Duty To Report Unrelated Information Observed During Rendering Of Services
Case 100
Source
Document Structure
4
Sections4/4
With Embeddings100%
Coverage384D
Dimensions
Embeddings use 384D local model for precedent matching
Document Sections
Content Length
342 chars
HTML Length
342 chars
Plain Text Length
693 chars
Embedding Dimension
384
Compatible
Created
2026-02-13 16:13
Updated
2026-02-13 16:13
Content Preview
It was ethical for Engineer A to retain the information in his engineering notes but not include it in the final written report as requested.It was ethical for Engineer A not to report this information to any other public agency or authority as long as corrective action is taken by the public agency within a relatively short period of time.
Content Length
7790 chars
HTML Length
8346 chars
Plain Text Length
7786 chars
Embedding Dimension
384
Compatible
Created
2026-02-13 16:13
Updated
2026-03-02 23:20
Content Preview
Engineers play a vital role in society in providing a higher degree of assurance that the products, systems, facilities, and structures used by the public are safe and effective. Engineers are frequently placed in situations where they must balance the extent of their obligations to their employer or client with their obligations to protect the public health and safety.
An example of this basic ethical dichotomy was considered by the NSPE Board of Ethical Review in Case No. 89-7 (which the Board also applied in Case No. 97-5). In that case, an engineer, Engineer A, was retained to investigate the structural integrity of a 60-year-old occupied apartment building, which his client was planning to sell. Under the terms of the agreement with the client, the structural report written by Engineer A was to remain confidential. In addition, the client made clear to Engineer A that the building was being sold "as is" and that the client was not planning to take any remedial action to repair or renovate any system within the building prior to its sale. Engineer A performed several structural tests on the building and determined that the building was structurally sound. However, during the course of providing services, the client confided in Engineer A and inform him that the building contained deficiencies in the electrical and mechanical systems, which violated applicable codes and standards. While Engineer A is not an electrical or mechanical engineer, he does realize those deficiencies could cause injury to the occupants of the building and so informs the client. Specifically, in his report, Engineer A made a brief mention of his conversation with the client concerning the deficiencies; however, in view of the terms of the agreement, Engineer A did not report the safety violations to any third party.
In deciding it was unethical for Engineer A not to report the safety violations to the appropriate public authorities, the Board noted that the facts presented in the case r...
Content Length
1680 chars
HTML Length
1680 chars
Plain Text Length
1682 chars
Embedding Dimension
384
Compatible
Created
2026-02-13 16:13
Updated
2026-02-13 16:13
Content Preview
A public agency retains the services of VWX Architects and Engineers to perform a major scheduled overhaul of a bridge. VWX Architects and Engineers retains the services of Engineer A, a civil engineer, as its subconsultant to perform bridge inspection services on the bridge. Engineer A’s scope of work is solely to identify any pavement damage on the bridge and report the damage to VWX for further review and repair.Three months prior to the beginning of the scheduled overhaul of the bridge, while traveling across the bridge, Police Officer B loses control of his patrol car. The vehicle crashed into the bridge wall. The wall failed to restrain the vehicle, which fell to the river below, killing Police Officer B.While conducting the bridge inspection, and although not part of the scope of services for which he was retained, Engineer A notices an apparent pre-existing defective condition in the wall close to where the accident involving Police Officer B occurred. Engineer A surmises that the defective condition may have been a contributing factor in the wall failure and notes this in his engineering notes. Engineer A verbally reports this information to his client, which then verbally reports the information to the public agency. The public agency contacts VWX Architects and Engineers which then contacts Engineer A and asks Engineer A not to include this additional information in his final report since it was not part of his scope of work. Engineer A states that he will retain the information from his engineering notes but not include it in the final report, as requested. Engineer A does not report this information to any other public agency or authority.
Content Length
234 chars
HTML Length
234 chars
Plain Text Length
477 chars
Embedding Dimension
384
Compatible
Created
2026-02-13 16:13
Updated
2026-02-13 16:13
Content Preview
Was it ethical for Engineer A to retain the information in his engineering notes but not include it in the final report as requested?Was it ethical for Engineer A not to report this information to any other public agency or authority?
Similar Cases
Find cases with similar D-tuple components, provisions, and tags.
Find Similar CasesD-tuple Component Breakdown
55
Total Entities9/9
Components Populated9/9
With EmbeddingsCombined Embedding
Roles
R
w=0.12
384D
Engineer A Inspector Engineer
Retained as subconsultant to perform bridge inspection services limited to identifying pavement damage. While...
VWX Prime Consultant Firm
Retained by the public agency for the bridge overhaul, retains Engineer A as inspection subconsultant, receives...
Police Officer B Affected Public
Three months prior to the scheduled overhaul, loses control of his patrol car while traveling across the bridge; the...
NSPE Board of Ethical Review
Adjudicates the present case by distinguishing it from BER Case No. 89-7, finding that no genuine expectation of...
