcases present a moral dilemma between the freedom to dis-seminate knowledge and the need to protect the public’shealth, safety, and welfare. Such dilemmas exist and requirecareful reflection and analysis.

Trend Micro is running an ad with the following headline:A Message Is Only Harmful If it

Is Allowed to Do Harm.It struck me that this headline provided an interesting com-

mentary on this issue. Knowledge is only harmful if used ina harming way. The question is, who decides how informationwill be used? Trend Micro sells virus detection software and,for that purpose, this is pretty good tag line–I seldom read adsand this one caught my eye. But antivirus-type software does-n’t exist for information in general.Our personal ethics providethis function. As we learned on September 11, 2001, some peo-ple have radically different views. As always, furtherdiscussion of this topic is welcomed.

Report Copies as Examples of Past Work;A Possible Confidentiality Problem

I recently prepared a proposal for a project for which thepotential client, a government agency, requested copies ofreports completed during the past three years as examples ofwork similar to that requested. While the agency’s request isreasonable, it presented my firm with a problem because therelevant reports were done in connection with existing or antic-ipated litigation and the clients, who paid for the reports, donot wish to have them circulated. Furthermore, because thereports are the client’s property (they pay for them althoughit is our professional work), the client has the right to controlhow the confidential information in a report is used. Standard3.2 of the Code of Ethics makes this clear; “Members shouldprotect, to the fullest possible extent, the interest of an employ-er or client so far as is consistent with the public health, safety,and welfare and the Member’s legal, professional, and ethicalobligations.”

The proposal explained this reason for failure to includethe examples of similar reports requested. I can only hope thatthe reason for not including the requested examples will notaffect consideration of the proposal. If it does, then that is theconsequence of acting in accord with one’s ethical principles,which can have negative consequences. This is integrity (col-umn 37, Dec ‘98).

If you have encountered a similar situation and are awareof the consequences, this column’s readers would welcome yourcontribution.


Compiled by David M. Abbott, Jr., CPG-04570, 2266 Forest Street, Denver, CO 80207-3831,303-394-0321, fax 303-394-0543, [email protected] or [email protected]

PROFESSIONAL ETHICS & PRACTICES - COLUMN 79



The Louisiana Section of AIPG held a dinner meeting atthe Radission Hotel, Baton Rouge on Thursday, September5, 2002. The Section Vice-President and President-ElectTom Isacks presided over the meeting which was attendedby the geologists of Louisiana Department of NaturalResources and the Geological Society of Baton Rouge aswell as consulting geologists from Baton Rouge, NewOrleans and Lafayette.The Past President Dr. M. B. Kumarintroduced the speaker and guest of honor,Hon.Commissioner of Conservation , Mr. James H. Welsh,and highlighted his professional accomplishments. Mr.Welsh was recognized and honored as the first geologistnamed as the State Commissioner of Conservation forLouisiana by Governor Mike Foster. In his speech,Mr.Welchtouched upon his career history and focused on the vitalroles his office plays for the public and the industries. TheState Laws have empowered him to establish and imple-ment rules to regulate all aspects of oil and gas mattersfrom exploration and production up to the refineries. Inaddition, the regulation of intrastate pipelines and distri-bution systems as well as geothermal resources and surfacemining comes under his jurisdiction. His additional func-tions include the implementation of programs forunderwater obstruction removal and oil field site restora-tion in order to ensure public safety and protection ofenvironment. He also is a member of the Ground WaterManagement Commission of the State of Louisiana.

The second picture shows Commissioner Welch (center)holding a plaque presented by Tom Isacks (left), flanked bySecretary Emil Maciasz,Past Presidents M.B.Kumar(right)and Steve Whitting.

PROFESSIONAL ETHICS & PRACTICES (continued)

Photographed by Anthony J. Duplechin, Jr.

Corporate Responsibility: Doing the RightThing and Ethical Actions

Graham Closs, CPG, called my attention to an article,“The Bourgeois Virtues–recent scandals may boost interest inbusiness ethics courses. But students should know ethics havenothing to do with corporate social responsibility,” written byGeorge Bragues for the September 2, 2002 issue of theNational Post, a Canadian newspaper. Bragues argues thatbusiness ethics courses that focus on corporate social respon-sibility have nothing to do with ethical corporate behavior.Corporate social responsibility responds to requests that cor-porations participate in various socially desirable activitiessuch as supporting arts and cultural programs, providingmatching funds for employee charitable donations, sponsor-ing events like walks for cures and other charitable causes,setting up corporate recycling centers, and taking otheractions leading to awards for promoting environmental goals,etc. These may be desirable activities, they do not translateinto fundamentally ethical business behavior.

Bragues cites a report by Sandra Waddock, a manage-ment professor at Boston College, that noted that “Enron wasa virtual poster boy for corporate social responsibility: it madethe annual list of top 100 companies to work for on three occa-sions, it won numerous environmental awards, it addressedethics conferences, and it made all the right commitments tohuman rights and anti- corruption causes.” Despite thesedemonstrations of corporate social responsibility, Enronproved it lacked a sense of ethical principles, like honesty, inits fundamental business practices. Clearly “doing the rightthing” cannot be measured by the number of plaques on a“love me” wall.

Identifying ethical corporate or personal behavior can bedifficult. It perhaps becomes most evident when doing theright thing, the ethical thing, requires at least short-termadverse consequences.Additional comments and examples arewelcomed.

Topical Index to theProfessional Ethics and Practices ColumnsI have prepared a topical index covering columns 1

through 79 that has been placed on the AIPG web site inthe ethics section. The index is in PDF format. The originalfile is in Microsoft Excel format. If you would prefer theExcel file, send me an e-mail and I'll send it to you. I'll updatethis index periodically and post the new copy on the AIPGweb site. If you have suggestions on organization, please letme know.

