DP2

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

DP2

Should Engineer B issue a complete and balanced report that affirmatively clears Engineer A's plumbing design while identifying the heating equipment sizing deficiency, and disclose to the new owner that the recommended equipment upgrade could generate additional compensated work for Engineer B — or is it sufficient to report only the adverse heating finding without affirmative disclosure of the potential financial interest?

Engineer B, having identified heating equipment sizing inadequacies in Engineer A's original design, must decide how to structure the report's findings — specifically whether to include the favorable plumbing finding alongside the adverse heating finding, and whether to disclose to the new owner that recommending higher-capacity equipment installation would likely generate additional compensated engineering work for Engineer B — in order to satisfy the completeness, objectivity, and conflict-of-interest disclosure obligations of the Code.

Issue a complete and balanced report that affirmatively clears Engineer A's plumbing design while identifying the heating equipment sizing deficiency, and separately disclose to the new owner that the recommended equipment upgrade could generate additional compensated engineering work for Engineer B, allowing the owner to make an informed decision about whether to seek independent verification of the sizing conclusions.

Issue a complete and balanced report that affirmatively clears Engineer A's plumbing design while identifying the heating equipment sizing deficiency, relying on the report's internal balance as sufficient evidence of objectivity without separately disclosing the potential financial interest in the remediation recommendation — on the ground that such interest is an ordinary and foreseeable consequence of any inspection engineer's role.

Issue a report identifying only the heating equipment sizing deficiency without affirmatively clearing the plumbing design, on the ground that the inspection scope was limited to identifying deficiencies rather than rendering a comprehensive adequacy assessment across all systems.

Engineer