I support the need to reduce experience requirements and believe that this should not have a significant negative impact to the quality and value of the PWD program, as long as the majority of an applicant's actual workload during those years remains wetland-specific.  

Reducing the certification requirements could negatively impact the quality of delineations, wetland permits, compensatory mitigation, accurate/true engineering plans, and site development. I supports the current educational, training, and reference components of the CPWD regulation which are critical to assuring reliable and consistent identification of State Surface Waters. Inaccurate delineations can lead to higher costs to business from punitive regulatory actions. It can lead to higher costs to the Commonwealth by increasing the workload of regulators who must review poor quality delineations. It can also lead to detrimental impacts to public health, safety, and welfare by having an adverse effect on water quality.

Will the Board consider making an exemption to the requirement for examination if the applicant holds a valid license as a professional soil scientist in the Commonwealth in good standing) and provides documentation of at least ten (10) delineations prepared in Virginia with at least six being non-tidal wetlands along with any other credentials the Board may deem necessary to determine the eligibility for exam exemption?

Reducing the certification requirements could negatively impact the quality of delineations, wetland permits, compensatory mitigation, accurate/true engineering plans, and site development. I support the current educational, training, and experiential components of the CPWD regulation which are critical to assuring reliable and consistent identification of State Surface Waters.

1. DEQ supports repealing language that is duplicative of statute language;
2. DEQ supports revising language with editorial improvements to provide clarity to applicants and the public;
3. DEQ supports strengthening the experience requirement in nontidal wetlands for those seeking certification based on inspection, review, or confirmation of wetland delineations (emphasis added);
4. DEQ recommends retaining a minimum number of hours in biological, physical, and quantitative sciences, from either an undergraduate or graduate degree or a combination of both. Having a clear and consistent metric benefits both the applicant and the regulated community;
5. DEQ strongly recommends retaining the requirement to sign and date plans, drawings, and documents prepared by or under the direction of a certificate holder. Signing plans, drawings, and documents signifies to the public that the work has been prepared by a qualified individual within the certification program’s standards. DEQ believes that without signing and dating plans, drawings, and documents, the integrity of the certification program is decreased, and enforcement of the standards of practice and conduct will be difficult. It also plays a crucial role in DEQ’s ongoing efforts to streamline wetland delineation and permitting processes, which is a key priority of this administration, by leveraging the expertise of trained and certified professionals to minimize regulatory burdens and delays for the citizens of our commonwealth.

I am not in support of amendments reducing the minimum qualifications of applicants applying for the Professional Wetland Delineator certification. I think it is imperative that a state endorsed standard of a competent wetland delineator be maintained at it's current requirement. This legitimate certification is invaluable within the environmental consulting industry as it establishes the standard of what it means to be a competent delineator. In a profession that plays a huge role in protecting the commonwealth's environment this certifications shows, employers, regulators, and the public utilizing wetland delineation services the depth of knowledge required to be a competent delineator. I have observed ample evidence of practitioners of wetland delineations relying on inexperienced and underqualified individuals to complete delineations. Establishing adequate standards that validate and legitimize an individual as a competent and qualified wetland delineator establishes a true and honest standard within the industry and facilitates the state's ability to carry out and enforce water protection laws. The minimum qualifications for an applicant emphasizes the mastery needed to successfully and accurately complete wetland delineations within the commonwealth. Alot of study and consistently performing wetland delineations is needed in order to fully grasp and master the concepts of soil science, botany, and hydrology, which are equally and substantially employed in wetland delineating. These are three separate and complex concepts that are learned through a rigorous academic setting like a graduate degree or at least a four-year degree. Therefor it is my opinion that the minimum number of required semester hours in biology, physical, and quantitative sciences be maintained. I also believe the minimum number of years of wetland delineation experience for an applicant should be four years. I am in support of increasing the number of nontidal wetland delineations that an applicant must have inspected, reviewed, or confirmed.

Kathleen R. Nosbich (via email at soilscientist@dpor.virginia.gov)
Executive Director
Board for Professional Soil Scientists, Wetlands Professionals, and Geologists
9960 Mayland Drive
Suite 400
Richmond, VA 23233
Submitted online to the Virginia Regulatory Town Hall at:
https://townhall.virginia.gov/L/entercomment.cfm?stageid=10507

RE: 18VAC145-30. Regulations Governing Certified Professional Wetland Delineators (amending 18VAC145-30-10 through 18VAC145-30-70, 18VAC145-30-120, 18VAC145-30-140, 18VAC145-30-160; repealing 18VAC145-30-80)

Dear Kathleen R. Nosbisch:

Wetlands Watch is a statewide 501(c)3 nonprofit organization, based in Norfolk and working statewide on the conservation and protection of Virginia’s wetlands. On behalf of the Virginia Association of Wetland Professionals, the Environmental Defense Fund, the Chesapeake Bay Foundation, Friends of the Rappahannock, and the Virginia Conservation Network, we offer the following comments on the proposed changes in regulations governing certified professional wetland delineators.