David M. Abbott, Jr., CPG-04570,2266 Forest Street, Denver, CO 80207-3831,

303-394-0321, fax 303-394-0543, [email protected]

The Louisiana Section HonorsThe New Commissioner of

Conservation



LETTERS TO THE EDITORDear Editor:

I read with interest Professor Raymond Bradley’s letter tothe editor (Is the Climate Changing, The ProfessionalGeologist, Aug/Sept 2002), written in commentary on LeeGerhard’s article (Is the Climate Really Changing, and WhyDo We Care?, TPG, Jan/Feb 2002). While I am not an experton “global warming,” as a geologist I do think that it is impor-tant to consider geologic time in the evaluation of the issue.In Lee Gerhard’s article, and in more detail in his (and other’s)“Geological Perspectives of Global Climate Change” (AAPGStudies in Geology No. 47), he outlines what we do, and don’t,know about climate changes over hundreds of millions of years.While not negating human influences, he makes a convincingargument that “the nonequilibrium systems that control nat-ural phenomena on earth very likely dwarf man’s ability toaffect climatic conditions on a global scale.”

Dr. Bradley challenges this interpretation, based primari-ly, it appears,on the rapid build-up of CO2 levels over negligiblegeologic time due to combustion of fossil fuels. This increasedCO2 concentration, in turn, is argued to be a factor in globalwarming that will have impact measurable in terms of humanlifespan. The issue thus appears to be one of perspective. Theperspective argued by Gerhard is that the effects of humanson climate are miniscule compared to what Mother Naturehas accomplished over geologic time. In contrast, Bradley con-tends that the changes wrought by humans —- minisculethough they may be in the grand scheme of things — willnonetheless have serious ramifications for humans and naturein our lifetimes.

From my limited review, the potential effects of CO2 in theatmosphere appear to be widely debated and subject toassumptions. I am inclined, therefore, to find Gerhard’s posi-tion the more convincing of the two. Where I would disagreewith him is in his selection of the title for his TPG article. The“why do we care?” tagline carries the risk of implying to acasual reader that because naturally occurring global climatechanges are a given, society should not care about them. I sus-pect that this is not his intended message. Given the earth’spopulation growth, it is reasonable to hypothesize that glob-al climate changes of either pattern (warming or cooling) willhave ramifications for our future infrastructure and agricul-tural strategies. Gerhard refers to the Medieval ClimateOptimum, for example, which allowed Vikings to briefly farmin Greenland until glaciers advanced during the Little Ice Age.When the ice came, the Vikings moved away. At that time, theworld was neither fully settled nor even fully explored, so wecan remember this as a quaint historic oddity. Today, our per-spective is different because we have run out of places on theplanet to migrate to, and even short term naturally occurringchanges will have consequences with respect to our utiliza-tion and preservation of resources.

So, yes, we certainly should care. But rather than overana-lyzing the atmospheric effects of fossil fuel combustion, let ourgoal be to increase our understanding of natural patterns inorder that we can adapt, thrive, and preserve in balance withnatural heterogeneity. Our social responsibility as scientists isto offer policy makers reliable insight into ways to improve ourresource utilization policies in light of natural conditions.

Anthony W. Creech, CPG-09876

Dear Editor:Cal Thomas’ recent opinion advocating an open discussion

of creation “theory” in the public schools appears on the sur-face to have merit. However, the arguments underlying hisposition do not withstand close scrutiny. The overwhelmingmajority of scientists who support the teaching of evolution inthe public schools do not fear any discussion of religion or acreator in the schools. What those scientists to do not supportis the portrayal of religion and religious beliefs as science.Science is a creative yet rigorous and critical way of thinkingabout the observable world. Scientific theories, such as the the-ory of evolution, are by definition testable. We can makepredictions based on scientific theories, and see if the predic-tionsarecorrect.Theuneducatedpersonmaychooseto“believe”in evolution, but scientists do not. Scientists require scientificproof. And the overwhelming bulk of the scientific evidence isthat the genetic makeup of organisms, the very blueprint oftheir form and behavior, is indeed quite dynamic. There shouldbe room for all of the major areas of knowledge in our publicschools, including religion, philosophy, and science. However,those who would intentionally blur the distinctions betweenthese fields of knowledge often have a hidden agenda.And thatagenda is to discourage critical thinking.

Jim Gross, CPG-07289Dear Editor:What a wonderful organization AIPG is!! Last month I

thanked the membership for remembering secondary earthscience programs and appealing for a petrographic microscopeand any other supplies. I encouraged members with unusedor unneeded materials to consider donating them to schools.

Were my prayers answered! Mr. Mike Hoge, CPG-09368, ofCincinatti, OH, told me he had a student petrographic micro-scope that he would be happy to donate. This microscope andassociated supplies arrived on Thursday, August 22 in wonder-ful condition.The Utah Geological Association also e-mailed methat they were sending goodies. I am simply awed by the gen-erosity! I also remember the many letters and goodies I receivedwhile serving in Operation Desert Shield/Storm. Clearly, wehave a membership that cares about it’s future. My earth sci-ence and college geology students now have a tool that willexpand their knowledge and horizons of geology, thanks to Mr.Hoge. I am hopeful that others will be similarly inspired to con-sider donations of any type to your local junior/senior high fortheir earth science or geology programs. Most schools cannotafford much other than small samples. Think of that sample inyour closet that a teacher would be eternally grateful for.

