The Wise Report Provides Government Updates for Areas of Interest to HGS Professionals.
Check out the Latest Wise Reports below...
Release Date: 6 May 2011
Release Date: 30 April 2011
Release Date: 27 April 2011
Release Date: 27 April 2011
Release Date: 27 April 2011
Release Date: 26 April 2011
Release Date: 17 April 2011
Release Date: 12 April 2011
Release Date: 10 April 2011
Release Date: 4 April 2011
Release Date: 4 April 2011
Release Date: 31 March 2011
Release Date: 31 March 2011
Release Date: 31 March 2011
Release Date: 26 March 2011
Release Date: 20 March 2011
Release Date: 13 March 2011
Release Date: 27 February 2011
Release Date: 24 February 2011
Release Date: 24 February 2011
Release Date: 24 February 2011
Release Date: 15 February 2011
Release Date: 12 February 2011
Release Date: 1 February 2011
Release Date: 1 February 2011
Release Date: 1 February 2011
Release Date: 30 January 2011
Release Date: 22 January 2011
Release Date: 15 January 2011
Release Date: 7 January 2011
The Houston Geological Society is powered by a community that cares.
Your donation supports students, technical programs, outreach, and the partnerships that strengthen our geoscience community. If HGS has helped you learn or connect, please consider giving back
Exploring for hydrocarbon in deep water has considerably changed the oil and gas industry premise. Great prospects have been abandoned due to their drilling complexity. The substantially increased water depth has impacted the subsurface geopressure profile and consequently all aspects of exploration, from seismic acquisition to drilling.
The behavior of the subsurface geopressure profile is driven by subsea water depth and stresses created by sedimentation rate, lithology, and structural setting. Principal Stress reduction due to subsea water depth is the main reason of the narrowing safe drilling envelope between the pore and fracture pressures i.e. Drilling Tolerance Window (DTW). This leads to limited maneuverability to control and overcome the surge of formation pressure using mud weight.
In the deep water there are four subsurface pressure zones. They are, from the top to the bottom: (1) the shallow free flow, (2) hydrodynamic, (3) transition (top of geopressure), and (4) geopressured. Each zone has it’s own pressure gradient dictated by stresses and compartmentalization. Several seismic velocity – pore pressure transformation models are used to identify these zones and predict their pressure gradients. The presence of nearby offset wells is very helpful in calibrating the prediction model. However, calibration of the forecast model should also continue during drilling.
The most common drilling challenges in the upper two zones are limited to Loss of Circulation (LOC) and Shallow Water Flow (SWF). On the other hand, in the transition and lower geopressured zones, higher pressure has recently emerged as a new challenge, especially during testing deep prospects. Hard kicks, high torques, mud cuts, Flow-Kill-LOC (loss of circulation) phenomenon and even uncontrollable underground and surface blow outs can take place in these deep geopressured zones.
In this study, several case histories from East Breaks and Mississippi Canyon areas (Neogene) exhibit the drilling challenges due to narrow DTW. The examined wells show that excess pressure created by compartmentalization between the shale and sand is usually amplified by the presence of hydrocarbon. This leads to even narrower DTW and hazardous events. Drilling the interface between seal and pay sand in the geopressured section is the most troublesome drilling zone e.g. Deep Horizon in MC 252 (Macondo prospect).
Moreover, drilling the new play trend at the Salt Toe (Wilcox / Neogene ) has suffered a number of drilling setbacks in some prospective areas. This is usually a result of narrow DTW, especially at the base of the salt. Losses of circulation followed by formation breakdown are common at the salt-sediment lower interface. Side tracks and bypasses to overcome these problems can substantially increase the exploration cost. Exploring Jack, St. Malo, and Atlantis fields in deep water frontier area exhibit the importance of defining this window ahead of drilling, especially in Sub Dirty Salt prospects.
To safely walk this fine line, several steps need to be taken. Before drilling, a calibrated geopressure model should be diligently assessed from seismic velocities and offset wells. The optimal processed velocity should be screened, QCed and tailored for pore pressure predictions. The predicted geopressure profile should be enhanced by adding the pressure transgression and regression risks due to the geological building blocks setting.
During drilling, model parameters and mud weight ought to be tuned frequently, especially across the shale – sand interface and potential pay zones. The excess pressure due to the presence of hydrocarbon column can create a sudden pressure surge and mud weight has to be adjusted accordingly. Setting casing and cementing operations must be done in gas free mud.
Drilling for deep prospective objects in the deep water is sensitive to the pressure – fracture subsurface envelope. Understanding and applying the previous recommended steps to managed pressure drilling can circumvent any future disastrous hydrocarbon spill. The Blowout Preventer (BOP) should be the last line of defense to control hard kicks, pressure surges and unexpected underground – surface blow outs.
On 4/21/2011, John
Mikels, with Geos Consulting, attended a House Government Efficiency and Reform
Committee (Callegari chair) meeting, for a public hearing on HB-3166. Mike Hess
and Charles Horton of the Texas Board of Professional Geoscientists (TBPG) were
also there. This bill abolishes/consolidates several state agencies. The TBPG
is still not amongst the targets, at this time. There was a rumor of a committee
substitute being introduced during this meeting, and there was a concern that
the TBPG would be added to target list. Fortunately we weren't, the substitute
was nixed, and original HB-3166 was left standing in committee. HB-3166 is
primarily the ongoing consolidation squabble between engineers, architects, and
surveyors. Nothing else of substance which might impact TBPG has been detected
since. -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------I've been compiling a list of
proposed bills that may be of interest to geologists. If you have any that I
have missed, let me know and I'll include them. Filing of proposed bills has begun
and here's the ones I'm currently watching. All new items or updates are in
bold: HB-377, by McClendon, Relating to
the expenditure of money from the general revenue fund for rail projects. 4/26/2011
– Referred to Transportation & Homeland Security. For more information
go to: http://www.capitol.state.tx.us/BillLookup/history.aspx?LegSess=82R&Bill=HB377 HB-444, by Creighton, Relating to
notification of applications for permits for certain injection wells. "If
an application is received in proper form for a permit for an injection well to
dispose of industrial and municipal waste
and the proposed location of the injection well is in the territory of a groundwater conservation district, the executive
director shall submit a copy of the application to the governing body of the
groundwater conservation district. The groundwater conservation district may
make recommendations to the commission concerning any aspect of the application..."
Scheduled for public hearing on 5/3/2011. For more information go to: http://www.capitol.state.tx.us/BillLookup/history.aspx?LegSess=82R&Bill=HB444
HB-977, by Burnham, Relating to the
development of a climate adaptation plan by certain entities. 4/29/2011 -
Committee report sent to calendars. For more information go to: http://www.capitol.state.tx.us/BillLookup/history.aspx?LegSess=82R&Bill=HB977
HB-1164, by Keffer, Relating to
enforcement actions by the Texas Board of
Professional Engineers against political subdivisions and certain public
officials. The PE Board may not impose an administrative penalty for a
violation on a political subdivision, or public official or employee of the
state or of a political subdivision of the state who is not licensed under this
chapter. Geologists aren't mentioned in this piece of legislation, but could
eventually be. 4/27/2011 - Committee report sent to calendars. For more
information go to: http://www.capitol.state.tx.us/BillLookup/history.aspx?LegSess=82R&Bill=HB1164
Where is HGS Heading?On Saturday March 12th, instead of going to the Cotulla, Texas Wild Hog Cook-Off, I joined the HGS Board and met with Spencer Yantis to discuss mission/vision, goals, strategy, and tactics to be applied in running the Houston Geological Society. Poor planning on my part! Spencer is a retired U of H marketing professor. Why did we do this? My Pop (grandfather) told me when I was young “If you don’t know where you are going, you are never going to get there”. The Houston Geological Society is equal in size and scope to a small business. We have about 45 committees overseeing the Society’s activities during the year. These committees can be placed in four general categories: technical education, networking, education outreach to the community, and administrative. We wanted to review what we were doing and what we should be doing. Most of the discussion centered on what we should be doing. As can be expected, the topics discussed ranged the gamut within our four general categories. Two of the topics of special interest to me were Web education and K-12 education. I feel the Society should concentrate on these areas. Two of the ideas for Web educat ion would involve the implementation of web-based technical talks and Webinars/Web Symposia. With this capability the Society would have the ability to reach out to many more of our membership (both in and out of the Houston area) than the standard technical dinner/luncheon sessions that we presently use. We could develop a catalog of online technical talks that would be available to HGS members. Extending geoscience education to our schools would help develop well-rounded citizens and would be a source of professional geoscientists for the future. Some of the topics mentioned were:
The Corpus Christi Geological Society has developed a very successful K-12 education plan. They provide a geologic map of the U.S., and rock, mineral and fossil specimens to their area schools. We have a limited Maps in School program for theHouston area which should be expanded. One thing Spencer shared with us involved member surveys. When we run a survey we should ask for the things people do not like. I would like for you readers to send me your list of things which HGS does that you do not like and recommendations as tohow we can improve. Please send your comments to me at jbtjr@sbcglobal.net. Thanks for the input. Laissez les bon temps rouler!
