Need a book? Engineering books recommendations...

Return to index: [Subject] [Thread] [Date] [Author]

Re: Direct Supervision in Texas

[Subject Prev][Subject Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
Stan,

Would it be way off to say the fella was reprimanded because he failed to
supervise at all. He probably set up a side business, got busy both with the
side work and his day job, hired an unlicensed engineer to do his side work
while he did his day job and then plan stamped the work when he got home
just in time to get a full nights rest. Forsaking the proper personal
engineering required.

My point about the firm registration is that if he was doing side work he
had to be registered as a firm (he had employees) which means the presence
of a licensed engineer was needed which by default he could not provide.
Anyway this can get complicated the above is what I really mean to focus on.

Rand

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Caldwell, Stan" <scaldwell(--nospam--at)halff.com>
To: <seaint(--nospam--at)seaint.org>
Sent: Wednesday, April 14, 2004 4:07 PM
Subject: RE: Direct Supervision in Texas


Rand:

Section 18(b) states:

"This section does not prohibit a licensed engineer from performing
engineering services on a part-time basis."

The last sentence of Section 131.18(9) states:

"Engineers providing direct supervision of engineering under the Texas
Engineering Practice Act, 18(b), shall be personally present during such
work."

Taken together, it seems to me that the intent is pretty clear:

[Stan's Opinion]  Engineers performing services on a part-time basis must be
present to supervise the work.

Over the past two or three years, a large percentage (30-40%) of all
enforcement actions have involved firms which practiced or offered to
practice engineering without the firm being properly registered with TBPE.
In each of these cases, the summary paragraphs explicitly point to this
violation.  The Perge case summary does not cite this issue.

Sidebar:  Can we all agree that the firm registration requirements that now
apply in most states are an unfortunate provincial tax?

Stan

¤º°`°º¤ø,¸¸,ø¤º°`°º¤ø¤º°`°º¤ø,¸¸,ø¤º°`°º¤ø¤º°`°º¤ø,¸¸,ø¤º°`°º¤

Rand Holtham wrote:

I think that the ruling may have (my opinion I don't know anything about the
particulars) been more related to the firm registration criteria. The
section ref'd in Stan's post, the last line has to do with firm
registration. Its on page 9 of the following link:

http://www.tbpe.state.tx.us/downloads/laws2001.pdf

The critical watching etc. I interpret as I stated before. So I don't think
(with the context of section 18 (b) in mind) that the commentary means
continuous supervision, it (as the reprimand stated) means "adequate direct
supervision ".


HTH,
Rand

******* ****** ******* ******** ******* ******* ******* ***
*   Read list FAQ at: http://www.seaint.org/list_FAQ.asp
*
*   This email was sent to you via Structural Engineers
*   Association of Southern California (SEAOSC) server. To
*   subscribe (no fee) or UnSubscribe, please go to:
*
*   http://www.seaint.org/sealist1.asp
*
*   Questions to seaint-ad(--nospam--at)seaint.org. Remember, any email you
*   send to the list is public domain and may be re-posted
*   without your permission. Make sure you visit our web
*   site at: http://www.seaint.org
******* ****** ****** ****** ******* ****** ****** ********



******* ****** ******* ******** ******* ******* ******* ***
*   Read list FAQ at: http://www.seaint.org/list_FAQ.asp
*
*   This email was sent to you via Structural Engineers
*   Association of Southern California (SEAOSC) server. To
*   subscribe (no fee) or UnSubscribe, please go to:
*
*   http://www.seaint.org/sealist1.asp
*
*   Questions to seaint-ad(--nospam--at)seaint.org. Remember, any email you
*   send to the list is public domain and may be re-posted
*   without your permission. Make sure you visit our web
*   site at: http://www.seaint.org
******* ****** ****** ****** ******* ****** ****** ********