Mr. Hoge’s donation will not sit in a corner to gather dustwhen I am not using it. I have told our physics teachers of thewonderful opportunities this instrument can provide in optics.I will also make the microscope available to other earth scienceteachers in the district and to the community college studentsI occasionally teach. I have always felt that everything in school“belongs to the kids” and all should be able to share and use.

Thank you, all for thinking of the real future of AIPG: thesecondary students in our 7-12 grade programs. Thank youMichael Hoge for answering my prayers so I can provide oppor-tunities equal to that at the college level. Thank you AIPG for“being there” for earth science education and all geologists!

Robert H. (Barney) Oldfield, RG, CPG-06346


BEN H. PARKER MEMORIAL MEDALThe Ben H. Parker Memorial Medal is the Institute’s most distin-

guished award. It was established by the Executive Committee in1969 in posthumous honor of a truly great leader, who devoted muchof his life to improve the quality of geology and geologists and theservices they provide. The medal is awarded to individuals who havelong records of distinguished and outstanding service to the profes-sion.

The most important criterion for this medal is a continual recordof contribution to the profession of geology. A wide variety of contri-butions can be considered, such as (a) the education and training ofgeologists, (b) professional development of geologists, (c) service to theInstitute, (d) leadership in the surveillance of laws, rules, and regu-lations affecting geology, geologists, and the public, and (e) activity inlocal and regional affairs of geologists.

MARTIN VAN COUVERINGMEMORIAL AWARD

The Martin Van Couvering Memorial Award was established bythe Executive Committee in 1979 in posthumous honor of the firstpresident of the Institute. Martin Van Couvering made the presiden-cy a full-time occupation for the first two years of the Institute’s his-tory. His dynamic leadership, diplomacy, and organizational abilitiesestablished the solid foundation from which the Institute has grown.Few, if any, have given so much to the Institute.

The most important criterion for the Martin Van CouveringMemorial Award is service to the Institute. As in other awards, a widevariety of contributions to the Institute may be considered. By far themost important contribution a geologist can make to the Institute isthat of time. It is the contributions by individuals to the Sections, thecommittees, and special projects that enable the Institute to enhancethe practice of geology.

JOHN T. GALEY, SR., MEMORIAL PUBLICSERVICE AWARD

The American Institute of Professional Geologists’ Public ServiceAward was established by the Executive Committee in 1982 in recog-nition of one of its primary purposes: service to the public. In 1992, itwas renamed the John T. Galey, Sr., Memorial Public Service Award,in posthumous honor of our fourth President, whose long profession-al career was a continuum of service to both the geological and thegeneral public.

Recognition of public service is important because so manyMembers have distinguished themselves and the Institute by givingexpert testimony to governmental commissions and committees, andby providing geological expertise where it was needed by the publicat large.

The application of geology to the needs of the general public maybe in many different forms. Recipients of this award have outstand-ing records of public service on the national, state, or local level wellbeyond their normal professional responsibilities.

AWARD OFHONORARY MEMBERSHIP

Since 1984, AIPG has conferred Honorary Membership to thosewho have an exemplary record of distinguished service to the profes-sion and to the Institute.

OUTSTANDINGACHIEVEMENT AWARD

The Outstanding Achievement Award was established by the 1989Executive Committee to honor a non-member of AIPG who is widelyrecognized as a major contributor to the profession of geology. Theaward is not necessarily given annually, but only when the AwardsCommittee recommends an outstanding candidate to the ExecutiveCommittee for their consideration.


REQUEST FOR NOMINATIONSThe 2003 AIPG Awards Committee is seeking nominations for future recipients of the Ben H. Parker Memorial Medal,

the Martin Van Couvering Memorial Award, the John T. Galey, Sr. Memorial Public Service Award, and HonoraryMembership. The qualifications for these awards can be found below. Nominations for these awards, accompanied by

supporting statement, should be sent to AIPG Headquarters, c/o Honors and Awards Chr., 8703 Yates Drive, Suite 200,Westminster, CO 80031-3681.

American Institute of Professional GeologistsNomination form for 2003 AIPG Awards

(Please check one)❑ Ben H. Parker Memorial Medal ❑ John T. Galey, Memorial Public Service Award❑ Martin Van Couvering Memorial Award ❑ Award of Honorary Membership ❑ Outstanding Achievement Award

NAME OF CANDIDATE: Telephone:

Address: Fax:

Address: E-mail:

NAME OF PERSON MAKINGTHE NOMINATION: Telephone:

Address: Fax:

Address: E-mail:

Signature: Date:

Supporting Statement (In brief here, please submit detailed letter of support):

RETURN TO: AIPG, Attn: Awards, 8703 Yates Dr., #200, Westminster, CO 80031. Ph. 303-412-6203 Fax: 303-412-6219DEADLINE: Completed nominations must be received by December 15, 2002.



This service is open to AIPG Members as well as non-members. The Professional Services Directory is a10-month listing offering experience and expertise inall phases of geology. Prepayment required.Advertising rates are based on a 3 3/8”x 1 3/4”space.

12-MONTH LISTING FOR ONLY:AIPG Member $200.00Non-member $300.00

Space can be increased vertically bydoubling or tripling the size and also the rate.

Dr. Robert Font, CPG, PG, EurGeolPresident

Geoscience Data ManagementOur geoscientists specialize indatabase entry of G&G and

engineering records.