Mentoring – From One Generation to the Next
I have two columns remaining as the HGS Bulletin editor and I need to select my topics carefully, as my opportunities to communicate to the membership have dwindled to a precious few. I don’t want to stray too far from my original themes: volunteerism, education, and mentoring. Each topic is important to me and to the future of our profession and the societies that support our science. I will go back to where I began – mentoring.
Mentoring remains a very personal relationship which to some degree is like a marriage and needs to be based on trust. A true mentor-protégé relationship results in the sharing of confidences and commonly deals with issues beyond simply technical training, such as career planning. It provides the mentee with an effective sounding board, and occasionally a shoulder to cry on. A good relationship may last for a lifetime or may end after a number of years. I do not believe that true mentors can be assigned to a professional; rather they are a result of mutual selection.
I was lucky. My first mentor was actually my first supervisor. Some thirty years later we still occasionally get together. To be truly honest, I didn’t totally realize that I had a mentor for several years. Back then, there were no formal mentors, but looking back at the many hours that we sat in his office discussing some of my ideas or a paper that I read, or a dataset that I generated, he truly filled the mentor role. We talked about my career plans and what I hoped to accomplish. No, we didn’t always agree on technical matters or on some of my career decisions, but he was there. In fact, looking back, I remember that Kadry’s door was always open and many of our discussions took place late in the day, very often after most of my colleagues had gone home. While I’m in this nostalgic mood, I will add that I believe he is proud of what I have accomplished and I believe that I represent part of his professional legacy.
Now that I find myself in the mentor role, I continue some of his practices. Although one of the first into the office, I will not go home if a question remains or if someone needs to talk, unless I have an appointment and must make an exit. My door remains open to my three protégés, as well as to the other members of the staff. Rather than providing direct answers to the many questions that I have received over the years, I prefer to guide them through the discovery process and then discuss what they have learned.
However, I’m always there as their backup and safety net, if the pathway to discovery has led them down a blind alley or dead end. My hope remains that I am able to effectively transfer what I have learned over the last three decades to each of my protégés and that each of them will build upon that foundation and surpass me in their accomplishments.
Some may view the mentor-protégé relationship as a one way process. Most can see the advantages to the protégé of these relationships — a teacher, career guide, and an entrée to a professional network. But, I can tell you from my own experience that the mentors gain as well. One of my protégés recently celebrated her fifth year with Chevron and she delivered a note (along with a piece of chocolate cake) which thanked me for all that I’ve done for her. Over the years I have received similar comments from my other mentees. Mentoring has brought me tremendous satisfaction. The most important benefit of mentoring for me is that my protégés will provide a technical legacy, just as my two daughters and my grandchildren will carry forward my bloodline. Even this iron horse will at some point rust out and disappear from the scene.
Why did I select mentoring as this month’s topic? Simply because mentoring is important to all of us. I ask that those of you who have the necessary experience make yourself available to act as a mentor. For those of you new to the game, seek out a mentor.
Remember that the mentor-protégé relationship is personal and cannot be forced. Sometimes these relationships last forever and sometimes they end after a brief few months. They are all valuable and will be a learning experience. Give mentoring a try whether at the office, at a university, or through a professional society’s program.
Until next month…
The current chair and past chairs of the HGS North American Explorationists group attended Charles Sternbach’s talk on Monday April 25 at the Westchase Hilton hotel. Sternbach’s presentation “Petroleum Resources of the Great American Carbonate Bank” was attended by 75 people who wanted to preview material from the upcoming AAPG Memoir book due out in 2012 on Cambro-Ordovician stratigraphy and oil resources dedicated to James Lee Wilson. Committee Chair Steve Getz presented poster sessions on cross sections of the midcontinent basins. The North American Explorationists ‘ group has been running monthly or bi-monthly talks since 1990 on oil and gas resources and plays of the U.S. and Canada, that are beyond the scope of the Gulf of Mexico. in photo below Steve Earle (HGS President Elect) Steve Getz, Steve Levine, and Charles Sternbach. All are present or past chairs of the North American Explorationists’ group. Steve Getz is the current chairman.
The Wise Report
Henry M. Wise, P.G
April 17, 2011
I've been compiling a list of
proposed bills that may be of interest to geologists. If you have any that I
have missed, let me know and I'll include them. Filing of proposed bills has
begun and here's the ones I'm currently watching. All new items or updates are
in bold:
HB-377, by McClendon, Relating to
the expenditure of money from the general revenue fund for rail projects. 4/13/2011
– Received from the House. For more information go to: http://www.capitol.state.tx.us/BillLookup/history.aspx?LegSess=82R&Bill=HB377
HB-444, by Creighton, Relating to
notification of applications for permits for certain injection wells. "If
an application is received in proper form for a permit for an injection well to
dispose of industrial and municipal waste and the proposed location of the
injection well is in the territory of a groundwater conservation district, the
executive director shall submit a copy of the application to the governing body
of the groundwater conservation district. The groundwater conservation district
may make recommendations to the commission concerning any aspect of the
application..." 4/7/2011 – Received from the House. For more
information go to: http://www.capitol.state.tx.us/BillLookup/history.aspx?LegSess=82R&Bill=HB444
HB-977, by Burnham, Relating to the
development of a climate adaptation plan by certain entities. Scheduled for public hearing on 4/20/2011.
For more information go to: http://www.capitol.state.tx.us/BillLookup/history.aspx?LegSess=82R&Bill=HB977
HB-1164, by Keffer, Relating to
enforcement actions by the Texas Board of Professional Engineers against
political subdivisions and certain public officials. The PE Board may not
impose an administrative penalty for a violation on a political subdivision, or
public official or employee of the state or of a political subdivision of the
state who is not licensed under this chapter. Geologists aren't mentioned in
this piece of legislation, but could eventually be. 4/14/2011 – Reported favorably without amendments. For more
information go to: http://www.capitol.state.tx.us/BillLookup/history.aspx?LegSess=82R&Bill=HB1164
HB-1302, by Larson, Relating to the
establishment of the Texas Energy and Communications Commission to consolidate
the functions of the Public Utility Commission of Texas and the Railroad
Commission of Texas. Scheduled for
public hearing on 4/13/2011. For more information go to: http://www.capitol.state.tx.us/BillLookup/history.aspx?LegSess=82R&Bill=HB1302
HB-2067, by Callegari, Relating to
the regulation of the practice of engineering by individuals engaged in the
evaluation of oil and gas resources. 4/15/2011 – Committee report
distributed. For more information go to: http://www.capitol.state.tx.us/BillLookup/history.aspx?LegSess=82R&Bil
Guest Night 2011 is almost here and you need to plan now to attend on Saturday, May 21 ! We are sure to have another sold out event at the Houston Museum of Natural Science that continues to be the best value for any geologist or their guest at the very reasonable price of $30 per person. Doors will open at 5:45 for the buffet dinner and cash bars while we visit among the wonderful museum exhibits. We will move into the IMAX theater at 7:30 for awards and recognitions before hearing our featured speaker, Derek Main. After a short intermission, we will see the IMAX film “Born to be Wild 3D”, and we will wrap things up by 10:00.
This year we will hear of the Arlington Archosaur discovery from Derek Main, a Lecturer in Geology at the University of Texas at Arlington. The title of his presentation is: “Wildfire Paleoecology along the Cretaceous Coast of Texas”. Derek describes this dig as a unique snapshot of a complete Cretaceous ecosystem. Imagine the paleo Mississippi delta at the location of present day Arlington. This Woodbine age site has yielded several significant fossils - a 95-million year old new super predator crocodile (and her babies), a new lungfish, and a fossil that may be an early ancestor of the “duck-billed dinosaurs” or iguanodonts. Dr. Christopher Scotese, Main’s PhD advisor at the Earth and Environmental Sciences Department at UTA, notes “the site is significant because it has a diverse fauna of reptiles and also abundant plant material.”
We are also excited to see the new IMAX movie “Born to be Wild 3D.” This film is about saving orphaned orangutans and elephants in Borneo and Kenya. It is narrated by Morgan Freeman and documents the dedication and remarkable bond between these animals and the humans that rescue and raise them. This will be the very first showing of this film in Houston by special arrangement with the HMNS.
Guest Night continues to recognize those students who have received special awards for their Science Fair entries. Please share with us the appreciation for these students’ work as we encourage them to continue their studies in the geosciences.
For more details and to register for this great annual event, click here.
Click here to see the FaceBook page for the UTA Archosaur Site with the latest activities there and great photos.
The Wise ReportHenry M. Wise, P.G.April 10, 2011
The saga of the Texas PG Board
continues. Yesterday (4/4/2011) was interesting and very confusing. I am in the
House Committee hearing currently. HB 2480 was not heard today. No other
legislation heard so far has any effect upon the geoscience community. The
other bill Kevin and I were concerned about, HB 2284, was heard and I heard
nothing in it that would affect us. That bill was essentially a peace treaty between
the engineers and architects.
