MINUTES
BOARD FOR PROFESSIONAL ENGINEERS
Date: September 18, 2002
Time: 9:00 a.m.
Place: 2nd Floor Conference Room
500 North Calvert Street
Baltimore, Maryland 21202
Present: Melvin Hotz, P.E., Chairman
Eugene C. Harvey, P.E., Vice Chairman
George C. Szego, Ph.D., P.E., Secretary
Alison A. Hunt, P.E.
Michael J. Howard
Sallye E. Perrin, P.E.
Others Present: Sally Wingo, Executive Director
Milena Trust, Counsel to the Board
Dorothy Matricciani, Administrative Secretary
Absent: Rosalind L. Yee
CALL TO ORDER
Mr. Melvin Hotz, Chairman, called the meeting to order at 9:02 a.m.
ACTION ON MINUTES
Motion (I) was made by Mr. Howard, seconded by Ms. Hunt, and unanimously carried by the Board to approve the Minutes of the August 21, 2002 meeting with corrections.
COMPLAINT COMMITTEE REPORT
Mr. Harvey provided the following report on the status of complaints and license reinstatement issues discussed by the Complaint Committee at its meeting on September 10, 2002.
01-PE-02: No response to the Consent Order was received from the respondent. Case has been sent to the Office of Administrative Hearings.
03-PE-02: The Complaint Committee recommended denial of license renewal, a Consent Order and $500 fine. Denial letter was sent on July 26, 2002. No reply has been received.
Board for Professional Engineers
Minutes – September 18, 2002
Page 2
03-PE-03: Case closed; consent order signed and $500 fine paid.
03-PE-04: The Complaint Committee recommended denial of license renewal, a Consent Order and $500 fine. Denial letter was sent on July 26, 2002. No reply has been received.
03-PE-05: Case closed: Consent Order signed and $500 fine paid.
03-PE-06: This case has been referred to the Office of Investigative Services for investigation as to whether the respondent had fraudulently obtained a license.
03-PE-07: Respondent’s license was lapsed one renewal period during which time three projects were signed and sealed in Maryland. The Complaint Committee recommends a Consent Order and $1,000 fine.
03-PE-08: Respondent’s license was lapsed for 22 years, during which time 14 projects were signed and sealed in Maryland. Additional information was recently received regarding the respondent’s involvement in these projects, which the Complaint Committee is taking into consideration. The Committee will make a recommendation at the October Board Meeting.
Motion (II) was made by Ms. Hunt, seconded by Mr. Howard, and unanimously carried
by the Board to accept the recommendations of the Complaint Committee as stated above.
CORRESPONDENCE
Letter from Betsy Browne, Executive Director, NCEES, dated August 27, 2002
The Board reviewed and noted a letter from Betsy Browne, Executive Director, NCEES, dated August 27, 2002, regarding actions taken during the 2002 NCEES Annual Meeting relative to the examination program. Some of the actions taken were:
· Professional engineer examinations scoring fees will be increased from $95 to $125, effective October 2004.
· Examination Schedule (EP 4) was revised to require all requests to administer any of the NCEES examinations on a date other than the published date be submitted and approved by NCEES prior to the administration.
· Revised Availability (EP7) by changing the name of the “Building Architectural” exam to “Architectural Engineering” exam.
· Access and Review of Examinations (EP 25) was revised to prohibit the review of
Board for Professional Engineers
Minutes – September 18, 2002
Page 3
examinations except in those jurisdictions where required by law. Such reviews shall be conducted in accordance with established NCEES procedures as follows:
Procedure for Examination Review if Required by Law (ref. EP25)
$250 per Candidate Review
NCEES will permit access to and review of an examination if required by law subject to the following conditions:
A. The results of the examination must be appealed by a failing examinee within 30 calendar days after score reports have been sent to the examinee by the Member Board.
B. Only those questions answered incorrectly by the failing examinee will be furnished by NCEES to the Member Board. NCEES will assemble the questions the examinee answered incorrectly in random order without item numbers. The NCEES fee for assembling the questions will be set annually by the NCEES Board of Directors.
C. Neither solutions or answer keys will be provided.
D. The examinee may not take notes or otherwise record any aspect of the review.
E. Only the examinee and a Member Board member or Member Board Administrator may be present during the review.
F. Following the review, the examinee will not be permitted to retake the examination until after the next regularly scheduled administration, unless otherwise prohibited by law.
G. Upon completion of the review, the Member Board shall return all material provided by NCEES for the review by traceable means to NCEES within seven calendar days.
· Revised EP 26 Examination of Candidates with Disabilities to require Member Boards to consult with NCEES to determine accommodations for those requests that impact examination format and scoring.
