eo haope eb ob @ ® a & a @ & @ & & fe & & ® a 2 8 NOTE: The following is the Professional Practice Exam, held April 24th, 1993. Minor editing has been done to save space, and the references to the 1984 Regulation (538/84) have been replaced with references to the 1999 Regulation (941/90). Try the questions on this exam paper under exam conditions. ANlow yourself 90 minutes, maximum, to solve each, part before looking at the answers. This chapter Is not contained on the video-tape. PART A- Ethics Exam Questions BSSIONAL PRACTICE EXAMINATION - APRIL. 24, 1992 PART "A" - Professional Practice and Ethics “PRO! FOUR QUESTIONS constitute a complete Part"A." Question | is compulsory ~ ALL candi plus three additional questions, Alf jvestions are submitted, without s four answers in the book n numbers in On h cshether the accident was due to operator error or failure of a machine component. {a) Do you have any Professional responsibility to become involved with the investigation? sional Ethics and Prof tigation’ (b) Having reference to the code of Prof or should you make to facilitate the inv ETHICS QUESTION 2. via) For what reason can a Certificate of Authorization be cancelled? ical dey sib) Isa P-Eng, required to keep up to date with tec lopenent in the professional’ field of interest? Why is it important that a P.Eng. protect the public interest in Engineering mi \{d) How can you become involved in the affairs and activities of the association? wie) What are the consequences to a compeny that uses persons without professional qual in positions whieh are generally considered to require Professional Engineering expe: ot, a simple "yes" or "no" answer is no) rio Regulation 941/90 ané camry ates must attempt i questions are of equal value (25%). When answers for more g which four are to be graded, marks will be awarded for only onal Conduct, what contribution can< EXHICS QUESTION 3, jonat Engineer employed by the Ministry of the Environment has inherited the family construction ness. From time to time in the past, this construction company has contracted work from the Ministry. The would like to carry on the construction business but also wants to continue as @ Ministry ernployee for five more years, which would be the minimum time needed to qualify for early retirement, > [sit ethically possible for this P.Eng. to do so? If you believe that it is, are there certain steps that must be taken (6 avoid ¢ conflict with Ontario Regulation 941/99 sections 72 and 77? ETHICS QUESTION 4. ‘me that you are a P.Eng. engaged in supervising the construction of @ natural gas pipe line. The lengths of re joined together by welding before the pipe is lowered into the trench, All of the welds must be radiogrephed (x-rayed) to insure that they are sound before the pipeline trench is backfilled. Your employer has ted the radiography to an ouiside contracting firm which does the x-ray work and interprets the results. “Althougi the outside contracting firm has a licence of Technical Competence from the Federal Goverment, it has no Professional Engineers on staff. From some of your field observations, you are eoncemed about the ppleteness of this company’s inspection procedure. if it had an engineer on the job, you would certainly ‘your doubts with this person, but since it does not, you are uncertain how to proceed. You have reread intercompany contract for this inspection work, No reference is made in it ebout Professional Engineering -ments on the job, but you still eel that the work has an engineering component. Jour ethical responsibility in this situation? > ETHICS QUESTION 5. ath problems reported by the aan County courthouse appear to be related to the y ‘with qualified professional staff and with considerable expertise the "clean air’ field. You know cof rectification depends on the source(s) of the problem. You ‘ken 10 the C.A,O, and have advised tha: & two stage approach to the solution is necessary, First, the ¢ problem must be identified, for waick only a modest expenditure is required. Following this, the reptedial work can be estimated realistically ané hence tenders called for. jocked to read an advertised proposal from the County requesting fixed price bids to clean up the Court ing to a specific "air quality reading," while in the seme newspaper the C.A.O. is quoted as saying. 2 county had budgeted "X" dollars for the work. Based on your previous experience, you feel strongly that edure proposed by the County is wrong. You are concemed that some general contractors will bid on ; without understanding all the possible complications, and that satisfactory results will not be achieved. ono avail. You wonder if your firin should refrain the proy 260% ‘Your artempts to reason with the country’s C.4.0, have been wating in a proposal Do you have an ethical r ponsibility to take further action? Discuss your social obligations in this matter. PART B~ Law Examination Questions PROFESSIONAL PRACTICE EXAMINATION - APRIL 24, 1993 PART "B" - Engineering Law and Professional Liability FOUR QUESTIONS constitute a complete Part "B", All four questions are of equal value. Question 1 is ‘ory. Four other questions are offered, and 3 of these must be selected for a complete paper. When for more than three optional questions are submitted (in addition to Question 1) without stating which 1d, marks will be awarded only for Question | and the first 3 answers in the answer book. RELA CECH EKER AA EEK EREEEEEEEEE EEE ELIA aWARBRREEEEDEBEBEBSRAD REE DE dab aba badass ste? LAW QUESTION 1. (COMPULSORY ~ TO BE, 1, Briefly, define any five of the following (a) Secret Commission (b) Common Law (6) Contract Rectification “ {d) Director's Duty of Care (e) Duress“ (®) Gratuitous Promise~ (g) Parol Evidence Rule (h) Slander * (i) The 5 Essentiats of a Binding Contract (list only)” 'SWERED BY EACH CANDIDATE) LAW QUESTION 2. 2. Answer all of the following question: \(@) Briefly describe the basis upon which damages for breach of contract are caleulated at common les What is the difference, if any, between the basis for calculating damages for breach of contract and for won? + (uy Brieny describe how a bonus Feature may be included ina guaranteed meximem price consuetion to the advantage of both the owner and the contractor. (e) GasMates Limited isa designer and manufacturer of small engine-driven equipment with « factory it Oatario, It produces lawnmowers, snowploughs and portable gasoline-powered clectreal generators A-consumer, "C", purchased a gasoline-powered lawnmower manufactured by GasMat sdwave store. The Hardware Club Limited, which is an authorized dealer of G: which "C" purchased included a weitten manufacturer's warranty that the unit would and deficiencies for a period of one year from the date of purchase. “CY was quite satisfied with the lawnmower and used it for ‘The lawnmower required no maintenance except fora yearly oll change. After fiv lawnmower's blade required Sharpening, "C"tumed the lnwnmower over and used a wrenchto loosen the nut which secured the blade to the drive shaft ofthe engine. As "C" was loosening the nut, "C" inadvertently rotated the blade one fall rum and the engine started as a result, 'C* sustained serious injusies as a result of the engine starting, including serious cuts to the hands, the joss of a thumb, and a concussion caused when the wrench "C" was using was hurled at "C's" head by the spinning blade, °C" also sustained property damage when the wrench broks 2 window afte hitting ‘Cin the head. After an investigation, it was determined that "C* failed to read the maintenance section in the owners Jpanual which was provided withthe lawnmower. The owner's manual contained the following sentence in regular size print “The spark plug should be disconnected before any maintenance is performed on this U No other safety warnings were given. Had "C* disconnected the spark plug before attempting to remove the blade, it would have been impossible for the engine to start. + Discuss what claims "C" may make in the circumstances,LAW QUESTION 3. 