Board denies application after undisclosed out-of-state sanctions; asks another applicant for substantiating experience

The Tennessee Board of Architectural and Engineering Examiners voted June 4 to deny an application after staff and committee members established the applicant had prior license sanctions in Kentucky and Delaware and had answered “No” to a question about prior discipline on his application.

At the engineering committee, staff reviewed the applicant’s four-page submission and pointed out that the question near the top of page three — asking whether the applicant had been denied registration or had a professional license suspended, revoked, or voluntarily surrendered — was answered negatively even though public records show revocations in 2024 and 2026. Committee members agreed the omission was material and moved to deny the application; the motion passed on a voice vote. The board directed staff to notify the applicant of the decision and to memorialize the committee’s action.

Separately, the committee examined an application from Mr. Ramirez, whose earlier submission had been denied for insufficient experience. Philip Lim summarized that Ramirez’s early career work appears technician-level and therefore may have fallen short of the progressive engineering experience the board seeks, but that his more recent two years of work could meet the standard if corroborated. Members discussed the new engineering-technology pathway, effective July 1, and whether technician or engineering-technology experience should be credited under the consolidated rules. The board asked staff (Ashley/Megan) to request additional supporting affidavits or references from Ramirez documenting supervisory relationships with licensed engineers or other substantiating evidence; no formal sanction or final decision on Ramirez was taken at the meeting.

Why it matters: The board’s actions reinforce application disclosure requirements and preview how the forthcoming engineering-technology pathway will shape experience crediting. The board also signaled it will consider tailored remedies (requests for documentation) rather than automatic denial when applicants can substantiate qualifying experience.

What’s next: Staff will notify the denied applicant and contact Mr. Ramirez for additional evidence. The board expects to consider rules and clarifying language to help applicants answer prior-discipline questions accurately on future forms.