THE DISCIPLINE FILE
Case No. 16-010-FH continued
MARC SABOURIN, P.ENG . Panel Member, APEGA Discipline Committee NASER RABBANI, P.ENG . Panel Member, APEGA Discipline Committee MURIEL DUNNIGAN Public Member, APEGA Discipline Committee Decision Date: March 20, 2017 Sanction Decision Date: June 16, 2017
professional organizations governing the conduct of Professional Geoscientists in Canada.
Signed, KEVIN SARETSKY, P.ENG. Panel Chair, APEGA Discipline Committee GRANT HALLAM, P.ENG. Panel Member, APEGA Discipline Committee
2. Inappropriately issuing a Schedule C-2 for the Project, the particulars of which included: a. Failure to conduct or ensure an adequate field review was conducted to ensure that the foundation was constructed in accordance with the design; and b. Failure to ensure the shotcrete was applied to the foundation of the Project to the proper thickness. The Permit Holder was charged with failure to follow its own policies for the Project, including: 1. Failure to prepare and maintain a Project Construction Checklist; and 2. Failure to generally follow the company’s Professional Practice Management Plan. The case proceeded by an Agreed Statement of Facts and an Acknowledgement of Unprofessional Con- duct by both the Member and the Permit Holder. The Hearing Panel found the alleged charges against both the Member and the Permit Holder were supported and proven on the agreed facts. The conduct of both the Member and the Permit Holder constituted unskilled and unprofessional conduct within the meaning of Section 44 of the Engineering and Geoscience Professions Act. The Hearing Panel highlighted the importance of ensuring that when professional documents are signed and stamped, the statements within the documents are absolutely accurate. It is vital for public safety and in the best interests of the public for the assurances in a Schedule C-2 to be complete and fully accurate. In this case, the Panel found that the Member failed to document the change in the formulation of the shotcrete and failed to conduct an adequate field
Date: April 24, 2017 Case No.: 12-010-FH and 13-008-FH
Pursuant to the Engineering and Geoscience Professions Act, an APEGA Disciplinary Hearing was held on January 30, 2017. The hearing addressed a complaint against the conduct of a Professional Member, P.Eng., and his employer, a Permit Holding Company. The Permit Holder was engaged to design and provide field inspection services at a home under construction in a residential subdivision (the “Project”). The Professional Member (the "Member") was employed by the Permit Holder as a Senior Structural Engineer. His responsibilities included preparing design drawings for the Project’s structural insulated concrete wall panel system, consisting of an expanded polystyrene foam core and new form of fibre- reinforced shotcrete and conducting the related field reviews. After an investigation into the conduct of the Mem- ber and the Permit Holder during the Project, the follow- ing charges were laid. The Member was charged with: 1. Having knowledge of and accepting a change in the formulation of the shotcrete used for the foundation of the Project, and for failure to document approval of the change and enclose that documentation with the Schedule C-2 for the Project. REGARDING THE CONDUCT OF A PROFESSIONAL MEMBER, P.ENG., AND HIS EMPLOYER, A PERMIT HOLDING COMPANY
WINTER 2017 PEG | 73
Made with FlippingBook flipbook maker