's contracto: specializing in farm buildings was engaged by an owner to design and construct # bern to be placed over a manure pit. The contract berween the contractor and the owner provided that the contractor {vould be responsible for both the design ané construction of the barn and manure p ‘The contractor had previously designed end built bams over manure pits, but had never designed @ manure pitof the size and shape requied by this owner, In preparing the design, the contractor contacted an engincer (sho wes employed by the Department of Agriculture of Ontario (the "Government Engineer"). Tbe ‘Goverment Engineer wes @ governmentemploye2 and nota consulting engineer. However, the Goverment ‘ineer was employed by the government t0 assist farmers and contractors to work out their plans and ithough the Government Engineer never received any payment from the contractor, the Government ee: had previously provided advice to the contractor in connection with the design of farm buildings. and the Government Engineer never met 10 discuss the plans but discussed the matter by wre. Eventually, the contractor left a copy of the plans on the Government Engineer's desk and the amt Engineer reviewed the plans and forwarded the following hand-written message to the contractor: Good set of plans. { like the detail. Wish I could spend that amount of time on each project. Keep up the good work." “After the manure pit was constructed in accordance with the plans, the walls of the manure pit cracked badly dnd had to be rebuilt. The owner sought the advice of another engineer (the "Consultant") who redesigned nanure pit prior to the remedial construction taking place, The Consultant noted that the contractor's plans had two particular deficiencis Gi) The plans showed the rebar (ceinforcing rod) to be in the middle of the wall, The rebar should have been closer to the inside wal! for maximum support, fii) There was a complete absence of any rebar schedule on the plans. ginal plane were deficient insofar as the structural steel components and he concrete wall were missing ‘The Consultant concluded that the ¢ vital to the integrity requiremer When the owner discovered that the contractor had sought advice from the Government Engineer, the owner sued both the contractor and the Government Engineer on account of the extra costs incurred by the owner in having the manure tank redesigned and reconstructed. “The Goverment Engineer's position wes that the Government Engincer really hadn't carefully reviewed the zlans, but had simply looked through them and hadn't really understood that the contractor was secking ice on the detailed sufficiency of the plans. » Do you think the owner would be successful in a tort claim against the Goverment Engineer? In your explanation, discuss the tor law principles that a court would apply to determine whether and to what extent the Government Engineer would be liable, “LAW QUESTION 4. 4 A mining contractor signed an option contract with a land owner which provided that if the mining contractor {the “optionee") performed a specified minimum amount of exploration serviees on the property of the owner onor") within a nine-month period, then the optionee would be entitled to exercise its option to mining claims from the optionor. ‘the expity of this nine-month option period”, the optionce realized that it coulda fulfil its obligation co eapend te required minimum amount by the expiry date, The optionee notified the optionor of its 29 nam mmo wo OGehOhGFO ACETATE ETEEEKEEET ECE CDebababuaky tb be BABBRELERREBLLBBRELBABBB ADEE AD Ma problem, prior to expiry of the opt extended, However, the optionce in return on period, and the optiono: indicated that the option period would be ;o written record of this extension was made, nor did the optionor receive anything from F the extension, .¢ optionee then proceeded to perform the services and to finally expend the specified minimum amount daring the extension period. However, when the optionee attempted to exercise its option to acquire the raining claim the optionor took the position that, on the basis of the strict wording of the signed contract, the optionee had not met its contractual obligations. The optionor refused to grant the mining claims to the optionee. > Was the optionor entitled to deny the optionee's exercise of the option? » Explain the contract law principles that apply to the positions taken by the optionor by the optionee. AV QUESTION 5. Prime Equipment Inc. ("Prime") is a company engaged in the business of supplying heavy ‘equipment used in the oil exploration and drilling industry. Prime became aware that Conventional Oil Company Ltd, (°Conventional") required a contraccorto design, manufacture, supply and install specialized gearboxes. The gear boxes would be used to drive « number of bucket wheel conveyor belts that transported sand at Conventional’ oil extraction tar sands plant in Alberta, Prime decided 0 tender on the Conventional contract In order to tender on the contract, Prime set out to purchase the gear boxes. Prime was contacied by a representative of MachineWorks Ltd., a company which manufactured similar equipment. ARter visitin Conventional’s site and examining the conveyors, the representative of Machine Works became familiar with the requirements of the gear boxes. Machine Works represented to Prime that MachineWorks would be able to Gesign and manufacture the specialized gear boxes and that the gear boxes would be suitable for the purpose intended. On the basis of these representations, MachineWorks and Prime entered into a contract. MachineWorks agreed that if Prime were successful in its tender to Conventional, MachineWorks would provide the equipment for a price of $300,000. The contract also contained a provision limiting Machine Works' total liability to $300,000 for any loss, damege or injury resulting from MachineWorks! performance of its services under the contract. entative, Prime prepared and submitted its for the gear Based on the information provided by the MachineWorks repr tender to Conventional. Conventional accepted the tender and entered into a contract with Pri boxes. The gear boxes were installed at Conventional’s site by employees of Prime according to Machine Works’ installation procedures. Shorily ofter the gear boxes were put into service, main gears inside them failed. As sult of this failure, the conveyers were damaged and it was impossible for Conventional to operate its conveyors. Machine Works made several unsuccessful attempts to correct the gear boxes. In order to meets its obligations under the Conventional contract, Prime hired another supplier to correct the Gefeots in the gearboxes, For an additional $400,000 Prime was able to correct the problem by replacing the gear boxes with gearboxes manufactured by another company and by repairing the damage to the conveyors. The total amount which had deen paid by Prime to MachineWorks prior to discovering the defect was $250,000. Explain and discuss what claim Prime can make against Machine Works in the circumstances. Would Prime be successful in its claim? Why? in answering, please include a summary of the development of relevant se precedents. the end of the exam ~ Try to solve it before reading the answers on the next page. 30.