214-213-9331 Cell [email protected]

David M. Abbott, Jr.Consulting Geologist

AIPG CPG, FAusIMM, Ch Geol. FGS, EuroGeol. WY-PG

evaluating natural resources, disclosures about them,reserve estimates, and geological ethics & practices

2266 Forest Street Tel: (303) 394-0321Denver, CO 80207-3831, USA Fax: (303) 394-0543

[email protected]

LARRY R. RHODES, P.G.President

Mailing Address:P.O. Box 24080Lexington, KY 40524

Ph: 859-887-5700FAX: 859-887-5703

Bluegrass Industrial Park115 Eisenhower Court

Nicholasville, KY 40356

e-mail: [email protected]

FAST-TEKEngineering Support Services

• Remediation Injection Process for PCE, TCETPH/BTEX, MTBE, Metals

• Geoprobe sampling and site investigation• GPS/GIS site mapping• Services nationwide

www.fast-tek.com James Jacobs, CPG-07760e-mail: [email protected] (415) 381-5195

HB Management GroupEngineering, Risk Analysis,

Turn-Arounds.(Svetovalec/Inñenior).

Kelvin J. Buchanan, P.E., M.B.A.President

USA575 Forest St., #100P.O. Box 2391Reno, NV 89505-2391Tel: (775) 786-4515Fax: (775) 786-4324E-mail: [email protected]

EUROPEAlpska 8

4248 LesceSlovenia

Tel: 386-04-537-88-54Fax: 386-04-537-88-40

E-mail: [email protected]

PROFESSIONAL SERVICES DIRECTORY



Draper Aden AssociatesBlacksburg, —— Richmond, Virginia

Engineering — Surveying — Environmental Services

• Groundwater Assessment and Remediation• Solid Waste Management• Wetlands and Ecological Services

2206 South Main Street • Blacksburg, Virginia 24060

Phone: (540) 552-0444 http://www.daa.com

Fax: (540) 552-0291 [email protected]

SPECIALIZED

ENGINEERING

Construction Quality Control • Environmental ConsultingGeotechnical & Forensic Engineering

• Vibration Monitoring• Geophysical Surveys• Crosshole Sonic Logging (CSL)

9607 Dr. Perry Road, Suite 102 - Ijamsville, MD 217541-800-773-3808 [email protected]

Full Service Environmental Consulting and Contracting

Roger Breeden, CPG, REPSenior Project Manager/Geologist

• RCRA, CERCLA • Geotechnical-Drilling/Engineering Service• Phase I, Phase II - Site Investigation • Construction Equipment, Land Development• Phase III-CAP’s, Remediation Design • Demolition• Hydrogeological Studies • Hazardous Waste Management• Regulatory/Industrial Compliance • UST Installation and Removal• Federal & State Permitting • Karst Studies• Expert Testimony • CDD Landfill Management/Ownership

*Recognized National Accounts2040 Old Louisville Road • P.O. Box 2590 • Bowling Green, KY 42102(270) 781-4945 • Fax (270) 793-0088 • e-mail: [email protected]

For 24-Hour Environmental Response call 1-800-TPM-4ERT

TOM FAILSCPG-3174, AAPG CPG-877, EFG - EG-182

INDEPENDENT PETROLEUM GEOLOGIST/CONSULTANT

South Louisiana and European E & P ProjectsBasin Analysis Coalbed MethaneExploration Management Salt Dome Problems

4101 East Louisiana Ave., Ste. 412Denver, CO 80246 USA

Ph: (303) 759-9733 Fax: (303) 759-9731E-mail: [email protected]

ELLIS INTERNATIONAL SERVICES, INC.Valuations • Geology • Economics

www.minevaluation.com

TREVOR R. ELLISCertified Minerals Appraiser-AIMA

Certified Professional Geologist-AIPGMineral Economist-MS

600 Gaylord Street • Geology ReportsDenver, Colorado 80206-3717, USA • Market StudiesPhone: 303 399 4361 • Economic EvaluationFax: 303 399 3151 • Property Valuatione-mail: [email protected]

The

Ernest K. Lehmann

& Associates Inc. Group

and

North Central

Mineral Ventures Inc.

Suite 62212 South 6th StreetMinneapolis, MN 55402

USATEL: 612-338-5584FAX: 612-338-5457

World WideGeologic, Mining,

and Mineral EconomicsConsulting Services and

Mineral Project Management

Since 1967





Workers at large U.S. mines take home larger paychecksand enjoy more benefits than those at smaller mines, accord-ing to a recent survey of 124 U.S. metal and industrial mineralmines conducted by the Mining Cost Service division ofWestern Mine Engineering, Inc. Paychecks were 20% higheron average for hourly workers at the large mines, and 24%higher for salaried workers. The disparity persists through-out all the job categories, with the single exception of chiefgeologists,who earn slightly more on average at smaller mines.In the hourly categories, the electrical and mechanical tradesat underground mines were the closet to parity between thetwo mine classifications. Electricians at large undergroundmines earn only 1% more than their counterparts at the small-er underground mines, mechanics, 8% more. Large mines weredefined for this study as those employing 100 or more work-ers, small mines as those with less than 100 employees.

Not only are paychecks higher at larger mines, but bene-fits are more generous as well. Workers at large mines enjoymore vacation, more sick leave and more holidays, and moreof them are provided with company supported medical plans,retirement plans, incentive bonus plans, and life insurance.

A significant element in this comparison may be the factthat 51% of the larger mines are unionized, wile only 20% ofthe smaller mines are unionized. Commonly, wages in thelower skill categories are higher at union mines than at com-

parable non-union mines, while wages in the higher skill cat-egories are lower.

The survey was conducted between November 2001 andJune 2002. Ninety-three of the 124 mines reported wageincreases averaging 2.9% in the 12 months preceding the sur-vey, while 31 of the mines reported no change in wages. Thetable below lists benchmark wages selected form the surveyresults. A complete survey report, including actual wage andsalary scales for each of the mines, benefit plan profiles, andbonus plan descriptions, can be purchased from Western MineEngineering, Inc. Details are available at www.western-mine.com/labor.html, or by calling (509) 328-8023.

