THE DISCIPLINE FILE
each case there is a final inspection before the product is shipped. The Agreed Statement of Facts and Admissions reviewed in detail 17 cases where test results were manipulated in various ways including: a. Changing test results to make it appear that the test bar conformed to required specifications; b. Creating tests results when the independent test results were not available; c. Using test results from representative or stand-in test bars in place of actual test results from actual test bars from a specific casting or heat. These test results were then sent to the customer without notifying the custom- er of what had been done or the potential issues in respect of the testing. The admissions acknowledged that while these actions were done primarily by Mr. Richard DeHaas and one of his em- ployees, these actions were taken with the knowledge and express or implicit authori- zation of the Plant Manager, Marc Poissant and the owners Isidro Ang and Carlos Ang. Based on this information, it was clear to the Hearing Panel that there was a systemic issue that went throughout MA Steel and that was condoned and participated in by all of the four professional members. The Hearing Panel held that certifica- tions of test results are professional docu- ments relied upon by clients. A professional member cannot sign or permit to be signed any professional certification that the pro- fessional member knows is not accurate. The situation is made worse when the pro- fessional member takes deliberate actions to alter the test results or to create test results or to test the wrong materials in order to certify to a client that the required standards have been met. The Hearing Panel also stated that the integrity of the profession depends upon the public being able to depend upon profes- sional members to ensure that products they design and produce and certify are safe and function as designed. If the public cannot depend upon a professional member’s integ- rity in this respect then the reputation and integrity of the profession is threatened. Therefore, the Hearing Panel found that the admitted actions of each of the profes-
and Richard DeHaas, P.Eng. are professional members who are employees of MA Steel. As a result of the investigation of a complaint from a former employee, a hear- ing was held on May 27, 2016 into charges against MA Steel and the four professional members. The charges alleged that between 2011 and 2013, Richard DeHaas, P.Eng., metallurgical engineer, intentionally altered material test results on certified material test reports issued to customers of M.A. Steel and that Marc R. Poissant, P.Eng., plant manager at MA Steel, intentionally altered material test results on certified material test reports for issuance to customers of MA Steel, and authorized or impliedly authorized the actions of Richard DeHaas. The charges also alleged that each of MA Steel, Isidro Ang, P.Eng. and Carlos Ang, P.Eng., failed to ensure the integrity of MA Steel’s quality assurance system for testing its steel casting products, by fail- ing to institute appropriate controls and procedures to ensure that accurate tests were done and reported to clients and that the steel casting products sent to clients had all undergone and passed valid tests. The charges alleged that the conduct of MA Steel and the four professional members was for the purpose of meeting customer delivery schedules, saving on expense or avoiding extra work. It was alleged that this conduct constituted unprofessional conduct or unskilled practice by the Member, as set out in sections 44(1) of the Engineering and Geoscience Professions Act , and contravenes one or more of Rules of Conduct 3, 4, and 5 of APEGA’s Code of Ethics. This case proceeded by way of an Agreed Statement of Facts and Admission of Unprofessional Conduct. Each of the four professional members and the Permit Hold- er MA Steel admitted all of the allegations set out in the Notice of Hearing. The detailed Agreed Statement of Facts and Admissions set out the admissions that supported each allegation in the Notice of Hearing. The Hearing Panel found that it was clear that under the ISO Standards under which MA Steel’s steel alloy products are produced the products must meet the re- quired qualities set by the American Society for Testing and Materials Standards (“ASTM Standards”) unless the customer accepts variations from the ASTM Standards. In
required to pay the full costs of the Appeal. The Investigative Committee argued that its appeal had been successful and MK Engi- neering’s appeal was not. MK Engineering advanced the argument that the Investiga- tive Committee’s appeal was not successful because it had been seeking cancellation of MK Engineering’s permit, and that costs should not constitute a punishment, but that if costs were to be assessed they should only be a small fraction of the total costs. The Appeal Board considered the sub- missions and divided the costs into two parts — one for the Investigative Committee’s appeal, and one for MK Engineering’s appeal. The decision was that even though the fines were increased against MK Engineering and Mr. Bermel, the Appeal Board was not per- suaded that the outcome of the Investigative Committee’s appeal should result in a costs assessment. As Mr. Bermel did not appeal, there was no need for the Appeal Board to consider the costs issue further. MK Engineering’s appeal required the Investigative Committee to respond, and since its appeal was completely unsuccess- ful, the Appeal Board assessed costs against MK Engineering in the sum of $22,500.00 representing 75% of the costs which the Ap- peal Board had allotted to the MK Engineer- ing appeal. Failure to pay the costs within 30 days of the date of the decision will result in suspension until the costs are paid. The full text of the Appeal Board deci- sion is available at: https://www.apega.ca/ enforcement/discipline-decisions/
VICTOR BENZ, P.ENG. Chair, Appeal Board
DECISION OF THE APEGA DISCIPLINE COMMITTEE REGARDING M.A. STEEL FOUNDRY LTD. AND OTHERS Date: August 11, 2016 Case No.: 16-003-FH M.A. Steel Foundry Ltd. (“MA Steel”) is an APEGA permit holder. Isidro Ang, P.Eng. and Carlos Ang, P.Eng. are professional members of APEGA who are some of the owners of MA Steel. Marc Poissant, P.Eng.
WINTER 2016 PEG | 61
Made with FlippingBook flipbook maker