| RRRSSSRYRARHE BEES S 7,3. Solutions to Ethies Questions The following solutions are suggested by ne author of this Smudy Guide. ANSWER TO ETHICS QUESTION 1. ) The term "become involved” is very vague, and shoukd be more clearly defined. However, the answer y "yes," regardless of the definition, £ there has been serious damage or death as a result of the accident, the company (ané 1) will cenainiy involved" in whatever lege! actions may be taken, whether I wish to or not, so it would be important the cause of the accident, and an offer to Transport Canada to “become involved" would be Ifthe damage is not en issue, but the design may be suspect, then I snder the Code of Ethics (Reg. 941/90, jotype vehicle (or futur ve a cleat obligation to safeguard the tion 77.2.4) by finding the cause of the accident, because milar vehicles) may become involved in other accidents and be a danger uture failures occurred, of a similar nature, then I could be guilty of professional misconduc: in Reg. 941/90, Sect n 72,(2)(¢), for "failing to make reasonable precautions ..." v However, speakingas an engineer involved in design, sheer professionel curiosity would drive. valved.” This question has ¢ simple answer. the investigation woule be to supply technical information on the vehicle, as 4. If confidential information is required to protect the public, then in accordance with the Code (Reg, 941/90, section 77.2.i}, I would provide i 4 more imporsant question is what would be done with the results of the investigation, Ifthe investigation ROWS that the vehicle may endanger the public, I have an obligation under the Code of Ethics to inform the vehicies have been sold), and to remedy the defect in the design. Failure 10 do so would be isconduct, if future felures occurred (see same references as above). ANSWER TO ETHICS QUESTION 2. 1c rules for issuance of a Certificate of Authorization are described in Regulation 941/90, sect tificate can be cancelled if any of the requirements are substantially changed: 2 A common reason would be if the Professional Engineer designated as the person who ass ity and supervises the engineering services, resigns, retires, quits oris fired, or loses his or ice to practice for whatever reason, company no longer provides professional engineering services. The company fails to pay the annual fee. A Professional Engineer is required to keep up to date with technica! developments in the Code of Professional Conduct, Reg. 941/90 72,(2)(h) which classifies "undertaking work practitioner is not competent to perform” as professional misconduct. In addition, the Code of Ethics, Reg 941/90 section 77.1 requires the engineer to be knowledgeable and competent in the provision of engineering 246) It is important for a P-Eng. to protect the public interest in engin obvious one and a philosophical one: The obvious reason is that itis required by the Code of Ethics, Reg 941/90 section 77.1 ilosophical reason is that this is the basic purpose of establishing engineering as a self-reg profession. If the safeguarding of the public interest (meaning the life, health, property or the pu welfare) is not important to the engineer, then this strikes at the root of the philosophy regulating ell of the professions in our society. ring matters for two reasons, an 31 e * or a ad e e eS Cod td ee oe eo e 4S %. -seeRERROVET PSH Oded Evebobsbebusbebuba be va. (Note! A good way for a person writing this exam to get involve Engineering Intern Training (EIT). As an EIT (or as a P.Eng.), I would receive notices of possibly write tothe Editor, Asa P-Eng,,1 could offer to serve on PEO committees, to serve my ch in an executive capacity, or to stand for election to PEO Council. 242) A company that permits persons without professional qualifications to practise enginecring is acting contrary to the Professional Engineers Act, section 12, and according to section 40, is guilty of an offence and, on conviction, is lisble to a fine of $25,000 (or $50,000 on a second offence). If the company’s personnel are eligible for P.Eng, registration, then they should apply for it, If they are not eligible, then the company may be receiving poor quality services, and the reputation of the company may be at risk. ANSWER TO ETHICS QUESTION 3. % The engineer may continue to temain a Ministry employee, provided that there is no conflict of intecest with the construction business, and provided that the Ministry (the employer) and the clients of the construction sny are aware of the dual activities of the engineer. The engineer must strictly avoid any construction sry business which involves his company (panicular ion of Requests for Proposals by the Ministry which only the farnily business could meet). Th nflict of interest is prohibited by the Code of Ethics, (Reg 941/90, section 77.4 and 77.5) and is considered professional misconduct under the Code of Professional Conduct (Reg 941/90, section 72(2).i}, unless er disclosure is made. Id be best for the family construction business to be managed by others for five years. These sements should be made known to the Ministry of Environment, and to all elients of the construction to satisfy the disclosure requirements. ANSWER TO ETHICS QUESTION 4. This question is rather vague about your precise position in the company and responsibility for the project. Therefore, you must assume a role which seems logical, and then answer according to the Way you have defined the problem. Many different 2 therefore acceptable. According to the question, you are “supervising” the construction, so let us assume that you are the project manager, and you are completely le for the project, including the weld quality, trenching, material quality, and proper backfilling.) (The first step in solving any problem is to gather the facts, ask questions and determine the issues. As you | Ssnow, the Professional Engineers Act applies, and the Cade of Ethics clearly states that the professional .gineer's duty to public welfare is paramount (Regulation 941/90 Sec. 77.2.i.), and in a project as potentially } dangero cry diligent in safeguarding life, health and property. In fact, & failure to do so may be considered professional misconduct (as defined in Regulation 941/90, section (2)b) J. There is a further duty to correct or report any situation that may endanger the public, in ‘ation 941/90, section 72.(2)(c). Therefore, as a supervisor of this project, you have a responsibi shat the public welfare is protected usually exist However, in any technical area where safety is an issue, other regulations, codes and stanc: ‘Your next step would be to find and read these documents, if you have not done so, already. (In fact, asimpie web search would show that there are at least two government regulations made under the Technical Standards and Safety Act, 2000 which regulate natural gas and gas pipelines.) Let us assume thet you have these documents. If these regulations specify that an engineer must direct the weld inspection, then you would approach the sub-contractor conducting the x-ray tests, to determine why the regulation is not being followed, Ifthe sub-contractors providing engineering services without a licensed engineer, then you would them to stop operation until they hired an engineer who could direct the work properly refused fo do so, you would ask PEO to investigate and enforce the Act.ality assurance procedure, there mus: always be a continuous chain of people whe are responsible or quality ~ from design, to manufacture, to inspection and documentation, The question implies that t asitranee proces has gap in sacs you are near the top of he quality assurance chain, and you be more aggresive if you have ted However, if you are not confident that weld quality is being inspected adequately, you would contact a more superior person within your company, because your company has an interest ir ensuring thet the work is Formed competently, and you would get full support on an issue