Several weeks ago, there was a thread on the SEAINT Listserv which discussed
foundation design without the benefit of site-specific geotechnical reports.
I offered a post explaining that such practice was contrary to the rules of
the Texas PE Board and could result in disciplinary action. Subsequently,
there were several replies to the Listserv and privately that implied that I
must be mistaken. To those induhviduals (oops, I just finished reading
Scott Adam's Dilbert Newsletter), I offer the following excerpt from the
Texas PE Board's Spring Newsletter, which describes a formal disciplinary
action taken at their September 10, 1999 Board Meeting:
"Mr. Martin Prager, P.E., Dallas, TX - File D-960 - It was alleged that Mr.
Prager issued foundation design plans for a residence that indicated they
were in conformance with Post Tension Institute standards; however, the
design was not based upon a site-specific geotechnical soils report.
Therefore, his designs were misleading and not in keeping with generally
accepted engineering standards or procedures. The design plans bore the
title block of a firm which Board records did not show Mr. Prager was
associated with, suggesting that he may have entered into a business
relationship contrary to Board rules. The Board accepted an Agreed Board
Order signed by Mr. Prager and his attorney for a two-year probated
suspension of his Texas engineer license contingent upon his agreement to
pay a $5,000 administrative penalty. Mr. Prager also agreed to inform the
Board of each engineering activity he performs during the probation period."
Stan R. Caldwell, P.E.
Dallas (Hockey Heaven), Texas