E-mail Correspondence from Jay Thomas, Team Chair for an EAC/ABET Evaluation, for the University of Maryland, College Park, dated August 28, 2002
The Board reviewed a letter from Jay Thomas, Team Chair for an EAC/ABET Evaluation of two new programs being offered by the University of Maryland, College Park, dated August 28, 2002. Mr. Thomas invites the Board to assign an observer to accompany his team during their evaluation of these programs on November 3-5. The programs to be evaluated are: Electrical Engineering and Mechanical Engineering. The evaluation will actually take place at Frostburg State University where the students reside and where portions of the curriculum are presented by distance delivery. The degrees will be from the University of Maryland, College Park. Ms. Hunt will advise the Board if she will be able to be the observer.
Board for Professional Engineers
Minutes – September 18, 2002
Page 4
Letter from Jeffrey B. Fertich, P.E., dated September 10, 2002
The Board reviewed a letter from Jeffrey B. Fertich, P.E., dated September 10, 2002, requesting the Board to clarify certain issues that Mr. Fertich has about the role of engineers in residential design. After discussion, the Board determined that it would further review the questions contained in Mr. Fertich’s letter and develop a response at the next Board Meeting.
Ms. Wingo will advise Mr. Fertich that his letter is being taken under consideration for further discussion at the October Board Meeting.
FE EXAMINATION DEADLINE FILING DATE
In response to an inquiry from the University of Maryland, the Board reviewed the possibility of revising the deadline filing date for the Fundamentals of Engineering (FE) examination. After discussion, the Board decided to change the deadline filing date from 90 to 60 days before the exam. This change will become effective with the April 12, 2003 FE examination.
Motion (III) was made by Ms. Perrin, seconded by Ms. Hunt, and unanimously carried by the Board to change the Fundamentals of Engineering Examination deadline filing date from 90 to 60 days, in the interest of promoting licensure.
Ms. Wingo will send letters to the engineering schools advising of the change, and the appropriate changes will be made to application instructions and on-line information.
The Board also discussed at this time the possibility of holding the exam at a location other than Timonium. Ms. Wingo reported that she had received a letter from the University of Maryland School of Engineering requesting that the Board consider holding the exam there due to the large number of students from the University who take the exam. Since ABET Reports indicate very few University of Maryland candidates sitting for the FE exam in Maryland, it was the consensus of the Board to wait to see if changing the filing deadline has any positive impact on the numbers of candidates. DLLR reports needing approximately 200 candidates to warrant the logistics of a separate exam site.
NEW BUSINESS
Chairman’s Report
Mr. Hotz reported on the following:
· The Joint Chairs will make a presentation as part of a training workshop for the Maryland
Board for Professional Engineers
Minutes – September 18, 2002
Page 5
Municipal League’s Annual Fall Conference to be held in Annapolis on October 3, 2002. Mr. Harvey will represent the Engineers’ Board.
· In conjunction with the Board’s review of the use of the Fundamentals of Engineering Examination for “outcomes assessment,” the Board discussed arrangements for a proposed meeting with the Deans and/or department heads of the engineering schools.
Ms. Wingo will contact Mike Shannon of NCEES to secure a date when he can present a talk on “outcomes assessment.” Board Members will contact the various Deans and department heads to determine their interest in a attending a meeting and attempt to set a date for the first week in December.
· The Department will submit the Professional Engineers’ Law Cleanup bill for the 2003 Session of the Legislature. A final decision if it will be introduced cannot be made until the new administration is in place.
PE Application Review
Mr. Hotz reviewed Sections 14-305 (a), (b), and (c) of the Engineers’ Law pertaining to the qualifications to take the PE exam. The Board discussed the review process to assure that applications are reviewed consistently by all Board Members. Mr. Hotz stated that while the Board must uphold the Law when reviewing applications, it may also make judgements based on the circumstances of the application, and it must be clearly documented on the application summary sheet.
Ms. Perrin suggested that time be set aside during the Board Meetings during the application review times for review of the PE exam applications. It was the consensus of the Board to schedule such on the monthly agendas in the future, as needed.
