Turning in other engineers
Turning in other engineers
(OP)
I'm working on a site in California with a pretty big environmental concern (soil gas at 10 times the human health screening level on the other side of inhabited commercial structures from the source area (so presumably directly under the inhabited structures the soil gas concentrations are even higher) and adjacent to an upscale condominium development. There is no existing indoor air samples, so it isn't clear that anyone is exposed, though I think you would have to assume they were in the absence of data to the contrary. I'm working for a third party doing due-dilligence. The owner's engineer (a very large national firm) has not reported the 10x soil gas exceedance to the regulators and doesn't appear to have any interest in doing so. We have a report from a previous engineering firm (this one international and even larger) showing the same result. Again, they did not report it and probably won't at this point. Our client has a confidentiality agreement with the current owner and is very concerned about what will happen to them if we report our results (which we should have in a week or so).
Eventually, this is going to be reported - by me if no one else will do it. It won't cost me my job, but it may cost us the client (who accounts for 20% of our gross, so it will probably cost one or two people their jobs if we lose them as a client).
Anyone have any thoughts on the best way to proceed?
Eventually, this is going to be reported - by me if no one else will do it. It won't cost me my job, but it may cost us the client (who accounts for 20% of our gross, so it will probably cost one or two people their jobs if we lose them as a client).
Anyone have any thoughts on the best way to proceed?





RE: Turning in other engineers
Proper course of action is to formally notify your client and/or employer. See b. below.
http://www.asce.org/Leadership-and-Management/Ethi...
"Engineers shall hold paramount the safety, health and welfare of the public and shall strive to comply with the principles of sustainable development in the performance of their professional duties.
Engineers shall recognize that the lives, safety, health and welfare of the general public are dependent upon engineering judgments, decisions and practices incorporated into structures, machines, products, processes and devices.
a. Engineers shall approve or seal only those design documents, reviewed or prepared by them, which are determined to be safe for public health and welfare in conformity with accepted engineering standards.
b. Engineers whose professional judgment is overruled under circumstances where the safety, health and welfare of the public are endangered, or the principles of sustainable development ignored, shall inform their clients or employers of the possible consequences.
c. Engineers who have knowledge or reason to believe that another person or firm may be in violation of any of the provisions of Canon 1 shall present such information to the proper authority in writing and shall cooperate with the proper authority in furnishing such further information or assistance as may be required.
d. Engineers should seek opportunities to be of constructive service in civic affairs and work for the advancement of the safety, health and well-being of their communities, and the protection of the environment through the practice of sustainable development.
e. Engineers should be committed to improving the environment by adherence to the principles of sustainable development so as to enhance the quality of life of the general public. "
RE: Turning in other engineers
John R. Baker, P.E.
Product 'Evangelist'
Product Engineering Software
Siemens PLM Software Inc.
Industry Sector
Cypress, CA
Siemens PLM:
UG/NX Museum:
To an Engineer, the glass is twice as big as it needs to be.
RE: Turning in other engineers
RE: Turning in other engineers
As to what is legal, only a licensed legal practitioner in your jurisdiction should advise you. After all, your lawyer does not specify spans for beams does he.
My personal higher authority is myself, but he sets a pretty high standard about right and wrong.
Regards
Pat
See FAQ731-376: Eng-Tips.com Forum Policies for tips on use of eng-tips by professional engineers &
http://eng-tips.com/market.cfm
for site rules
RE: Turning in other engineers
If you've "misintrepreted" the situation, this might save you from a lot of embarassment and potential legal problems. And the code of ethics allows you to then proceed to the Deep Throat step.
RE: Turning in other engineers
Your advice gets no disagreement from me. The obvious first step is consultation with your boss and the customer. There might not really be the problem envisaged once explained. The sceptic within doubts that, but hey why assume the worst before looking for the best.
Regards
Pat
See FAQ731-376: Eng-Tips.com Forum Policies for tips on use of eng-tips by professional engineers &
http://eng-tips.com/market.cfm
for site rules
RE: Turning in other engineers
Remember that nothing ever really goes away on the Internet and by starting this thread you have created a gigantic personal liability that could come back on you in spades. eng-tips.com does not have a First Amendment right to protect your identity and the management will not go to jail to protect it. Take a copy of your original post to the lawyer and see how much he yells at you. Prior knowledge of a potentially lethal set of conditions is not a small thing.
David Simpson, PE
MuleShoe Engineering
"Belief" is the acceptance of an hypotheses in the absence of data.
"Prejudice" is having an opinion not supported by the preponderance of the data.
"Knowledge" is only found through the accumulation and analysis of data.
