ALJDEC decisions subject to certification as final

2010A-308475565-ROC · Registrar of Contractors · 2011-03-23

IN THE OFFICE OF ADMINISTRATIVE HEARINGS

HEARING: March 4, 2011 APPEARANCES: Sun Systems, Inc. was represented by its president and qualifying party, Tom Bohner. Sunrise Energy Solutions, L.L.C. was represented by its qualifying party and member, Paul Joseph Autry. ADMINISTRATIVE LAW JUDGE: Brian Brendan Tully _____________________________________________________________________ Based upon the evidence of record, the Administrative Law Judge makes the following Findings of Fact, Conclusions of Law, and Recommended Order: FINDINGS OF FACT 1. Sunrise Energy Solutions, L.L.C. (“Respondent”) is the holder of License No. 265243, a Class K-78 contracting license issued by the Registrar of Contractors (“Registrar”). 2. Paul Joseph Autry is Respondent’s member and qualifying party. 3. Sun Systems, Inc. (“Complainant”) is the holder of License No. 254606 issued by the Registrar. 4. Thomas Bohner is Complainant’s president and qualifying party. 5. Mr. Autry is Complainant’s former general manager for operations and sales. 6. Complainant filed a written Complaint with the Registrar alleging that Mr. Autry lacked the necessary experience to become Respondent’s qualifying party. The Registrar designated the Complaint as Case No. 2010-[number redacted] 7. The Registrar issued a Citation and Complaint in Case No. 2010- [number redacted] charging Respondent with violating the provisions of A.R.S. § 32-1154(A) (6). 8. The Registrar forwarded Case No. 2010-[number redacted] to the Office of Administrative Hearings, an independent agency, for an evidentiary hearing. 9. Page one of the Registrar’s Application for Contractor’s License contains the following warning: “NOTICE Fabrication of any information on this application is a felony[.]” 10. The Registrar’s Instruction for Completing Qualifying Party Experience Forms contains, among other things, the following instruction: “Line 7. Name of your immediate supervisor at the place of business….” 11. Mr. Autry listed Gene Sawyer as his immediate supervisor while he worked for Complainant. 12. Mr. Sawyer had been employed by Complainant as a Commercial Sales Representative. He reported to Brian Manchip, Complainant’s Marketing/Creative Director. Mr. Manchip reported directly to Mr. Autry. 13. Mr. Sawyer is the former qualifying party for Totus Landscapes and Design, a licensed contractor who was revoked three times and had a Residential Contractors’ Recovery Fund payout to a residential homeowner for damages. 14. Mr. Sawyer did not testify at the hearing. 15. At the hearing, Mr. Autry testified that he did not list Mr. Bohner as his immediate supervisor on his application because Mr. Autry felt that Mr. Bohner would not support his application to become Respondent’s qualifying party. 16. Mr. Autry’s work experience was not accurately presented to the Registrar. For example, Mr. Autry listed a residential contractor as a reference on his list of commercial projects in support of his experience necessary to become a qualifying party. 17. Manuel Torres served as Complainant’s manufacturing/purchasing manager reporting to Mr. Autry while the latter was employed by Complainant. Mr. Torres testified that he was also a close friend of Mr. Autry. Mr. Torres stated that Mr. Sawyer never supervised Mr. Autry and that Mr. Autry lacked the background to become a qualifying party for a solar license. CONCLUSIONS OF LAW 1. The Registrar has jurisdiction over Respondent and the subject matter in this case. 2. Pursuant to A.A.C. R2-19-119(B), Complainant has the burden of proof in this matter. The standard of proof is by a preponderance of the evidence. A.A.C. R2-19-119(A). 3. Complainant sustained its burden of establishing that Respondent violated the provisions of A.R.S. § 32-1154(A) (6). Mr. Autry knowingly misrepresented the identity of his supervisor while employed by Complainant in order to hinder any investigation of his experience that could be obtained from his real supervisor, Mr. Bohner. RECOMMENDED ORDER Respondent’s License No. 265243 shall be revoked on the effective date of the Order entered in Case No. 2010-[number redacted]. If Respondent disassociates Mr. Autry from License No. 265243 and replaces him as qualifying party for the license with a qualified qualifying party approved by the Registrar on or before the effective date of the Order entered in Case No. 2010-[number redacted], or on or before any other deadline date granted by the Registrar, then the above-provided license revocation shall not take place, but instead Respondent’s contracting license shall be placed on disciplinary probation for a period of 120 days. This alternative penalty shall commence, if at all, on the effective date of the Order entered in Case No. 2010-[number redacted]. In addition to the above-provided license revocation, if any, any restoration of Respondent’s rights to resume contracting, whether or not probationary, shall be subject to a condition that Respondent first post an additional surety bond, cash deposit or alternative deposit for a period of months, including future renewal periods, in the amount of $3,500.00, such bond or deposit to be in addition to the required surety bond, cash deposit or recovery fund participation set forth in A.R.S. § 32-1152. Cash or alternative additional deposits, if utilized, shall be returned only after the expiration of an additional two-year period following the above- provided 24-month period and only if no claims are then pending. In the event of certification of the Administrative Law Judge Decision by the Director of the Office of Administrative Hearings, the effective date of the Order will be 40 days from the date of that certification.

Done this day, March 23, 2011.

/s/ Brian Brendan Tully Administrative Law Judge

Transmitted electronically to:

William A. Mundell, Director Registrar of Contractors -----------------------

Office of Administrative Hearings 1400 West Washington, Suite 101 Phoenix, Arizona 85007 (602) 542-9826