APPLICATIONS APPROVED FOR RECIPROCITY
Motion (IV) was made by Mr. Harvey, seconded by Ms. Perrin, and unanimously carried by the Board to approve the following applications for reciprocity:
Mohammad A. Ajlouni – 28031 Andrea H. Reede – 27923
Muhammad S. Ali – 27951 David J. Shih – 28030
Victor A. Amole – 27996 Robert J. Slocum – 28032
Allen W. Cadden – 27952 Thomas E. Smiles – 27995
Amsalu Duressa – 27918 Angela M. Smith – 28036
Stuart K. Gause – 28029 Marlon D. Smoker – 27914
Naeem R. Ismaily – 27921 Bradley R. Stinebiser – 27940
Board for Professional Engineers
Minutes – September 18, 2002
Page 6
Ronald J. Jakominich – 27925 Paul C. Sweetwood – 27961
Peter J. Koonce - 28040 Soradej Thimdit – 27958
William M. Lupi – 28022 Walter A. Tillit – 28033
Brian M. McGraw – 28039 Ronald J. Verreault – 28035
Carl E. Messina – 27916 Edwin L. Vopelak, Jr. – 27849
Don A. Nicholson – 28037 James Watt – 28027
Vera Pronker - 28038 Marvin H. Wright – 28034
Robert S. Quast – 27929 Nasr H. Youssef – 27873
Muhammad S. Qureshi – 27954
APPLICATIONS APPROVED ADMINISTRATIVELY FOR RECIPROCITY
The following applications, supported by NCEES Model Law Engineer files, were administratively approved for licensure by the Assistant Executive Director of the Board for Professional Engineers:
William J. Blankenship – 27955 William M. McDonald – 27999
Thomas C. Boren – 27990 Ryan Nedwicke – 27948
Brian P. Early – 27998 James C. Peaco – 28069
Robert B. Fisackerly – 27944 Randal L. Pool – 28013
Israel Gaphni – 28049 Wayne E. Siladi – 28009
Robert J. Graf – 28002 Sean F. Tuohy – 28006
Robert T. Herd – 27941 Charles A. Williams – 28028
Robert P. Lamancusa – 28005 Gary L. Williams – 27997
Matthew D. Lewis – 28068 Gary M. Wisniewski – 28012
Moufdi A. Louah – 28014
APPLICATION DENIED FOR LICENSURE BY RECIPROCITY
Motion (V) was made by Dr. Szego, seconded by Ms. Hunt, and unanimously carried by the Board to deny the following application for reciprocity because the applicants did not meet the requirements for licensure in Maryland:
John A. McGill
APPLICATIONS APPROVED FOR THE PRINCIPLES AND PRACTICE OF ENGINEERING EXAMINATION TO BE HELD ON OCTOBER 25, 2002
Following are all applications approved by the Board for the Principles and Practice of Engineering Examination to be held on October 25, 2002:
See attached list.
Board for Professional Engineers
Minutes – September 18, 2002
Page 7
APPLICATIONS DENIED FOR THE PRINCIPLES AND PRACTICE OF ENGINEERING EXAMINATION TO BE HELD ON OCTOBER 25, 2002
Motion (VI) was made by Dr. Szego, seconded by Mr. Harvey, and unanimously carried by the Board to deny the following applications for the Principles and Practice of Engineering Examination to be held on October 25, 2002:
Mohammed Bennoudi Calin Stanciu
Hongchun Liu Jih-Jiun Pan
Shi Meng Kiran S. Pokkuluri
Harper J. Ogborn, III Rajiv Syal
ADJOURNMENT
Motion (VII) was made by Mr. Howard, seconded by Mr. Harvey, and unanimously carried by the Board to adjourn the meeting at 12:35 p.m.
______X______With Corrections
______Without Corrections
Signed by: Melvin Hotz, P.E.
Chairman
Corrections to September 18, 2002 Minutes
Page 5, under heading “PE Application Review,” change second paragraph, first sentence to read: “Ms. Perrin suggested that there be shorter Board Meeting agendas during the PE exam review period so that the applications may be reviewed after the meetings.”
PRINCIPLES AND PRACTICES OF ENGINEERING
EXAMINATION ELIGIBLE CANDIDATES FOR OCTOBER 25, 2002
Last Name / First Name / Mid NameAdu-Osei / Alex
Agostino / Catherine
Bagga / Rajinder / Singh
Batra / Rakesh
Bensinger / Tanya / L.
Bensinger / Bradley / Andrew
Bethea / Jerryl / Baynard
Black / David / Wayne
Bloodworth / Kenneth / Wayne
Bouzinac / Muriel / Patricia
Bowers / Randy / Lee
Brisben / Amy / Jean
Brown / Thomas / Leonard
Buccini / David / Lynn
Burhan / Younus
Bush / Bernard
Campitell / Anthony / Joseph
Cantwell / William / Francis
Chan / Kim-Hou
Chandra / Suresh
Chirwa / Evans / Martin Nkhalambayausi
Chowdhary / Manranjan / Singh
Clarke / Steven / Harrison
Corey / Robert / William
Cornetto / Anthony / Dominic
Crawford / Benjamin / David
Crosswell / Scott / Brownlee
Cullum, Jr. / Clarence / Winfield
Dedominicis / Eric / J.
Dobres / Mitchell / Eric
Doherty / Dennis / L.
Donnelly / Steven / C.
Drucker / Ian / Jay
Elzaiat / Hesham / Mohamed
Evans / Douglas / Keith