CA Electrician Certification Renewal UPDATE!!!!

[e57]

So nothing yet?????
I'll ask my mole to look into it next week.

I remember your mole...

Otherwise....

OH DANNY! - SERVE UP THAT CROW!!!!!
(Just remember the last time I ate it I barfed it up...)

It seems no one should ever need to take CEU's EVER again - just let it expire and take a test the next morning for less money than CEU's and the renewal fee.

From: Luisa Martinez
Sent: Thursday, May 21, 2009 6:21 AM
To: ~~~~~~~~~~
Cc: Glenna Linn
Subject: RE: Electrician Certification

You do not need to do 32 hours of continuing education if your card expired. If your card lapsed, then you will need to retake the exam with the fee of $200. Otherwise, the on time renewal is $100 fee, only If you have the 32 hours of continuing education completed and have the 2,000 of on-the-job work within 3 years.
~~~~~~

Thank You.

Luisa Martinez
Electrician Certification Manager
Division of Apprenticeship Standards
Electrician Certification Unit

 

[ibew441dc]

Here ya go!:grin:

 

[e57]

I responded to Luisa's email with an additional question on the "laborer" issue. But not sure I'll get a response this time as as I was a little livid about that bird I'm eating....

 

[ike5547]

I paid the money and finished this a few minutes ago:

http://www2.weca-iec.org:3391/courseCatalogProgramHMCOMPBSD.asp?Program=CONTINEDUC&catalogType=J#2005%20NEC%20Home%20Study

I'm not sure what's supposed to happen next. I guess I need them to give me something I can mail....somehow.

 

[e57]

I paid the money and finished this a few minutes ago:

http://www2.weca-iec.org:3391/cours...=CONTINEDUC&catalogType=J#2005 NEC Home Study

I'm not sure what's supposed to happen next. I guess I need them to give me something I can mail....somehow.

Yes they will takes a few days - But you can e-mail them, and let them know if you need it quicker, they sent me mine all in PDF so I could get it all over with. But you should get the certificates pretty soon. Then copies of those need to be sent to the DAS with your application to re-new. And a check for $100...
http://www.dir.ca.gov/DAS/ECU/ElectricalCertificationFormRenewal.pdf

Anyway how was the course work? (That one wasn't available when I did mine)

 

[ike5547]

Anyway how was the course work? (That one wasn't available when I did mine)

So I finished taking the tests (54 of them), decide to go for a little drive, and on my way out the door I saw this big package in the mailbox.

Big shiny book titled: Understanding The National Electric Code.

And a pamphlet from WECA: Student Guide.

The pamphlet contains a FAQ answering all my questions (i.e., when do I get my certificate, etc.) plus detailed illustrated directions for logging in and taking the tests.

The book is very nice. 500 pages and color illustrations.

Nevertheless, I think I scored ninety-something percent by using my code book as a reference.

 

[ike5547]

When taking the test online there is an index of fifty-four links that you select one at a time to take the tests. They don't specify in advance how many questions there are per section and and the number of questions varies from section to section. I didn't keep track of the total number of questions.

I think it was about 250 to 300.

If I had more time I might have tried that trouble-shooting thing. It looked like it might be fun.

 

[e57]

If I had more time I might have tried that trouble-shooting thing. It looked like it might be fun.

It had an element of cheese - but also some realism:

It had 3 different items that you troubleshoot 24 times each in 3 different levels each.

• Dare I say it I forget what the first ones were...
• A ladder logic circuit where you trouble shoot a key pad that opens a door through a series of relays.
• A 3 phase garage door stop start with safety relays

Something funny I noticed is that in each of them they have 3 levels, and each of the levels you get assigned to a better 'class' of job. i.e. In one level you take an elevator that has graffiti, and trash in it, and in the last level you are taking a much cleaner elevator to the penthouse. My boss dropped my laptop I had these on and I had to call the company who makes this program in Canada. I mentioned that I noticed that the hourly rate went up too in each level.... The guy was like 'we really tried to make it fun...'

