30-day setup period before pile strength testing
Adversarial Context Professional Independence
[discussion] Engineer B appears to have assumed a responsibility to defend the client municipality by the selective use of data.
Engineer B appears to have assumed a responsibility to defend the client municipality by the selective use of data.
The competency to maintain professional objectivity and fulfill engineering duties without assuming an advocacy role for the retaining client in legal or quasi-legal proceedings
[discussion] Engineer B appears to have assumed a responsibility to defend the client municipality by the selective use of data. This is an egregious denial
Engineer B appears to have assumed a responsibility to defend the client municipality by the selective use of data. This is an egregious denial
Constraint that prohibits engineers from allowing adversarial legal or quasi-legal circumstances to influence selective use of technical data
[discussion] In this case, an adversarial relationship is established between the municipality and Engineer A to resolve the sharing of a settlement cost between the two.
In this case, an adversarial relationship is established between the municipality and Engineer A to resolve the sharing of a settlement cost between the two.
A state where parties are in formal opposition or dispute, typically in legal or quasi-legal proceedings, which may influence professional judgment and fact presentation
[discussion] Engineers must be exponents of all the available technical facts as the basis for problem solving.
Engineers must be exponents of all the available technical facts as the basis for problem solving.
A state where a professional has inappropriately assumed an advocacy role for their client rather than maintaining objective professional judgment
Communication Avoidance Decision → Pile Safety Failures Identified
[facts] Engineer B did not state anywhere in the report that these 19 piles, according to the pile driving records, had been driven to essential refusal and that, applying accepted wave equation calculations, the piles would have indicated a strength several multiples over the calculated load requirements. Additionally, Engineer B did not report that the dynamic test equipment had failed.
Engineer B did not state anywhere in the report that these 19 piles, according to the pile driving records, had been driven to essential refusal and that, applying accepted wave equation calculations, the piles would have indicated a strength several multiples over the calculated load requirements. Additionally, Engineer B did not report that the dynamic test equipment had failed.
Principle that engineers must fully disclose all material facts, including limitations, failures, and contrary evidence, in their professional reports and opinions
[facts] Engineer B did not report that the dynamic test equipment had failed.
Engineer B did not report that the dynamic test equipment had failed.
Constraint requiring engineers to report all relevant findings including equipment failures, limitations, and alternative interpretations in technical reports
[discussion] Material facts, however, were not addressed in Engineer B's report. Among them, that dynamic test equipment failed during the test
Material facts, however, were not addressed in Engineer B's report. Among them, that dynamic test equipment failed during the test
The competency to produce engineering reports that include all material facts, test results, equipment issues, and contextual information necessary for independent expert review
[discussion] Code of Ethics which requires that engineers 'shall include all relevant and pertinent information in such report, statements or testimony.'
Code of Ethics which requires that engineers 'shall include all relevant and pertinent information in such report, statements or testimony.'
Constraint that limits engineers from selectively omitting relevant technical data, facts, or information from engineering reports and testimony
Obligation requiring engineers to include all relevant and pertinent information in reports, statements, or testimony, without selective omission of material facts
[facts] Engineer B did not state anywhere in the report that these 19 piles, according to the pile driving records, had been driven to essential refusal
Engineer B did not state anywhere in the report that these 19 piles, according to the pile driving records, had been driven to essential refusal
Obligation requiring professionals to include all relevant findings, data, and observations in their reports, including information that may contradict their conclusions or be unfavorable to their client's position
The competency to systematically gather, compile, and present all available technical facts relevant to an engineering problem, regardless of whether they support a particular position or interest
[facts] No effort was made by Engineer B to inquire from contractors, workers, or others on the job to verify or refute his theories
No effort was made by Engineer B to inquire from contractors, workers, or others on the job to verify or refute his theories
The competency to systematically verify, validate, and interpret construction records by cross-referencing with available witnesses, contractors, and physical evidence
[facts] Engineer B's concluding report stated that approximately 19 of the 90 piles did not meet the safety factor required by the design calculations.
Engineer B's concluding report stated that approximately 19 of the 90 piles did not meet the safety factor required by the design calculations.
