THE DISCIPLINE FILE
Case No. 17-014-RDO continued
4. The Member was aware of the minimum bearing requirement of 4 inches for the roof trusses as indicated in the roof truss drawings. 5. The Member did not identify during his field review that the roof trusses installed on the building’s exterior ICF north wall did not meet the minimum 4-inch bearing requirement on the building’s exterior ICF north wall as indicated in the roof truss drawings. 6. The Member did not identify during his field review that the floor joists (supporting the 2nd floor) were only bearing on a supporting beam by 3/4-inch at the location where the 3-ply beam transitions to a 2-ply beam. 7. The Member did not confirm in his field review that the Simpson H2.5AZ uplift anchors, meant to be installed at the ends of the trusses, were installed as required. 8. Per the Alberta Building Code , [Facility C] is classified as a Division B, Group D Occupancy as it contains two storeys, each greater than 250 sq. m. As such it requires professional involvement by an architect and an engineer, therefore requiring appropriate schedules. D. CONDUCT 9. The Member freely and voluntarily admits that: a. During his field review he did not identify the items set out in paragraphs 5, 6 and 7 of the Agreed Statement of Facts and thereby demonstrated a lack of skill in carrying out a duty required by the Alberta Building Code . 10. The Member acknowledges that the conduct is a breach of section 44(1)(e) of the Act and therefore constitutes unskilled practice as defined in the Act . E. RECOMMENDED ORDERS 11. On the recommendation of the Investigative Committee, and by agreement of [Professional Member A] and following a discussion and review with the Discipline Committee’s Case Manager, the Discipline Committee hereby orders that:
1. The Member shall receive a letter of reprimand and a copy to be retained on his APEGA file. 2. The Member shall pay a fine in the amount of $4,000 to be paid within 90 days after the Discipline Committee’s Case Manager approves the Recommended Order. 3. The Member has agreed not to act as a Registered Professional of Record for the structural elements of a project and shall state such in a letter to APEGA to be retained on his APEGA file. 4. Should the Member fail to pay the fine in the period specified, or should he not submit the letter, his registration will be suspended until such time as he does. 5. Although the Investigative Committee and the Member understand and acknowledge that APEGA’s usual policy is to publish Recommended Discipline Orders in a manner that identifies the Member by name, the parties understand that the decision to publish with or without name is discretionary. The parties submit that publication without name is appropriate, given the specific facts in this case, including the following: a. The Member has been in good standing as a Member of APEGA since 1967 and has had no prior findings of unprofessional conduct or unskilled practice since he has been a member; b. [Facility C] is currently the subject of proceedings in the Court of Queen’s Bench of Alberta.
Signed, [PROFESSIONAL MEMBER A], P.ENG. ALLAN YUCOCO, P.L.(ENG.) Panel Chair, APEGA Investigative Committee D.F. COX, P.ENG. Case Manager, APEGA Discipline Committee Date: November 10, 2017
WINTER 2017 PEG | 55
Made with FlippingBook flipbook maker