FILED : Florida Engineers Managemen Corporation MAR 18 2016 wo: Pelee Neher see Clerk: STATE OF FLORIDA 3/18/2016 FLORIDA BOARD OF PROFESSIONAL ENGINEERS Deputy Agency Clerk FLORIDA BOARD OF PROFESSIONAL ENGINEERS, Petitioner, ! v. FEMC Case Nos. 2015032603, 2015036080 i JULIO BANKS, 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 JULIO BANKS, 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 materia! hereto, a licensed professional engineer in the State of Florida, having been issued license number PE 46544. Respondent's last known address is Post Office Box 880187, Port St. Lucie, Florida 34988, GENERAL ALLEGATIONS 3. 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), Florida Administrative Code (FAC), 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.” 4. Rule 61G15-18,001(4) (FAC) provides: “Certification” shall mean a statement signed and sealed by a professional engineer representing that the engineering services addressed therein, as defined in Section 471.005(6), F.S., have been performed by the professional engineer, and based upon the professional engineer's knowledge, information and belief, and in accordance with commonly accepted procedures consistent with applicable standards of practice, and is not a guaranty or warranty, either expressed or implied.” ALLEGATIONS SPECIFIC TO CASE NO. 2015032603 5. On June 17, 2015 Respondent sealed, signed and dated a “Residential Engineer/Architect Letter of Compliance” form (LOC Form) which was filed with the City of Port Saint Lucie Building Department (Building Department), The LOC Form stated that Respondent had “personally inspected” the construction of a roof for a porch enclosure at 576 NW Cortina Lane, Port Saint Lucie, Florida (Cortina Lane Project). Respondent's engineering FBPE vs. Sulio Banks, P.B,, Case Nas. 2015032603, 2015036080 2 opinion on the LOC Form for the Cortina Lane Project stated that “the structure is in compliance with the [Florida Building Code- Residential] 2010 (FBC-R).” 6. The signed, sealed and dated LOC Form is an engineering “certification” as that term is defined in Rule 61G15-18.011(4). 7. After receipt of the LOC Form for the Cortina Lane Project, the Building Department tasked a state licensed building inspector to inspect the roof construction at 576 NW Cortina Lane. During the inspection, the inspector noted serious deviations from the FBC-R 2010 and issued a Stop Work Order. The state licensed building inspector noted several deficiencies in the construction, the most critical being that the work was not complete, even though Respondent had certified that the work had been completed in the LOC Form. 8. Respondent’s signed, sealed and dated LOC Form for the Cortina Lane Project construction is materially deficient as follows: A. Respondent certified that the porch enclosure was in compliance with the FBC-R 2010 when the work was not actually completed. B. Respondent certified on the LOC Form that “the dead load of the wood frame provides sufficient resistance against wind induced lift forces..." when that is a grossly incorrect statement. FBC-R 2010, Section R301.2.1 states: Buildings and portions thereof shall be constructed in accordance with the wind pressures of this code using the basic wind speed in Table R301.2 (1) as determined from Figure R301.2 (4). Based upon this requirement the allowable stress design wind uplift loads for this porch addition vary from 32.6 per square foot (psf) to 84.4 psf depending on which roof zone and how large of a tributary area is involved. Even the smallest of the uplift pressures on the roof at the 576 NW Cortina Lane far exceeds the dead load of the wood frame at the site which weighs less than 5 psf. FBPE vs. Julio Banks, P.E., Case Nos. 2015032603, 2015036080 Cc. Prior to issuing the LOC Form, Respondent didn’t perform any calculations to determine if the porch enclosure met the requirements of the Florida Residential Building Code. ALLEGATIONS SPECIFIC TO CASE NO, 2015036080 9. On July 1, 2015 Respondent sealed, signed and dated a “Residential Enginecr/Architect Letter of Compliance” form (LOC Form) which was filed with the City of Port Saint Lucie Building Department (Building Department). The LOC Form stated that Respondent had “personally inspected” the construction for the enclosure of a patio/porch addition at a residence at 1438 SW Medina Avenue, Port Saint Lucie, Florida (Medina Lane Project). Respondent‘s engineering opinion on the LOC Form stated that “the structure is in compliance with the [Florida Building Code- Residential] 2013 (FBC-R).”The LOC Form was intended to form the basis for an after-the-fact building permit for the enclosure construction at the site. 10. The signed, sealed and dated LOC Form for the Medina Lane Project is an engineering “certification” as that term is defined in Rule 61G15-18.011(4). 11. After receipt of the LOC Form, the Building Department inspected the enclosure construction at 1438 SW Medina Avenue. After the inspection, Building Department issued a Stop Work Order. Subsequent thereto, the owner of the 1438 SW Medina Avenue property demolished the unpermitted patio/porch addition. 