STATE OF FLORIDA FLORIDA BOARD OF PROFESSIONAL ENGINEERS tLORIDA BOARD OF PROFESSIONAL ENGINEERS, Petitioner, Vv. FEMC Case No. 2008015794 ANTONINO LUCIA, P.E., Respondent, ADMINISTRATIVE COMPLAINT COMES NOW the Florida Engineers Management Corporation (FEMC) on behalf of Petitioner, Florida Board of Professional Engineers, hercinafter referred to as “Petitioner,” and files this Administrative Complaint against ANTONINO LUCIA, 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 cngineering pursuant to Chapter 455, llorida 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). Bepraeed TeSETeSset wo44 6PitT S88e-66-330 TS: ¢7T 8002 6 Jal 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 60160. Respondent's last known address is 291 Mansfield, Boca Raton, FL 33434. 3. On December 17, 2007, Respondent signed, sealed and dated a three (3) page set of engineering design documents for an aluminum screen enclosure structure for the Lewis Residence at 795 Whippoorwill Terrace in Palm Beach County (Lewis Project). The set includes a site specific framing plan with elevations and two pages of generic screen enclosure details and specifications. 4. Respondent’s engineering documents for the Lewis Project are materially deficient as follows: A. The configuration of the 2x3 roof purlins is not sct forth in the permit drawings and is not addressed in the engineer’s calculations. By not designating whether he intended {o use a “Hollow” of a “Snap” configuration, Respondent permitted the contractor to use a 2x3 “Hollow” section for the roof purlins, which would not be “deemed to comply” with applicable codes or standards and the use of which is not otherwise justified by the calculations, B. The wall thickness for the 3x3 eave ratl elements and the 3x3 corner column clements is not set forth on the permit drawings. C. The height of the chair rail is not dimensioned on the permit drawings. D. The flange and wall thicknesses for the 2x5 and 2x8 SMB beam and column shapes are not sct forth in the permit documents. E. Respondent's calculations do not address the design of the diagonal bracing in the roof, the roof purlins, and the wall girts or the K-bracing. FBPE vs. Antonino Lucia, PB, Case No, 2008015794 Begrased TeSETeSset wo44 6PitT S88e-66-330 TST 8002 6 Jaq I’, The deflection calculations submitted for the main roof beams are incorrect and not in accordance with accepted engineering principles. G. The 2x5 SMB non-flow thru wall columns are overstressed at design load. TH. The 2x5 flow thru wall columns are overstressed at design load. I, The 2x8 roof beams are overstressed al design load, J. For the roof corner diagonal bracing clements, the average compressive stress on the cross section (fa) exceeds the elastic buckling stress (Fe) at design loading. K. For the redundant diagonal roof bracing elements at the non-flow thru wall, the average compressive stress on the cross section (fa) exceeds the elastic buckling stress (Fc) at design loading. 5. The Board has adopted Responsibility Rules of Professional Engincers (Responsibility Rules), These Rules are contained in Chapter 61G15-30 to Chapter 61G15-36, Fla. Administrative Code. Professional Engineers who perform services covered by the Responsibility Rules are required to comply with the Rules. 6. Rule 61G15-30.002(1), F. A. C., mandates that Respondent, as the engineer of record, is professionally responsible for the documents prepared for the Lewis Project. As such, Respondent is responsible for producing documents that comply with the applicable portions of the Responsibility Rules. 7. Respondent acted as Engineer of Record for the Structure for the Lewis Project as that term is defined in Rule 61G15-31.002(1), F. A. C, As such all structural documents prepared, signed, sealed and dated by Respondent must contain the information set out in Rule 61G15-31.002(5), F. A. C., as is mandated by Rule 61G15-31.001, F. A. C., setting out the General Responsibility standards for engineers designing structures. The plans and specifications FBPE vs. Antonino Lucia, PLE, Case No. 2008015794 B-Ors6ed Tesh TeShSST Wo 4 4 6PitT S88e-66-330 TST 8002 6 Jaq for the Lewis Project fail to contain this information and thus fail to comply with the Responsibility Rules. 8. 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 enginecring principles.” 9, Rule 61G15-19.001(4) also provides that “[fJailure 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 this section 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.” 10. The Respondent’s drawings and calculations for the Lewis Project contain deficiencies including; but not limited to, those set forth in Paragraph (4)(A)-(K). Respondent violated the provisions of Section 471.033(1)(g), Florida Statutes, and Rule 61G15-19.001(4), F. A. C., by sealing, signing and dating engineering documents that were issued and filed for public record when such documents were materially deficient in respect to and not in compliance with applicable code requirements or acceptable engineering principles. 11. Based on the foregoing, Respondent is charged with violating Section 471.033(1)(g), Florida Statutes, and Rule 61G15-19.001(4), F. A, C., by engaging in negligence in the practice of engineering. WHERETORE, the Petitioner respectfully requests the Board of Professional Engineers to enter an order imposing one or more of the following penalties: permanent revocation or FRPE vs. Antonino tucia, PB, Case No. 2008015794 Bei Sse Tesh TeShSST Wo 4 4 6PitT S88e-66-330 TS: ¢7T 8002 6 Jal 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 cosis 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 24> day of SG /\. , 2008. i F | L E D Carrie Flynn Department of Business and Professional Regulation Executive Director DEPUTY CLERK CLERK Mtlichete DATE - 26- 2008 BN’: John Rimes P COUNSEL FOR FEMC: John Rimes Prosecuting Attomey Florida Engineers Managemeni Corporation 2507 Callaway Road, Suitc 200 Tallahassee, Florida 32303 Florida Bar No. 212008 IT/jt PCP DATE: September 16, 2008 PCP Members: Rebane, Burke CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE 1 hereby cerlily thal a copy of the foregoing was furnishéd’to ANTONTNO LUCIA, P.E., 291 MANSFIELD, BOCA RATON, FL 33434, by certified mnail, pn the wv of eat ; 2008. FRFE vs. Antonino Lucia, P.E., Case No. 2008015794 8/9: s6ed Tesh TeShSST Wo 4 4 @SitT 8882-66-33 eg:reT 800¢ 6 Jay

Docket for Case No: 08-006143PL