MANUEL S.

ENVERGA UNIVERSITY
FOUNDATION
COLLEGE OF ENGINEERING
MECHANICAL ENGINEERING
2nd SEMESTER S.Y. 2023 – 2024

ME Laws, Ethics, Contracts, Code & Std

(Practical Exercise #1B)

CASE Study Analysis

SUBMITTED BY:
Kevin Cleo R. de la Vega
DATE OF SUBMISSION:
February 24, 2024
DATE OF SUBMITTED:
February 7, 2024
SUBMITTED TO:
Engr. Guillermo Rago
Instructions:
CASE STUDY ANALYSIS
•Prepare an analysis of the case given below.
•Follow the format in analyzing the case.
CASE
•Engineer Joaquin Aragon is the chief engineer in a large engineering firm and affixes his seal to
some of the plans not prepared by registered engineers working under his general direction who
do not affix their seals to the plans. At times Engineer Joaquin Aragon also seals plans prepared
by a non-registered, graduate engineer working under his general supervision.
• Because the size of the organization and the large number of projects being designed at any
one time, Engineer Joaquin Aragon finds it impossible to give a detailed review or check of the
designed. He believes he is ethically and legally correct in not doing so because of his
confidence in the ability of those he has hired and who are working under his general direction
and supervision.
• By general direction and supervision, Engineer Joaquin Aragon means that he is involved in
helping to establish the concept, the design requirements, and review elements of the design or
projects status as a design progresses. Engineer Joaquin Aragon is consulted about technical
question and answers and direction in these matters.
Analysis:
The case presented involves Engineer Joaquin Aragon, who is the chief engineer at a large
engineering firm.

1. Engineer Joaquin Aragon affixes his seal to plans not prepared by him but by
registered engineers and non-registered graduate engineers working under his general
supervision.

2. Due to the organization’s size and the volume of projects, it is impractical for Aragon
to review each design in detail.

3. Aragon justifies his actions by his confidence in the abilities of his team and the level
of general supervision he provides, which includes establishing concepts, design
requirements, and occasional consultations on technical matters.

The ethical and legal aspects of this case revolve around the practice of sealing engineering
plans. In many jurisdictions, the seal represents a professional engineer’s endorsement that the
plans meet applicable standards and regulations. The act of sealing documents not directly
prepared or thoroughly reviewed by the engineer who is sealing them can raise significant ethical
and legal questions. The primary concerns include:

• Responsibility and Accountability: By sealing the plans, Engineer Aragon assumes

responsibility and liability for their adequacy and compliance with relevant standards.
Without a detailed review, there is a risk that errors or inadequacies in the plans could go
unnoticed.
• Professional Standards and Regulations: Professional engineering bodies and
regulations often stipulate that engineers should only seal documents they have either
prepared themselves or have reviewed in detail. The practice described may conflict with
these standards.
• Public Safety: Engineering work has implications for public safety. Ensuring that
designs are adequately reviewed by a qualified professional is crucial to preventing
failures that could result in harm.

While Aragon’s confidence in his team’s abilities and his system of general supervision may
be well-intentioned, they do not absolve him of the ethical and legal responsibilities
associated with affixing his seal to engineering plans. To ensure compliance with
professional standards, legal regulations, and safeguard public safety, Aragon should
implement measures to ensure thorough review and verification of all sealed documents,
even in the face of organizational constraints.