EGR/BUS 445, Section 01

Exam 1: Winter Quarter 2010

Instructions
Administration
This is a take home exam. It is due at 4:00 p.m. Monday, February 9, 2009 in our classroom.
There is no limit to the amount of time you may spend on this exam so long as it is submitted on
time.

Collaboration policy
This exam is an individual effort exercise. You may not collaborate with or receive assistance
from any person in preparing your answers to this exam. There is one exception to this policy;
you may consult with the University Writing Center to aid you in the written presentation of your
answers. If you do consult the Writing Center, you must document who helped you and the
nature of the help received.

Submittal requirement
This exam consists of 2 parts. All answers must be double spaced using Times New Roman font
at 12 points, and 1” margins on all sides. Page lengths are specified on each question.
You will submit the completed exam in two separate packages, one for each part. Each package
will be complete, have page numbers, be stapled, and have your name on each page. Your
response to each part must be submitted as a separate package.

EGR/BUS 445-01 Exam #1 1 Winter Qtr 2010

Fehlman/Kitch
Part I: Standard of Care & Liability (100 points)
1. Answer the following questions assuming you are a licensed civil engineer based in Los
Angeles, California. Each answer should take only a few sentences. (5 points each)
a. Define the professional standard of care you must follow
b. You are asked to provide design services for a new bridge over the Los Angeles
River using new lightweight composite materials that have not previously been
used in bridge construction. Define what criteria you would use to establish the
proper professional standard of care;
c. You are asked to design a conventional arch-type bridge over the River Kwai in
Thailand. Assuming Thailand has laws similar to the U.S., define the specific
standard of care you must follow; and
d. You are hired to design a freeway overpass to accommodate traffic at 55 miles per
hour. During the first month of operation, four cars with bald tires traveling at 60
miles per hour have spun off the overpass killing all occupants. Discuss Actual
and Proximate Cause as it relates to professional negligence against you the
engineer.

Use the following scenario to answer question 2 below.

Cyrus (Cy) Anora, a professional civil engineer, prepares a traditional tilt-up design for
prefabricated industrial buildings for his client, Engulf & Devour Corporation. E & D plans on
erecting the same building in light industrial parks all over the country. E & D requests that
Anora make changes in the initial design to reduce the amount of steel framing, rebar, and
concrete by shifting to a superior grade of concrete and using a lighter and narrower steel frame.
E & D anticipates that concrete and steel will become more and more expensive and that there
will be future shortages because the Chinese and the Indians will keep buying more and more.
Anora makes the requested changes, but then informs E & D that although the changes will
clearly work, it “might be a good idea” to subject the new design to destructive vibration testing
of several tenth-scaled models; Anora tells E & D about a theoretical increased the risk of
harmonic instability under highly unusual circumstances possibly leading to an increased risk of
collapse in a moderate earthquake. E & D’s engineers review and approve the new design; they
agree that scaled model testing is always a “good idea,” but is not necessary, and E & D rejects
the idea to save both time and money.
Three years later, in an industrial building built with the new design, a forklift operator, Ure
Toast, mistakenly shifts into reverse and slams his forklift backwards into one of the walls,
taking a small chunk out of the concrete base and punching a hole in the wall. An eerie vibrating
sound is heard and then the wall collapses on Toast and brings down the whole building. Toast
is killed and several other people are seriously injured. Toast’s estate sues E & D and Anora for
professional negligence.
At trial, Toast’s lawyer introduces the testimony of an expert civil engineer who states that any
competent civil engineer should have known that the new plans and specifications should have
been subjected to detailed destructive testing and that E & D’s engineers should have done more
than merely reviewed Anora’s work, but rather have independently done the strength
calculations, and therefore discovered the actual, not merely theoretical deficiencies in the

EGR/BUS 445-01 Exam #1 2 Winter Qtr 2010

Fehlman/Kitch
design. E & D defends by arguing that it was entitled to rely on Anora and that its engineering
review is limited to the overall design, not the details. Anora and E & D defend further by
claiming that the revised plans and specifications were safe and that Anora’s concern was only
theoretical and in reference to an earthquake. His expert testifies that the collapse of the building
under the actual circumstances was not foreseeable.
Apply the IRAC methodology (Issue, Rules, Analysis, Conclusion) to the issue of negligence.
Include discussion of any relevant affirmative defenses. To apply IRAC, properly, first state the
legal question. In the Rules, define professional negligence and each of its elements and relevant
defenses to it. Discuss the proof or lack thereof for each element or defense in the Analysis.
Make full use of the facts and testimony. Be sure to specifically state the standard of care you
are using as to the first element. State your Conclusion at the end and make any allocation of
comparative fault.
2. Based on the above scenario, provide a one paragraph answer to each of the following
questions. (20 points each)
a. What standard of care is applicable to each of the following persons or groups:
E&D's engineers, Anora, Toast?
b. Did E&D's engineers breach their standard of care? Why or why not? Use all
applicable facts.
c. If you find that E&D's engineers breached their standard of care, was that breach
the Actual and Proximate Cause of Toast's death? Why or why not? Use all
applicable facts.
d. State your conclusion as to whether E&D's engineers were negligent, including
your complete analysis of comparative fault assigning percentage fault to each
party that you believe is responsible for Toast's death.

