Quiz Questions: |
| |
|
| 1. |
In case #11; It was alleged that Mr. Doe, a Texas PE engineer, altered boundary information on Survey plats for a subdivision that had been prepared by a license surveyor, affixed a copy of the surveyor’s seal to the plats and submitted the plats to county officials for approval without knowledge of the surveyor. The Board reportedly suspended his license for one year and fined him $1000.00 |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
|
a) |
True |
|
| |
|
b) |
False |
|
| |
|
|
|
|
| 2. |
In case # 15; It was alleged that Jim, the company’s president, designed seven swimming pools and affixed a copy of a Texas Professional engineer’s seal and signature that he had obtained from another source to the plan sheets which were submitted to a city for permitting. Board records did not show that Jim was licensed as a professional engineer in Texas nor that his company had Texas professional engineer as a regular full-time employee. The Board accepted an Agreed Board Order signed by Jim to cease and desist from any and all representations that his company can offer and/or perform engineering services and from the actual performance of engineering services until such time as the company hires a Texas licensed professional engineer as a regular full time employee, and to immediately discontinue the use of the Texas professional engineer’s seal and signature on any and all documents. Jim also agreed to hire a Texas professional engineer to perform after the fact engineering inspections and issue certification reports for the five swimming pools that were permitted and constructed. The company was also ordered to pay a $5000.00 administrative penalty. |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
|
a) |
True |
|
| |
|
b) |
False |
|
| |
|
|
|
|
| 3. |
In case #17; John was a registered engineer in: |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
|
a) |
Texas |
|
| |
|
b) |
Michigan |
|
| |
|
c) |
New Mexico |
|
| |
|
|
|
|
| 4. |
In case #21; It was alleged that Billy signed his name and affixed his Texas Architectural seal to structural, mechanical, electrical and plumbing design plans for renovation of a commercial building. Based upon the size of the building, the structural, mechanical, electrical and plumbing designs were required by law to have been performed by a licensed professional engineer; therefore Billy’s preparation of these design plans constituted the unlawful practice of engineering. The Board accepted a consent order signed by Billy and his attorney agreeing that Billy will not practice engineering outside the exemption listed in the Engineering practice Act and will refrain from making any and all representations that he can offer and/or perform engineering services until such time as he hires a Texas licensed professional engineer as a regular full time employee or until such time as he becomes a Texas licensed professional engineer. Billy also agreed to pay a $1000.00 administrative penalty. |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
|
a) |
True |
|
| |
|
b) |
False |
|
| |
|
|
|
|
| 5. |
In case #6; It was alleged that Jim provided professional engineering design services in connection with residential foundation design and exterior wall systems during a period when his Texas engineer license was expired. The Board accepted a Consent Order signed by Jim for a two-year probated suspension of his Texas engineer license contingent upon his payment of a $2000.00 administrative penalty. |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
|
a) |
True |
|
| |
|
b) |
False |
|
| |
|
|
|
|
| 6. |
In case #7; It was alleged that Dr. Smith conducted an engineering inspection for his client in December 1998; but did not provide his client with his inspection report until February 2000. This Indicated that he was not acting as a faithful agent for his client and his actions were not in keeping with generally accepted engineering standards and procedures. The Board accepted a Consent Order signed by Dr. Smith for a formal reprimand. |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
|
a) |
True |
|
| |
|
b) |
False |
|
| |
|
|
|
|
| 7. |
In case # 24; John-David-Bill, Inc. It was alleged that site grading and drainage plans for two projects were submitted to the city of Brownsville, one set bearing John’s signature and architect seal and the other bearing David’s signature and architectural seal. The size and scope of the respective projects required that Texas licensed professional engineers prepare the grading and the drainage design plans. Board records did not show any of the three were licensed as professional engineers in Texas nor that their company had any regular full time employee who was licensed as professional engineers in Texas. Therefore it appears these individuals unlawfully performed engineering services and their respective plans were an unlawful representation of their company ability to offer and /or perform engineering services. The Board accepted a Consent order signed by the president of the company to cease and desist from practice of engineering and from any and all representations that the company can offer of performing engineering services until the such time as the firm hires a full time employee who is licensed as a professional engineer in Texas. The company also agreed to pay a $2000.00 administrative penalty. |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
|
a) |
True |
|
| |
|
b) |
False |
|
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
