Engineer B's act of notifying Engineer A of his relationship with franchiser was not consistent with the Code. The Board was split on the second question and could not reach agreement.

One of the more challenging areas of engineering ethics issues involves the everyday relations among engineers. At one time, the Code had strict provisions regarding relations among engineers. However, with the passage of time, these strict provisions have been carefully modified to reflect the needs of clients and the evolving nature and realities of engineering practice. As with any provision of the Code of Ethics, provisions regarding relations among engineers must be carefully balanced with the needs and requirements of the individual client as well as the particular facts and circumstance of the case. It is not always possible to draw fine distinctions in this area, however certain general ethical principles as enunciated in the Code of Ethics provide guidance in the resolution of these issues. As has been noted on several occasions by the Board, the question of one engineer reviewing the work of another engineer has long been a subject of inquiry by the Board. Section III.8.a. admonishes engineers against reviewing the work of another engineer for the same client except with expressed knowledge of the engineer or unless the original relationship between the first engineer and the client has been terminated. In BER Case 79-7, an engineer was asked to inspect mechanical and electrical engineering work performed seven years earlier. The Board concluded that the engineer notified the former engineer that the engineer was being retained to perform review and inspection services and that the review would entail a review of the original design. Said the Board: "It may be helpful for future guidance to again point out that the purpose of Section 12(a) (now Section III.8.a.) is to provide the engineer whose work is being reviewed by another engineer an opportunity to submit...comments or explanations for...technical decisions, thereby enabling the reviewing engineer to have the benefit of a fuller understanding of the technical considerations in the original design ...

Engineer A is retained by an major franchiser to provide engineering design services for a chain of stores throughout the United States. After several years, the franchiser decides to terminate its relationship with Engineer A and provides Engineer A of notice of its intent not to renew its contract with Engineer A's firm. In order to maintain continuity and before the contract expires, the franchiser begins discussions with Engineer B and retains Engineer B to provide immediate review of design concerns that are pending in connection with the design of several franchise facilities throughout the US. Prior to the review, franchiser specifically tells Engineer B not to disclose to Engineer A, Engineer B's relationship with franchiser. Nevertheless, Engineer B reviews the design information the following week and following his review, notifies Engineer A of his relationship with franchiser and the preliminary results of his review. Several weeks later, Engineer A's agreement with the franchiser expires and the franchiser retains Engineer B as its design engineer.

Was Engineer B's act of notifying Engineer A of his relationship with franchiser consistent with the Code? Was it ethical for Engineer B to proceed with the review at that time?