Engineer M should challenge the validity of Firm DBA’s report as Firm DBA did not abide by the Code in a number of instances.Engineer M should first confer with Firm DBA to correct all discrepancies in the report. If no agreement can be made going forward, Engineer M should confer with the City to outline the ethical obligations. Engineer M should also consider any obligations they may have to report to the state licensure board.The actions of Firm DBA are not ethical under the Code as the services provided were under the supervision and ownership of licensed professional engineers.

The overriding issue for the Board of Ethical Review (BER) to consider in this case is that of the actions of Firm DBA. The ethical requirements of Firm DBA must be clarified before establishing what actions are required by Engineer M. As stated, Firm DBA provided a report that omitted details about where the sessions were held and at what time of day the sessions were held, including not identifying that written comments were not accepted. Additionally, Firm DBA’s report claimed Community P supported the project, without any evidence to support that claim. These actions likely violated the NSPE Code of Ethics ( Code) regarding issuing statements in an objective and truthful manner, deceptive acts, misrepresentation of fact, and omitting a material fact However, does the Code apply to Firm DBA? If the individuals most heavily involved in the project at Firm DBA are Certified Public Relations Professionals, they would be held to a code of ethics that provides for honest and truthful conduct. However, the BER will not comment on these potential obligations, as it is beyond the BER’s duties to review other codes. In BER Case 60-3 , the facts indicated that an engineering firm was providing sub-professional services and, because of that, the firm was not required to abide by the provisions of the Canons of Ethics and Rules of Professional Conduct. The conclusion by the BER in BER Case 60-3 was that the Canons and Rules did not apply. However, the Code has been revised since that time. The most fundamental and primary Canon of the Code is to hold paramount the safety, health, and welfare of the public. The facts in this case state that Firm DBA has licensed professional engineers in charge or in supervisory roles of all departments in the firm as well as ownership. It would be difficult to believe that through their duties as licensed professional engineers, the Code would be irrelevant to the Firm’s business dealings simply because the services being provided were not e...

Engineer M is retained by the City as the lead engineer on a major public infrastructure project to upgrade a highway system that runs through Community P, a historically underserved, underrepresented, and overburdened neighborhood. During the planning phase, the City requires a series of public engagement sessions to gather input from the affected community. Engineer M’s firm partners with an engineering consultant, Firm DBA, to coordinate public outreach and conduct these sessions. Firm DBA has a department within its corporate structure that specializes in communications and public relations. It is this department that is directly charged with providing these services on behalf of Firm DBA. Firm DBA has licensed professional engineers in charge or in supervisory roles of all departments in the firm as well as in Firm DBA ownership.Firm DBA organizes meetings at times and locations that are difficult for Community P residents to attend, such as during work hours at venues far from the area and not easily accessible via public transit. Further, Firm DBA’s outreach and notices do not provide for a method for community members to submit written comments. Finally, no virtual meetings are held to gather feedback from interested persons.The area in which Firm DBA holds the public outreach sessions, Community Q, is an alternate route for the major public infrastructure project. Few Community P members participate, and those who do express concerns about the project’s potential to displace residents and disrupt local businesses. Many comments are received that support the upgrade through the historically underserved, underrepresented, and overburdened neighborhood (Community P) and not through Community Q.Engineer M expresses concern to Firm DBA about the public outreach and session locations, but Firm DBA states that these practices are consistent with prior projects undertaken for the City. Further, Firm DBA states that City leaders, citing economic, political, and soci...

Should Engineer M challenge the validity of Firm DBA’s report?Should Engineer M raise any concerns with the City, as the client, and, if so, how?Are Firm DBA’s actions ethical? Even though Firm DBA is not providing engineering services, are they required to abide by NSPE’s Code of Ethics?

I.1. Hold paramount the safety, health, and welfare of the public. Subject Reference Duty to the Public I.3. Issue public statements only in an objective and truthful manner. Subject Reference Public Statements and Criticism I.5. Avoid deceptive acts. Subject Reference Advertising II.1.d. Engineers shall not permit the use of their name or associate in business ventures with any person or firm that they believe is engaged in fraudulent or dishonest enterprise. Subject Reference Associating with Others Firm Name II.1.f. Engineers having knowledge of any alleged violation of this Code shall report thereon to appropriate professional bodies and, when relevant, also to public authorities, and cooperate with the proper authorities in furnishing such information or assistance as may be required. II.3.a. Engineers shall be objective and truthful in professional reports, statements, or testimony. They shall include all relevant and pertinent information in such reports, statements, or testimony, which should bear the date indicating when it was current. Subject Reference Misrepresentation/Omission of Facts Professional Reports, Statements, Testimony III.1.b. Engineers shall advise their clients or employers when they believe a project will not be successful. Subject Reference Duty to Disclose III.3.a. Engineers shall avoid the use of statements containing a material misrepresentation of fact or omitting a material fact. Subject Reference Advertising Self-Promotion III.7. Engineers shall not attempt to injure, maliciously or falsely, directly or indirectly, the professional reputation, prospects, practice, or employment of other engineers. Engineers who believe others are guilty of unethical or illegal practice shall presen...