as important as this. All discussions howid be documented in writing, in case they had to be verified later in a court case. ANSWER TO ETHICS QUESTION 5. constraints imposed by the Chief Administrative Officer (CAO) will limit the quality of the solution th ‘sill result, If Tam correct (and the problem states that my previous experience is valid), then 1 would not bid on the project since satisfactory results will not be achieved, the County will tose public money, the ‘who mistakenly try to solve the problem may be sued or suffer loss of reputation, and this will It from the CAO trying to put reflect badly on the entire profession. In other words, many bad effects res financial constraints on 2 technical problem, Therefore, I da have an ethical responsibility to take further action. Safeguarding of health is at risk ia this ase, atid the method used will not remediy the "clean ais" problems, Therefore I should speak out to prote the public welfare, in accordance with Regulation 941/90, section 77.2... The action by the County Counc’ ‘a clear lack of care for the interest cf the public even though I personally’ spoke to the CAO. A to the County Council reiterating the concem. ! should take an active roie in audit stioning the procedure, to ensure that public welfare is protected ndicas ener should be finearar| and q1 However, there is no question of professional misconduct if] fail to do any ng contract or obligation, other than the Code of Ethies. Moreover, as & potential bidder on the project, my activities may be construed as self-serving, so any comments must be backed by sound technics cd by the Code of Ethics in Regulation 941/90, section 77.2. Solutions to Law Questions ANSWER TO LAW QUESTION 1. - Lila) Secret Commission - a bribe, kickback, reward or advantage, such as money or something of value, ting from a secret egreement to deceive or show favour (or disfavour) to e third party. Offering or ing a secret commission is an offence under the Criminal Code of Canada, Section 338A Professional Engineer who offers of accepts a secret commission is also subject to charges under Regulation 941/90, Section 72,2)(), T7.Li., 7.1.i, 77.3 and 77.4, (See p. 169 also “secret profit") Lave - In deciding cases, the courts apply legal principles established in previous cour, cases. hece court decisions are known as "Common Lew." Itis judge-made law, as opposed to law "statutes by legislative assemblies or parliaments. All provinces except Quebec use common law. (See text, pp. 2 and 99.) n mistake. The party applying sat with the terms agreed upon rectification," law text, p. 113.) ier must persuade the court that the written coniractis icons ling mistake. (See "s ~ te OMA HH AAMHAKRARRARCMAHRARARRAREEEhat he 4 ababs bb 4 LEREBEEEEEEEDEEREEE EEL AC LES a * YiG@) Director's Duty of Care - Every director and officer ofa corporation in exercising powers or discharging duties shall: (2) act honestly and in good faith with a view to the best interest of the corporation; and (b) exercise the care, diligence and skill that a reasonably pident person would exercise in comparable circumstances. (See law text'P"90.) Le) Intimidation, such as threatened or actual violence or imprisonment of a person, aclose relative or property. An agreement executed under duress is not an offer willingly made and accepted, and theref ct. (See law text, p. 108.) lly binding. Itmay be enforceable under equitable estoppel, if there isa clear inequity. (See law text, p. 88, under “equitable estoppel.") Parol Evidence Rute - "Paro!" means "oral" or "verbal". ‘The parol evidence rule states that if clauses or condition’ are not written into a contract, they are not enforceable in resolving a dispute. A contract may, of course, always be aniended by agreement. There are only a few exceptions to this rule text P-128) The r L(t) Slander A defamatory oral statement. Iti slightly different ftom libel, which is a written or permanent defamatory statement, Either may be the basis of a tort (See Law text, p.53.) Five essentials of a binding contract: For a contract to be binding and enforceable, five elements must be present: 1. An offer must be made and accepted; 2. a mutual intene to complete the contract, 3. a “consideration,” usually mone} 4. "capacity" or ability of the parties to create and perform a contract; and 5. a lavful purpose (legal purpose) for the contract. sie (0r more) of the above essential elements is not presert, then @ contract and such an agreement is not enforceable. (See Law text, p. 75.) ANSWER TO LAW QUESTION 2. 2a) Thereare long-established common law principles for calculating damages forbr ich of contract, sta ‘The basic principe i thet damages must “flow naturally ‘which means thatthe damages should cover the reasonable consequences which woul Benormaily foreseeable. For example, if contract is awarded for repair of a machine part, and the repair is seriously delayed, then reasonable damages might equal the cost of manufacturing a replacement part, but not the econcmic loss of production of the machine from which the part was taken, unless avoiding lost production was specifically mentioned as a clause in the contract. Obviously, it is good law, and good engineering, io consider all reasonable ways that an agreement may go wrong, to foresee the datrages which may result, and to include clauses which specify bonuses for good results, payments for damages, and/or limits to liability. Damages cannot be included to "punish a contractor. (See lew text, p. 139, “temedies.”) The principles for damages in tort law are similer to contract law, in thet damages must be only those that are easonable in the circumstances. However, one significant difference is that in a contract, the parties have ‘an opportunity to include clauses which limit the damages for which one of them may be liable. However, intort law. a duty of care may exist, even if there is no contract, and therefore no opportunity to limit liability. pie, in the case of Rivvaw Marine vs. Washington Iron Works, it was established th: ich as lost profits) may in some cases be recoverable im tort law. (See law text, p. 55.ANSWER TO LAW QUESTION 3. ©) The cos j Althoue’ \ ANSWER TO LAW QUESTION 4, a “sonus" is an extra payment for special service (like a tip"). A bonus clause gives the contactor incentive to Tedace costs. For example, a clause may say that for every dollar saved beneath the ‘pusrunteed maximum price, the contractor will receive @ percentage of the savings. Bath the ownes and the contractor benefit. THe owner may ask or expect the engineer to estimate the contractor's Costs, te an accurate estimate of the maximum price, so that the bonus will be a reasonable incentive, (See law text, p. 183,) yA ‘umer *C could make a claim for damages under tort lew, and would have to prove that the ‘ures failed to exefeiee'a diity of care, However. the consumer is unlikely to collect damages. Manufacturers owe a duty to consumers to ensure that no defects will give injury during the ordinary ‘course of use. However, the repair made by the consumer "C should have been carried out following manual provided. Since the safety warming was ignored, the consumer would not likely collect + case ig in the law text: George Ho Lem vs. Barotto Sports. (Set Ta manok damages. A simi he manufacturer would probably claim the waming to “remove the spark plug before working on ign engineer would have an obligation under the Code of the machine” was clear and wnambiguous, the de cee ieviow the accident and see ifthe machine can be rade safer. This might include improveé jesigning the ma | warnings in the manual or on the machine, or making the warning print larger, or re- \to require the spark ping to be removed before the blade can be remover