18VAC145-30-20. Qualifications for certification. / 18VAC145-30-80. Waiver from examination. (Repealed.)

We are concerned about the language in 18VAC145-30-20 and the repeal of 18VAC145-30-80, specifically regarding the waiver from examination. This provision allows individuals who obtained Provisional Certification under the United States Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) Wetland Delineator Certification Program of 1993 to obtain Virginia certification without taking an exam. It is important to note that these provisional certifications were invalidated in 1994 when the USACE discontinued the trial program.

As a result, the current regulation has led to waivers of examination being issued by the Department of Professional and Occupational Regulation, granting Virginia Certified Professional Wetland Delineator (PWD) Certifications based solely on these outdated 1993 provisional Corps certifications. Given the significant changes in the procedures for identifying/delineating wetlands and various changes in regulations defining the Waters of the United States since 1994, allowing these 30-year-old provisional certifications to serve as proof of qualifications for performing wetland delineations today seems unreasonable.

We respectfully suggest that this provision be reconsidered, and that the specific language enabling this waiver be removed from the regulation. The invalidation of these provisional certifications in 1994/1995 provides a compelling argument for the need to make this change.

18VAC145-30-60. Course requirements.

We oppose eliminating the minimum course hour requirements in biological, physical, and quantitative sciences. Regardless of degree, maintaining a minimum standard for these courses ensures that PWDs have a solid scientific foundation for accurate and consistent delineations. Removing these requirements would introduce ambiguity, leading to inconsistencies in PWD applications and making it harder to assess applicants’ qualifications. This could weaken the overall competency of the profession.

The listed coursework outlines example course topics, allowing applicants to choose from a variety of classes while still meeting a consistent minimum standard. This clear and consistent academic requirement benefits both applicants and the public by setting expectations and preserving the integrity of the certification process.

18VAC145-30-140. Standards of practice and conduct

We oppose the proposed removal of the following provisions:

“7. Shall immediately notify the client or employer and the appropriate regulatory agency if the certificate holder's professional judgment is overruled and not adhered to when advising appropriate parties of any circumstances of a substantial threat to the public health, safety, or welfare.”

“9. Shall sign and date all plans, drawings, blueprints, surveys, reports, specifications, maps, or other documents prepared or reviewed and approved by the certificate holder. The certified professional wetland delineator shall also indicate that he is a Virginia-certified professional wetland delineator on all plans, drawings, blueprints, surveys, reports, specifications, maps, or other documents prepared or reviewed and approved by the certificate holder and include his certificate number."

The requirement for a Certified Professional Wetland Delineator (PWD) to sign and date all documents, prepared or reviewed, ensures accountability and maintains the integrity of the certification program. Notably, no reasonable justification was provided for the proposed removal of the provision in the agency’s background document. If this provision is removed, it would severely hinder the ability of PWDs to support the program's certification standards. Specifically, if a PWD has an employee or assistant working under their supervision to certify a project, and that person makes an error, the PWD should have the ability to sign off on the work. Without the requirement to personally review and sign the documents, it would be difficult for PWDs to ensure the accuracy and compliance of the work being done under their direction. Virginia’s own Department of Environmental Quality (DEQ) shares our concerns with the proposed removal of this language from the regulations and has noted that “without signing and dating plans, drawings, and documents, the integrity of the certification program is decreased, and enforcement of the standards of practice and conduct will be difficult.”

Additionally, the signing requirement and the notification of non-adherence reinforce the PWD’s responsibility for the work and support enforcing the PWD’s professional code of conduct. Notifying clients and regulatory agencies when professional judgment is overruled is essential for safeguarding the environment and ensuring that PWDs fulfill their ethical and legal responsibilities in protecting the public interest. Without this accountability, the integrity of the certification program could be weakened, leading to a potential erosion of public trust in the qualifications and standards of certified professionals. We ask that this language be restored in any final regulations.

Thank you for your attention.

Sincerely,

Mary-Carson Stiff
Executive Director
Wetlands Watch

Robin Bedenbaugh
Wetland Delineator Certification Committee Chair
Virginia Association of Wetland Professionals

Emily Steinhilber
Virginia Director, Climate Resilient Coasts & Watersheds
Environmental Defense Fund

Patrick Fanning
Virginia Staff Attorney
Chesapeake Bay Foundation

Pat Calvert
Director-Water & Land Conservation Programs
Virginia Conservation Network

Brent Hunsinger
Advocacy and Coastal Programs Director
Friends of the Rappahannock

I provide the following comments as an active wetland delineation professional in Virginia. I am a Professional Wetland Delineator (PWD) [#3402000183] in good standing and hold an M.S. in Environmental Science from Christopher Newport University (2015), where my thesis research focused on wetland bank creation and ecology in Virginia. Since completing my graduate studies, I have worked as an Environmental Scientist in the Commonwealth, with the majority of my responsibilities centered on wetland delineation and compliance with Virginia’s state and federal wetland regulations. I am also the president and founder of a Virginia-based environmental consulting firm.

