Over the course of three summers (1988, 1990, and 1992) a team of speakers was put together by Bob Landreth of the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency to travel to each of the EPA’s ten regions to teach and/or explain the agency’s regulations on landfill design. The core group was Bob Landreth who opened the 1 ½-day long sessions, followed by Dave Daniel on compacted clay liners, Bob Koerner on geosynthetic materials, Greg Richardson on system design, and Paul Schroeder on HELP Modeling. Each event was ended by a panel session consisting of all of the speakers. An issue that frequently arose was essentially a challenge to the credibility and expertise of both construction quality control and construction quality assurance personnel, i.e., CQC and CQA personnel. With this in mind, the group subsequently explored existing certification institutes and eventually went with the National Institute for Certification of Engineering Technologists, i.e., NICET. They are a well established group certifying engineering technologists in approximately 30-different application areas. We worked with them forming advisory experts in geosynthetics and they started with examinations and the granting of certifications in about 1994 at three different levels for geosynthetic materials (CCLs never were developed under NICET auspices).
Over the subsequent few years progress was made, however, it became apparent that the CQC personnel did not fit the mold of taking written examinations. For example, some excellent installers don’t speak English. To compensate for this unfulfilled need, the International Association of Geosynthetics Installers (IAGI) was formed. This “hands-on” testing organization is functioning well and certainly filling the need for certified installation personnel.
In the approximate 10-years since the NICET-CQA examinations were first crafted, little has been done in upgrading the questions and/or answers of the exams and the “fit” for geosynthetics CQA inspectors was felt to be marginal, at best. The suggestion was made in 2005 that GSI might provide such a service since we are presently doing both laboratory accreditation (the GAI-LAP program) and product certification (the GCI-PCP program). Furthermore, GSI has a vested interest in geosynthetics, per se, and thus program maintenance is assured. The GSI Board of Directors gave the green-light and we formed an ad-hoc Steering Committee. They presently consist of the following:
• Jeff Blum of STS
• Maria Tanase of Earth Tech
• Rick Thiel of Vector
• Jeff Fassett of Golder
• Sam Allen of TRI
• Mark Sieracke of Weaver Boos
• Jim Olsta of CETCO
• Boyd Ramsey of GSE
• Steve Wintheiser of CTI
• Dan Rohe of EPI
• Jim Goddard of ADS
Working in a very efficient manner we decided upon the following basic criteria:
(a) The candidate must be recommended by his/her supervisor, preferably a Professional Engineer.
(b) The candidate’s resume must be submitted which must include at least six-months experience in CQA of like materials.
(c) The fee was established at $400 for 5-years certification for geosynthetics materials. (Subsequently it was modified to be $500 for 5-years of certification for both geosynthetic materials and compacted clay liners.)
(d) The candidate must pass a multiple choice geosynthetics examination of 140 questions with a grade of 70%, or higher. (The compacted clay liner examination is an additional 55 questions, with 70% again being the passing grade.)
The Steering Committee then crafted the geosynthetics examination which is presently 20 questions on geosynthetics; 20 questions on geotextiles; 10 questions on geogrids; 20 questions on geonets; 35 questions on geomembranes; 20 questions on GCLs; and 15 questions on geopipe. The first examination was held at GSI on January 28, 2006 with eleven people taking (and all passing) the examination. There were subsequent modifications made to the exam, however, and some poorly worded or possible multiple answer questions were revised.
At that point in time Sam Allen suggested to add compacted clay liners (CCLs) to the program. Of course, soils are beyond the mandate of GSI, so our Board of Directors was brought back into the discussion and eventually approved of the idea. The logic of this decision is that CCLs have no “home” and that for liner systems, geosynthetics and CCLs truly go together and are often inspected by the same CQA personnel. Fortunately, Sam with the aid of John Allen and Bob Gilbert (with eventually the Steering Committee mentioned earlier) had a set of questions and answers and offered them to us for the purpose of the certification examination in CCLs. There are 55 Q & As in this particular test. Testing times are two hours for geosynthetic materials and one hour for CCLs, with a half hour break in between the two exams.
The first offering of both exams was in Richmond, Virginia at Golder Associates on March 1, 2006 with an independent Proctor overseeing the exams; GSI does all of the grading. Nine candidates took the two examinations and they all passed with 70%, or above, and are certified accordingly.
Presently, both examinations are being offered in Fairmount, West Virginia on March 17, 2006; Austin, Texas on March 24, 2006; Richmond, Virginia on April 1, 2006; Lansing, Michigan on April 3, 2006; Grass Valley, California on April 7, 2006; Folsom, Pennsylvania on April 22, 2006; Irvine, California on May 3, 2006; and Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania on May 13, 2006.
As can be inferred from the number of sites and the nice geographic distribution of locations, the program has stared out well beyond our expectations. Landfill owners, particularly Waste Management, Inc., are firmly behind the program and we sense that the regulatory community is as well. George Koerner is project manager, Jamie Koerner is handling the considerable bookkeeping that is involved and Bob Koerner is providing oversight. Please visit us on our website at “Inspector Certification – GCI-ICP” for information on further background details, application forms, Proctor details, and scheduled examination dates and locations. Also, please don’t hesitate to give us feedback as to your thoughts and ideas in regard to ongoing improvement in the examinations or on the program’s organization.