ort ig to compensate a party sustaining loss. fi is not t0 p: jmmale, which is covered under the Criminal Code. The 3 principies of tort jaw could be applied to th case principles in 2 ort action must be proven by the plaintiffbeyond a "balance of pra for the clcim to be successful, The 3 principles are: (a) a duty ofcare; (b) a breach of that duty; (©) resulting loss or damage The purpose of a law-suit in a case of ti In this case, it appears that the owner would be successful in # tort cleim against the government ‘The government engineer (whether intentionally or not) was placed in a position of responsibility fora duty of cate, simply by reviewing the plans and offering an opinion; tast is, by writing the “Good plans" nove principle (a) i satisfied. Since the government engineer did not carefully analyze the plans, that inciple (b), and damage occurred as 2 result of the violation, \ responsibility was violated, satisfying ps | satisfying principle (c). “The fact that no fee was peid by the contractor does not lessen the responsibility of the government engineer The contractor also bears some responsibility for the failure, since there was no rebar schedule on the plat and the contractor apparently determined the sizes, A conscientious contractor would have known the ‘Consequences of @ poor design and would have been more specific in asking for engineering approve taken directly from the law text; see Unit Farm Concrete vs. Eckerlea Acres, p. 40. The oo (on appeal assigned responsibility for reconstruction costs and remedial work, as 75% to the government ve, and 25% to the contractor. Where the claim is in tort, the contractor and the government tortfeasors". The government is "vicariously liable" for the act of its employee en: gincer. "This is Sample Case Study on page 92 of the text, The facts are very sinnilar to @ case which before the courts (See Conwest Exploration vs. Letain, p. 88.) The principle of “equitable estoppel ina fone party to a contract makes a gretuitous promise which effectively amends the tems of the contract, nd the second party relies on that promise, then the first party may be stopped from reverting to the origin! vane of tre contract. A court will permit equitable estoppel only to avoid an obviously unfair resi. 35 RGEERAEEEEAE EE EE REaEas TUAMAAMLBBREBERERRRBR RE BER Gb abadabadaakad AN V5. THREE FINAL HD © In the Conwest case, the court ruled that the optionor is not entitled to deny the oa option. When the optionee notified the optionor of the problem and requested the extension, the optionor agreed verbally to the extension. This verbal agreement is a gratuitous promise by the opticner, since no consideration," or payment was made to obtain the extension. In contract law an agreement without some consideration is normally unenforceable. However, denial of the options would be inequitable, since the optionee relied on this promise and completed the work. Therefore, the optionee could exercise "equitable estoppel” to prevent the optionor from reverting to the original terms of the contract, WER TO LAW QUESTION 8. “This question is presented in detail as a Sample Case Study in the specified law text on pages 154 to 156. The probiem involves a fundamental breach of contract, and while in previous years a clause to limit liabi was not enforceable in the case of a fundamental breach, recent court decisions have changed the law (as explained in the law text in Chapter 20, Fundamental Breach), and the clear wording of the provision limiting hiability would now stand (see Hunter and Syncrude case, pages 127 and 151). This is an example where th hanged in the last few years, as the result of court “precedents.” (Soe pages 154 to 156.) 'S (repeated from pag PART A~ The examiner who seis and grades PART A of the PPE has asked me to explain that, when tying the READ - EGAD! -SUMMARIZE procedure, too many eandilaies spend almost ‘on the E,G,A steps (Ethical issues, Generation of alternatives, and Analysis) and not enough time on explaining step D! (che Decision) and the SUMMARY, This usually results in @ short an to the question. Remember that the EGAD! process is intended merely to help you think the problem in an orderly way. It is not necessary to write out these steps; your grade wil be hrow well vou have explained your decision in your written summary, So star write as soo PART B~ The person who sets and grades Part B of the exam is a prominent lawyer snd Pro Engineer. He has asked me to “emphasize to the candidates the importance of closely studying # ‘material in preparation for the examination. Ail too often, in answeting, unsuccessful candidates simply identity legal concepts without indicating an awareness of the meaning of the legal principle. Providing conclusions without reasons doesn't indi arker that the candidate has a sufficient awaren of the nature of the legal principle. Reliance on memorizing sample examination solutions alse occurs too often. These are problems reflected on many recent unsuccessful exam papers. It's really important ro convey to the candidste thar a detailed aporeciation of the text material is required, as the vast majority of failures simply stem from lack of preparation.” DIFFERENCE BETWEEN ETHICS & LAW: As mentioned on the vidoo-tape, ethies is a code of behaviour which one follows in order to avoid problems with the law. Another way of expressing it is that “Ethics is what you follow to avoid bad things from happening, and Law is what you must follow afer bad things happen.” The people who grade the exams have suggested that it is not wise to mix ‘thics and faw in your answers on the PPE. That is, your answers to the ethics questions should be based mainly on the Professional Engineers Act and Regulation 941, Section 77 the Code of Ethics) and Section 72 (the definition of professional misconduct) and concepts from the ethics text, On the other hhand, your answers to the law questions should be based on Canadian law, such as the laws of tort and contracts and the previous law cases (“precedents”) which are discussed in the law text. Separating the concepts simplifies the marking,PISOSITISISSTSSSTUSTIVSTICISISTOTISI STOLE ce CHAPTER 8 SECOND SAMPLE EXAM (1998) NOTE: The following is the Professional Practice Exar, held September 12, 1998, Minor editing has been done to save space. Try the questions on this exam paper under exam conditions. Aow yourself 90 minutes, maximum, to salve each part before looking at the answers. This chapter is not contained on the video-tape. Ethics Exam Questions PROFESSIONAL PRACTICE EXAMINATION - September PART "A" - Professional Practice and Ethics 1998 FOUR QUESTIONS constitute @ complete Part "A." Question | is compulsory — ALL candidates must attempt Question 1, plus three additional questions. All full questions are of equal value (25%). When answers for more than four questions are submitted, without stating which four are to be graded, marks will be awarded for only the first four answers in the book, wer is not comment Where a question asks if certain action by an engineer was ethical or not, a simple" sufficient: you should identify the epplicab ction numbers ini Ontario Regulation 941,90 and on the action in each situation. PRHICS QUESTION T a) Are any of the follow 2) the PEO logo ’) a educed reproduction of your engincering sel ii) the slogan "lowest price in the business Briefly describe the reasons for your selection(s). Wg advertising components appropriate on x consulting b) Cana the PB: a corporation, holding a Certificate of Authorization, still provide engineering, services to the public if named on the certificate is fired or resigns? cuss the principal objective of the Association of Professional Engineers of Ontario. 