It is my understanding that since
the engineers and architects have come to terms, Smith's and Callegari's bill
that would lump the engineers, architects and surveyors one board are no longer
in play.
HB 2480 (Geran's bill that would
combine the PG and PE Boards) was not laid out in the Licensing and
Administrative Procedures (LAP) Committee meeting on 4/5/2011. This was because
the Legislative Budget Board's Fiscal Note for the bill that was finally
published and indicated that it would cost $1.2M more over the biennium to
administer than the existing unconsolidated boards. Therefore, it appears that
this bill will not pass.
HB 2284, which dealt with an
agreement on the practice of architecture by qualified engineers who had been
practicing architectural design prior to 2011 with amendments (essentially, a
grandfather provision) was left pending in the LAP Committee to allow detailed
review of all the amendment language by all concerned parties. There was no
negative testimony.
All of the above is important
because HB 2543 (Smith's bill, which would combine architecture, engineering,
landscape architecture, and land surveying into the Texas Board of Professional
Services, deregulate interior design, and the abolishment of the Texas Board of
Professional Engineers, the Texas Board of Architectural Examiners, and the
Texas Board of Professional Land Surveyors), and HB 3166 Callegari's bill,
which abolishes a number of Professional Boards, but not the PG Board) are
anticipated to go away once the architects and engineers agreed to HB 2284. We
have never heard that geoscientists were to be included in HB 2543 or HB 3166,
but we were concerned that we could be.
We have been told that none of the
consolidation bills were going through, and they would be recommended for an
interim study between this session and the next session. We need to be involved
in that interim study as much as possible if we are to have any input into our
own professional destiny.
We have been unable to find a
sponsor for our
"Professional Services Department Legislation", probably because of
all of the above actions. It's just as well, since it currently looks like we
may wind up being left alone. The House Finance Committee has approved the TBPG's
budget, as proposed. and it looks like the Senate Finance Committee will also approve the TBPG
budget. However, the Governor
could still line item veto the TBPG, but without some other mechanism in place,
a line item veto of the TBPG would result in a net loss of $1.1 million to the
state over the 2012-2013 biennium.
As we
have
learned, the situation can change
with in hours. As long as the legislature is in session we need to be diligent
in our watch. Other
legislation, such as
a bill that abolishes the TBPG under a consolidation plan could still change
the appropriation to the TBPG.
The Wise Report (Part 2)Henry M. Wise, P.GApril 2, 2011
Due to space limitations the Wise
Report is being given in two parts.
I've been compiling a list of
proposed bills that may be of interest to geologists. If you have any that I
have missed, let me know and I'll include them. Filing of proposed bills has
begun and here's the ones I'm currently watching. All new items or updates are
in bold:
HB-377, by McClendon, Relating to
the expenditure of money from the general revenue fund for rail projects. 4/4/2011
- Placed on General State Calendar. For more information go to: http://www.capitol.state.tx.us/BillLookup/history.aspx?LegSess=82R&Bill=HB377
HB-444, by Creighton, Relating to
notification of applications for permits for certain injection wells. "If
an application is received in proper form for a permit for an injection well to
dispose of industrial and municipal waste and the proposed location of the
injection well is in the territory of a groundwater conservation district, the
executive director shall submit a copy of the application to the governing body
of the groundwater conservation district. The groundwater conservation district
may make recommendations to the commission concerning any aspect of the
application..." 4/5/2011 - Placed on General State Calendar. For
more information go to: http://www.capitol.state.tx.us/BillLookup/history.aspx?LegSess=82R&Bill=HB444
HB-977, by Burnham, Relating to the
development of a climate adaptation plan by certain entities. 2/28/2011 -
Referred to State Affairs. For more information go to: http://www.capitol.state.tx.us/BillLookup/history.aspx?LegSess=82R&Bill=HB977
HB-1164, by Keffer, Relating to
enforcement actions by the Texas Board of Professional Engineers against
political subdivisions and certain public officials. The PE Board may not
impose an administrative penalty for a violation on a political subdivision, or
public official or employee of the state or of a political subdivision of the
state who is not licensed under this chapter. Geologists aren't mentioned in
this piece of legislation, but could eventually be. 3/1/2011 - Referred
to Licensing & Administrative Procedures. For more information go to: http://www.capitol.state.tx.us/BillLookup/history.aspx?LegSess=82R&Bill=HB1164
HB-1302, by Larson, Relating to the
establishment of the Texas Energy and Communications Commission to consolidate
the functions of the Public Utility Commission of Texas and the Railroad
Commission of Texas. 3/1/2011 - Referred to Energy Resources . For more
information go to: http://www.capitol.state.tx.us/BillLookup/history.aspx?LegSess=82R&Bill=HB1302
The Wise Report (Part 1)
Henry M. Wise, P.G
April 2, 2011
Due to space limitations the Wise
Report is being given in two parts.
Despite the Governor's apparent wish
to defund the TBPG, on April 1, 2011 he recommended three new appointees to the
PG Board. No, this isn't an April Fool's joke! They still need to be confirmed
by the Senate. The proposed appointees are:
Becky Johnson of Fort Worth is a
board certified professional geoscientist and geologist, an environmental
science professor at Texas Christian University, and owner of Environmental
Trainers Inc. She is secretary of the Society of Texas Environmental
Professionals, a partner with the Sustainable Energy Roundtable Initiative, and
a volunteer with the Texas Commission on Environmental Quality EnviroMentor
Program. She is past president of Environmental Education for Tomorrow, and a
past member of the Fort Worth Brownfields Consortium and Fort Worth Chamber of
Commerce Environmental Health and Safety Committee. Johnson received a
bachelor's degree from the University of Texas at Arlington and a master's
degree in environmental science and hydrogeology from Texas Christian
University.
Judy A. Reeves of Grapevine is a
board certified professional geoscientist and geologist, and a senior
hydrogeologist at Cirrus Associates LLC. She is a member of the American
Institute of Professional Geologists, National Groundwater Association, Geological
Society of America, and Association of Groundwater Scientists and Engineers.
She is also water committee chair of the Industry Council on the Environment.
Reeves received a bachelor's degree, a master's degree in geology, and a doctorate
degree in geosciences from Texas Tech University.
Gregory Ulmer of Houston is an
attorney at Baker & Hostetler LLP. He is admitted to practice law before
the U.S. District Courts for the Southern and Eastern districts of Texas, and
the U.S. Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals. He is a member of the State Bar of
Texas, American Bar Association, and Garland Walker American Inns of Court. He
is also board chair of the Houston Bar Association Dispute Resolution Center
and past chair of the Houston Police Officers' Civil Service Commission. Ulmer
received a bachelor's degree from the University of Pennsylvania and a law
degree from the University of Houston Law Center. He is being reappointed.
Henry M. Wise, P.G.
The Wise Report
4/2/2011
A Great and Unique Opportunity
You are now reading the HGS Bulletin’s April election issue. Once again this provides me an opportunity to discuss the importance of volunteerism to professional societies. First, let me thank each candidate for the HGS Board for their willingness to come forward and take on a leadership role in our organization, ensuring that the high quality technical and social program, short courses, and conferences continues. These individuals will also determine how the society’s funds are spent on membership services for current members and those that may soon enter our profession. I would also like to thank those who stepped forward to serve as a potential member of the AAPG House of Delegates. They will help to review the membership applications and guide AAPG’s direction. In an organization which has and will continue to undergo major changes, such activities are important to all engaged in our profession. Now it is our turn, once again. We need to review the information provided on each of the candidates and then vote. Your active participation in the election will help ensure that the incoming board will represent your interests and needs. Please remember that most of the positions that you will be voting on serve multiple year terms. Last year’s election was dominated by apathy, as manifested by the very low member turnout. Less than a quarter of our membership voted in last year’s election. As it is often said, you lose your right to complain if you did not vote. Please remember to vote. Once the new board begins working in July, they will need your assistance on many fronts. Each of the HGS committees needs active members, including those that are willing to step-up and lead the committees. The introduction of new blood is key to preventing the society’s programs from becoming stale and predictable. Many of the chairmen have also served for multiple years and they are looking for an heir apparent. There will also be a need for speakers at the various monthly meetings that HGS sponsors. There are as many as six HGS sponsored meetings each month. So if you have something new and exciting, let the new Vice President know so that an appropriate venue can be found. If you are unable to present but have a suggestion for a topic or speaker contact the Vice President as well. There is always a need to sense the pulse of the membership. The Vice President is working constantly to ensure that the program presented, fits the needs of the membership. He or she needs support from the membership. Just as in US politics, as soon as one election concludes the next cycle begins. I would like you to consider serving on the HGS Board in the future. The nominating committee led by past President Gary Coburn has been actively searching for volunteers to step forward for several months and it has remained difficult to find volunteers to fill many of the ballot positions. We are all familiar with the reasons people find for not volunteering. But just consider what the world would look like if everyone used these excuses. There would be no professional societies. Opportunities for training and professional development, especially for those not employed by a large corporation, would be significantly less or much more expensive and there would be less opportunities for professional networks. How might such a world have impacted your career? Some of us may not be employed and some might be less well prepared. I promise you, unlike many nonprofit organizations that are concerned about their balance sheet, this is not a problem the HGS Board need to deal with. The Board will have the more pleasant task of determining how to effectively use the significant amount of funds available. Please consider making John Tubb’s job as next year’s nominating committee chair a little easier. This is also the month of AAPG’s Annual Convention at the George R. Brown Convention Center. If you haven’t yet registered, please consider attending. This remains one of the best opportunities for learning what is new and for networking. Also, remember that volunteers are always needed for judging both the oral and poster sessions, so please consider stepping forward. My final thoughts for this month were inspired by my older daughter, Rebecca. As you may remember, she is a fifth grade school teacher in a Title I school. Title I schools are provided funds to aim to bridge the gap between low-income students and other students. The students are at risk of failure and living at or near poverty. Earlier this year I once again visited her classroom and talked with three classes about the oil industry and the importance of energy. Yes, I would like all HGS members to consider finding a little time to talk about geology, our industry, and the importance of what we do for society. Such a discussion is needed throughout the various school districts in the greater Houston area. But I would hope that some of you find a school like Rebecca’s to visit. Rebecca has requested that I ask HGS members take the time to visit Title 1 schools and talk to the kids. They need role models who can show the value of education as the doorway to opportunities. These kids must be convinced that education is the path to a better life. I will be visiting Rebecca’s school again this year to talk specifically about the importance of education and how I was the first in my family to finish college and complete an advanced degree. Whether anyone of those kids grow-up to be a geologist or a geophysicist is less important than whether they start to understand that the time in the classroom can be transformational, leading to a variety of opportunities and a pathway to success.Until next month…
A Problem that We Need Work
In my February letter, I looked for reasons for the steady decline in HGS membership since 1991 when our membership then numbered 5,500. I asked for your thoughts on this problematic decline and was pleasantly surprised to receive two responses. One response gave a list of suggestions for increasing the membership and we are currently taking these into consideration.
