HAYTHAM MAHMOUD, PE
PE No. 78453
Case Nos. 2017031256, 2017029746

In Case No. 2017031256, Licensee was charged with violating Section 471.033(1)(g), Florida Statutes; negligence in the practice of engineering. Mr. Mahmoud signed, dated, and sealed the Electrical and Structural Engineering design documents for the construction of a residence. The Electrical Engineering design documents contained material deficiencies. Those deficiencies include, but are not limited to, the drawings contain no electrical riser diagram and no short circuit values and no voltage drop calculations for the feeders and customer-owners service conductors, no circuit interrupting devices, no fault current capability, no surge protective devices are shown on the drawings, no electrical load computations, no specification, design or description of any grounding and bonding of any aspect of the electrical system, etc. The Structural Engineering design documents contained material deficiencies. Those deficiencies include, but are not limited to, the General Notes state that the project is a “Remodel and Renovation and a Level II Alteration”, however, the design drawings appear to be intended for new construction, sheets CS, GN, and A1 contain wind load design criteria that is contradictory and in error, sheet GN states that the “foundations have been designed in accordance with the geotechnical report” and “an allowable bearing pressure of 3,000 psf.” The note also required the contractor to follow the recommendations of the geotechnical engineer in site preparation activities, however the drawings do not identify a geotechnical engineering company, a geotechnical engineer or geotechnical report date, sheet A3 notes that the structure is to be construction with the Quad-Lock Building System and refers to contractor to the manufacturer’s details. The information provided by Mr. Mahmoud is incomplete, misleading, and/or inconsistent with other notes and specifications, the design plans and details do not identify the expected total floor or roof slab thickness or explicitly call for a topping slab, the precast panel shop drawings show 5-inch thick solid concrete slabs at the front and rear balconies, with a 2-inch thick topping slab. The weight of the topping slab is included in the loading criteria, but not the required balcony life load of 60 psf, the submitted structural calculations also do not appear to address the design of these balcony beams, etc.

In Case No. 2017029746, Licensee was charged with violating Section 471.033(1)(g), Florida Statutes; negligence in the practice of engineering. Mr. Mahmoud, acted as the Electrical Engineer and Structural Engineer of Record for a project. The Electrical Engineering documents which were signed, dated, and sealed by Mr. Mahmoud contain material deficiencies. Those deficiencies include, but are not limited to no electrical riser diagram, no short circuit values, and no voltage drop calculations for the feeders and customer-owned service conductors, no circuit interrupting devices, no fault current capability, no surge protective devices, no electrical load computation, no specification, design or description of any grounding and bonding of any aspect of the electrical system, etc. The Structural Engineering design documents contained material deficiencies. Those deficiencies include, but are not limited to, the design criteria shown on Sheets CS and GN are incorrect and inconsistent, the wind load design criteria shown on the drawings is inconsistent and is in conflict with information referenced in the calculations, Sheet SP shows the proposed layout of the new structure relative to the existing property lines but no information regarding the existing site topography and existing structures, proposed finished grades or site drainage, Sheet GN states that the “foundations have been designed in accordance with the geotechnical report” and “an allowable bearing pressure of 3,000 psf.” The note also requires the contractor to follow the recommendations of the geotechnical engineer in site preparation activities, however the drawings do not identify a geotechnical engineering company, a geotechnical engineer or geotechnical report date, Sheet A2 depicts six new interior steel tube columns that would be welded to the top and bottom side rails of the cargo containers. Sheet S1 shows 12 new interior tube columns, the main wind-force resisting system is the combined steel frame that would be formed when the right steel shipping containers are welded together at the corner poses. The submitted design/construction drawings call for the removal or cutting away of portions of the container side wall panels to provide door and window openings and to provide a large open space within the building. The lateral wind loads imposed on the building would be expected to be transferred to the foundation via the roof structure and the remaining exterior side and end wall panels. The drawings call for the existing top and bottom side rails to remain “as it,” apparently without even welding or bolting the top side rails to each other to form a continuous roof diagram. No lateral bracing and no additional beams or other stiffening elements were provided for structural support and stability of the unsupported container top and bottom side rails, the building elevations on Sheets A6 and A7 show parapet walls extending above the roof surface along the north and south sides of the building. There are no notes specifying the construction materials to be used for the parapet walls, how they are to be attached to the building, or the locations and sizes or scuppers through the parapet wall at the north side of the building, etc.

Ruling: This case was presented to the full Board upon a Settlement Stipulation. The Board imposed an Administrative Fine of $2,000, Administrative Costs of $7,500, a Reprimand, Appearance before the Board, a Restriction from the practice of Electrical and Mechanical Engineering until such time that Mr. Mahmoud takes and passes the eight-hour Electrical and the NCEES eight-hour Mechanical HVAC examinations, project review at six and 18 months in the areas of Electrical and Mechanical Engineering which will occur after the Restriction is lifted, Probation with terms which include successful completion of the Basic Engineering Professionalism and Ethics course, the Board’s Study Guide and Structural Engineering project review at six and 18 months. Final Order was issued on 10/10/19.

Violation: Section 471.033(1)(g), Florida Statutes