Practice Problems: Code of Conduct
Question 1
A licensed civil engineer is approached by a commercial developer to design a shopping mall foundation. The engineer has primarily worked on residential projects and has limited experience with large commercial structures. The developer offers a lucrative contract and emphasizes the tight timeline. What should the engineer do?
(a) Accept the project and hire consultants to assist with unfamiliar aspects
(b) Accept the project to gain experience in commercial design
(c) Decline the project because it is outside their area of competence
(d) Accept the project and use online resources to learn commercial foundation design
Question 2
A structural engineer discovers that a contractor has substituted lower-grade steel (Grade 36) instead of the specified Grade 50 steel in critical structural members of a bridge project. The contractor claims the substitution saves $50,000 and argues that "it's close enough." The engineer is concerned about structural integrity but the contractor threatens to report the engineer for project delays. What is the engineer's primary obligation?
(a) Accept the substitution to avoid conflict and project delays
(b) Report the deviation to the appropriate authorities and require correction
(c) Calculate if Grade 36 steel provides adequate safety factor before deciding
(d) Negotiate a compromise using Grade 40 steel instead
Question 3
An electrical engineer working for Company A is offered a position at Company B, a competitor. Before leaving Company A, the engineer copies proprietary circuit designs and client lists to use at the new job. The engineer reasons that they personally developed these designs. Which ethical principle is violated?
(a) Confidentiality and protection of employer's proprietary information
(b) Honesty in representing qualifications
(c) Holding paramount the public safety
(d) Avoiding conflicts of interest
Question 4
A mechanical engineer is asked by their supervisor to approve a pressure vessel design that meets minimum code requirements but has a safety factor of only 1.2 instead of the company's internal standard of 2.0. The supervisor argues that the lower safety factor is "legally acceptable" and will save the company $30,000. The vessel will operate in a facility adjacent to a residential area. What should the engineer do?
(a) Approve the design since it meets minimum legal code requirements
(b) Refuse to approve and insist on meeting the company's internal safety standard
(c) Approve with a written disclaimer about the reduced safety factor
(d) Request the supervisor to take full responsibility in writing
Question 5
A professional engineer is serving on a city planning commission reviewing a proposed development. The engineer owns property located 2 miles from the proposed development site, which would likely increase in value by approximately $75,000 if the development is approved. The engineer believes the development is technically sound and beneficial to the community. What action should the engineer take?
(a) Participate in the review since the property is 2 miles away and the conflict is minimal
(b) Disclose the potential financial interest and recuse themselves from the decision
(c) Participate but vote against the development to avoid appearance of conflict
(d) Sell the property before the commission votes on the development
Question 6
An environmental engineer discovers that a wastewater treatment plant they designed 5 years ago is now discharging effluent with pollutant levels exceeding newly enacted regulatory limits by 15%. The plant owner asks the engineer to sign a compliance report stating the plant meets all applicable standards. The owner argues the plant met standards when designed and retrofit costs would exceed $2 million. What should the engineer do?
(a) Sign the report since the plant met standards when originally designed
(b) Refuse to sign and recommend immediate upgrades to meet current standards
(c) Sign the report with a footnote explaining the design vintage
(d) Suggest the owner seek another engineer's opinion
Question 7
A civil engineer is invited to serve as an expert witness in litigation involving a bridge collapse. After reviewing the case materials, the engineer concludes that the design was deficient and contributed to the failure. The attorney who hired the engineer asks them to provide testimony emphasizing only the contractor's construction errors and to minimize discussion of design deficiencies. The attorney offers a $25,000 bonus for favorable testimony. What should the engineer do?
(a) Accept the bonus and testify as requested since attorneys direct expert testimony
(b) Provide objective testimony based on technical facts regardless of which party it favors
(c) Withdraw from the case and return all fees received
(d) Testify only about construction errors and refuse to discuss design issues
Question 8
A software engineer discovers a critical security vulnerability in an industrial control system they helped develop for a power plant. The vulnerability could allow unauthorized access to plant operations. The engineer's employer decides not to issue a patch immediately, citing concerns about system disruption and planning to address it in the next scheduled update in 6 months. What should the engineer do?
(a) Accept the employer's decision since they have business judgment authority
(b) Immediately inform relevant authorities and the plant operator of the vulnerability
(c) Develop an unofficial patch and provide it to the plant operator privately
(d) Document the concern in writing to the employer and take no further action
Question 9
A licensed professional engineer is asked to seal drawings prepared by an unlicensed designer working in their office. The PE has not personally reviewed the calculations or design details but trusts the designer's competence based on 10 years of working together. The PE's standard practice is to spot-check approximately 20% of such work. The project is a routine commercial building similar to many previous projects. What should the PE do?
(a) Seal the drawings based on the designer's proven track record
(b) Perform the standard 20% spot-check before sealing
(c) Thoroughly review all calculations and design details before sealing
(d) Seal the drawings but add a disclaimer limiting responsibility
Question 10
A chemical engineer is designing a process that generates hazardous waste. Technology A costs $500,000 and generates 1,000 kg/year of hazardous waste requiring disposal. Technology B costs $800,000 and generates only 200 kg/year of hazardous waste. Both technologies meet all regulatory requirements for the production process and waste disposal. The client insists on Technology A to minimize capital costs. What should the engineer recommend?