4) B 'y describe the rain differences between a limited licence, a temporary livence and a licence. €) Name three requirements that a professional engineer must meet in order to use the title "consulting engineer” Yemmics QUESTION 2. Engineer Mu, employed by an aircratt manufacturer, conducted tests on a new, lightweight, brat -m being developed by Mu's employer. Mu found that under certain conditions the composite lining af the ¢ pad would fase, Whick could fead to the possible destruction ofthe aircraft when lending Mu attends a conference in the United States on aircraft design and inadvertently overheats Professional Engineer Omicron describing a new braking system that is under development by Omicron's company, @ mpetitor to Mu's company. Mu suspects that Omicron's brake is similar to that which Mu's company is ping. Mu feels an obligation to act upon this information but is unsure what to do. Mu asks you, a P.Eng., jon to take, if any. what a > What advice do you give Mu? * What are your ethical obligations? Cite the relevant sections of Professional Misconduct and the Code of Ethics.‘VETHICS QUESTION 3 For seventeen years Psi has worked in the engineering division of Electron, « large corporation in the electrical industry based in British Columbia, Psi was promoted to vice-president of engineering two years ago and transferred to Manitoba, Last y ‘he major shareholder of the corporation sold its ownership to 2 foreign based Company. This Change i ownership has resulted in ¢ new corporate structure. Psi's position has been designated fedundant and Psi has been offered a generous financial settlement and one month's notice, Psi decides to eorept the package and leave at the end of the month For some time Psi has wanted to join ¢ friend and start a partnership designing and menufacturing electrical seiigets in Ontario, Throupl their experiences at Elector, Psi ane the friend believe they have gained sufficient arta oo portise to ereate a profitable company. They decide such an opportunity may nex come again and ide to establish their own company the company? + Ave there any professional requirements and obligations that Psi shculd meet before star © Discuss this situation as it relates to the Code of Ethies and Professional Misconduct. Frcs QUESTION 4 Professional Engineer Rho is a sales engineer for Kool Inc. Kool manufactures and sells te sel ehscomine the final temperature control in héating, ventilating and air conditioning systems) - Rho offers, ‘fos of charge, to consulting engineer Omega, 2 computerized design developed by Kool Ine. for complete sir ‘ributian systems. The computer printout specifies not only terminal units but also duct size, duct fittings, sir Guantses, atc pressure, nose level, sound abscrption and insulation requirements, This output inforrtion ‘ased on data which is input by Engincer Omega. units (devices > Isitethical for Engineer Omega to utilize the services provided by Kool Ine. without his independent analy of the data furnished and consideration of alternatives ? + sit ethical for Engineer Rho to offer these services to Engineer Omegi / ETHICS QUESTION § Procerp, a well known and respected development company, was awarded the contract to develop a site for Speomung intemational symposium, It is expected that thousands of delegates will be tending from many diferent countries. Procorp is responsible for renovating some existing facilities end building adéitional facilities se cecommodate the symposium members, Your firm has been retained by Procorp to design # pedestrian bridge thet will permit access to the facilities fiom the local transportation network ee. ‘ou have been working with the firm for three years and you were recently’ icensed as a professional en your bose, aso a professional engineer, hes asked you to design the structural components for the pesestri “You complete the design, including a construction cost and time estimate, and present it to Procomp for jproval prior fo obtaining approval from the City building department fier reviewing, Procorp requests « design change on the basis thatthe bridge cannot be completed in time for ‘Be csrapostum and the estimated cost is 30% greater than their allocated budget, Procomp says they have received approval fom the regulatory Ministry 10 reduce the design standards for the bridge for this special occasion and "you to redesign it using the reduced standards, ‘You know you won't have te time to redesign the bridge. You discuss this matter with your boss. Your boss ells ‘you the firm designed a similar bridge fora private client last year. This bridge was designed using lowes design 2etards cince it was not a public bridge, With only some minor modifications to its design it should mect Procorp’s budget and time constraints > Are there any restrictions that might prevent you from using the previous design? + What other issues should you address before proceeding? 38. Me Me he he He Me Me Gee EMG AY a mB Me Ge Me Ne Beeahs. kas LARVRRELERERERLEROREL EGBG DO Rehab abel 8.2 PART B—Law Examination Questions ~~ PROFESSIONAL PRACTICE EXAMINATION — September 12, 1998 PART "B" - Engineering Law and Professional Liability FOUR QUESTIONS constitute a complete Part "B". All four questions are of equal value. Question 1 is mpalsory. Four other questions are offered, and 3 of these must be selected for a complete paper. When answers for more than three optiowal questions are submitted (in acdition to Question 1) without stating which aro to be considered, marks will be awarded only for Question | and the first 3 answers in the answer book. LAW QUESTION 1. ‘define and explain any five of the following: (8) Liquidated damages yoke {(b) Statutory holdback {c) Gratuitous Promise (2) Vicarious Liability (©) Fraudulent Misrepresentation () Common Law: (g) Slander (h) Five examples of prohibited conduct in the workplace under the ‘Ontario Human Rights Code ecific Performance LAW QUESTION 2, ration technology firm assigned to one of is junior employee engineers the task of developing speci software for application on major bridge designs. The employee engineer had recently become & pro! sional eer and was chosen for the task hecatse of the engineer's background in both tae comsttuction and the ware engineering” industries. ‘The resutting bridge software package was purchasec end used by a structural ongineoring design firm on a mejor bridge design project on which it had been engaged by comtract with a municipal government. Unfortunately, the bridge collapsed in less than one year after completion of construction, Motorists were killed and injured he resulting investigation into the cause of the collapse concluded that the design of the bridge was de! ‘hat the software implemented as part of the design did not adéress all ofthe parameters involved in th is particular bridge design. The’ investigators concluded that although the design software would suffice for of certain types of structures it was not appropriate inthe circumstances of the particular subsurface conditions and length of span required for this particular agplication. The investigetors' report also indicated that the design software package was not sufficiently explicit in waming users of the software of the scope of the design parameters addressed by the software. The investigators’ report also stated that even an experienced user of the software might reasonably assume that the software would be appropriate for application on this particular project, and that too litle attention had been paid to ensuring that adequate warnings had been provided to software users of the limitations on the application of the software, | abilities in tore law arise inthis case? In your answer, explain what principles of tort law are. jevant and how each applies to the case. atc a likely outcome to the matter LAW QUESTION 3. 