Ethics Case Study
INCOMPLETE PLANS AND SPECIFICATIONS – ENGINEER, GOVERNMENT, AND CONTRACTOR RESPONSIBILITIES
Facts:
Engineer A responds to an RFP from a small local public agency to build a new dam to be financed in part by a federal grant. Engineer A’s firm’s impressive brochure and personal interview results in the award of a contract for the design, drawings, and specifications.
The signed and sealed drawings and specifications are ultimately approved by Engineer B of the engineering staff of the federal agency funding the project, and the project is thereafter duly advertised for bids and a contract is awarded to the low bidder, Hi-Lo Construction. The local public agency does not have the in-house technical resources to review the drawings and specifications.
At the pre-construction conference, it is pointed out by Engineer C, owner of Hi-Lo Construction, that much of the design detail is lacking in the drawings and specifications and that Hi-Lo Construction declares that certain parts of the project are “unbuildable” without major changes. Engineer A generally agrees with Hi-Lo’s characterization, but in his defense responds that he felt pressured to deliver the drawings and specifications on a specified date, but did not inform anyone as to their incompleteness. While much of the information was missing from the drawings and specifications, Engineer A was confident that sufficient federal funds (and not local funding) would cover any potential increased costs.
Questions: (Analyze the Problem thoroughly and Provide detailed response)
- Was it ethical for Engineer A to submit final drawings and specifications for review and approval that he knew were incomplete?
- Was it ethical for Engineer B to approve a set of incomplete drawings on behalf of the Federal government for competitive bidding?
- Was it ethical for Engineer C, owner of the Hi-Lo Construction firm, to submit a bid on a construction contract that he later characterized as “unbuildable” without major changes?
References:
Section I.1. – Code of Ethics: Engineers, in the fulfillment of their professional duties, shall hold paramount the safety, health and welfare of the public.
Section II.3.a. – Code of Ethics: Engineers shall be objective and truthful in professional reports, statements or testimony. They shall include all relevant and pertinent information in such reports, statements or testimony, which should bear the date indicating when it was current.
Section II.5. – Code of Ethics: Engineers shall avoid deceptive acts.
Section III.1.b. – Code of Ethics: Engineers shall advise their clients or employers when they believe a project will not be successful.
Section III.2.b. – Code of Ethics: Engineers shall not complete, sign or seal plans and/or specifications that are not in conformity with applicable engineering standards. If the client or employer insists on such unprofessional conduct, they shall notify the proper authorities and withdraw from further service on the project.
