TEXAS BOARD OF PROFESSIONAL ENGINEERS
August 18, 2011, Board Meeting Disciplinary Actions
Case Number: D-32715; Mark Donohue, P.E.; Lewisville, Texas.
Violation: It was alleged that Mr. Donohue signed and affixed his Texas engineer seal to engineering plans during a period when his Texas engineer license was expired and his firm registration was inactive, due to the expired status of his engineer license since he was the only Texas licensed professional engineer in his firm. Therefore, it appears that Mr. Donohue practiced engineering and affixed his seal to engineering documents when his Texas engineer license was expired and while his firm did not have an active firm registration.
Resolution: Formal reprimand and a $530.00 administrative penalty.
Case Number: D-32869; Christopher Glenn Goodman, P.E.; Nashville, Tennessee.
Violation: It was alleged that during his Texas engineer license renewal process, Mr. Goodman certified that he had completed the required 15 hours of continuing education. However, after being selected to have his continuing education records audited which he did not promptly respond to, Mr. Goodman acknowledged that in fact he had not completed the required continuing education. Therefore, it appears that in addition to his failure to promptly respond to a Board inquiry, Mr. Goodman failed to submit his continuing education records for audit and falsely certified that he had completed the required continuing education.
Resolution: Two year probated suspension, a $3,900.00 administrative penalty and completion of an engineering ethics course.
Case Number: D-32991; Nigel Matthew Henry Ottwa Brown, P.E.; Dallas, Texas.
Violation: It was alleged that Mr. Brown signed and affixed his Texas engineer seal to engineering plans for several projects during a period when his Texas engineer license was expired and his firm registration was inactive, due to the expired status of his engineer license since he was the only Texas licensed professional engineer in his firm. Therefore, it appears that Mr. Brown practiced engineering and affixed his seal to engineering documents when his Texas engineer license was expired and while his firm did not have an active firm registration.
Resolution: Formal reprimand and a $975.00 administrative penalty.
Case Number: D-32686; Enrique Isidoro Tabak, Toronto, Canada.
Violation: It was alleged that Mr. Tabak, who is no longer licensed in Texas as a professional engineer, signed and affixed his Texas engineer seal, when he had a current Texas engineer license, to design plans for a manufactured covering system constructed over a sport practice field in Texas and certified that the structure was designed and manufactured in a careful and diligent manner. This structure later collapsed during a severe storm event injuring several people. A review of the original design documents prepared by Mr. Tabak, indicated that several design aspects of the structure had not been thoroughly analyzed prior to manufacturing and construction and did not appear to be in compliance with various manufacturing, design and building codes. Therefore, it appears that, when licensed in Texas as a professional engineer, Mr. Tabak signed and sealed design plans that were not prepared in a careful and diligent manner and that his certification was misleading.
Resolution: Cease and desist from practicing engineering in Texas and from affixing his Texas engineer seal for any project in Texas until such time as he should become re-licensed in Texas as a professional engineer and a $12,040.00 administrative penalty.
Case Number: B-32531; Warren Van Simmons, P.E.; Tyler, Texas.
Violation: It was alleged that Mr. Simmons identified himself as a Texas licensed professional engineer, practiced engineering and affixed his Texas engineer seal to an engineering design after his Texas engineer license had expired and became non-renewable. Although Mr. Simmons because re-licensed in Texas as a professional engineer, it appears that his identification of being a Texas licensed professional engineer, practice of engineering and use of his Texas engineer seal for the above-mentioned project was unlawful.
Resolution: A $2,200.00 administrative penalty.
Case Number: E-32873; Joe Acevedo; San Antonio, Texas.
Violation: It was alleged that Mr. Acevedo prepared a fire sprinkler system document which required a Texas professional engineer seal and that he had a Texas engineer seal made which showed an individual’s name with a Texas engineer license number that he affixed to the document, signed the person’s name using an “Engineer” title and issued under his firm’s title block. Board records show the neither Mr. Acevedo nor the person named on the engineer seal have ever been licensed in Texas as professional engineers; nor was Mr. Acevedo’s firm registered with the Board. Therefore, it appears that Mr. Acevedo’s preparation of the document and his use of a false Texas engineer seal and “Engineer” title constituted the unlicensed and unlawful practice of engineering.
Resolution: Cease and desist from offering to perform or the actual performance of engineering services, from using an engineer seal or any “Engineer” title in Texas until such time as he becomes licensed in Texas as a professional engineer his firm becomes registered with the Board and a $2,240.00 administrative penalty.
Case Number: B-32541; Building Inspection Services, Inc.; Arlington, Texas.
Violation: It was alleged that this business entity continued to represent the ability to offer and provide consulting engineering services to the public of Texas and actually provided engineering services during a period when it did not have a current firm registration and after its firm registration became non-renewable.
Resolution: A $750.00 administrative penalty.
Case Number: B-32685; Foundation Inspections, L.P.; Dallas, Texas.
Violation: It was alleged that this business entity’s firm registration became inactive a result of its only Texas licensed professional engineer leaving the firm; however, during the inactive period, the business continued to offer and provide engineering services when it did not have a current firm registration.
Resolution: A $500.00 administrative penalty.
Case Number: B-32768; Cadick Corporation; Garland, Texas.
Violation: It was alleged that this business entity continued to offer and provide consulting engineering services to the public of Texas during a period when it did not have a current firm registration.
Resolution: A $500.00 administrative penalty.
Case Number: B-32813; CSD Engineering Group, Inc.; Houston, Texas.
Violation: It was alleged that this business entity continued to offer and provide consulting engineering services to the public of Texas during a period when it did not have a current firm registration.
Resolution: A $500.00 administrative penalty.