The other suggestion dealt with a problem of seeming unfriendliness within our membership. This individual moved to Houston in the late 1970’s and became active in the HGS as a member of the HGS Board of Directors. He moved away from the area in the late 1980’s and upon moving back to Houston recently, he attended several of our technical meetings. His comment was that the mood at the meetings had changed, becoming “cliquish”. Could this explain some of our problems? Probably. However, it depends on a person’s point of view. One person’s view of cliquishness could be another person’s view of visiting with friends that they haven’t seen recently. Regardless of how you look at it, this is still a problem that we need to work on at our meetings. How many times have you gone to a meeting and not known all of the people at your table? Did you make an effort to introduce yourself to everyone? How many times have you seen a person standing alone with no one to talk to? Our Treasurer-elect told me that a person came to one of the meetings as a walk-up, went inside, came out later and told her “I don’t know anyone in there. No one talked to me. Please give me back my money,” and he left. We can do better than this!
I know this perceived unwelcoming attitude toward those we don’t know is only one of our membership problems. Working to correct this problem will help both potential new members and regular members alike.
On a pleasant note, the HGS Legends Night was a huge success. I would like to thank Ashley Harris, Gaby Henriquez, and Sandra Babcock for all of their work to make the night a success. Profits from the gala were split between the two HGS scholarship funds. The total profit for the event was $11,694.36. As a result, each scholarship fund received $5,847.18. With receipt of these profits, both the Calvert Memorial Scholarship Fund and the Foundation Fund met their $10,000 matching goals. As a result, the HGS scholarship funds will receive $10,000 from both the HGS and the GCAGS! As scholarship fundraising is a year-round effort, your donation to HGS’ funds is always welcome at http://www.hgs.org/en/donations/add.asp.
Ashley Harris has agreed to work part time as a consultant for the HGS. She will be using her marketing experience to work on marketing and advertising projects. Ashley will be an excellent addition to our staff.
The Mudstone Conference held in February had a sellout crowd of 480 attendees. Congratulations go to Frank Walles and his hard working committee.
Hope to see everyone at the AAPG Convention in Houston later this month.
Laissez les bon temps rouler!
The Wise Report
Henry M. Wise, P.G
March 26, 2011
The Professional Geoscientist Task Force has determined, due to lack of support in the Legislature and the Governor's office to leave the Texas Board of Professional Geoscientists, that our best bet is to come up with new legislation that will combine the PGs, Professional Engineers, Architects, and Surveyors into one "Department of Professional Services". The idea is to create an amalgamation of independent boards that will share an administrative staff. This idea currently has some support in the Legislature and we are checking with the Governor's office for support, but we believe it will be there. The details still need to be worked out, which includes discussing the idea with the other boards that we'll be involved with, but it will have the benefit of accomplishing the Governor's goal of combining like-boards while allowing each of the boards to control their destinies without interference from each other.
The Task Force is also developing a way for all geological groups and individuals to be able to better coordinate legislative attacks on the PG board in the future. There has long been a need for this and the lack of this coordination is part of the reason why the PG board has problems with the Legislature and/or the Governor's office every two years. This coordination will involve a central group that will be charged with interacting with the Legislature and Governor's office to assure that Geologists are being properly represented.
I've been compiling a list of proposed bills that may be of interest to geologists. If you have any that I have missed, let me know and I'll include them. Filing of proposed bills has begun and here's the ones I'm currently watching. All new items or updates are in bold:
HB-377, by McClendon, Relating to the expenditure of money from the general revenue fund for rail projects. 3/21/2011 - Committee report sent to Calendars. For more information go to: http://www.capitol.state.tx.us/BillLookup/history.aspx?LegSess=82R&Bill=HB377
HB-444, by Creighton, Relating to notification of applications for permits for certain injection wells. "If an application is received in proper form for a permit for an injection well to dispose of industrial and municipal waste and the proposed location of the injection well is in the territory of a groundwater conservation district, the executive director shall submit a copy of the application to the governing body of the groundwater conservation district. The groundwater conservation district may make recommendations to the commission concerning any aspect of the application..." 3/25/2011 - Committee report distributed. For more information go to: http://www.capitol.state.tx.us/BillLookup/history.aspx?LegSess=82R&Bill=HB444
HB-977, by Burnham, Relating to the development of a climate adaptation plan by certain entities. 2/28/2011 - Referred to State Affairs. For more information go to: http://www.capitol.state.tx.us/BillLookup/history.aspx?LegSess=82R&Bill=HB977
HB-1164, by Keffer, Relating to enforcement actions by the Texas Board of Professional Engineers against political subdivisions and certain public officials. The PE Board may not impose an administrative penalty for a violation on a political subdivision, or public official or employee of the state or of a political subdivision of the state who is not licensed under this chapter. Geologists aren't mentioned in this piece of legislation, but could eventually be. 3/1/2011 - Referred to Licensing & Administrative Procedures. For more information go to: http://www.capitol.state.tx.us/BillLookup/history.aspx?LegSess=82R&Bill=HB1164
HB-1302, by Larson, Relating to the establishment of the Texas Energy and Communications Commission to consolidate the functions of the Public Utility Commission of Texas and the Railroad Commission of Texas. 3/1/2011 - Referred to Energy Resources . For more information go to: http://www.capitol.state.tx.us/BillLookup/history.aspx?LegSess=82R&Bill=HB1302
The Wise Report
Henry M. Wise, P.G
March 20, 2011
The Professional Geoscientist Task Force has learned that the TBPG will not be allowed to become a SDSI Board, nor will it be allowed to stand as is. Therefore, it appears we need to make sure that we have the remaining options left are the best we can do. Currently, there are three bills before the Legislature that we are following, HB 2680, HB 2543 and HB 3166.
HB 2680 will abolish the TBPG and place geologists under the Texas Board of Professional Engineers. The Task Force is working on proposing an amendment that will essential create two separate boards that are under one entity. This may be our best option. We can share the administration staff, but keep our rules and Board essentially intact. We'd be able to operate as before, as would the Engineers.
The other two other bills, HB 2543 and HB 3166, are similar to each other, and the Texas Board of Professional Geoscientists would be left intact, in it's current form. If either of these two bills pass, there's still the possibility that the Governor could line-item veto the funding for the TBPG.
The only other question that needs to be answered is what happens if HB 2680, and HB 2543 and/or HB 3166 pass the legislature. HB 2680 will combine the PG and PE boards. The other two bills combine the PE board with several other boards, but the PG board isn't included. Which bill takes president? Will the Governor veto one? This still needs to be worked out.