4 $30,000,000 contract for the design, supply and installation of a co-generation facility was entered into between, a pulp and paper company ("Pulpco") até an industrial contractor, The co-generation facility, the major components of which included a gas turbine, 2 heat recovery steam generator and 2 steam turbine, w! and constructed to simultaneously generate both electricity and steam for use by Pulpco in its operation:1 provided that the electrical pawer generated by the co-generation facility was not 10 be less than A liquidated damages provision was included in the contractor to Pulpco for each megawatt of electrical power generated less than the minimum specified inder the o contract, including any failure by the contractor to meet the required heat rates or.t9 achieve completion of the provisions specified additional liquidated damages at prescribed rates relating to other matte facility for commercial use by a stipulated date. However, the contract also included a "maximum hbility” provision that limited t0 $5,000,000 the contracior’s liability forall liguidated dameges due to failure to achiewe (@ the specified electrical power outpu, Gi) the guaranteed heat rate and {iii} the specified completion date tract clearly provided that under no circumstances was the contractor to be liable for any other dem beyond the overall total of $5,000,000 for liquidated damages. Pulpzo’s sole and exclusive remedy for damages under the contract was strictly limited to the total liquidated damages, up to the maximum of $5,000,000. The contract specified that Pulpco was not entitled to make any other claim for damages, whether on account of any direct, indirect, special or consequential damages, howsoever caused. fortunately the contractor's instalation fell far shortof the electrical power generation specifications (achieving [ese than 25% of the specified megawatts) and the heat rate specifications provided in the contract. The contracior jd $27,000,000 before the problems were identified on startup and testing, Because of its very poor od to meet the completion date by a very substenti ng th ontractor’s overall liability for all liquidated damages unde ipoo had to make arrangements throu; 510 be ordered and installed ir order to enable the co-gene sions, with the result thet the totel cost of the replacement equipm \00 beyond the original contract price of $30,000,000. performance, the contractor also fa ‘quidated damages provisions, t (000,000. Ultimately Pi tract ent P e technical additional > Explain and discuss what claim Pulpco could make against the contractor in the circumstances. In clude e brie LAW QUESTION 4. - Answer all of the following questions _Aa) (§ marks) Some construction contracts contain a provision that failure of the contractor to complet by e specific date will result in the contractor being required to make a specified payment to the day, week or month that completion of construction is delayed > Is such a penalty provision always enforceable? Discuss. he work (b) (12 marks) A contractor, in designing and constructing a shopping centre in 1983, negligently designed end installed certain ceiling anchors. The shopping centre was sold to a new owner in 1996, The inadequacy of the ceiling anchors was not detected until September of 197 when the new owner undertook significant renovations § discovered that new ceiling anchors and new ceilings had to be insta > Isthe new owner entitled to recover any damages from the contractor? I periods during which engineers and contcactors can be sued in tort » Explain what the limitation period would be if there was privity of contract between the o contractor, imitation per and the (©) (8 marks) A professional engineer entered into a written employment contract with @ Toronto civil-engineering design firm, The engineer's contract of employment stated that, for period of five years after the termination of employment, the engineer would not practise professional engineering either alone, or in ,junction with, oras an employee, agent, principal, or shareholder of an engineering firm anywhere within the City of Toronto. 40-p & ? B @ & 6 ® & & & & & & @ & @ S & & e& & e ® During the engineer's employment with the design firm, the engineer dealt directly with many of the firm's clien's The engineer became extremely skilled in preparing cost estimates, and established @ good personal rep City of Toronto, withi the engineer terminated the employment contract with the consulting firm after three years, and immediat :eering firm in another part of the City of Toronto. The engineer's previous employers then commenced feourt action for en injunction, claiming that the engineer had breached the employment contract and should no be permitted to practise within the City limits. > Do you think the engineer's former employers should succeed in an action against the engineer? In answer state the principles a court would apply in arciving at a decision, LAW QUESTION 5, Arbour Pulp & Paper Company (ARBOUR’ entered into a written equipment supply contract with Recovary Exchangers and Turbines Inc. (/RECOVERY"). According to the agreement, RECOVERY was to desig: ee ufmetuce and deliver a heat recovery steam generator t0 ARBOUR 's pulp and paper mill in Ontario ‘hase price of $3.5 milion. ARBOUR would arrange to instal the equipment in its mith as part o! stem for the purpose of converting steam into electricity accord deliver svoutd pay the $3.5 million purchase price xj the following provision the agreement, RECOVERY was to begin manufacturing the equipment on February 1, 1992 an: inished product to ARBOUR on or before March 30, 1993, The agreement provided that ARBOUR monthly instalments over the manufacturing period. The a calment of the purchase 0 te for which the instalm RBOUR fails to pay any instalment within 10 days ‘kunde: ent is to be mad ed, RECOVERY invoiced ARBOUR foreach monthly instalment, Although ARBOUR peid ent on time, it was more than 20 days late in paying each of the second, third, fourth, fifth and ain RECOVERY never once complained about the late payments, even when ARBOUR zed forthe delayed payments and commented in meetings with RECOVERY that ARBOUR's current cash resulting from the impact of y times, were the reasons for the l: si By the middle of September 1992, it became apparent t9 RECOVERY that due to serious cost overrun: sn its own design errors and lack of productivity it would stand to lose a substantial amount of mer contract by the time the equipment would be completed. Although the instalment for August had been invaiced was due on August 31, 1992, ARBOUR hed not yet paid it by Septeraber 15, 1992. Or COVERY terrainated the contract. > Was RECOVERY entitled to terminate the contract? Explain RS Solutions to Ethics Questions ANSWER TO ETHICS QUESTION 1: (A) See p. 165 in the Ethies text or Regulation 941 ) The PEO logo is acceptable on a consulting firm's letterhead, but only to denote that the ft to practise, engineering (that is, the firm maintains a Certificate of Authorization). permissible to use your engineering seal on anything except a document (drawing, report, which you have personally prepared. § slogan such as “lowest price in the business” is clear mpetence is the major factor in selecting a consult 1c. 75 for restrictions on advertising and use of the seal ticensed ion, ete. since iti nappropriat8 ‘obtain a licens See the Ethies text (p. 35) or Licensing of Corporations or (p. 89) oa Licensing for Private ., comporation must identify the P.Eng. whe is personally responsible for ensuring engineering quality ané competence. Ifthe engineer is fired or resigns, another P.Eng must be designatec by the corporation