[facts] Engineer B did not report that the dynamic test equipment had failed
Engineer B did not report that the dynamic test equipment had failed
Obligation requiring professionals to disclose equipment failures, methodological deviations, and other limitations that may affect the validity or reliability of test results
[discussion] Engineer B's failure to inquire from the contractor, workers or others on the job is a failure of fact gathering diligence.
Engineer B's failure to inquire from the contractor, workers or others on the job is a failure of fact gathering diligence.
Principle that engineers must exercise thoroughness and care in assembling all relevant facts before rendering professional opinions or conclusions
[facts] At no time during the development of Engineer B's report did Engineer B talk to any representative of Engineer A, even though Engineer A's on-site representatives were available
At no time during the development of Engineer B's report did Engineer B talk to any representative of Engineer A, even though Engineer A's on-site representatives were available
Obligation requiring professionals to conduct thorough investigations by consulting available sources, witnesses, and documentation before forming professional opinions or conclusions
[facts] dynamic test equipment had failed during the test
dynamic test equipment had failed during the test
The competency to properly operate, monitor, and verify functionality of dynamic testing equipment during geotechnical investigations
[facts] Engineer A was retained by a municipality to design a dock on a supporting foundation of 90 piles
Engineer A was retained by a municipality to design a dock on a supporting foundation of 90 piles
[facts] Engineer A testified that the geotechnical firm's report expected that the piles would gain sufficient additional strength
Engineer A testified that the geotechnical firm's report expected that the piles would gain sufficient additional strength
[facts] Engineer A testified that the geotechnical firm's report expected that the piles would gain sufficient additional strength within 30 days
Engineer A testified that the geotechnical firm's report expected that the piles would gain sufficient additional strength within 30 days
[discussion] To test the criteria and professional judgment upon which Engineer A's conclusion, and recommendations were based
To test the criteria and professional judgment upon which Engineer A's conclusion, and recommendations were based
[discussion] the select language of the report precludes any interpretation that any or all 90 piles met the factor of safety requirement
the select language of the report precludes any interpretation that any or all 90 piles met the factor of safety requirement
[facts] Engineer B did not state anywhere in the report that these 19 piles...applying accepted wave equation calculations, the piles would have indicated a strength several multiples over
Engineer B did not state anywhere in the report that these 19 piles...applying accepted wave equation calculations, the piles would have indicated a strength several multiples over
Led to selective use of data that appeared to serve no purpose except to impugn Engineer A or support municipality's expert witness
[discussion] Engineer B appears to have assumed a responsibility to defend the client municipality by the selective use of data. This is an egregious denial of the duties and responsibilities of a professional engineer in any setting, legal, quasi-legal or non-legal.
Engineer B appears to have assumed a responsibility to defend the client municipality by the selective use of data. This is an egregious denial of the duties and responsibilities of a professional engineer in any setting, legal, quasi-legal or non-legal.
[discussion] by excluding the pile driving records, Engineer B has denied himself the opportunity to present a rational for discounting their value, and thereby to serve his client.
by excluding the pile driving records, Engineer B has denied himself the opportunity to present a rational for discounting their value, and thereby to serve his client.
[discussion] It is clear that Engineer B may be criticized for his failure to communicate with Engineer A's on-site representative.
It is clear that Engineer B may be criticized for his failure to communicate with Engineer A's on-site representative.
[facts] Previously, Engineer B had said, 'We didn't look at the pile driving records because it was not in our scope of work.'
Previously, Engineer B had said, 'We didn't look at the pile driving records because it was not in our scope of work.'
[facts] At no time during the development of Engineer B's report did Engineer B talk to any representative of Engineer A
At no time during the development of Engineer B's report did Engineer B talk to any representative of Engineer A
Contributed to incomplete fact gathering and failure to obtain pile driving records
[discussion] However, Engineer B's failure to inquire from the contractor, workers or others on the job is a failure of fact gathering diligence.
However, Engineer B's failure to inquire from the contractor, workers or others on the job is a failure of fact gathering diligence.