4 entities
Principles
P
w=0.2
384D
Public Welfare in Bridge Defect Case
Engineer A came forward to his client with the observed defect information and documented it for possible future...
Public Welfare in Bridge Inspection
Engineer A, although the defective wall condition was not part of his retained scope of services, notices it,...
Loyalty in Report Omission Request
Engineer A agrees to the request relayed through VWX Architects and Engineers and the public agency, retaining the...
Follow Through on Corrective Action
The Board held that Engineer A must follow through to see that correct follow-up action is taken by the public...
Loyalty in Bridge Defect Case
Engineer A reported the observed defect verbally to his client, the prime consultant, which the Board recognized was...
Confidentiality Expectation in Present Case
The Board examined whether the defect information was confidential and found it was not, because it was revealed to...
Expertise-Calibrated Reporting of Defect
The Board held it may be appropriate for Engineer A to note the observation in his field notes and to report it...
7 entities
Obligations
O
w=0.15
384D
Engineer A Defect Disclosure Duty
Engineer A must disclose to his client the apparent pre-existing defective condition in the bridge wall that he...
Engineer A Client Defect Disclosure Duty
Engineer A must come forward to his client with the observed defect information and document it for possible future...
Engineer A Public Safety Duty
Engineer A must hold paramount the safety, health, and welfare of the public with respect to the apparent...
Engineer A Faithful Agent Duty
Engineer A must act as a faithful agent of his client VWX Architects and Engineers in performing the retained bridge...
Engineer A Corrective Action Follow-Through Duty
Engineer A must follow through to see that correct follow-up action is taken by the public agency, and only if the...
5 entities
States
S
w=0.1
384D
Pavement Inspection Scope Limit
Defective Bridge Wall Hazard
Unquantified Wall Defect Surmise
Client Report Omission Directive
Wall Defect Report Omission
Public Agency Defect Awareness
No Confidentiality Expectation on Wall Defect
Engineer A Structural Expertise Gap
Awaiting Public Agency Corrective Action
Prime Consultant Informed Evaluation Position
10 entities
Resources
Rs
w=0.1
384D
Engineer A Engineering Notes
engineering notes (topic: apparent pre-existing defective condition in the bridge wall)
Engineer A Final Report
final report (topic: bridge inspection findings on pavement damage)
BER Case No. 89-7
Case No. 89-7 (topic: conflict between client confidentiality and the duty to hold paramount the public health and safety)
BER Case No. 97-5
Case No. 97-5 (topic: application of the Case 89-7 reasoning on confidentiality versus public safety)
NSPE Code of Ethics
NSPE Code (topic: nondisclosure of confidential client information and the duty to hold paramount the public health...
5 entities
Actions
A
w=0.1
384D
Report Exclusion Compliance
Nonreporting to Authorities
Consultant Retention
Subconsultant Retention
Defect Documentation
Verbal Safety Reporting
Information Relay
Omission Request
8 entities
Events
E
w=0.08
384D
Vehicle Control Loss
Bridge Wall Failure
Officer Fatality
Defect Discovery
4 entities
Capabilities
Ca
w=0.07
384D
Engineer A Failure Risk Judgment
Engineer A forms the professional surmise that the defective wall condition may have been a contributing factor in...
Engineer A Corrective Action Follow-Through
The Board imposes on Engineer A the duty to follow through to see that correct follow-up action is taken by the...
Engineer A Bridge Inspection
Engineer A is retained as subconsultant to perform bridge inspection services and exercises this competence in...
Engineer A Defect Recognition
While inspecting, Engineer A notices an apparent pre-existing defective condition in the bridge wall even though it...
Engineer A Defect Disclosure
Engineer A verbally reports the apparent pre-existing defective wall condition to his client VWX Architects and...
Engineer A Obligation Balancing
The Board finds that Engineer A acted reasonably by properly balancing his duty of faithfulness to his client...
Engineer A Field Note Documentation
Engineer A documented the observed defect information in his field notes for possible future reference, which the...
VWX Project Interrelationship Knowledge
The Board holds that the prime consultant, with overall responsibility for the project, is in a far better position...
8 entities
Constraints
Cs
w=0.08
384D
Engineer A Field Notes Alteration Ban
Engineer A must not alter his field notes under any circumstance, even though it would have been improper to include...
Engineer A Speculative Final Report Ban
Engineer A must not include reference to the wall defect information in his final report, since it would be based...
Engineer A Wall Defect Report Suppression
Engineer A must not include the apparent pre-existing defective wall condition information in his final bridge...
Engineer A Premature Authority Report Ban
Engineer A must not report the wall defect information to a public authority before determining whether corrective...
4 entities
Embeddings: all-MiniLM-L6-v2 (384D, local) | Storage: pgvector (PostgreSQL) | Used for section and component similarity matching