5 7 DX¥-3 7D PL STATE OF FLORIDA FLORIDA BOARD OF PROFESSIONAL ENGINEERS FLORIDA BOARD OF PROFESSIONAL ENGINEERS, Petitioner, v. FEMC Case No. 2007033986 IRVING ABCUG, P.E., Respondent, ADMINISTRATIVE COMPLAINT COMES NOW the Florida Engineers Management Corporation (FEMC) on behalf of Petitioner, Florida Board of Professional Engineers, hereinafter referred to as “Petitioner,” and files this Administrative Complaint against, IRVING ABCUG, P. E., hereinafter referred to as “Respondent.” This Administrative Complaint is issued pursuant to Sections 120.60 and 471.038, Florida Statutes. Any proceeding concerning this complaint shall be conducted pursuant to Section 120.57, Florida Statutes. In support of this complaint, Petitioner alleges the following: 1. Petitioner, Florida Board of Professional Engineers, is charged with regulating the practice of engineering pursuant to Chapter 455, Florida Statutes. This complaint is filed by the Florida Engineers Management Corporation (FEMC) on behalf of Petitioner. FEMC is charged with providing administrative, investigative, and prosecutorial services to the Florida Board of Professional Engineers pursuant to Section 471.038, Florida Statutes (1997). 2. Respondent is, and has been at all times material hereto, a licensed professional engineer in the State of Florida, having been issued license number PE 28376. Respondent’s last known address is 3450 NW 27" Avenue, Pompano Beach, Fl. 33069. 3. Respondent was responsible for the engineering design of the structural system for a residence to be built for the Demeo family in Parkland, Florida (Demeo Project). After several iterations of the design for the Demeo Project were prepared and rejected by the local building department, a final design set of design documents was submitted to the Parkland Building Department. The structural system portions of the design were sealed, signed and dated by Respondent on April 30, 2007. This entire set of design drawings was also rejected by the Parkland Building Department. 4. The entire set of design documents for the Demeo Project consisted of 27 pages. Respondent took professional responsibility as an engineer for the following pages by placing his seal, signature and date upon the documents: Pages 2 and 3 (Foundation Plans A & B), Pages 7 and 8 (Second Floor Columns Plans A & B), Pages 17, 18 and 19 (Elevation Plans A, B and C), Pages 20 and 21 (Roof Framing Plans A & B), Pages 22 and 23 (Roof Framing Plans A & B), Pages 24, 25 and 26 (Delineated D-1 to D-3), and Page 27 (General Structural Notes). 5. The documents sealed, signed and dated by Respondent for the Demeo Project contain the following engineering deficiencies: A. Sheet 2 of 27: FOUNDATION PLAN A: The ground floor porch construction has not been identified. It is unclear how foundation type F1 is to be constructed, ie., CMU stem wall or slab edge turndown, the dimensions are not correct, no vertical dowel are shown. The footing notations are not consistent between the plan and the footing schedule. The footings are not clearly defined in the footing schedule including all applicable dimensions, elevations and FBPE vs. Irving Abcug, P.E., Case # 2007033986 2 reinforcement locations. The footings supporting columns interfere with one another in three locations. The footings are not coordinated between F1 and FS transition. The concrete masonry unit (CMU) is not identified, and the note specifying #7 bars not clear. There are apparent conflicts between the foundation plan sheets (both A & B) and the wall section shown on Page D-2. B. Sheet 3 of 27: FOUNDATION PLAN B: It is unclear how foundation type F1 is to be constructed. The footing notations are not consistent between the plan and the footing schedule. The footings are not clearly defined in the footing schedule including all applicable dimensions and reinforcement locations. The finished floor elevations are not clear. There appears to be a non-typical poured concrete column near the match line on the right side in which the dimension provided appears to be in error. Cc. Sheets 7 & 8 of 27: 2nd FLOOR COLUMN PLANS A & B: The wall material is not clearly identified on the drawings. D. Sheets 20 & 21 of 27: FLOOR FRAMING PLANS A & B: The beam sizes, locations, and elevations are unclear. The connections between floor joist and girders and girders and columns are not detailed or specified. The coordination between framing and foundation plans unclear. The CMU wall construction incorporates formed and poured reinforced concrete beams over openings with beam schedules/calculations incorporated onto plans sheets, however, the beam construction and locations are not clear. The floor and roof framing connections to the concrete beams are not clear. Steel beams are indicated on the framing plan sheets; however, the floor framing connections to the steel beams are not shown. Girders are called out on the plan sheets with unclear size designations and no material indicated. Connections between floor joist and girders and girders and columns are not detailed or called out FBPE vs. Irving Abcug, P.E., Case # 2007033986 3 E. Sheets 22 & 23 of 27: ROOF FRAMING PLANS A & B: The roof Framing is not clearly identified on the plan. This includes the rafters (common framed), ridges, hips, and valleys. In addition, while the ceiling heights are identified, the ceiling joists are not identified. No pre-engineered truss notes, loads, or specifications are indicated. Wind uplift connectors are contained in the Legend on Sheets 20-23 with no clear location marks on plan sheets; however, details shown on plan and detail sheets are not coordinated with the Schedule. Specifications for pre-engineered floor and roof trusses including loading, material specifications, deflection limits, etc., are not shown on plans. Wood material specifications are not shown on plans. 