Petitioner: FLORIDA ENGINEERS MANAGEMENT CORPORATION
Respondent: EMILIO R. PINERO, P.E.
Judges: CLAUDE B. ARRINGTON
Agency: Department of Business and Professional Regulation
Locations: Miami, Florida
Filed: Jan. 08, 2002
Status: Closed
Settled and/or Dismissed prior to entry of RO/FO on Friday, March 15, 2002.
Latest Update: Dec. 22, 2024
wl.
efi ii
: O2- V3 PL.
f° Ff pss ge
STATE OF FLORIDA i E 2
FLORIDA ENGINEERS MANAGEMENT CORPORATION
02 JAN -8 PH |: Ob
ris
iy
FLORIDAEN NEERS A Mii
MANAGEME > CORPORATION, HEARINGS
Petitio:
v. FEMC Case No. 00-0098
EMILIOR. PI RO, P.E.,
Respor at.
/
ADMINISTRATIVE COMPLAINT
COME OW the Florida Engineers Management Corporation, hereinafter referred to as
“Petitioner,” a1
against Emilio
Complaint is is
concerning this
support of this
1.
Chapters 455 ai
2. ]
engineer in the
known address
3. (
calculations for
iles this Administrative Complaint before the Board of Professional Engineers
Pinero, P.E., hereinafter referred to as “Respondent”. This Administrative
:d pursuant to Sections 120.60 and 471.038, Florida Statutes. Any proceeding
»mplaint shall be conducted pursuant to Section 120.57, Florida Statutes. In
aplaint, Petitioner alleges the following:
itioner is charged with regulating the practice of engineering pursuant to
471, Florida Statutes.
pondent is and has been at all time material hereto a licensed professional
te of Florida, having been issued license number PE 48352. Respondent’s last
1530 S.W. 29" Street, Miami, Florida 33165.
July 3 and 5, 2000, Respondent signed and sealed ten pages of structural
amp (a stage) to support 1000 pounds per square foot (psf).
*
PE TEE RM re ee
cata
vee
e
OR RET AR ©
TERRI I REIT rm IRE SS Re REE FI
eli, fii
wit bel
4.
acceptable en,
5.
fully set forth
6.
requirements,
150 psf, instee
for reviewing :
Miami Grands
an aluminum
2.44 psf — not ‘
bleacher plank
Factors have b
concrete or re
calculations be.
guardrail post I
the moment arr
calculated by R
ae design approach used by the Respondent was not in compliance with the
2ering standards.
COUNT ONE
titioner realleges and incorporates paragraphs one (1) through four (4) as if
‘ein this Count One.
te structural calculations contain deficiencies and do not meet code
wit:
Respondent’s calculations variously list live load values of 40, 100 and
f the South Florida Building Code requirement of a design live load of 100 psf
ids and bleachers.
The dead load of the 9.5” x 1.75” aluminum extrusion shown on the
d detail has (based on the indicated cross-sectional area of 1.60855 sq. in. and
sity of 0.10 Ibs per cubic inch) a dead load of 0.1 x 1.60855 x 12 x 12/9.5 =
3 psf as shown in the Respondent’s calculations.
The formulae used by Respondent to calculate the bending capacity of the
vere intended for use in the design of rectangular reinforced concrete beam.
. included to reflect the strength concrete and reinforcing steel but there is no
orcing steel in the aluminum extrusion in question. Consequently, these
10 rational relationship to the bleacher planks.
The calculations to determine the moment imposed on the aluminum
failed to recognize that that moment is simply equal to the force multiplied by
Thus the correct value is 200 Ibs x35 = 700 ft Ibs — not 1225 foot pounds as
‘ondent.
Ferree omer >
SPT RR mer
bok ke
ook Bb Bs ilk ut ala
alii:
ik.
ronan
concrete in an
logical justific
7.
471.033(1)(g),
WHER
to enter an or
suspension of”
administrative
assessment of
associated witt
any other relie:
SIGNE
COUNSEL FOR
Douglas D. Suns
Prosecuting Attc
Florida Engineer
1208 Hays Stree
Tallahassee, Flo
Florida Bar No. !
DDS/tb
PCP: March 14,
PCP Members: °
Respondent used formulae intended for use in the design of reinforced
empt to determine the bending capacity of the aluminum guardrail post has no
on.
ised on the foregoing, Respondent is charged with violating Section
orida Statutes, by engaging in negligence in the practice of engineering.
‘ORE, the Petitioner respectfully requests the Board of Professional Engineers
‘imposing one or more of the following penalties: permanent revocation or
Respondent’s license, restriction of the Respondent's practice, imposition of an
\e, issuance of a reprimand, placement of the Respondent on probation, the
sts related to the investigation and prosecution of this case, other than costs
1. attorney’s time, as provided for in Section 455.227(3), Florida Statutes, and/or
at the Board deems appropriat
his AUS day of Merck. , 2001.
IMC: )
— FELED
lanagement Corporation Depertinent of brary eR
32301 p EL , bh,
7 - a me 3-20-2001,
vane and Seckinger
wer”
opm
ei ce ae a
TE ENR ARO TER oR ©
Docket for Case No: 02-000083PL
Issue Date |
Proceedings |
Jul. 03, 2002 |
Letter to A. Cole from D. Sunshine requesting to reopen the case (filed via facsimile).
|
Mar. 15, 2002 |
Order Closing File issued. CASE CLOSED.
|
Mar. 14, 2002 |
Motion to Hold in Abeyance (filed by Petitioner via facsimile).
|
Mar. 05, 2002 |
Joint Pre-hearing Stipulation (filed via facsimile).
|
Mar. 01, 2002 |
Amended Notice of Video Teleconference issued. (hearing scheduled for March 15, 2002; 9:00 a.m.; Miami and Tallahassee, FL, amended as to video, location, and time).
|
Jan. 24, 2002 |
Order of Pre-hearing Instructions issued.
|
Jan. 24, 2002 |
Notice of Hearing issued (hearing set for March 15, 2002; 9:30 a.m.; Miami, FL).
|
Jan. 16, 2002 |
Joint Response to Initial Order (filed via facsimile).
|
Jan. 09, 2002 |
Notice of Serving Petitioner`s First Set of Request for Admissions (filed via facsimile).
|
Jan. 09, 2002 |
Initial Order issued.
|
Jan. 08, 2002 |
Administrative Complaint filed.
|
Jan. 08, 2002 |
Amended Petition for Formal Hearing filed.
|
Jan. 08, 2002 |
Agency referral filed.
|