RE: Turning in other engineers
Having read the California Business and Professions Code and the applicable environmental regulations this morning, I don't believe I have a legal obligation to report the contamination (or that the other two firms had a legal obligation). The contamination occurred before CERCLA, was reported to the County in the late 80s and the County closed the Site in 1990 based on bad engineering by the current owner's consultant. During the due diligence work we (and they) found that considerable contamination was missed and it is likely that workers are being exposed to unhealthful concentrations of carcinogens. I think the owner has an absolute requirement to report (Prop 65 if nothing else) and is risking a very large fine and potentially jail time if the indoor air concentrations turn out to be very high.
Ethically and morally I think I have a requirement to report the contamination because the public may be being exposed to unhealthy levels of carcinogens (it isn't certain). If I have to do it, I'm pretty sure I'm going to ask the board of professional engineers and geologists what the right thing to do was, and by implication, if the PEs and PGs of the other two firms have the requisite moral fiber to practice in California. It seems pretty clear to me that I have that obligation and that so do they (at least the current owner's consultant's head guy is neither a PE nor a PG and is going to skate regardless of what happens). As of now, investigations are still on-going,so I don't think I have an immediate need to report it.
This is a trickier moral issue than you might think because by doing the right thing, I'm risking some money down the road but I'm also putting the jobs of at least two of our company's employees in jeopardy (we might lose one of our biggest clients if I have to report the contamination).
So, I know what the right thing to do is (you don't have to tell me) my issue is how do I go about doing the right thing and when do I have to do it?
RE: Turning in other engineers
"Gorgeous hair is the best revenge." Ivana Trump
RE: Turning in other engineers
Dik
RE: Turning in other engineers
RE: Turning in other engineers
RE: Turning in other engineers
RE: Turning in other engineers
I've done soil gas to indoor air infiltration calcs many years ago in past employ, and I can tell you that the concentration in the underlying soils has to be way more than 10x the human health concern level to cause an impact of concern to indoor air quality in a typical basement. The calculations need to be done by a competent person, and any parameters that you don't have good values for need to be estimated and sensitivity analysis performed so you know the range of accuracy of the result.
I can also tell you that indoor air sampling of an existing residence is a recipie for disaster unless the compounds you're looking for are so unusual that they would never be found inside a typical home. By the way, that eliminates most of the compounds that have been used industrially in the past 50 years or so- at trace levels, all of those substances can be detected in indoor air even if they're absent from the local soils. If you sample for a typical compoound, you WILL find it, and then regardless where it actually came from, the soils WILL be blamed for it.
Once you've determined that there actually IS a REAL concern, the local regulatory authorities have to be informed. At that point, the responsibility to inform the people who would be impacted by this lies with the regulatory bodies- there is no need for you to go knocking on doors or to contact the media unless you are certain that peoples' lives are in danger and there is nothing being done about it.
When dealing with an issue like this, order of operations is everything. You have a responsibility to do things in the right order, raising the issue with increasing levels of authority and responsibility (and documenting that you have done so) and giving them all the opportunity to do the right thing before you go to the media or directly to a regulatory body (assuming that this is not already your responsibility to inform them under local regulations).
RE: Turning in other engineers
(2) Verify the accuracy of the data.
(3) Report the data.
(4) Report the potential ramifications of the data based on facts.
I fail to see the problem. It is what it is.
RE: Turning in other engineers
Dik
RE: Turning in other engineers
Is this a threat to public safety?
While there is no explicit requirement, the California PE Act states,
"In order to safeguard life, health, property, and public welfare, no person shall practice civil, electrical, or mechanical engineering..."
The implication is that by licensing is to "safeguard life, health, property, and public welfare."
TTFN
FAQ731-376: Eng-Tips.com Forum Policies
RE: Turning in other engineers
RE: Turning in other engineers
Now for the aftermath. So maybe this client does drop your company, someone may lose their job, etc. Do you really want to work with a client that is doing questionable practices? I am hoping the engineering industry still has some morality as to what is the right thing to do. I know we are only humans and still chasing the dollars, but we know when we shouldn't go beyond that thin line of money hindering our judgement. Ethics and following basic standards should go hand in hand with each other and you should be taking that into account.
I think your lawyers would not be too happy that this thread even exists. But its good to know that owners or partial stake owners are thinking about the entire picture when making the tough choices. I have had to make those decisions on maybe a smaller level and its not fun when we have to drop those clients and refund their money.
B+W Engineering and Design
Los Angeles Civil Engineer and Structural Engineer
http://bwengr.com | http://bwstructuralengineer.com | http://bwcivilengineer.com
RE: Turning in other engineers
RE: Turning in other engineers
RE: Turning in other engineers
But before you go shouting it from the roof tops, talk to the owner and get all the facts from their end too.
PE, SE
Eastern United States
"If a builder builds a house for someone, and does not construct it properly, and the house which he built falls in and kills its owner, then that builder shall be put to death!"
~Code of Hammurabi