The Erosion Control Blogs

The Blogger

J. Eric Scherer J. Eric Scherer

Eric Scherer

August 11th, 2008 11:16am PST

Bringing Inspectors On Board

Posted By J. Eric Scherer 6 Comments

There are a couple of things that I have learned in life. One is that experience does count for something and being retrospective is a good thing, it allows you to look back and hopefully allow you to change courses if you are going the wrong way. You also become more cautious with age, not a bad thing either. What I hope not to see is that history does repeat itself. We should learn from our mistakes and leave a better world then the one we found.

As I look back (being retrospective) at over 30 years as a professional soil conservationist, with better then 20 in the urban landscape, I am pleased with what I see. I was interested in urban soil erosion when it wasn’t too popular in my agency, and I became a Certified Professional in Erosion and Sediment Control early on when the process was more like joining a “club.” We have come a long way in 20 years. The road to a better planet is a result of many dedicated individuals and organizations (and publications) created to support these professionals.

I am pleased to see the development and implementation of the new Certified Erosion, Sediment, and Storm Water Inspector (CESSWI) program. It only took a couple of knocks on my head by some colleagues to point out that we were doing better at training planners and designers and that we had great tools to work with (software, products, and services), but we weren’t getting the implementation we thought would naturally come with an “educated” workforce and public. We realized (I later then most) that the people responsible for implementation were not on board yet: the inspectors and the contractors. So we are addressing the inspectors now with a new certification program. What do we do about the contractors? I have heard of a couple of ideas in the past, and there is the Land Improvement Contractors of America, but it this working? If not, why? What can we do to help address this piece of the puzzle?

What Do You Think?

Post a Comment

lvc

February 6th, 2010 3:23 PM PT

My concerns mirror mjb on 2.3.10, in this time of budgetary constraint it is imperitive to make all dollars count. So what accreditation do I really need? Does a CESSWI carry more weight than a CISEC? Do I really need anything other than a CPESC? Most of all who or what agency or organization can I believe in to set the standard? It does seem that sometimes it's just all about who can charge me for things I do not need.

ressl5

February 25th, 2010 6:48 AM PT

Most of these techniques increase the shrot term cost of a project (make a difference in the amount of money the executing contractor can put in his pocket). Therefore, there has to be an incentive and generally it isn't because it is cheaper to do it right. What it has to be is that if you don't it will cost you more in the long run or that you will be fined (enforcement) or sued. We keep wanting to "do the right thing" and believe that doing the right thing is what everyone will do. That isn't the human nature of everyone. There has to be enforcement to get implementation. Inspectors must become enforcers and they have to have a big enough stick to make enforcement stick and there have to be enough of them that those being enforced on know that they will get caught and pay.

riderw25

February 2nd, 2010 10:43 AM PT

In my local market, the problem with bringing on contractors comes down to lack of enforcement. Many of them have been trained by the State to develop SW plans, conduct inspections, etc. but when the risk of enforcement is near ZERO, the incentives are far from tangible.

kevininoregon

February 24th, 2010 10:58 AM PT

I agree with Rider. Drivers only travel the speed limit if they believe there's a cop to hand out a ticket. No different for the contracting community. Even more so, because the profit incentive is to disregard effective BMPs if you can get away with it. Enforcement requires support from the management of the regulating agency, and that will only come if the community (city, county, etc.) accepts the program.

kkristoffersen

March 17th, 2010 9:18 AM PT

With California's new NPDES Permit a QSP, Qualified Stormwater Practitioner must either be a PE, or have a CISEC or CESSWI to implement and inspect onsite BMP's. A QSD, Qualified Stormwater Developer must be either a PE or a CPESC to develop a SWPPP, or alter an existing WP Control Plan. It will be interesting to see the level of control exercised by the state to ensure that only qualified people are performing these tasks. As it stands now, inspections appear to be few and far between, perhaps because of budget contraints, or perhaps its an attempt not overburden a construction industry that is attempting to recover from the current economic crisis. Either way, enforcement has been light at best.

mjb

February 3rd, 2010 4:53 AM PT

I looked up the CESSWI program; unfortunately my employer (your local government) does not like to pay annual dues. They will pay for training all day long but what is gained by the inspector paying an annual fee to keep a certification? It looks like the need to renew the certification annually is just a way of collecting $ without offering any training. In fact no training is offered at all only a test certification that expires in one year. The photograph of building occupied by EnviroCert International, Inc. makes it look like it is a 2 person operation. If you want us inspectors on board TEACH US. Just taking our money and handing out certs will only keep things as they are and cost more money. mjb

Post a Comment

Not a subscriber? Sign Up
 
 
*  
 




 

Get Erosion Control E-mail Updates!

Get weekly news and updates through our Erosion Control e-mail newsletter!