(a) Technology A since it meets regulations and respects client's budget constraints
(b) Technology B as it better serves environmental protection and sustainability principles
(c) Technology A with enhanced waste treatment to reduce disposal volumes
(d) Technology A since economic decisions are the client's prerogative, not the engineer's
Question 11
An engineer is asked to provide a cost estimate for a water treatment facility upgrade. Based on preliminary analysis, the engineer estimates the cost at $3.5 million. The city council has budgeted only $2.5 million and asks the engineer to revise the estimate downward to secure project approval, promising that additional funds will be found during construction. The engineer is concerned that the lower estimate is not technically supportable. What should the engineer do?
(a) Provide the $2.5 million estimate with assumptions explaining the reduced scope
(b) Maintain the $3.5 million estimate based on technical analysis
(c) Provide a $2.8 million estimate as a compromise
(d) Provide the $2.5 million estimate since the council promises additional funding
Question 12
A consulting engineer completes a traffic study for a city showing that a proposed bypass highway would reduce downtown traffic congestion by 35%. A citizens' group opposed to the highway offers the engineer $15,000 to provide testimony questioning the study's methodology and conclusions. The engineer believes the original study was technically sound and properly conducted. What should the engineer do?
(a) Accept the engagement and identify any legitimate methodological concerns
(b) Decline the engagement as it conflicts with their professional opinion
(c) Accept but only if allowed to present objective technical analysis
(d) Decline initially but suggest another engineer who might be more supportive
Question 13
A professional engineer discovers that a colleague has been claiming credit for a technical paper that was actually written by a graduate student. The colleague is using this publication to enhance their reputation for a promotion to senior engineer. The graduate student is unaware of the misappropriation. What should the engineer do?
(a) Inform the graduate student and let them decide how to proceed
(b) Report the plagiarism to the appropriate authority within the organization
(c) Confront the colleague privately and demand they correct the attribution
(d) Ignore the situation as it does not directly affect public safety
Question 14
An engineer is designing a stormwater management system for a residential development. During site investigation, the engineer discovers that constructing the system as proposed would destroy a small wetland area (0.3 acres) that provides habitat for a locally rare species. The destruction is legal under current permits, and relocating the system would add $125,000 to project costs. What should the engineer do?
(a) Proceed with the original design since it is legally permitted
(b) Inform the client of the environmental impact and present alternative designs
(c) Report the rare species to environmental authorities before proceeding
(d) Proceed with the original design but recommend mitigation plantings elsewhere
Question 15
A structural engineer is reviewing shop drawings for a building project and notices that the steel fabricator has made minor modifications to connection details that differ from the engineer's design. The modifications appear to be constructible and may even be slightly stronger than the original design, but the engineer has not verified this through calculations. The fabricator requests approval to proceed to meet the construction schedule. What should the engineer do?
(a) Approve the modifications since they appear adequate and avoid delays
(b) Reject the modifications and require fabrication per original design
(c) Review and analyze the modifications before approving or rejecting
(d) Approve with a note that the fabricator assumes responsibility for the changes
Question 16
An engineer working for a manufacturer is asked to certify that a product complies with industry safety standards. The engineer's testing shows the product fails one minor test requirement by a small margin (8% below the required threshold), but passes all other requirements with substantial margins. The marketing department argues the failure is insignificant and certification should be granted to avoid losing a major contract worth $5 million. What should the engineer do?
(a) Certify the product since it substantially complies with most requirements
(b) Refuse certification until the product fully meets all requirements
(c) Certify with a notation explaining the minor deviation
(d) Recommend the client seek certification from a different testing authority
Question 17
A consulting engineer is engaged by a municipality to evaluate bids for a wastewater treatment plant. One bidder is a firm where the engineer's spouse works as a project manager, though not on this particular project. The engineer believes they can be objective, and the spouse's firm submitted the most competitive bid. What should the engineer do?
(a) Proceed with the evaluation since the spouse is not directly involved
(b) Disclose the relationship to the municipality and offer to withdraw
(c) Recuse only from evaluating the spouse's firm and evaluate other bids
(d) Proceed but have another engineer verify the evaluation results
Question 18
An engineer receives a request from a prospective client to prepare a feasibility study for a commercial development. During initial discussions, the engineer realizes the project is located on a site where they previously performed environmental consulting and knows about undisclosed soil contamination issues. The previous client has not authorized release of that information, which is confidential. What should the engineer do?
(a) Accept the new project and use the knowledge to provide better service
(b) Decline the project without explaining the reason to protect confidentiality
(c) Accept the project but recommend environmental testing without mentioning prior knowledge
(d) Inform the new client about the contamination since it affects public safety
Question 19
A licensed professional engineer is contacted by a former classmate who needs PE sealed drawings for a small residential addition but wants to avoid hiring a full engineering service to save money. The classmate offers to pay the PE $500 just to review and seal drawings prepared by an unlicensed designer. The PE has not seen the drawings or project details. What should the PE do?
(a) Accept if the fee is increased to compensate for liability exposure
(b) Decline because sealing work not under the PE's responsible charge is prohibited
(c) Accept but thoroughly review the drawings before sealing
(d) Accept if the unlicensed designer has good references and experience
Question 20
An engineer is asked to serve on a technical review board evaluating proposals for a major infrastructure project. One of the proposing firms has offered the engineer a consulting position starting after the current project selection is complete, with an annual retainer of $40,000. The engineer has not yet accepted or declined the offer. What should the engineer do regarding the review board service?
(a) Continue serving since no employment relationship currently exists
(b) Disclose the job offer to the review board and withdraw from service
(c) Continue serving but recuse from evaluating only that firm's proposal
(d) Decline the job offer to avoid any appearance of conflict