12, During the demolition of the porch addition, the assistant building official for the Building Department visited the 1438 SW Medina Avenue site and observed that there was no foundation under the masonry walls and that the slab edge did not have any reinforcing steel. FBPE vs. Julio Banks, PE, Case Nos, 2015032603, 2015036080 13. Respondent’s signed, sealed and dated LOC Form for the Medina Lane Project construction is materially deficient as follows: A. _ FBC-R Section R401.2 states in part, that foundations sha]l be capable of resisting all loads from roof uplift and building overturning. Since there is no foundation present, even though Respondent certified that there was, the lack of a foundation is a violation of FBC-R Section R401.2. As a result, Respondent’s certification “the structure is in compliance with the . [Florida Building Code- Residential] 2013”0n the LOC Form was materially deficient. B. FBC-R Section R403.1 states in part, that all exterior walls shall be supported on continuous solid or fully grouted masonry or concrete footings. Since there is no foundation present, even though Respondent certified that there was, the lack of a foundation is a violation of FBC-R Section R403.1. As a result, Respondent’s certification “the structure is in compliance with the [Florida Building Code- Residential] 2013”0n the LOC Form was materially deficient. Cc. FBC-R Section R802.1 states in material part that roof and ceiling framing of wood construction shall be designed and constructed in accordance with the provisions of FBC- R Section R802.1. The 2x4 roof rafters were under sized and over stressed for their span which is a violation of FBC-R Section R802.1. Notwithstanding this fact, Respondent certified “the structure is in compliance with the [Florida Building Code- Residential] 2013”0n the LOC Form. As a result, of the undersized and overstressed rafters, Respondent’s certification is materially in error. D. _FBC-R Section R802.1.9 states in material part that roof assemblies shall have roof rafters or trusses attached to their supporting wall assemblies by connectors capable of providing the resistance required in Table R802.1.9. There are no roof ‘straps to resist the vequired uplift forces on the structure. Notwithstanding this fact, Respondent certified “the FBPE vs. Julio Banks, PE, Case Nos, 2015032603, 2015036080 structure is in compliance with the [Florida Building Code- Residential] 2013”0n the LOC Form. As a result, of the fact that no roof straps are present on the structure Respondent’s certification is materially in error. COUNT I 14, Petitioner realleges and incorporates Paragraphs One (1) through Eight (8) as if fully set forth in this Count One. 15. Respondent’s engineering certification contained in the LOC Form for the Cortina Lane Project contain deficiencies including, but not limited to, those set forth in Paragraphs One (1) through Eight (8). Respondent violated the provisions of Section 471.033(1)(g), Florida Statutes, and Rule 61G15-19,001(4), F. A. C., by signing and sealing engineering documents that were issued and filed for public record when such documents were materially deficient in that Respondent did not exercise due care in the preparation of engineering certification contained in the LOC Form for the Cortina Lane Project. 16. Based on the foregoing, Respondent is charged with violating Section 471.033(1)(g), Florida Statutes, by engaging in negligence in the practice of engineering. COUNT II 17. Petitioner realleges and incorporates Paragraphs One (1) through Four (4) and Nine (9) through Thirteen (13), as if fully set forth in this Count Two. 18. Respondent’s Engineering certification for the Medina Lane Project contain deficiencies including, but not limited to, those set forth in Paragraphs One (1) through Four (4) and Nine (9) through Thirteen (13), Respondent violated the provisions of Section 471.033(1)(g), FBPE vs. Julio Banks, P.E., Case Nos. 2015032603, 2015036080 6 Florida Statutes, and Rule 61G15-19,001(4), F. A. C., by signing and sealing engineering documents that were issued and filed for public record when such documents were materially deficient in that Respondent were materially deficient in that Respondent did not exercise due care in the preparation of engineering certification contained in the LOC Form for the Medina Lane Project. 19. Based on the foregoing, Respondent is charged with violating Section 471.033(1)(g), Florida Statutes, 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 | Oey of \ I ta MN) 2016. Zana Raybon Executive Director FBPE ys, Julio Banks, P.E., Caso Nos. 2015032603, 2015036080 7 COUNSEL FOR FEMC: John J. Rimes, Il Prosecuting Attorney Florida Engineers Management Corporation 2639 North Monroe Street, Suite B-112 Tallahassee, Florida 32303 Florida Bar No. 212008 JR/tv PCP DATE: March 08, 2016 PCP Members: Fiorillo, Fleming, & Matthews CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I hereby certify that a copy of the foregoing was furnished to Julio Banks, P.E. at PO Box 880187, Port St. Lucie, Florida 34988, by certified mail and First Class U. S. Mail, on the aN of YYociy 2016. { loreve. Volante vk Rebecca Valentine, Paralegal FBPE vs, Julio Banks, P.E., Case Nos. 2015032603, 2015036080 8

Docket for Case No: 16-003218PL