[discussion] each was independently responsible for the assembly and interpretation of the facts of the pile driving
each was independently responsible for the assembly and interpretation of the facts of the pile driving
[discussion] Engineer B appears to have assumed a responsibility to defend the client municipality by the selective use of data
Engineer B appears to have assumed a responsibility to defend the client municipality by the selective use of data
[discussion] Material facts, however, were not addressed in Engineer B's report
Material facts, however, were not addressed in Engineer B's report
[discussion] Engineer B's failure to inquire from the contractor, workers or others on the job is a failure of fact gathering diligence
Engineer B's failure to inquire from the contractor, workers or others on the job is a failure of fact gathering diligence
[discussion] The opportunity for expert engineering review and interpretation of the pile driving test was effectively denied by Engineer B's report
The opportunity for expert engineering review and interpretation of the pile driving test was effectively denied by Engineer B's report
[discussion] by excluding the pile driving records, Engineer B has denied himself the opportunity to present a rational for discounting their value
by excluding the pile driving records, Engineer B has denied himself the opportunity to present a rational for discounting their value
Violated Code of Ethics requirement that engineers shall include all relevant and pertinent information in reports, statements or testimony
[discussion] Neither interpretation is tolerated by the Code of Ethics which requires that engineers 'shall include all relevant and pertinent information in such report, statements or testimony.'
Neither interpretation is tolerated by the Code of Ethics which requires that engineers 'shall include all relevant and pertinent information in such report, statements or testimony.'
[discussion] This is an egregious denial of the duties and responsibilities of a professional engineer in any setting, legal, quasi-legal or non-legal.
This is an egregious denial of the duties and responsibilities of a professional engineer in any setting, legal, quasi-legal or non-legal.
[facts] the municipality retained Engineer B to supervise the driving of several test piles
the municipality retained Engineer B to supervise the driving of several test piles
[facts] opinion was based upon the fact that the nineteen piles did not reach sufficient depth to develop the full strength when applying skin friction
opinion was based upon the fact that the nineteen piles did not reach sufficient depth to develop the full strength when applying skin friction
[discussion] At the conclusion of the program Engineer B reports that 19 piles do not meet the required factor of safety... Material facts, however, were not addressed in Engineer B's report.
At the conclusion of the program Engineer B reports that 19 piles do not meet the required factor of safety... Material facts, however, were not addressed in Engineer B's report.
[facts] municipality retained Engineer B to supervise the driving of several test piles
municipality retained Engineer B to supervise the driving of several test piles
[facts] Driving conditions were not duplicated in driving the test piles in that a vibratory hammer was used for the test piles and not used in the original driving
Driving conditions were not duplicated in driving the test piles in that a vibratory hammer was used for the test piles and not used in the original driving
[facts] We didn't look at the pile driving records because it was not in our scope of work
We didn't look at the pile driving records because it was not in our scope of work
[facts] We didn't look at the pile driving records because it was not in our scope of work.
We didn't look at the pile driving records because it was not in our scope of work.
Report excluded equipment failure and refusal data, potentially misdirecting conclusions and impugning Engineer A
[discussion] Material facts, however, were not addressed in Engineer B's report. Among them, that dynamic test equipment failed during the test, and that all 19 test piles reported as failing the test were driven to refusal.
Material facts, however, were not addressed in Engineer B's report. Among them, that dynamic test equipment failed during the test, and that all 19 test piles reported as failing the test were driven to refusal.
[facts] applying accepted wave equation calculations, the piles would have indicated a strength several multiples over the calculated load
applying accepted wave equation calculations, the piles would have indicated a strength several multiples over the calculated load
Observed test pile driving, testified about equipment failure, noted testing conditions differed from original construction, opined that hammer drops broke pile bond and undervalued results
Retained by party with interest in outcome, yet expected to provide objective testimony
[facts] An independent geotechnical consultant was retained by Engineer A to observe the test.
An independent geotechnical consultant was retained by Engineer A to observe the test.
Present on-site during pile driving test; Engineer B failed to communicate with this representative
Assembly and interpretation of pile driving facts
[discussion] Engineer B may be criticized for his failure to communicate with Engineer A's on-site representative
Engineer B may be criticized for his failure to communicate with Engineer A's on-site representative
[discussion] Neither interpretation is tolerated by the Code of Ethics which requires that engineers 'shall include all relevant and pertinent information in such report, statements or testimony.' Note: Code III.1.f no longer exists.
Neither interpretation is tolerated by the Code of Ethics which requires that engineers 'shall include all relevant and pertinent information in such report, statements or testimony.' Note: Code III.1.f no longer exists.