I've been compiling a list of proposed bills that may be of interest to geologists. If you have any that I have missed, let me know and I'll include them. Filing of proposed bills has begun and here's the ones I'm currently watching. All new items or updates are in bold:
HB-377, by McClendon, Relating to the expenditure of money from the general revenue fund for rail projects. 3/16/2011 - Reported favorably without amendments. For more information go to: http://www.capitol.state.tx.us/BillLookup/history.aspx?LegSess=82R&Bill=HB377
HB-444, by Creighton, Relating to notification of applications for permits for certain injection wells. "If an application is received in proper form for a permit for an injection well to dispose of industrial and municipal waste and the proposed location of the injection well is in the territory of a groundwater conservation district, the executive director shall submit a copy of the application to the governing body of the groundwater conservation district. The groundwater conservation district may make recommendations to the commission concerning any aspect of the application..." 3/15/2011 - Reported favorably as substituted. For more information go to: http://www.capitol.state.tx.us/BillLookup/history.aspx?LegSess=82R&Bill=HB444
HB-977, by Burnham, Relating to the development of a climate adaptation plan by certain entities. 2/28/2011 - Referred to State Affairs. For more information go to: http://www.capitol.state.tx.us/BillLookup/history.aspx?LegSess=82R&Bill=HB977
HB-1164, by Keffer, Relating to enforcement actions by the Texas Board of Professional Engineers against political subdivisions and certain public officials. The PE Board may not impose an administrative penalty for a violation on a political subdivision, or public official or employee of the state or of a political subdivision of the state who is not licensed under this chapter. Geologists aren't mentioned in this piece of legislation, but could eventually be. 3/1/2011 - Referred to Licensing & Administrative Procedures. For more information go to: http://www.capitol.state.tx.us/BillLookup/history.aspx?LegSess=82R&Bill=HB1164
HB-1302, by Larson, Relating to the establishment of the Texas Energy and Communications Commission to consolidate the functions of the Public Utility Commission of Texas and the Railroad Commission of Texas. 3/1/2011 - Referred to Energy Resources . For more information go to: http://www.capitol.state.tx.us/BillLookup/history.aspx?LegSess=82R&Bill=HB1302
HB-2067, by Callegari, Relating to the regulation of the practice of engineering by individuals engaged in the evaluation of oil and gas resources. 3/8/2011 - Referred to Licensing & Administrative Proceedures. For more information go to: http://www.capitol.state.tx
The Wise Report
Henry M. Wise, P.G
March 13, 2011
The 2011 legislative session is heating up and the threat to the Texas Board of Professional Geoscientist is the greatest it's been since it's creation. The Governor's office appears to be trying hard to abolish the Texas Board of Professional Geoscientists, which was originally created under his administration at the request of the Geological Community. HB 2680 will abolish the TBPG and place geologists under the Texas Board of Professional Geoscientists. As is currently written, the TBPE will consist of six PEs, five PGs, and five Public. Note that we would not be on a par with the Engineers, and there would be no recognition of us in the name of the Board. Also, there is no provision for the Geoscientist in Training portion of our current rules and we'd have to follow the PE rules of ethics, rather than our own. Other provisions in our rules would also be dropped. A number of other questions remain. Will we still require the ASBOG exam? Will qualified geologists oversee any geological complaints to the Board? Most importantly, do we want to potentially be told how to perform geology by engineers? I don't know what the stand of the PE Board on any of this. In the past the PG and PE Boards have been friendly and cooperative, but I personnally don't believe that the PE Board really wants us under them.
Two other bills that require close attention are HB 2543 and HB 3166. These two bills combine several Boards, although the PG Board isn't included. However, there is potential that they could be ammended to include the PG Board.
I've been compiling a list of proposed bills that may be of interest to geologists. If you have any that I have missed, let me know and I'll include them. Filing of proposed bills has begun and here's the ones I'm currently watching. All new items or updates are in bold:
HB-377, by McClendon, Relating to the expenditure of money from the general revenue fund for rail projects. Scheduled for public hearing on 3/9/2011. For more information go to: http://www.capitol.state.tx.us/BillLookup/history.aspx?LegSess=82R&Bill=HB377
HB-444, by Creighton, Relating to notification of applications for permits for certain injection wells. "If an application is received in proper form for a permit for an injection well to dispose of industrial and municipal waste and the proposed location of the injection well is in the territory of a groundwater conservation district, the executive director shall submit a copy of the application to the governing body of the groundwater conservation district. The groundwater conservation district may make recommendations to the commission concerning any aspect of the application..." Scheduled for public hearing on 3/9/2011. For more information go to: http://www.capitol.state.tx.us/BillLookup/history.aspx?LegSess=82R&Bill=HB444
HB-977, by Burnham, Relating to the development of a climate adaptation plan by certain entities. Referred to State Affairs 2/28/2011. For more information go to: http://www.capitol.state.tx.us/BillLookup/history.aspx?LegSess=82R&Bill=HB977
HB-1164, by Keffer, Relating to enforcement actions by the Texas Board of Professional Engineers against political subdivisions and certain public officials. The PE Board may not impose an administrative penalty for a violation on a political subdivision, or public official or employee of the state or of a political subdivision of the state who is not licensed under this chapter. Geologists aren't mentioned in this piece of legislation, but could eventually be. Referred to Licensing & Administrative Procedures 3/1/2011. For more information go to: http://www.capitol.state.tx.us/BillLookup/history.aspx?LegSess=82R&Bill=HB1164
HB-1302, by by Larson, Relating to the establishment of the Texas Energy and Communications Commission to consolidate the functions of the Public Utility Commission of Texas and the Railroad Commission of Texas. Referred to Energy Resources 3/1/2011. For more information go to: http://www.capitol.state.tx.us/BillLookup/history.aspx?LegSess=82R&Bill=HB1302
HB-2067, by by Callegari, Relating to the regulation of the practice of engineering by individuals engaged in the evaluation of oil and gas resources. Referred to Licensing & Administrative Proceedures 3/8/2011. For more information go to: http://www.capitol.state.tx.us/BillLookup/history.aspx?LegSess=82R&Bill=HB2067
The Wise Report
Henry M. Wise, P.G.
February 27, 2010
After the surprise announcement by the Governor that he wants to suspend the Texas Board of Professional Geoscientists (TBPG), a task force was formed to determine the best way to respond and to act on it. This task force is made up of members of the HGS, Texas Association of Professional Geologists (TAPG), AEG, AAPG, AAPG DPG, AAPG EMD, SIPES, and former members of the TBPG. There are also two surveyors who have been giving us insights into their experiences with the same problem, since they are also on the Governor’s list. The task force will also coordinate their efforts with other Texas geological organizations.
The task force has determined that the best plan of action is to attend as many of the House and Senate budgetary committee meetings as possible and try to assure that the TBPG has their requested biannual budget approved. In addition, the task force is pursuing a change in the TBPG’s status to a self-determining, semi-independent (SDSI) agency. This will remove the TBPG from the list of expenses to the State and place them into the revenue-producing list, thus fulfilling one of the wishes of the Governor. It should also relieve the TBPG from having to fight for a budget every 2 years.
Representative Chisum’s office is unable to sponsor a bill at this time. Representative Chisum's office also recieved several questions as to whether the PG licensing was really needed or if it was just a way to keep people out of the profession. Representative Chisum reassured them that that was not the case and that licensing was necessary. He also suggested merging with another agency as a possibility, and that there was the feeling that the House was inclined to follow the Governor’s request concerning agency consolidations and eliminations. The task force decided to investigate other Representatives and Senators to see if what Representative Chisum said was correct and to find a sponsor for a SDSI bill. This was done when members of the task force attended the Senate Finance Committee meeting on February 24, 2011. In the meantime, the task force will watch for any possible bills that might negatively affect the TBPG. All bills must be submitted to the Legislature by March 11, 2011 or they will not be considered this session.
Those who attended the Senate Finance committee hearing were:
Chairman Ogden said that he could not understand why an agency that brings in more money than it is budgeted would be slated for suspension since that would actually cost the State money.
After the meeting, Glenn Lowenstein, Matthew Cowan and Kevin Coleman visited three representatives and one senator:
On February 25, 2011, Matthew Cowan contacted Represen
Looking for Options to GrowLast month’s President’s Letter dealt with a chart showing the number of members by year for the AAPG and HGS and the real and inflation-adjusted price of crude oil between 1982 and 2009. This month we will look at a chart showing energy companies in Houston with a breakdown of the number of HGS members versus the number of AAPG members who do not belong to HGS. Again, I am grateful to Greg Murrie of Inexs for providing the graphics work. The chart shows there are 7 companies that have more HGS members than AAPG members and 16 companies with the reverse relationship. These numbers are based on 2008 membership. The chart shows a large number of AAPG members not in HGS for Chevron and Exxon. This may be due to employees who work internationally but have Houston as their mailing address. In an ideal world, there would be no AAPG members in Houston who are not HGS members. Why this happens is not readily apparent to me. As I wrote last month, our membership problems could be apathy of geoscientists today or lack of encouragement by oil companies’ management, or both. When I first started working in the oil patch, we were encouraged by management to join both AAPG and the local geological society. At that time the companies paid for annual dues to both organizations as well as the monthly dinner meetings. Geoscientists were sent to national conventions on a rotating basis. It is apparent that our methods for recruiting and retaining members are not working. The Board is in the process of evaluating what we have done and what we need to better. This month (March) we will meet with a marketing professor from the University of Houston to get advice on ways to combat this problem. On a different note, Rosemary Laidacker and her Continuing Education Committee have arranged to offer a “Quality Control for Subsurface Maps” short course by Dan Tearpock, Chief Executive Officer of Subsurface Consultants & Associates, LLC (SCA), on March 9th, 2011, at the Marathon Building. This is an excellent short course, especially for younger geoscientists. Remember to register for the AAPG Convention to be held in Houston on April 10-13. Laissez les bon temps rouler!