NEWS RELEASEContact: Jennifer Leinart

Compensation AnalystWestern Mine Engineering, Inc.

222 W. Mission Ave., Suite 218Spokane, WA 99201, USA,

Phone (509) 328-8023

Job Title Small Mines Large Mines

Laborer - surface mine $11.08/hr. $13.35/hr.

Production Truck Driver - surface mine $13.73/hr. $16.34/hr.

Miner - underground mine $13.84/hr. $16.92/hr.

Mine Superintendent $61,900/yr. $77,100/yr.

Chief Engineer $68,400/yr. $78,300/yr.

Personnel Manager $55,400/yr. $77,300/yr.

Source: U.S. Metal and Industrial Mine Salaries, Wages and Benefits: 2002 Survey Results. Western Mine Engineering,Inc., www.westernmine.com

Mine Employees Benefit from Economies of Scale




AIPG STORE

Geode Pair A Geode Pair B Geode Pair C

Geode Pair D Geode Pair E Geode Pair F

Geode Pairs

NEW ITEM!

Geode Pairs - Small, yet exquisite geode pairs.Please indicate three preferences in the eventyour first choice is no longer available.

Price: $9.95

NEW ITEM!

Contour Pen - blue ink, AIPGimprinted in multiple colors withAIPG phone number and website URL.

Price: $1.50

NEW ITEM!

AIPG Pin -1" diameter,butterfly clutch.

Price: $2.50

AIPG Decal3" diameter

Price: $.50(includes shipping)

AIPG Bookmarker -7 1/2" x 2 1/2"

Price: $.50 (includes shipping)

NEW ITEM!

Pen - blue ink, laser-engravedgold w/AIPG phone number andURL web site. Assorted colors.

Price: $4.00

Tee Shirt - Russell brand, 50%cotton, royal blue with white silkscreen of AIPG seal.Price: $12.50

Sweat Shirt - Russell brand, 50%cotton, royal blue with whitesilk screen of AIPG seal.Price: $21.50

Golf Shirt - Outerbanks, 100%cotton, white with royal blueembroidery of AIPG on upperleft chest.Price: $30.00

Cap - Royal blue, navyor navy with yellow billwith AIPG logo.Price: $15.50

Steel Die - Round AIPGseal with your nameand member number.Choose from left, rightor bottom embossingpositions.Price: $35.00

Self-inking Stamp -Round AIPG seal withyour name and mem-ber number.Price: 28.00

Plaque - 10.5" x 13", walnut, fits8.5" x 11" certificate, clearacrylic cover and brassrosettes.Price: $18.95

Coffee Mug - 11 oz.,ceramic, microwave-able, white with blueand red AIPG lettering.Price: $6.00

Coffee Mug - 11oz.,microwaveable, blackmarble, platinum rimwith platinum AIPGseal.Price: $12.50

NEW ITEM!

Capped Pen - blue ink, non-retractable with cap, AIPGimprinted in multiple colors withAIPG phone number and website URL.

Price: $.99



AIPG Store Order FormChoose color(s) and size(s).

ITEM PRICE QTY LINE TOTALNEW! Geode Pairs - Small, yet exquisite geode pairs. Please indicatethree preferences, by entering the numbers 1, 2, and 3, in the eventyour first choice is no longer available. (1 indicating your first choice).

Geode Pair A Geode Pair B Geode Pair CGeode Pair D Geode Pair E Geode Pair F $9.95

NEW! Golf Shirt, (not shown) white or black shirt with embroideryof U.S. Flag with AIPG lettering below on upper left chest.“ White “ Black “ Medium “ Large “ X-Large“ XX-Large (add $1.25) “ XXX-Large (add $3.00) $25.95

NEW! Cap, (not shown) Navy with gold embroidered AIPGlettering and the words Competence... Integrity... Ethics... on front.A U.S. Flag on the left side. $12.50

NEW! Gold Lapel Pin, (not shown), 5/8” with red outer rim and blue center. $12.95

NEW! Travel Mug (not shown) green with gold AIPG Logo. $7.95

NEW! Coffee Mug, (not shown) blue marble with gold AIPG Logo. $8.95

NEW! Coffee Mug (not shown) white with blue AIPG Logo on oneside and blue 40th Anniversary text on other side. $4.50

NEW! Pen, blue ink, laser engraved with AIPG phone numberand web site. $4.00

NEW! Contour Pen, blue ink, white with AIPG phone number and web site. $1.50NEW! Capped Pen, blue ink, white with AIPG phone number, and web site. $.99NEW! AIPG Pin, 1" diameter, gold with two shades of blue. $2.50

AIPG Decal, 3” diameter, price includes shipping. $.50AIPG Bookmarker, (7 1/2 x 2 1/2), price includes shipping. $.50

Tee Shirt, blue with white silk screened AIPG logo.“ Medium “ Large “ X-Large “ XX-Large (add $2.00) $12.50

Sweat Shirt, blue with white silk screen AIPG logo.“ Medium “ Large “ X-Large “ XX-Large (add $2.00) $21.50

Golf Shirt, white with blue embroidery of AIPG lettering on upper leftchest “ Medium “ X-Large “ XX-Large (add $2.00) $30.00