6. Section 471.033(1)(g), Florida Statutes, provides that an engineer is subject to discipline for engaging in negligence in the practice of engineering. Rule 61G15-19.001(4), Fla. Admin Code, provides that negligence constitutes “failure by a professional engineer to utilize due care in performing in an engineering capacity or failing to have due regard for acceptable standards of engineering principles.” Respondent’s Structural System design for the Demeo Project fails to meet these standards for the reasons set forth in Paragraphs 5 above. 7. The Board of Professional Engineers has adopted Rule Chapters 61G15-30 to 61G15-36 which are collectively termed the Responsibility Rules. The Responsibility Rules apply to all professional engineers who perform the services outlined therein. Failure on the part of a professional engineer to comply with the applicable provisions of the Responsibility Rules is negligence in the practice of engineering and subjects the offending engineer to discipline as provided in Rule 61G15-19.001(4), Florida Administrative Code, “Failure to comply with the procedures set forth in the Responsibility Rules as adopted by the Board of Professional Engineers shall be considered as non-compliance with [Section 61G15-19.001(4), F. A. C.) FBPE vs. Irving Abcug, P.E., Case # 2007033986 4 unless the deviation or departures therefrom are justified by the specific circumstances of the project in question and the sound professional judgment of the professional engineer.” 8. Rule Chapter 61G15-31 of the Responsibility Rules applies to the design of structures and structural systems and is therefore applicable to the Demeo Project. Rule 61G15- 31.001”General Responsibility” sets out standards of responsibility which are applicable to all structural design. This Rule states in material part that “[t]he engineer of record for a structure is responsible for all structural aspects of the design of the structure including the design of all of the structure's systems and components. .... [T]he engineer of record for the structure ...shall comply with the requirements of the general responsibility rules...” 9. The engineering design of a structure is evidenced by the creation of Structural Engineering Documents by the professional engineer in responsible charge of the design of the structure. Structural Engineering Documents are defined in Rule 61G15-31.002(5) as “[t]he structural drawings, specifications and other documents setting forth the overall design and requirements for the construction, alteration, modernization, repair, removal, demolition, arrangement and/or use of the structure, prepared by and signed and sealed by the engineer of record for the structure. Structural engineering documents shall identify the project and specify design criteria both for the overall structure and for structural components and structural systems. The drawings shall identify the nature, magnitude and location of all design loads to be imposed on the structure. The structural engineering documents shall provide construction requirements to indicate the nature and character of the work and to describe, detail, label and define the structure's components, systems, materials, assemblies, and equipment.” 10. ‘In order to comply with the requirements of Rule 61G15-31, Respondent must have produced and then signed, sealed a dated a set of structural engineering documents that FBPE vs. Irving Abcug, P.E., Case # 2007033986 5 meet the standards set forth in the Florida Building Code and in the applicable Responsibility Rules. For the reasons set forth in Paragraph 5 above, Respondent’s sealed and signed structural engineering documents for the Demeo Project fail to meet this standard. 11. Based on the foregoing, Respondent is charged with violating Section 471.033(1)(g), Florida Statutes, and Rule 61G15-19.001(4), Fla. Admin Code, by engaging in negligence in the practice of engineering. WHEREFORE, the Petitioner respectfully requests the Board of Professional Engineers to enter an order imposing one or more of the following penalties: permanent revocation or suspension of the Respondent’s license, restriction of the Respondent’s practice, imposition of an administrative fine, issuance of a reprimand, placement of the Respondent on probation, the assessment of costs related to the investigation and prosecution of this case, other than costs associated with an attorney’s time, as provided for in Section 455.227(3), Florida Statutes, and/or any other relief that the Board deems appropriate. SIGNED this 7] day of __ , 2008. Department of Business and Professional Regulation DEPUTY CLERK Carrie Flynn suemeLrardmt Michele Executive Director DATE 5-28-2008 COUNSEL FOR FEMC: John J. Rimes III Prosecuting Attorney ; ; FILED Florida Engineers Management Corporation Florida Engineers Management Corporation 2507 Callaway Road, Suite 200 FBPE vs. Irving Abcug, P.E., Case # 2007033986 6 Tallahassee, Florida 32303 Florida Bar No. 212008 JR/jt PCP DATE: May 20, 2008 PCP Members: Rebane, Seckinger CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE Thereby certify that a copy of the foregoing was furnished to IRVING E. ABCUG, P.E., 3450 NW 27 AVE, POMPANO BCH, FL 33069, by certified mail, on the ZO" of BY, 2008. > af FBPE vs. Irving Abcug, P.E., Case # 2007033986 7

Docket for Case No: 08-003926PL