Original question written by FE Exam AI Prep from the public FE Civil exam specification. Before release, a solver model re-derived the answer twice from the question alone, without its answer key, and a critic model checked the result. No licensed engineer reviews these questions. It is not an NCEES question and does not come from any NCEES practice exam. FE Exam AI Prep is an independent study tool and is not affiliated with, endorsed by, or sponsored by NCEES.
Professional Ethics and Public Welfare: FE Civil practice problem 4
For the Oak Point bridge widening, a civil analyst preparing an asset management screening finds that a report table accidentally excludes failed quality-control tests. Which action is most consistent with ethical practice?
- ARemove the source files after issuing the report to avoid confusion.
- BCorrect the report and disclose the basis for the revised quality-control summary.
- CReport only passing tests because failed tests were later replaced.
- DAverage the failed tests with unrelated lots to reduce their impact.
Show the answer and worked solution
Answer: B — Correct the report and disclose the basis for the revised quality-control summary.
Worked solution
- Step 1. Identify the professional obligation
Public welfare, competence, honesty, and conflict disclosure control the decision.
- Step 2. Select the defensible action
The correct response preserves transparent review and avoids misleading reliance.
Why the other choices are wrong
- Choice A
- Deleting the underlying test files erases the record an independent reviewer needs to verify what actually happened, and destroying source documentation after a report ships conceals the very quality-control error that still needs correcting.
- Choice C
- Reporting only the passing results and quietly dropping the failed lots because later retests replaced them treats the original failure as though it never occurred, misrepresenting the documented quality-control history to anyone who relies on the report.
- Choice D
- Blending the failed results into unrelated lots so the failure disappears into a broader average manipulates how the data is presented instead of reporting each lot's actual outcome, hiding a real deficiency behind a diluted statistic.