A Great and Unique Opportunity
The Annual AAPG Convention is a little more than a month away and I am proud to report that our HGS membership was heavily involved with the convention organization. Why do so many people become involved with the organization of such a meeting? In large part I believe that this volunteerism is a result of their shared interest in providing a broad range of opportunities to their fellow members of the profession. What are some of these opportunities? The annual convention provides the perfect environment for networking, a “one stop shop” for learning what’s new in our specialties, and expanding outside of our technical domains and specialties. The ability to expand our knowledge base, outside of our usual job responsibilities may be of the greatest value because it is often difficult to justify a class or conference to management which might not impact every day activities. However a session or two at a major meeting is one way to accomplish this without that management pushback. Now a little more thought on the opportunities available at the upcoming meeting, including how I plan the time I spend at AAPG. In a world where virtual networks such as Facebook and Linked-In are growing exponentially, it is important to remember just how important face-to-face communication remains. The “social” part of the convention provides an opportunity for building one’s network. The value of a network does not rest simply with the number of connections, but rather in the interaction among the members of the network: obtaining and providing solutions to problems, and providing necessary contacts. Although a growing number of the interactions associated with professional networks may be virtual, the usefulness of a network is heavily dependent on trust, which is most often established through face-to-face interactions. What better time than at this year’s convention! Consider targeting some people to add to your network. Check the program. See where and when you might find them to make that important initial contact. Connections that you make this year may be important five years in the future, so value all of your contacts. This year’s technical program provides many of those learning opportunities that I keep espousing. I spent some time over the last few days reviewing this year’s technical program. I must first compliment the committee. The program is diverse in content as well as format, with something for everyone. I developed a game plan to determine how I will be spending my three days at the George R. Brown Convention Center. I have decided to balance my time between strengthening my core area, expanding my technical understanding of areas that I have recently begun working in, and gaining a basic understanding in a few areas that just seem to be interesting. The Convention is providing me with several ways to tackle my professional growth. You will most probably find me in a few of the forums where different perspectives will be debated amongst panel members, especially in those where I anticipate some very divergent opinions. I am particularly interested in those dealing with unconventional resources. Some of the oral sessions in my areas of expertise are also in my plan. These sessions provide the opportunity to see what is new, what has changed, and meet those working in my field. I also generally volunteer to judge those sessions. I view judging as an opportunity to truly think about what is being said and how it is being said and provide some feedback. There are also some sessions where my interest is in specific talks and I will pop in and out of those sessions. These talks tend to fall into three categories: 1) something outside my technical specialty but related and may potentially impact how I do my job, 2) an interesting title or well known presenter irrespective of the topic, and 3) supporting friends and colleagues. I will also be wandering the poster sessions. Over the course of time I have come to believe the posters are more informative than the oral sessions largely because of the potential for interaction, not only with the author but with others that are interested in the presentation.This is my plan for attending the conference. I offer my thoughts to encourage others to give consideration to the time they spend at the meeting. We will see how my plans workout this year. By the way, last year, I shared my thoughts on how I was going to approach the New Orleans meeting. I did follow through on ensuring that the meeting was a broadening opportunity.I would like to offer a few more thoughts for you to consider. With this year’s AAPG meeting soon to be history, start considering how you may become involved with the next two AAPG Conventions scheduled for Houston, between now and 2017.These meetings just don’t happen by themselves; volunteers are needed at multiple levels. I know that since becoming Editor I have asked you to consider becoming a volunteer and mentor, but I have at least one more selfish request. Please join us at the Opening Ceremony for this year’s convention. Yes there is an actual event before the Ice Breaker. Several HGS members will be recognized by the Association and it would be great to fill the hall. I hope to see you at the George R. Brown! Until next month…
2011 HGS Applied Geosciences Mudstone ConferencePost Conference Survey questionsConference Framework1. Were the themes and topics covered what you expected, i.e., as advertised?2. Do you like the four component nature of the conference of Geology, Geochemisty, Geophysics and Completions?3. How would you rate the overall quality of the technical material presented during the presentations as compared to what is typically presented at industry conferences?4. How would you rate the overall applicability of the talks to your day to day work ?5. Rate the amount of time devoted to each presentation. Was there too much/too little time for each topic/ questions? 6. Are the summaries at the end of the day valuable?7. Was the new Monday evening panel dinner of interest and value? How can it be improved?8. Are there additional topics you would like to see covered or specific speakers you would like to hear in 2012?9. Do you have any suggestions for topics that have been sufficiently covered in the literature and at conferences and should be deleted in favor of other topics?10. Does holding this conference over two full days provide sufficient time to address the topics that were covered?11. Would you like the opportunity to for a lab tour/field trip?12. Would you like to be appointed to a position of responsibility in the next 2012 conference or provide a talk?13. In the interest of continued improvement, what is your number one suggestion to improve the conference in 2012?Conference Venue1. What were the positives and negatives associated with the facilities/ food/ services?2. Would you recommend using the same conference facility again?
The Wise Report
Henry M. Wise, P.G.
February 12, 2011
As I'm sure most of you have heard, Governor Perry has requested the combining or suspension of 40 Boards. The Texas PG Board is one of those he requested to be suspended. All of this is the result of the severe budget deficit in Texas. Suspending the PG Board will save Texas $1.2 million over two years. However, what they don't seem to talk about is that the Board brings in about twice that amount. No one seems to know if suspension means no fees will be collected. If no fees are collected, there will be a net loss to the State. If fees are collected, who will collect and administrate them? The Texas Department of Licensing and Regulation (TDLR)? They've already overseeing a multitude of licenses for 600,000 people. It's my understanding that they're backlogged as it is. If the TDLR did administer the PG registrations I'm concerned that the Texas PG will become a worthless piece of paper. How would the TDLR handle complaints? I don't believe they're set up for it. Will we combine with the PE Board? They're not interested either. Besides, we'd have no representation until at least one seat at the Board opens up, and there's no guarantee that we'll be given it. Do you really want engineers overseeing our work again?
The Governor also stated that the combining and suspending of the various boards is an effort to create a smaller government presence, "get government off the backs of the people." While many people support this point of view, this is an inappropriate reason for suspending the PG Board. Unlike many Boards, the PG Board wasn't created because some legislator was reacting to reacting to a specific issue. The Geological Community saw that there was a lot of poor geology being done in the public sector by unqualified individuals and companies and requested the Board be formed. Therefore, in this case, suspending the PG Board is actually against the wishes of the people who are most affected by it.
On February 9, 2011, a group of concerned people got together to discuss possible solutions to this problem. Attending the meeting were representatives of the Houston Geological Society, American Association of Petroleum Geologists, Texas Association of Professional Geoscientists, present and former members of the Texas Board of Professional Geoscientists, concerned geologists, and licensed surveyors. The surveyors are also on the list of Boards to be suspended and were interested in our ideas. They also provided other pieces of valuable insight into what we are facing as well.
After much discussion on the various alternatives, it was decided that our best bet is to push for the TBPG to be granted self-directed, semi-independent status. The current situation is that all fees and fines sent to the TBPG goes directly into the State of Texas General Fund. The legislature then decides how much the Board will get back. The TBPG has been receiving approximately 40-50% of the fees generated. In addition, if the budget isn't spent, the excess reverts back to the Texas General Fund. Need more money, over and above what the legislature has decided you need? You have to raise your fees. This is why our annual fees have gone up so much. This happens every two years.
If the Board were to become a self-directed, semi-independent agency, like the PE Board, the PG Board will set it's own fees and fines and keep everything. They will need to pay an annual fee to the Texas General Fund, but that fee can be negotiated. Most important of all, however, is that the PG Board will be "off the books" as an expense to the State of Texas. The Governor and Legislature is currently only interested in showing that they are reducing costs. How much you may be bringing in doesn't matter as much. If we can do this, then it's a win-win situation. The Governor and Legislature get to show that we're no longer an expense to the State, and we'll have less of an accounting problem every two years.
Unfortunately, it appears we don't have much time. So far it appears that the TBPG has a budget for the next two years, but it's not set in stone yet. The first House Finance Subcommittee meets next week and the full House Finance Committee meets in two weeks. We are currently looking into what we need to do to gain self-directed, semi-independent agency status. We are also looking into obtaining a lobbyist to help us in our endeavors. Lobbyists don't come cheap, and we are looking for financial support from the various geological organizations around the state. If you are looking to help, I suggest you contact your local geological society and ask them to help us in this endeavor. We need to have a show of support by February 17, 2011. You can also show up to the House Finance Subcommittee and Committee meetings to voice your opinions. We have only just begun our efforts and are still trying to find out which Representatives and Senators we need to contact. I will, as usual, keep you all abreast of the news as it comes up.