Cap, embroidered AIPG logo in gold. “ Blue “ Blue w/yellow bill $15.50

Coffee Mug, black marble with platinum AIPG Logo. $12.50

Coffee Mug, white with red and blue AIPG lettering. 6.00

Certificate, 8 1/2” x 11” 10.00

Plaque, walnut, for 8 1/2” x 11” certificate. 18.95

Self-Inking Stamp, available only to CPGs. 28.00

Steel Die, available only to CPGs(Choose embossing position) “ Bottom “ Left “ Right 35.00

Name

Ship to address

City, State, Zip

Country Phone

E-mail

Prepayment required. “ Check “ Money OrderCredit Card: “ Visa “ MasterCard “ American Express

Account number

Expiration Date Signature

SubtotalShipping & Handling

Orders up to $15.00 add $4.00Orders $15.01 - $30.00 add $5.00

Orders Over $30 add $6.00

GRAND TOTAL

Mail order form to: AIPG, 8703 Yates, Dr., #200,Westminster, CO 80031. Ph.: 303-412-6205,Fax: (303) 412-6219, e-mail: [email protected], ororder online <http://www.aipg.org>.



Robert W. Anderson, CPG-0058Charter/Emeritus Member

September 30, 2002Missoula, Montana

James E. Hooks, CPG-03999September 11, 2002

Houston, Texas

William A. Kneller, CPG-06365Septmeber, 2002Sylvania, Ohio

Noel M. Ravneberg, CPG-01928May 19,2002

Williamsburg, Virginia

Donald E. Reed, CPG-03489December 7, 2001

Norwell, Massachusetts

Richard M. Winar, CPG-01851September 6, 2002

Auburn Hills, Michigan

William A. Kneller, CPG-06365, 1929-2002

William A. Kneller, Ph. D. , Professor Emeritus of Geology,the University of Toledo, Ohio, passed away Friday,September 13, 2002 at Flower Hospital. Dr. Kneller is abeloved husband, brother, father, and teacher.

Few people could accomplish in three lifetimes what Dr.Kneller accomplished in one. A deeply committed man hedevoted 51 years to his wife and family, 28 years to theUniversity of Toledo and 33 years to his country as a reserveofficer in the United States Marine Corps.

He was a man with a vision and the commitment to real-ize his dreams. His favorite adage was “man builds not forhimself alone, but also for his children and his children’s chil-dren....”

In 1961, Dr. Kneller came to the University of Toledo witha vision to build a geology program par excellence. He tookup the challenge of making an entire geology program froma couple of courses in the Geography Department and a sin-gle classroom to an entire department offering anoutstanding Graduate Program in Geology.

An excellent grantsman, he directed over a million dol-lars in materials science research and authored over 100publications in physicochemical characteristics of gravel,aggregates, coal and cement kiln dust. A true academician,he brought the first and only endowed chair to the Universityof Toledo. The 1.2 multi-million-dollar endowment estab-lished the Wilhelm Eitel Institute for Silicates and CeramicResearch. As Director of the Wilhelm Eitel Institute, Dr.Kneller championed the practical application of science toindustry, bringing the resources of the University to localstone companies, Owens-Illinois Corporation, Air Productsand Chemical Co., Toledo Edison and others.

An outstanding professor, he advised more than a hun-dred students’ research and professional development andhelped to shape the inquisitive minds of many more. His door

was always open. He generously bestowed his guidance uponany seeker of knowledge. A true educator, Dr. Kneller formedthe Sigma Xi student chapter at the University to supportthe professional development of all UT students.

In addition, he was a veteran of the Korean War, retiringfrom the United States Marine Corps Reserve as a Colonel.He played collegiate football with Bo Schembeckler at MiamiUniversity of Ohio for Woody Hayes. He excelled in track andfield events, especially the shot put.

He received his doctorate degree in geology from the pres-tigious program at the University of Michigan. He lived tosee life come full circle as his grandson begins his doctoralstudies in geology at the University of Michigan this fall.

Dr. Kneller is survived by his loving wife, Olga; two daugh-ters, Karinlee and Ellen Kay; two sons, Gregory John andKurt Tihon; two daughters-in-law, Linda and Mimi; threegrand children, Erik Arthur, Heather Grace, and KatherineOlga; and sister, Margarite Grundy. His parents John Jacoband Cora Mae Kneller preceded him in death.

Donations maybe made in his honor to the AmericanDiabetes Association, the National Kidney Foundation, andthe Multiple Sclerosis (MS) Society.

Richard M. “Dick” Winar

Richard M. “Dick” Winar, CPG-01851, of Auburn Hills,Michigan, died on September 6, 2002 after a long battle withcancer. He was a native of Chicago and graduated from ParkRidge High School. He was an alumnus of the University ofIllinois at Urbana-Champaign, a veteran of the U.S. Army,and had served on the Board of the Paint Creek UnitarianUniversalist Congregation. He was a dedicated environ-mental engineer and geologist, and his work took him tomany cities across the country. He worked most recently withthe Oakland County Road Commission in Michigan.He madefriends everywhere he went and remembered them all.

After joining AIPG in 1968, Dick Winar served theInstitute in many capacities. He was 1975 Illinois-IndianaSection President, and chaired AIPG’s National CooperativeEvaluation Committee in 1978-1980, the NationalEducational Standards Committee in 1980-1981, and theNational Educational Affairs Committee in 1981-1982. Hewas a member of the Ethics Committee and received theAIPG National Certificate of Merit in 1982, and in 1983served as AIPG National Vice President and a member ofthe Radioactive Waste Disposal Committee. He also was amember of the ad hoc committee for AIPG’s publication onRadioactive Waste Issues and Answers. More recently he wasvery active in AIPG’s Michigan Section, from 1994 through1997 serving variously as Membership Chairman,Secretary-Treasurer, Advisory Board Delegate, and as SectionPresident in 1997.

