DP1

DecisionPoint
http://proethica.org/ontology/cases#DecisionPoint

DP1

Should the retained engineer affirmatively disclose client affiliation and the associated interest to the legislative committee before offering engineering testimony, or proceed without disclosure and allow the testimony to be evaluated solely on its technical merits?

Each engineer is retained by an interested party — one by a public agency, one by a private company — and must decide whether to affirmatively disclose that retained status and the associated financial or institutional interest to the legislative committee before presenting technical testimony. The retained relationship creates a structural conflict between the engineer's role as an objective technical expert and the client's preferred policy outcome.

Before presenting technical findings, explicitly inform the legislative committee of the retaining party's identity, the nature of the financial or institutional relationship, and any interest the client holds in the legislative outcome, so that committee members can properly calibrate the weight of the testimony.

Present engineering data and conclusions without volunteering the retained relationship, relying on the committee to independently investigate affiliations and treating the technical quality of the submission as sufficient to establish credibility.

Disclose the retained relationship and additionally clarify on the record which elements of the testimony reflect the engineer's independent professional judgment versus positions advanced at the client's direction, preserving the honest-conviction prerequisite while fully informing the legislature.

Retained Legislative Witness Engineer (State Power Commission PE or Private Power Company PE)