Anyway, the programs all started with a work order with a vague description of the problem, and then you were sent there... You had to use a digital meter, lock out the breakers, etc. Violate a safety rule like removing or replacing a wire or component you failed - if you replaced unnecessary components you failed. And when you complete each "Job" you got a bill for T&M....

The program was both tedious and boring and fun at the same time - if thats possible....

 

[ike5547]

Got an email today from WECA. My certificate is in the mail. I'm very happy with the way this turned out. I'd recommend it to others.

 

[sandsnow]

The following is copied from an email that I immediately sent to Luisa Martinez, the Electrician Certification Manager, Division of Apprenticeship Standards Electrician Certification Unit ........I know I left some other good places out but it wasn't intentional, I should have listed AVO, Tom Henry's stuff, Mark Shapiro's stuff ect. I didn't think of them until afterwords( I'm sure there's others also)



She responded to me and stated that she would forward this to the Chief of the DAS.......we'll see what happens????

I recommend anyone that this may be of concern to, shoot an email to the DAS Electricians Certification Unit.

Great idea Dan, but realistically you can forget about for the near future. The language in the bill needs to be ammended. There is a slight possibility it could be done with a rule change, but that is a long process also. Remember the state is currently in receivership, so everyone is just treading water.
If it comes to pass, what should the new language say? Remember you cannot exclude any private firm that offers certification since that would be discrimination.

It all gets so complicated. The original and present language was written to exclude "just anyone" printing up certificates.

Certainly Mike Holt, NFPA, IAEI etc are credible and I agree they should be included. There's a lot more that are not and should not be included.

My mole contributed to this report.

 

[ibew441dc]

Great idea Dan, but realistically you can forget about for the near future. The language in the bill needs to be ammended. There is a slight possibility it could be done with a rule change, but that is a long process also. Remember the state is currently in receivership, so everyone is just treading water.
If it comes to pass, what should the new language say? Remember you cannot exclude any private firm that offers certification since that would be discrimination.

It all gets so complicated. The original and present language was written to exclude "just anyone" printing up certificates.

Certainly Mike Holt, NFPA, IAEI etc are credible and I agree they should be included. There's a lot more that are not and should not be included.

My mole contributed to this report.

I agree with what you have stated:smile: But this is another email I sent to Glen Forman (Chief of the DAS), in an attempt to maybe trigger some thoughts with one in a position to change something quicker than a Joe Schmoe.

I sent the following email to the Chief of the DAS

Dear Glen Forman,

Previously the Division of Apprenticeship Standards FAQ page stated any entity could provide continuing education, and is now limited. I see clearly why the "any entity" part would need to be cleaned up, but now appears to exclude excellent sources of continuing education/training such as:


Mike Holt Enterprises http://www.mikeholt.com/index.php?id=homegeneral
National Fire Protection Association http://www.nfpa.org/catalog/categor...ing+|+National+Electrical+Code&Page=1&src=fpw
International Association of Electrical Inspectors http://www.iaei.org/education/seminartopics.html
International Codes Council http://www2.iccsafe.org/Training_Education/Seminar/nbceu.cfm
Underwriters Laboratories http://www.uluniversity.us/Common/NCSResponse.aspx?RenderText=ContinuingEducation
AVO Training Institute Inc.http://www.electricaltrainingservices.com/

Please consider the inclusion of a fourth option as I have suggested in the following italic text. The listed entities are directly related to the California electrical industry and it would be unfortunate to exclude any of them. I feel that clearly listing these entities will clear up any confusion in this matter. Also these entities do not exclude anyone based on political, union, non-union, or any other bias, other than that they are strictly electrically affiliated in nature.

"Who may offer continuing education?
1) community colleges, public school districts, public educational institutions; or,
