A client retains an architecture and engineering firm to design and supervise construction of a church building that features a geodesic dome structure. While the project is under construction, a dispute between the client and the firm arises over payment of the latter’s fees. When the parties are unable to reach a prompt resolution, the firm resigns from the project, and its principal informs the county building department that the firm is no longer associated with the church project. The building department, in turn, revokes the client’s construction permit and advises the client that the project cannot continue without an architect or engineer overseeing the project.

Eager to avoid further delays, the client contacts another design professional-a civil engineer and ASCE member. The client assures the engineer that its contract dispute with the architecture and engineering firm is close to a resolution but explains that it has no desire to work with that firm in the future and thus is looking to retain another engineer to see the construction through to completion. The engineer agrees to take the job and discusses the project with the county building department
The engineer advises the department that even though he was not responsible for the original design, he is willing to supervise the project and ensure that it is built according to the previously approved plans. The department points out that because the previous permit had been revoked the owner will have to submit a new permit application, along with signed and sealed plans. The engineer removes the seal and title block from the original plans, replaces them with his own signature and stamp, and submits them with the new permit application. However, he includes a written statement that he takes no credit or responsibility for the plans and is signing them “only to affirm that he will oversee construction
The permit is approved and construction resumes, but a member of the architecture and engineering firm learns of the engineer’s actions and reports the engineer to the state licensing board. The board files an administrative complaint against the engineer for violating state laws regarding the proper use of the P.E. seal. It offers the engineer an opportunity to settle the complaint and waive his right to a formal hearing, and the engineer accepts. As a result of the settlement, he is ordered to pay a $1,500 fine, but no further action is taken against his license. Notice of the disciplinary action appears in the state board’s quarterly newsletter, and an ASCE member forwards a copy of the notice to ASCE’s Committee on Professional Conduct (CPC).
Did the member’s actions in signing and sealing the plans violate ASCE’s Code of Ethics? Fully explain your answer. If you answer “yes”, state which ASCE Code of Ethics was violated. If you answer “no”, state your reasons for your response.

Save your time - order a paper!

Get your paper written from scratch within the tight deadline. Our service is a reliable solution to all your troubles. Place an order on any task and we will take care of it. You won’t have to worry about the quality and deadlines

Order Paper Now


"Looking for a Similar Assignment? Get Expert Help at an Amazing Discount!"