[discussion] Engineers must be exponents of all the available technical facts as the basis for problem solving. Facts are not adversarial
Engineers must be exponents of all the available technical facts as the basis for problem solving. Facts are not adversarial
[discussion] Among them, that dynamic test equipment failed during the test
Among them, that dynamic test equipment failed during the test
A state where testing equipment has malfunctioned during a critical evaluation, potentially compromising the validity of test results
Constraint requiring engineers to verify or investigate available evidence before drawing conclusions or issuing reports that may affect others
[discussion] to support the original testimony of the municipality's expert witness
to support the original testimony of the municipality's expert witness
Professional who provides expert testimony in legal or quasi-legal proceedings, offering technical opinions and interpretations to support dispute resolution
[facts] Engineer B did not state anywhere in the report that these 19 piles...had been driven to essential refusal
Engineer B did not state anywhere in the report that these 19 piles...had been driven to essential refusal
The competency to provide complete, balanced expert testimony that includes all relevant findings, limitations, and alternative explanations
Principle that engineering analysis must be grounded in technical facts rather than shaped by adversarial or partisan interests, maintaining independence from external pressures
Constraint that limits engineers from drawing conclusions without conducting adequate investigation and inquiry from all available sources
Obligation requiring engineers to conduct thorough investigation and inquiry from all available sources when gathering technical facts for professional conclusions
The competency to proactively seek information from all available sources including contractors, workers, on-site representatives, and other stakeholders during engineering investigations
A state where a professional has failed to exercise reasonable diligence in collecting relevant information from available sources
[discussion] 19 piles do not meet the required factor of safety for the reason that the piles were not driven to a sufficient depth that pile friction resistance would support the load
19 piles do not meet the required factor of safety for the reason that the piles were not driven to a sufficient depth that pile friction resistance would support the load
Engineering standard or requirement specifying the minimum factor of safety that structural elements must achieve to be considered adequate for their intended load
[facts] this would have broken the pile bond and undervalued the skin friction value reported by Engineer B's tests
this would have broken the pile bond and undervalued the skin friction value reported by Engineer B's tests
[facts] geotechnical consultant testified and showed that dynamic test equipment had failed during the test
geotechnical consultant testified and showed that dynamic test equipment had failed during the test
Specialized consultant providing expert analysis of soil conditions, pile behavior, and foundation performance, often retained to observe testing or provide expert testimony
Professional engineer responsible for analyzing soil conditions, designing foundation systems, and making recommendations regarding pile driving and load-bearing capacity of structural foundations
[facts] test piles were not driven to the same depth of penetration that apparently was required for the plug to form in the original piles
test piles were not driven to the same depth of penetration that apparently was required for the plug to form in the original piles
The competency to design and specify testing protocols that accurately replicate original construction conditions to ensure valid comparative results
[facts] When queried by Engineer A after the report was issued by Engineer B, Engineer B said: 'We just did not believe the driving records and there was also the issue of whether the pile was vented to allow air to escape from below a closure plate that was included in the pile to separate the concrete fill in the pile from the clay. The driving records look suspicious.' Previously, Engineer B had said, 'We didn't look at the pile driving records because it was not in our scope of work.'
When queried by Engineer A after the report was issued by Engineer B, Engineer B said: 'We just did not believe the driving records and there was also the issue of whether the pile was vented to allow air to escape from below a closure plate that was included in the pile to separate the concrete fill in the pile from the clay. The driving records look suspicious.' Previously, Engineer B had said, 'We didn't look at the pile driving records because it was not in our scope of work.'
[facts] the municipality retained Engineer B to supervise the driving of several test piles to see whether the piles would gain sufficient strength
the municipality retained Engineer B to supervise the driving of several test piles to see whether the piles would gain sufficient strength
Professional engineer retained to conduct independent testing and evaluation of construction work, providing expert assessment of whether completed work meets design specifications
Initial Dock Design Decision → Contractor Legal Action
[discussion] Further, by excluding the pile driving records, Engineer B has denied himself the opportunity to present a rational for discounting their value, and thereby to serve his client.
Further, by excluding the pile driving records, Engineer B has denied himself the opportunity to present a rational for discounting their value, and thereby to serve his client.