TE the Au «cy thep: to serves @) Re ) ‘sno suitable P Eng to assume the responsibility then the corporation must surrender the Cerificate of horization and therefore can no longer provide engineering services to the public. The principal objective of PEO, as stated in the Professional Engineers Act (Section 2(3)), is to “regulate tive of professional engineering and to govern its members... inaccordance with this Act, the regulations and protected,” ¥ doubt that much further discussion ‘by-iaws in order thatthe public interest may be se ‘required, although ic might be appropriate to emphasise that the PEO was not set up to serve jls members, But + protect the people of Ontario, Many members of the general public are not aware of this key fect See p. 34 of the Ethios text, Section 18 of the Professional Engineers Act and Sections 42 to 46 of lation 941. The difference between a licence, 2 temperary licence end « limited licens hows: Licensing end “registration” have the same meaning. According to the Act (Section 1), licence permits the member or “licences” to practise professional engineering in Ontario, ‘A temporary lieence is ewarded to foreign (or out-of province) engineers for specific proje: foreign engineer must collaborate with an Ontario engineer to practise on the project; but an ou-of province engineer, if fully licensed in a province which requires qualifications equal to Ontario may be permitted to practise on the project alone. ‘A limited licence is rarely issued, but itis altowed by Sections 45 and 46 of the Act, It permits a senior st (minimum 13 years experience) 10 provide specifically-defined engineering services to @ Jiy-defined employer. If the technologist leaves the employer, the limited licence must be turned 10 PEO. A Ethics text (p. 92) of Regulation 941, Section 56, The designation of “Consulting Engineer” is awartied to 2 licensed P.Eng. provided that the P.Eng. @ in the independent practice of engineering, Gi} has 5 of more years of satisfactory experience, ii) has passed exams (or been exempted) as designated by Council ‘ANSWER TO ETHICS QUESTION 2: is que: is very similar to Case Study 7.6 in the Ethics text (see p. 142). ANSWER TO ETHICS QUESTION 3: Th ‘uestion is somewhat obscure. The question asks about “professional requirements” and from the viewpoint of PEO, the most obvious requirement is a licence, if the business is practising engineering. Since the Professional question asks f¢ the Since Engineer Psi will be practising engineeri Engineers Act specifically includes “any act of designing” then it appears fairly certain that the new npany will be practising engineering, so the individuals end the company must be livensed. However, the 4 discussion telated to the Code of Ethics and Professional Misconduct, which would apply to after licensing. I suggest the following P.Eng. on in Ontario, presumably within month (as stated ia the {question) then an Ontario licence is required. Engineer Psi cannot practise in Ontario usinge lieence from another province, To become licensed in Ontario, Engineer Psi must make aa application to PEC Supporting decunsentation. In view of Engineer Psi's experience and (presumed) previous F and provide the sgistrations in BC and Manitoba, then licensing in Ontario should be ¢ routine matter. However, PEO may require a few weeks or months to process the application, so the applicat Jhould be made as soan as possible, and the start-up should ype planned to occur after the licence has been granted, (Note that itis not possible, at prosent, to “transfes” a pro In addition, ¢ corporation (or parinership) whi cence, but ao enginger practising in one proviuce will usually be granted a lice ckly in any other equ wince.) hh provides engineering services to the public in Onterio mmusthave HOM MRAHKBHESASESSEETEEEEEEEDRERIETEECTESEELS4 KRASALARARRSALLS ization, This form of Certificate is not requiced in BC joba, so Engineer Psi may t. To obiain Certificate of Authorization, the company must designate e P-Eng, upervising the engineering activities ofthe company. Inaddition, the partnership. (unless the exemption under Regulation 94] Section 741s to beused). a mo, and the C of A application cannot begin until Engi so Engineer Psi obviously must begin the application process as soon as possible. , Providing that the above licensin by the previous employer, then th requitemenis are met, and there is no abuse of proprietary information owned should be n0 concerns involving Code of Ethics or Professional Misconduct, ANSWER TO ETHICS QUES This question involves the unauthorized use of a computer program by Engineer Rho, who works for Kool Inc. Engineer Rho has been accepting input tiom Engineer Omega, running it through the program without the knowledge of the employer, and then turning the output over to Engineer Or Even though there is no yyment of other reward for offering this service, both Rho and Omega are engaged in blatantly ices, (A similar, but not identical, case is discussed in the Ethies text in Case Study 7.3, p.138.) unethical practic znocr Rho, by providing the unauthorized use of the employer's computer program is contravening the Co: of Ethics (Regulation 941, Sections 77(1) and 77(3)) concerning the duty of the engineer to his/her employer More importantly, Engineer Omega presumably is unable to carry out independent calculations to validate or check the results of the Kool program. Therefore the computer output may be grossly inaccurate and Engineer would unable t check and devest this inaccuracy. This failure to maintain adequate standa validation would be considered to be neglizence under Regulation 941, Section 72(1), Also, see the Ethics text Liability for errors in computer programs” (p. 148). If Kool Inc. becomes aware of the arrangement, both Rho and Omega could be subjected to professional discipline under the Act. inaddition, ifan incorrect ages. jd cause a fi wgineers may be liable for d: sancial loss for one of Oraega's clients, the VASSWER TO ETHICS QUESTION It is not unethical to use 2 previous design as the basis for a new structure. In fact, experience shov prove as they are re-worked. However, there are some restrictions that apply The company must own the previous design., This is typically true if the design were done by an ious agreement specifically stated that the design was to belong to eA 3 of negligence ifthe he bridge ci) at the “Ministry has reduced the design standards” must be substantiated i vverbul assurance will leave the engineer totally defenceless against chi shotld ever fail at any time in its expected lifespan: (iii) The design calculations (specifically those for strength) must be carried out again, at least to the extent chat the previous calculations are independently verified, ts not suffictent to avcept the work of aa earlier engineer for a second application, since there my be hidden reasons why the design may be unsuitable for the second application. By approving the design for 2 second installation, the second engineer accepts full responsibility for the design. Flaws or errors in the design, even if they can be traced to the work of the first engineer, are nevertheless the responsibility of the second engineer. A thorough analysis must be done. There must be no reduction of your fee if you agree to use the prior design, since you are accepting as much responsibility (perhaps more) by agreeing to use 2 previous design rather than carrying out the design completely. HINT: You might want to review pages 167 to 175 in the Ethics text which deal with design issues such as the al, “checking” engineering work, design calculations and reviewing the work of another coblems occur frequently in engineering practice and are therefore frequently the subject of