A bill was filed in the Florida Legislature this past week that would shut down the Florida PG Board. It was also withdrawn this week. My understanding was that a lone legislator introduced the bill and then withdrew it under heavy pressure from the geological community.
The 2011 legislative session has begun. I've been compiling a list of proposed bills that may be of interest to geologists. If you have any that I have missed, let me know and I'll include them. Filing of proposed bills has begun and here's the ones I'm currently watching. All new items or updates are in bold:
HB-377, by McClendon, Relating to the expenditure of money from the general revenue fund for rail projects. Filed 12/02/2010. For more information go to: http://www.capitol.state.tx.us/BillLookup/history.aspx?LegSess=82R&Bill=HB377
HB-444, by Creighton, Relating to notification of applications for permits for certain injection wells. "If an application is received in proper form for a permit for an injection well to dispose of industrial and
I’m Still Learning, What About You?
Over the course of the fifteen columns that I have written for HGS I have tended to focus on three general themes: mentoring, volunteerism, and the need for continuous learning. All three topics remain important to me and I see no reason to diversify, believing that maintaining focus is the key. This month we turn back to the need for continuous learning throughout our careers. I believed that I have adopted Eartha Kitt’s philosophy, “I am learning all the time. The tombstone will be my diploma.”
Why this topic, again? I was recently reminded why continuous learning is so important. I have just completed two projects. One contained a large and diverse dataset which I had examined about twelve years ago. My original work had focused on conventional gas and oil; the new project focused on unconventional gas. A second was a “quick hit” concerning the presence of a nonhydrocarbon gas component. For both projects there were a number of technical components that were outside the normal bounds and required that “I go back to school”. I found that the actual searching for the answers was a major learning experience, involving a review of the literature, the connection of the different technical themes and issues, and the drawing of the appropriate conclusions. When finished with the project, I had learned significantly more than was required to answer the initial questions posed, making me better prepared for the next time similar questions arise. Once again, I have grown professionally.
Every so often I visit a college or university and present a lecture. These visits remind me how the science of geology has advanced since my Ph.D. degree was granted in 1979. The geosciences have become quantitative and much more information is available to the students online and in the growing number of specialty technical journals. The technology available to students has increased as seen in the use of computers and workstations. I am always impressed with the quality of the students and the concepts and information that they have learned, but I am also reminded that although they have been exposed to much, “we learn by direct experience because there are real limits to the adequacy of verbal instructions” (Malcolm Gladwell). Although these students are well prepared there remains much to learn and experience and it will be several years after graduation before they become full contributors to the profession.
When sitting and talking to these students I also reflect on how the technical components have changed and how much I have had to unlearn and then relearn. In my November 2010 column I discussed how things have changed over my career. It is the unlearning of what we have found to be incorrect that is particularly difficult. First, there is the admission to yourself and others that you were wrong, even if “correct” at the time. The possibility of changes to the foundational science is one reason that I believe well-referenced documentation is a must . Things inevitably change and we need to know when, how, and why, with good documentation providing such information. Unlearning is also difficult because of the problems associated with separating ourselves from information that has become part of our general knowledge base. For example, for much of my career when I discussed hydrocarbon source rocks my focus was on oil, with some very specific criteria and thresholds. Now with the growing interest in gas I must remember the “new and expanded” rules, simply because the old oil rules do not apply. There is also the pressure from those that have not yet been “enlightened” to pushback and question the change and the need to unlearn and relearn. Remember not all new ideas are immediately accepted. Continental drift was first proposed by Wegner in 1912 but it was not until the 1950s and 1960s that sufficient data were generated for the concept to be generally embraced.
So, what am I suggesting? Remember that “learning is not attained by chance, it must be sought for with ardor and attended to with diligence” (Abigail Adams). Put together a specific learning plan focused on expanding your technical breadth or depth. Personally, I have plans to expand my technical breadth by learning more about carbon sequestration and technical depth in the field of gas geochemistry. This plan could include attending short courses and/or technical presentations, the reading of foundational articles as well as recent papers, and some hands-on exposure with the help and guidance of skilled teachers or mentors. For most of us, that hands-on exposure is critical since it provides practical long-term learning. Look to the professional societies to help with some of the foundation building, but not necessarily the practical exposure. For example, if you were interested in learning about shale gas — HGS, SIPES, and AAPG could be of great assistance through their many meetings focused on the topic, including this month’s Mudstone Conference.
Look for assignments that have the potential for technical growth. Even when working on routine projects look for opportunities to learn — every dataset is different and has the potential to teach. Such an approach will provide that needed practical experience. If you have the opportunity, teach a class or short course. There is nothing like the preparation for a class or lecture to force you to learn. I have the junior members of my team take an active teaching role as soon as possible. Author a peer-reviewed paper. The peer-review process, although far from perfect, does provide an opportunity to validate your thoughts and test the fruits of your learning. The reviewer comments also provide a secondary opportunity for learning through the examination of what was said and why, along with what needs to be done to clarify and support your ideas. Remember, learning should be considered a journey, with a clearly defined plan, a series of well-marked milestones, but hopefully no end in sight.
Until next month…
Any Thoughts on Membership?
So far this year, my President’s letter has dealt with where we live, where we work, and AAPG’s membership age distribution: issues dealing with HGS membership numbers, or lack thereof. Today’s charts show the number of members by year for the AAPG and HGS and the real and inflation-adjusted price of crude oil between 1982 and 2009. Again, I am indebted to Greg Muirre of INEXS for the graphics work.
The Historic Crude Oil Price Data show a gradual decline of both real and adjusted prices until 1986, when it dropped down to ~$15/BBL. The prices then remained roughly constant, between $15 and $20/BBL, until a gradual increase began in 2000, finally topping out at ~$130/BBL in 2008. Today ’s price of $88 /BBL (12/14/10) is only slightly higher than the adjusted price of ~$80/BBL in 1982.
The AAPG membership peaked at ~44,000 in 1985, and declined declined to ~30,000 by 1996, where it more or less remained until 2006 when the numbers began a gradual increase to ~35,000 by 2009. The increase in memberships came from new international memberships and an influx of new professionals under age 30 to the industry.
Unfortunately, there are gaps in the HGS historic membership data. The partial HGS membership chart shows a gradual increase from ~3,900 members in 1982 to ~5,500 members by 1991. HGS membership has since gradually declined and only recently increased slightly to ~3,900 in 2009.
It is mystifying to me that both the AAPG and HGS numbers show flat to a slight increase in membership during a time from 2001 to 2009 of high historic crude oil price levels. I do not know the reason for the lower membership numbers on the right side of the chart compared to the left side. It could be that there are fewer geoscientists today. It could be apathy of younger geoscientists today or lack of encouragement by oil companies’ managements. It has been suggested that the older average age of the membership is a turn-off for the younger professionals. This is a Catch 22 problem in that the average age will not fall if the younger geoscientists do not join the HGS. Generally, about one-fourth to one-third of the registrants for HGS technical talks are non-members. I don’t think that the membership cost is the reason: at $24/year, membership is a great deal. However, looking at the end years of 1982 and 2009 on the chart, it may be a coincidence but the memberships of the AAPG and HGS and the adjusted crude oil price are more of less the same and the values are rising slightly. The HGS has made a concerted effort during the last four years to increase membership. It is an admirable goal but one that has been very difficult to achieve. We are open to suggestions.
Members who missed the Holiday Ho-Ho-Ho-down missed a great party. Thanks to Kelly Limbaugh for all her work in arranging the party. Remember this event next December. The HGS Applied Geoscience Mudrocks Conference is the 7th and 8th of this month. Don’t forget to register early; this conference has sold out in the last three years!
Laissez les bon temps rouler!
The Wise Report
Henry M. Wise, P.G.
January 30, 2011
The Texas Commission on Environmental Quality (TCEQ) revising the UST Fund Cost Reimbursement Fees. For more information on the proposed revisions go to: http://www.tceq.texas.gov/rules/prop.html#11004
For those interested in becoming a registered Professional Geologist in Louisiana, you'll need to wait longer. Louisiana hasn't set up their PG board yet, so no guidelines or registration forms are available yet. Hopefully sometime this year.