Dick Winar is survived by his wife, Lois Jensen Winar;children Susan Winar, Gail Winar, and Nancy WinarCracknell; four grandchildren; and brother Henry Winiarski.Memorial contributions in Dick’s name may be made to theAmerican Cancer Society.

IN MEMORY



CERTIFIED PROFESSIONALGEOLOGIST

EDUCATION: 36 semester or 54 quarterhours in geological sciences* with a bac-calaureate or higher degree; certifiedcopy of official transcripts must be sentby each college or university

EXPERIENCE: 8 years beyond bachelor'sdegree, or 7 years beyond master'sdegree, or 5 years beyond doctorate

SPONSORS: 3 required from professionalgeologists, 2 of whom must be CPG's (seeSection 2.3.1.4 of the Bylaws for excep-tions)

SCREENING: Section and National

APPLICATION FEE: $50 (to upgrade fromRegistered Member or Member to CPG,the fee is $35)

ANNUAL DUES: $120 plus Section dues;both pro-rated for remainder of yearwhen accepted

MEMBERS

EDUCATION: 30 semester or 45 quarterhours in geological sciences* with a bac-calaureate or higher degree

SPONSORS: 1 required from a CPG orMember

SIGNUP DUES: $40 (current years dues)

ANNUAL DUES: $55 plus Section dues

STUDENT

EDUCATION: Currently enrolled in ageological science degree program*

SPONSOR: 1 letter from geological sci-ence faculty member

APPLICATION FEE: $5

ANNUAL DUES: $15

ASSOCIATENo education, experience, or sponsorsrequired. This category is for anyone thathas an interest in geology.

APPLICATION FEE: $5

ANNUAL DUES: $60 plus Section dues;both pro-rated for remainder of yearwhen accepted

*As defined by theAmerican Geological Institute,a geological science is any of the subdisciplinaryspecialties that are part of the science of geol-ogy, e.g., geophysics, geochemistry, paleontol-ogy, petrology, etc.

Note to those who received their degrees fromnon-U.S./Canadian universities: If you received adegree from a university or college outside theU.S. or Canada, and the school is unable to pro-vide an acceptable transcript, you must submita copy of your diploma and a list of courses taken.The Screening Committee may ask you to pro-vide additional information or an equivalencyevaluation, at your expense.

AIPG MEMBERSHIPS AND REQUIREMENTS

NEW!AIPG MEMBERSHIP POSTCARD



Applicants for certification must meetAIPG’s standards as set forth in its Bylawson education, experience, competence,and personal integrity. If any Member orboard has any factual information as to anyapplicant’s qualifications in regard to thesestandards, whether that information mightbe positive or negative, please mail thatinformation to Headquarters within thirty(30) days. This information will be circulat-ed only so far as necessary to process andmake decisions on the applications.Negative information regarding an appli-cant’s qualifications must be specific andsupportable; persons who provide infor-mation that leads to an application’srejection may be called as a witness in anyresulting appeal action.

Applicants forCertified Professional GeologistTX-Jeffery B. Bennett

#3 Los Ranchos, Alpine TX 79830. Sponsors:Roger Peery, Jeffrey Watson, Brad Ilg, WendyMeyer.

GA-John R. Dozierc/o CE Minerals/Mulcoa, P.O. Box 37,Andersonville GA 31711. Sponsors: SamPickering, Doral Mills, H.E. Cofer.

LA-Anthony J. DuplechinLouisiana Dept. of Nat. Res., P.O. Box 94275,Baton Rouge LA 70804-9275. Sponsors:Madhurendu B. Kumar, Bruce Darling,Laurence Bland.

IA-Jeff A. HoveGAB Robins, 2600 72nd St., Ste. A, Des MoinesIA 50322. Sponsors: Barb Ryan, Steve Pettit,Joh Jahnke.

AZ-Linus T. Keating, Jr.4325 E. Cooper Cir., Tucson AZ 85711.Sponsors: Peter Megaw, John Frost, Robert T.Wilson.

FL-John W. Maddry790 E. Church St., Bartow FL 33830. Sponsors:Jon Courtney, John Walter, Allen Truesdell.

AK-James A. Munter5701 Penny Cir., Anchorage AK 99516.Sponsors: Brad Authier, Marilyn Plitnik, JaneParis.

OH-A. Edward Onyia3726 Turret Green Dr., Toledo OH 43607.Sponsors: Jack Leow, George Stuckey, GeoffLeking.

NC-Tina P. Parrish ParsonsP.O. Box 78, Asheville NC 28802. Sponsors:Diane Eskenasy, Tom Galya, SandraGoodman-Cash, David Kidder, David Watkins,Ted Mew.

MI-Michelle A. RaczGeoTrans, Inc., 710 Avis Dr., Ann Arbor MI48169. Sponsors: Joseph Esseichick, A. LinetteMcMonagle, Michael Gebhard.

CO-John J. Read1714 Robb St., #12-305, Lakewood CO 80215.Sponsors: Rich Harris, Colin McLachlan, CurtisEverson.

TX-Gordon V. Spradley12918 Carla Way, Cypress TX 77429.Sponsors: Derrick Vallance, Steve Hall, BobIlles.

NJ-Allan M. WoodMalcolm Pirnie, Inc., 17-17 Route 208 North,Fairlawn NJ 07410. Sponsors: Dan St.Germain, Don Cohen, Douglas Beal.

Applicants Upgrading to CPGNY-Richard G. Bova

24 Old Orchard Way, Miller Place NY 11764.Sponsors: Steven Colabufo, Karen Destefanis,Christopher Shubert.

MO-Duane T. KreugerGeotechnology, Inc., 2258 Grissom Dr., St.Louis MO 63146. Sponsors: John Howard,Patrick King, Douglas Lambert.