2) a state-licensed private post-secondary institution under contract with a community college, public school district, or public educational institution; or,
3) federal or state apprenticeship programs"; or,
4) professionally recognized electrical entities, including: Mike Holt Enterprises, National Fire Protection Association, International Association of Electrical Inspectors, International Codes Council, Underwriters Laboratories, International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers, National Electrical Contractors Association, Associated Builders and Contractors, National Electrical Manufacturers Association, Wyotech, AVO Training Institute Inc, and any entity approved by the Division of Apprenticeship Standards.



Thank you very much for your time and consideration in this matter,


Danny Craft
International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers, Local 441
Orange County Electrical Training Trust - Electrical Instructor

 

[e57]

But this is another email I sent to Glen Forman (Chief of the DAS), in an attempt to maybe trigger some thoughts with one in a position to change something quicker than a Joe Schmoe.

You mean the Govenator?! He does have the power to sack the lot of them, and throw in an agenda-less bull-dog. (Which is what I think is needed.)

 

[sethas]

so i got the stupid cert. about 6-7 years ago. the first cycle around there were no schools to even take continuing education through. so they just automatically renewed everyone. second time around i just let it expire, couldnt quite figure out who was really allowed to give me my ceu's.

i sent in to retake the test, and when all was said and done, i think i saved a couple of a hundred dollars being re-cert. than taking the ceu's. only drawback was i wasnt cert. for about a month.....didnt work much anyway.

 

[ike5547]

You mean the Govenator?! He does have the power to sack the lot of them, and throw in an agenda-less bull-dog. (Which is what I think is needed.)

Are you still waiting on them to process your app? Have they cashed your check even?

 

[e57]

Are you still waiting on them to process your app? Have they cashed your check even?

On the 3rd this month, I got a letter from them after checking the bank for 3 1/2 weeks and the day prior sending an e-mail to them.... The letter was post marked that day.... (3rd) And said my application was accepted - 'pending review' blah blah.... So I walked up stairs and checked the bank - they cashed the check. The very next day I got a new card. (With the same, but smaller picture) It was post marked the 3rd, and it was from Prometric... (The testing company they hired out)

Pretty lickity split after a long wait.

3 days later they answered my email with a boiler plate about how much of a work load they have - Whaaaa... I built their own boat.

 

[LBwIReman2]

On the 3rd this month, I got a letter from them after checking the bank for 3 1/2 weeks and the day prior sending an e-mail to them.... The letter was post marked that day.... (3rd) And said my application was accepted - 'pending review' blah blah.... So I walked up stairs and checked the bank - they cashed the check. The very next day I got a new card. (With the same, but smaller picture) It was post marked the 3rd, and it was from Prometric... (The testing company they hired out)

Pretty lickity split after a long wait.

3 days later they answered my email with a boiler plate about how much of a work load they have - Whaaaa... I built their own boat.

So you did finally get your new cert! That's good news for us, maybe we could be so lucky! By the way, was that a Renewal or did you go in and take the test again?

 

[e57]

So you did finally get your new cert! That's good news for us, maybe we could be so lucky! By the way, was that a Renewal or did you go in and take the test again?

Yep - I assume you are still waiting? And yes - it was a renewal with CEU's.... Had I known they reversed the decission to force people to take classes as the law states I would have just let it expire for a day and go take the test again, saving both time and money. In some of my email exchanges with Luisa of the DAS she seemed clueless that classes cost money, and take time to do. But like I have said before all of the regulations and enforcement of them is subject to change - they may at some point require the classes be taken (as they should) - but then again they may be just looking for a reason to kick people out of the trade once they get them used to just letting certification expire to take the test again... Then go get 'em to force them into apprenticeship programs because they worked a day uncertified. Seriously, I have very little trust for those people.... While at many points things start looking less like conspiracy as they are just bafoons, only to reverse suddenly again and again to seem even more like conspiracy as time goes along with calculated gotcha's and catch 22's. The good thing is I won't have to worry about them personally until 2012.

 

