Engineer A should contact the client and inquire about the actions the client has taken and point out the action is a violation of the law and that steps need to be take to remedy the violation or obtain a variance from the proper authorities. In this connection, the engineer should advise that the remedial actions should be in full compliance with all applicable environmental laws and regulations, which may include the review of a licensed engineer. If appropriate steps are not taken by the client, Engineer A has an obligation to bring this matter to the attention of the appropriate authorities.

The facts in this case present a situation that often raises very difficult issues for engineers in their dealings with clients. Engineering practice sometimes places the engineer in the position where the interests of a client and the interests of the public are in open and serious conflict. Although the NSPE Board of Ethical Review has had occasion to address similar issues in the past, it has not addressed the issue in the context of a client’s apparent violation of environmental laws and regulations relating to wetland mitigation efforts. Engineers play an essential role in society by taking steps and actions to see that  products, systems, facilities, structures, and the land surrounding them are reasonably safe. Sometimes engineers are 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 the basic ethical dichotomy presented in this case was considered by the BER in Case No. 89-7. In that case, 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 informed 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 realized that those deficiencies could ca...

Engineer A is an environmental engineer. Engineer A performs wetland delineation services on the client’s wetland site. A few months after Engineer A completes the services, he drives by his client’s property and notices that the client has installed a substantial amount of fill material on more than ½ an acre across a portion of the wetlands without any permits, variances, or permissions. The installation of the fill material is a substantial violation of the federal and state laws and regulations.

What are Engineer A’s ethical obligations under these facts?