MI-Philip J. Loew4700 Powell Rd., Kewadin MI 49648.Sponsors: Kurt Koella, Alfred Jordan, EugeneGutting.

MI-James G. McLaughlin350 Ottawa N.W., 6th Flr., State Office Bldg.,Grand Rapids MI 49503. Sponsors: AlanHinks, Amy Lachance, Lee Anne Claucherty.

Applicants for MemberMI-Nicholas B. Swiger

306 Lansing St., Cadillac MI 49601. Sponsors:Jason Iseler, Maureen Allen.

MI-Kevin R. WilsonARCADIS G&M Inc., 25200 Telegraph Rd.,Southfield MI 48034. Sponsors: RobertFerree, Curt Cramer.

Certified Professional GeologistsCA-Javed Azam CPG-10672

418 North Lima St., Sierra Madre CA 91024,(310) 320-5100

AK-Keri L. DePalma CPG-10675AMEC Earth & Enivr., 3504 Industrial Ave., Ste.5, Fairbanks AK 99701, (907) 479-7586

NV-David R. Shaddrick CPG-10677P.O. Box 4940, Sparks NV 89432, (775) 746-2071

MN-Scott A. Johnson CPG-10678285 Rice Creek Blvd., Fridley MN 55432, (651)770-1500

OH-Thomas J. Kilbane CPG-106793823 Leeward Ct., Hamilton OH 45011, (513)772-6650

MD-Donald J. Mullis CPG-10680844 West Street, Ste. 100, Annapolis MD21401, (410) 990-4607

MI-Brian S. Palys CPG-10681132 Coalmont, Walled Lake MI 48390, (734)779-2837

NJ-Donald W. Richardson CPG-1068222 South Crescent, Maplewood NJ 07040,(973) 361-3600

MI-Curtis G. Roebuck CPG-10683DLZ Michigan, Inc., 1425 Keystone Ave.,Lansing MI 18911, (517) 393-6800

MI-Alan H. Hooper CPG-10684P.O. Box 248, Laingsburg MI 48848, (517) 702-0470 x103

Registered MembersCA-Barbara Matz RM-0033

IT Corp., 4005 Port Chicago Hwy, Concord CA94520-1120, (925) 288-2337

New Student AdjunctsPA-Patricia A. Jannett SA-0258

3667 Chesterfield Rd., , Philadelphia PA19114, (215) 204-8227

WV-Cheryle A. Boggs SA-0259HC 64 Box 193, Hillsboro WV 24946, (304) 384-5975

ADVERTISERSINDEX

AIPG 2003 Annual Meeting BIC

Krueger Enterprises, Inc. 16

Professional Services Directory 34-36

RockWare, Inc. BC

Seabury & Smith IFC

AIPG Membership Totals

As of As of09/27/01 10/08/02

CPG - Active 3,993 3,923CPG - Retired 522 505Member 73 78Registered Memb. 20 22Associate Memb. 9 12Student Adjunct 102 126Honorary 20 24

TOTALS 4,739 4,690

AIPG ANNUALMEETINGS

October 4-9, 2003Glenwood Springs,

Colorado

2004Saratoga Springs,

New York

NEW APPLICANTS AND MEMBERS (08/22/02-10/07/02)


AIPG 40th Annual MeetingGlenwood Springs, Colorado

October 4-9, 2003

PLANNED FIELD TRIPSPICEANCE BASIN TRIP

Petroleum, stratigraphic and structural geology for tight-gas sands and coals

YULE MARBLE QUARRYRedstone and the Crystal River Valley

GYPSUM QUARRY AND WALLBOARD PLANTGEOHAZARDS, COLLAPSE FEATURES, AND EVAPORITES OF THE EAGLE VALLEY

UNCONVENTIONAL RESERVOIRS – TIGHT GAS SANDS,BASIN-CENTERED ACCUMULATIONS, AND OIL SHALE

ENGINEERING GEOLOGY AND STRATIGRAPHY OF GLENWOOD CANYONCARBONATE DISSOOLUTION AND PRECIPITATION –TOURS OF GLENWOOD CAVERNS AND FAIRY CAVE

HYDROLOGY OF GLENWOOD HOT SPRINGS WITH DISCUSSION OF WATER RIGHTSASPEN AND MAROON BELLS

with ghost town of Ashcroft, lecture on avalanches, Crystal River Valley and Redstone.Geologic stabilization of Highway 82 between Carbondale and Aspen

PALISADES WINERY AND VINEYARD

PLANNED TECHNICAL SESSIONSTTuueessddaayy,, 77 OOccttoobbeerr 22000033

• Water in the West• Environment OR Geologic Hazards

• Unconventional Reservoirs: The Future of Rocky Mountain Natural Gas

PLANNED PROFESSIONAL SESSIONSWWeeddnneessddaayy,, 88 OOccttoobbeerr 22000022

• Political Relations Symposium• Ethics and Integrity Session

• Continuing Professional DevelopmentGeologists and other interested parties who are not AIPG members are welcome to register as non-members

to attend the Annual Meeting and participate in the Field Trips and Professional and Technical Sessions. Foradditional information, please contact AIPG Headquarters at phone 303-412-6205, fax 303-412- 6219, [email protected]

AIPG 2003 Annual Meeting Co-ChairsSusan Landon, CPG

[email protected](303) 436-1930

(303) 322-2288 Fax

Tom Fails, [email protected]

(303) 759-9733(303) 759-9731 Fax