The 2011 legislative session will begin on January 11, 2011. I've been compiling a list of proposed bills that may be of interest to geologists. If you have any that I have missed, let me know and I'll include them. Filing of proposed bills has begun and here's the ones I'm currently watching. All new items or updates are in bold:
HB-377, by McClendon, Relating to the expenditure of money from the general revenue fund for rail projects. Filed 12/02/2010. For more information go to: http://www.capitol.state.tx.us/BillLookup/history.aspx?LegSess=82R&Bill=HB377
HB-444, by Creighton, Relating to notification of applications for permits for certain injection wells. "If an application is received in proper form for a permit for an injection well to dispose of industrial and municipal waste and the proposed location of the injection well is in the territory of a groundwater conservation district, the executive director shall submit a copy of the application to the governing body of the groundwater conservation district. The groundwater conservation district may make recommendations to the commission concerning any aspect of the application..." For more information go to: http://www.capitol.state.tx.us/BillLookup/history.aspx?LegSess=82R&Bill=HB444
HB-977, by Burnham, Relating to the development of a climate adaptation plan by certain entities. Filed 1/27/2011 For more information go to: http://www.capitol.state.tx.us/BillLookup/history.aspx?LegSess=82R&Bill=HB977
SB-104, by Davis, Relating to restriction on the release into the air of natural gas and an associated vapors from a gas well. Filed 11/8/2010. For more information go to: http://www.capitol.state.tx.us/BillLookup/history.aspx?LegSess=82R&Bill=SB104
SB-105, by Davis, relating to a restriction on the formation in which certain commercial disposal wells permitted by the Railroad Commission of Texas may inject oil and gas waste. "...applies only to a commercial disposal well...proposed to be located in a hydrocarbon-producing geological formation that underlies all or part of two counties: (1) that are adjacent to one another; and (2) each of which has a population of more than 1.4 million.(b) A permit issued by the railroad commission for a commercial disposal well...that authorizes the disposal of oil and gas waste may authorize the disposal of the waste only in the Ellenberger formation or a deeper formation." For more information go to: http://www.capitol.state.tx.us/BillLookup/history.aspx?LegSess=82R&Bill=SB105
SB-274, by Uresti, Relating to the regulation by groundwater conservation districts of certain wells. Pertains specifically to the Hill Country Priority Groundwater Management Area. For more information go to:
The Wise Report
Henry M. Wise, P.G.
January 11, 2011
The Texas Railroad Commission (RRC) has reviewed and re-adopted 16 TAC 4 because the reasons for adopting these rules continue to exist. In addition, amendments have been made to various sections relating to Definitions; General Permit Provisions; Permit Renewal; Acceptance or rejection of an Application; Permit for Surface Disposal; and Recordkeeping. These amendments make only non-substantive changes to correct cross-references to other RRC rules. For more information go to: http://www.rrc.state.tx.us/rules/Jan13-adopt-ch4-amdmts-and-review.PDF
The RRC also has adopted new Section 11.136, relating to Uranium Exploration Permit Fees, with changes to the version published in the November 19, 2010 issue of the Texas Register. For more information go to: http://www.rrc.state.tx.us/rules/Jan13-adopt-new-11-136-fees.PDF
The RRC proposes to amend Section 3.79, relating to Definitions, and Section 3.86, relating to Horizontal Drainhole Wells, to update and modernize the regulatory approach to new and evolving technologies regarding horizontal drilling and unconventional resource development in Texas. The RRC proposes to amend Section 3.79 to add new, and update existing, definitions. The RRC proposes to amend Section 3.86 to update, modernize, and clarify the rule, and incorporate for statewide application elements from numerous recent field rules relating to spacing of horizontal drainhole wells, including the concept of the "box rule," production sharing agreements, stacked lateral wells, and required information to be submitted with completion reports. The RRC also proposes to clarify notice requirements in certain circumstances to incorporate the concept of non-perforated zones (NPZs). For more information go to: http://www.sos.state.tx.us/texreg/sos/PROPOSED/16.ECONOMIC%20REGULATION.html#32
Henry M. Wise, P.G.The Wise Report1/22/2011
The Wise Report
Henry M. Wise, P.G.
January 15, 2011
The Texas Board of Professional Geoscientists (TBPG) has signed a Memorandum of Agreement (MOA) with the Railroad Commission of Texas (RRC) to coordinate the respective responsibilities and duties of the two in the regulation of professional geoscience.
"The RRC is the state agency with primary regulatory jurisdiction of the oil and natural gas industry, pipeline transporters, natural gas and hazardous liquid pipeline industry, natural gas utilities, the liquefied petroleum (LP) gas industry and coal and uranium surface mining operations. The RRC also is responsible for research and education to promote the use of LP-gas as an alternative fuel in Texas. The RRC exercises its statutory responsibilities under provisions of the Texas Constitution, the Texas Natural Resources Code, the Texas Water Code, the Texas Health and Safety Code, the Texas Utilities Code, the Coal and Uranium Surface Mining Reclamation Acts, and the Pipeline Safety Acts. The RRC also has regulatory and enforcement responsibilities under federal law including the Surface Coal Mining Control and Reclamation Act, the Safe Drinking Water Act, the Pipeline Safety Acts, the Resource Conservation Recovery Act, and the Clean Water Act."
"The TBPG is the state agency with regulatory jurisdiction over the public practice of professional geoscience authorized by Chapter 1002 of the TOC. TBPG has the authority to adopt and enforce rules consistent with TOC Chapter 1002 relating to Geoscientists, and necessary for the performance of its duties. These Rules are identified in Title 22, Part 39, Chapter 850 and Chapter 851 of the Texas Administrative Code (TAC)."
The complete MOA can be found at: https://tbpg.state.tx.us/RRC-MOA-011411.pdf
The Texas Commission on Environmental Quality (TCEQ) has revised its Texas Risk Reduction Program (TRRP) Guidance Document, RG-366/TRRP-22, "Tiered Development of Human Health PCLs". This document discusses the process of establishing protective concentration levels (PCLs) in accordance with the various tiers set forth in 350.75 of the TRRP rule. The document can be downloaded at: http://www.tceq.state.tx.us/publications/rg/rg-366_trrp_22.html
George Dunfield, with the TBPG, told me that I misunderstood his comments on SB 301, which is legislation relating to filing a complaint against a person licensed to engage in a business, occupation, or profession; providing civil and criminal penalties, as discussed in the last Wise Report. Mr. Dunfield's comments were his personal opinions, and are not those of the TBPG. The TBPG will not meet to discuss this, and other items of interest, until its next scheduled meeting on January 21, 2011, so no official TBPG opinion on this bill is available at this time. I always try to be accurate and thanked Mr. Dunfield for this correction.
Henry M. Wise, P.G.The Wise Report1/15/2011
The Wise Report
Henry M. Wise, P.G.
January 7, 2011
The 2011 legislative session will begin on January 11, 2011. I've been compiling a list of proposed bills that may be of interest to geologists. If you have any that I have missed, let me know and I'll include them. Filing of proposed bills has begun and here's the ones I'm currently watching. All new items or updates are in bold:
HB-377, by McClendon, Relating to the expenditure of money from the general revenue fund for rail projects. Filed 12/02/2010. For more information go to: http://www.capitol.state.tx.us/BillLookup/history.aspx?LegSess=82R&Bill=HB377
HB-444, by Creighton, Relating to notification of applications for permits for certain injection wells. "If an application is received in proper form for a permit for an injection well to dispose of industrial and municipal waste and the proposed location of the injection well is in the territory of a groundwater conservation district, the executive director shall submit a copy of the application to the governing body of the groundwater conservation district. The groundwater conservation district may make recommendations to the commissionconcerning any aspect of the application..." For more information go to: http://www.capitol.state.tx.us/BillLookup/history.aspx?LegSess=82R&Bill=HB444
SB-104, by Davis, Relating to restriction on the release into the air of natural gas and an associated vapors from a gas well. Filed 11/8/2010. For more information go to: http://www.capitol.state.tx.us/BillLookup/history.aspx?LegSess=82R&Bill=SB104
SB-105, by Davis, relating to a restriction on the formation in which certain commercial disposal wells permitted by the Railroad Commission of Texas may inject oil and gas waste. "...applies only to a commercial disposal well...proposed to be located in a hydrocarbon-producing geological formation that underlies all or part of two counties: (1) that are adjacent to one another; and (2) each of which has a population of more than 1.4 million.(b) A permit issued by the railroad commission for a commercial disposal well...that authorizes the disposal of oil and gas waste may authorize the disposal of the waste only in the Ellenberger formation or a deeper formation." For more information go to: http://www.capitol.state.tx.us/BillLookup/history.aspx?LegSess=82R&Bill=SB105
SB-274, by Uresti, Relating to the regulation by groundwater conservation districts of certain wells. Pertains specifically to the Hill Country Priority Groundwater Management Area. For more information go to: http://www.capitol.state.tx.us/BillLookup/history.aspx?LegSess=82R&Bill=SB274
SB-301, by Wentworth, Relating to filing a complaint against a person licensed to engage in a business, occupation, or profession; providing civil and criminal penalties. I spoke with George Dunfield, with the TBPG, who told me that the TBPG isn't concerned about this legislation. It's designed to keep the "he said/she said" complaints down, especially in complaints about doctors, etc. In addition, only the city, county or state attorney can prosecute anyone under this legislation because it's a civil offense. The TBPG has no authority to prosecute. It won't affect any self-initiated complaints by the TBPG so you could still complain unofficially. Also, 39 TAC 851.106(e) says that Professional Geoscientists are supposed to report violations, so you've always got the excuse that you felt it was a violation and you reported it as such. Kind of like a good samaritan law. For more information go to: http://www.capitol.state.tx.us/BillLookup/history.aspx?LegSess=82R&Bill=SB301
Henry M. Wise, P.G.
The Wise Report
1/7/2011