I have been actively involved with the Virginia Association of Wetland Professionals (VAWP) Board since 2018 and currently serve as a VAWP Executive Officer in the role of Immediate Past President. Additionally, I am a certified Professional Wetland Scientist (PWS) [#3196] through the Society of Wetland Scientists (SWS) Professional Certification Program.

18VAC145-30-10. Definitions.

Per the background documents, revising the definitions of "tidal wetlands" and "nontidal wetlands" in 18VAC145-30-10 is intended to update and clarify the meaning of these terms. However, the proposed text replaces the term ‘defines’ with the phrase “subject to the jurisdiction of” in relation to of Chapter 13 (§ 28.2-1300 et seq.) of Title 28.2 of the Code of Virginia.

The incorporation of 'subject to the jurisdiction of' may create confusion rather than clarify the intended meaning, particularly in the context of wetland delineations. The practice of wetland delineation is intended to identify areas that meet specific regulatory and/or statutory criteria, not determine if those wetlands are regulated by any specific governing body. All wetlands, regardless of jurisdictional status, are to be identified and located as part of a wetland delineation. Therefore, adding the term ‘subject to the jurisdiction of’ goes beyond the basic intention of a wetland delineation

Determination of jurisdiction is made in later stages of delineation reviews by governing bodies. Jurisdictional determinations are conducted by the appropriate regulatory bodies, such as the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (via Preliminary or Approved Jurisdictional Determinations), the Virginia DEQ (through State Surface Water Determinations), and the Virginia Marine Resources Commission or Local Wetlands Boards for tidal wetlands, not by the delineator.

Furthermore, the Code of Virginia at § 54.1-2200 (Definitions), already defines "Wetlands" to mean the same as that term is defined in §§ 28.2-1300 and 62.1-44.3 and the current DPOR regulations already incorporate the § 54.1-2200 definitions. In addition, the term ‘Tidal wetland’ is not included anywhere in DPOR current or proposed regulations.  There are only two occurrences of ‘nontidal wetlands’ in 18VAC145-30-50.  Therefore, specific clarification regarding the terms ‘Tidal Wetland’ and ‘Nontidal Wetlands’ seems unnecessary as the existing incorporation of § 54.1-2200 definitions already aligns with statutory language.

18VAC145-30-20. Qualifications for certification.

The addition of 'pass the board-approved exam and' is a necessary clarification and aligns with certification requirements.

However, the proposed language of “The board will waive the examination requirement for applicants who meet the requirements of § 54.1-2206 B of the Code of Virginia.” is unnecessary, as the waiver of the examination requirement is already established and mandatory under § 54.1-2206 B of the Code of Virginia. Including this provision in the DPOR regulations contradicts the stated goal of regulatory reduction under Executive Directive Number One."

18VAC145-30-60. Course requirements.

As others have commented in this public forum, I also oppose eliminating the minimum course hour requirements in biological, physical, and quantitative sciences. These requirements are necessary to maintain the integrity of the PWD. Wetland delineation requires specialized knowledge across multiple disciplines and the current course hour framework addresses this base knowledge.  For those without the educational background required to qualify pursuant to subdivision 1 of § 54.1-2206.2, there is a pathway outline under subdivision 2 which provide submission of academic experience for job experience. The existing pathway outlined under § 54.1-2206.2(2) already allows applicants to substitute job experience for educational requirements, ensuring flexibility while maintaining professional standards. Therefore, maintaining these education requirements should not pose an undue burden

18VAC145-30-70. Examination.

B. I support the removal of the requirement for candidates to submit applications at least 90 days prior to examinations. However, it remains essential that DPOR clearly outlines examination deadlines and procedures to ensure transparency and accessibility for applicants."

18VAC145-30-120. Reinstatement.

The rationale for removing the Board’s ability to require examination or reexamination for reinstatement is not clearly explained in the background documents. Allowing the board the flexibility to require reexamination is important for maintaining integrity of the profession.  If someone was certified and then let their certification lapse due to a change in professions, there is a high likelihood that they have not kept up with current practices of wetland delineation. The PWD exam questions are reevaluated regularly for the same reason, wetland delineation practices and procedures change over time. Allowing the Board flexibility to require reexamination on a case-by-case basis is critical for maintaining professional competency, given the evolving nature of wetland delineation practices.

18VAC145-30-140. Standards of practice and conduct

I agree with the commented provided by Wetland watch and other and oppose the proposed removal of Items 7 & 9 from 18VAC145-30-140.  As noted, there is no reasonable justification provided for the proposed removal of these provisions and they are necessary to help maintain the integrity of the certification.