EGR/BUS 445-01 Exam #1 3 Winter Qtr 2010

Fehlman/Kitch
Part II: Risk & Project Delivery (100 points)
You are an engineer employed by the City of Mountainside. The city council has asked your
department to manage renovation the Veterans’ Memorial Recreational Center (VMRC)
constructed in 1961. VMRC is a remarkable example of the local Inland Stone Craftsmen style
and is listed on the state and federal historic building registers. VMRC does not meet current
seismic standards and must be brought up to standards. In addition asbestos containing materials
were used in the original construction and must be abated or removed during the renovation.
You do not have a detailed scope of work. The city has completed the planning process,
identified the general scope of the project and developed a program cost. The scope includes:
• Seismic upgrade, program cost: $12 million
• Asbestos abatement, program cost: $3 million
• Historic façade restoration: $5-6 million depending on extent of restoration
• Expansion/upgrade of the aquatics center. $4-7 million depending on size of expansion
All of the program cost estimates are based on total design and construction costs (TDCC). The
seismic upgrades and asbestos abatement are essential to the project. The façade restoration and
aquatics center expansion are highly desired by the city but not essential; this work could be
completed later under a separate project, but that would increase costs.
The city currently has an approved bond of $17 million. The city is has also applied for an
additional $9 million of federal stimulus funds. However, to receive the stimulus funds, the city
must be ready to let a construction contract in 18 months. This is a very aggressive schedule.
Historically the city has used a traditional Design-Bid-Build project delivery method which
generally takes 2-3 years to get from the end of the planning phase to the start of construction.
Through extensive meetings with the Mountainside city council, you have established the
following goals for this project, in priority order from highest to lowest:
1. Hire qualified designers and builders who will deliver high quality work
2. Ensure critical seismic upgrades and asbestos abatement are completed
3. Get the stimulus funds
4. Complete as much of the façade restoration and aquatics center expansion as funds allow
Your meetings with the city council have narrowed the potential delivery methods to: Design-
Bid-Build, Design/Build Best Value, and Design/Build QBS. The board has asked you to bring a
final recommendation for the best delivery method to the board meeting next week.
Present your response in two sections as outlined below. Your response should be no more than
five double-spaced typed pages using 12 point Times New Roman font with 1” margins,
including all figures and tables.
Section 1: Evaluate the risks associated with achieving the project objectives using a risk
matrix. Identify at least 6 important threats, define your probability and cost scales, evaluate the
risks and list the threats in order from highest to lowest risk.
Section 2: Prepare a written analysis and recommendation for the city council. To do this you
must analyze each of the three potential delivery methods to determine how well each method
mitigates risks identified in Part A. After analyzing each delivery method, you must,
recommend a delivery method and explain why this method was chosen. You must also describe
of how you would evaluate potential bidders for your selected method.

EGR/BUS 445-01 Exam #1 4 Winter Qtr 2010

Fehlman/Kitch
Part II: Grading Rubric
The following guidelines will be used to grade question #2

Risk Assessment
• Were the identified threats specific?
• How important were the threats identified?
• Were the cost and probability scales clearly identified?
• Were the threats listed properly from highest to lowest risk?

Analysis of each delivery method

• Were the selection process and contract structure clearly identified and correct?
• Were the most important advantages and disadvantages identified?
• Was the analysis fair and accurate, biased, or inaccurate?
• How well did the analysis focus on the identified project goals?
• How well did the analysis make use of the risk assessment?

Recommended method
• Is there a clear recommendation?
• Does the recommendation flow logically from the analyses presented?
• Is the recommendation tied to the project goals and risk?
• Did the recommendation include a general description of how cost and/or quality of bids
would be evaluated?

Overall effectiveness
• Did the grammar and quality of writing enhance, not affect, or detract from the intended
message?
• Did the writer convince the reader that the recommended delivery method is the best?

EGR/BUS 445-01 Exam #1 5 Winter Qtr 2010

Fehlman/Kitch