[e57]

As for the conspiracy:

This is a specific example of what I mean. A very important change in the law occured MONTHS ago. Yet the DAS has a link to an obsolete section of law on their site....

http://www.dir.ca.gov/DAS/ecu/LaborCode3099-3099_5.html

3099.2. ~~~
(h) For the purposes of this section, "electricians" has the same meaning as the definition set forth in Section 3099.

This is the actual law, and one they intend to enforce...
http://www.leginfo.ca.gov/cgi-bin/waisgate?WAISdocID=01390113325+0+0+0&WAISaction=retrieve

3099.2~~~
(h) Commencing July 1, 2009, the following shall constitute
additional grounds for disciplinary proceedings, including suspension
or revocation of the license of a class C-10 electrical contractor
pursuant to Article 7 (commencing with Section 7090) of Chapter 9 of
Division 3 of the Business and Professions Code:
(1) The contractor willfully employs one or more uncertified
persons to perform work as electricians in violation of this section.

(2) The contractor willfully fails to provide the adequate
supervision of uncertified workers required by paragraph (3) of
subdivision (a) of Section 3099.4.
(3) The contractor willfully fails to provide adequate supervision
of apprentices performing work pursuant to subdivision (d).
(i) The Chief of the Division of Apprenticeship Standards shall
develop a process for referring cases to the Contractors' State
License Board when it has been determined that a violation of this
section has likely occurred. On or before July 1, 2009, the chief
shall prepare and execute a memorandum of understanding with the
Registrar of Contractors in furtherance of this section.
(j) Upon receipt of a referral by the Chief of the Division of
Apprenticeship Standards alleging a violation under this section, the
Registrar of Contractors shall open an investigation. Any
disciplinary action against the licensee shall be initiated within 60
days of the receipt of the referral. The Registrar of Contractors
may initiate disciplinary action against any licensee upon his or her
own investigation, the filing of any complaint, or any finding that
results from a referral from the Chief of the Division of
Apprenticeship Standards alleging a violation under this section.
Failure of the employer or employee to provide evidence of
certification or trainee status shall create a rebuttable presumption
of violation of this provision.
(k) For the purposes of this section, "electricians" has the same
meaning as the definition set forth in Section 3099.

Pretty different, and very important huh?

 

[ibew441dc]

This is the actual law, and one they intend to enforce...
http://www.leginfo.ca.gov/cgi-bin/waisgate?WAISdocID=01390113325+0+0+0&WAISaction=retrieve

Link takes me to a blank page???:-?

 

[e57]

Link takes me to a blank page???:-?

Sorry it was from a search.... Try this one:
http://www.leginfo.ca.gov/cgi-bin/displaycode?section=lab&group=03001-04000&file=3070-3099.5

If that doesnt work you have to follow the path from here:
http://www.leginfo.ca.gov/cgi-bin/calawquery?codesection=lab&codebody=&hits=20

Or here to 3099 in chapter 4:
http://www.leginfo.ca.gov/calaw.html

Or hereto Cal law, to 3099 in chapter 4:
http://www.leginfo.ca.gov/

CSLB minutes:

Mr. Fogt referred to the enforcement of implementing SB 1362 to ensure C-10 Electrical contractors are adhering to the new law when it goes into effect July 1, 2009. Richard Markeson, Western Electrical Contractors, addressed the Board and audience, expressing appreciation to Mike Brown and David Fogt in CSLB’s commitment in using progressive discipline to ensure electrical contractors’ compliance with this new law.

Reff: http://www.cslb.ca.gov/GeneralInfor...gendasAndMinutes2008/BoardMinutes20081120.asp

The offending bill is '08 SB 1362:
http://www.leginfo.ca.gov/pub/07-08/bill/sen/sb_1351-1400/sb_1362_bill_20080930_chaptered.pdf