The competency to present engineering conclusions in language that permits alternative interpretations and expert review, rather than using selective language that forecloses other valid conclusions
[facts] At no time during the development of Engineer B's report did Engineer B talk to any representative of Engineer A, even though Engineer A's on-site representatives were available to testify as to the accuracy of the pile driving records. No effort was made by Engineer B to inquire from contractors, workers, or others on the job to verify or refute his theories about why the 19 piles met driving refusal prior to predicted depth.
At no time during the development of Engineer B's report did Engineer B talk to any representative of Engineer A, even though Engineer A's on-site representatives were available to testify as to the accuracy of the pile driving records. No effort was made by Engineer B to inquire from contractors, workers, or others on the job to verify or refute his theories about why the 19 piles met driving refusal prior to predicted depth.
Principle that engineers must conduct comprehensive and diligent investigation of all available evidence and information before rendering professional opinions or conclusions
[discussion] As an engineering document the report is incomplete and does a disservice to Engineer B's client municipality by potentially misdirecting a conclusion.
As an engineering document the report is incomplete and does a disservice to Engineer B's client municipality by potentially misdirecting a conclusion.
[facts] The geotechnical consultant testified and showed that dynamic test equipment had failed during the test and that the test piles were not driven to the same depth of penetration that apparently was required for the plug to form in the original piles. Driving conditions were not duplicated in driving the test piles in that a vibratory hammer was used for the test piles and not used in the original driving.
The geotechnical consultant testified and showed that dynamic test equipment had failed during the test and that the test piles were not driven to the same depth of penetration that apparently was required for the plug to form in the original piles. Driving conditions were not duplicated in driving the test piles in that a vibratory hammer was used for the test piles and not used in the original driving.
Principle that engineers must ensure testing and evaluation methods accurately replicate relevant conditions and follow accepted scientific and engineering practices
Municipal Infrastructure Design Engineer
[facts] Engineer A was retained by a municipality to design a dock on a supporting foundation of 90 piles.
Engineer A was retained by a municipality to design a dock on a supporting foundation of 90 piles.
Professional engineer retained by governmental entities to design public infrastructure projects such as docks, bridges, and foundations, responsible for structural calculations and specifications
Created the adversarial context in which Engineer B was retained and conducted testing
[discussion] Facts are not adversarial, even if they may be conflicting. Adversarial interests, however, are polarizing to the effect that some facts may be preferred
Facts are not adversarial, even if they may be conflicting. Adversarial interests, however, are polarizing to the effect that some facts may be preferred
The competency to present technical findings objectively without allowing adversarial interests to influence the selection or emphasis of facts
Obligation requiring professionals serving as expert witnesses or consultants to provide objective, unbiased analysis regardless of which party retained them
Obligation requiring engineers to base conclusions on complete technical facts without allowing adversarial interests to influence selective use of data
[discussion] Engineers must be exponents of all the available technical facts as the basis for problem solving. Facts are not adversarial, even if they may be conflicting.
Engineers must be exponents of all the available technical facts as the basis for problem solving. Facts are not adversarial, even if they may be conflicting.
[facts] Engineer B did not state anywhere in the report that these 19 piles, according to the pile driving records, had been driven to essential refusal and that, applying accepted wave equation calculations, the piles would have indicated a strength several multiples over the calculated load requirements.
Engineer B did not state anywhere in the report that these 19 piles, according to the pile driving records, had been driven to essential refusal and that, applying accepted wave equation calculations, the piles would have indicated a strength several multiples over the calculated load requirements.
[discussion] all 19 test piles reported as failing the test were driven to refusal... by excluding the pile driving records, Engineer B has denied himself the opportunity to present a rational for discounting their value
all 19 test piles reported as failing the test were driven to refusal... by excluding the pile driving records, Engineer B has denied himself the opportunity to present a rational for discounting their value
Material fact that was excluded from Engineer B's report, affecting validity of test conclusions
[facts] applying accepted wave equation calculations, the piles would have indicated a strength several multiples over the calculated load requirements
applying accepted wave equation calculations, the piles would have indicated a strength several multiples over the calculated load requirements
The technical competency to analyze pile driving records, apply wave equation calculations, and assess load-bearing capacity through multiple analytical methods
Field documentation recording the actual conditions and data from pile driving operations, including driving depth, refusal conditions, and equipment status
[discussion] At the conclusion of the program Engineer B reports that 19 piles do not meet the required factor of safety for the reason that the piles were not driven to a sufficient depth
At the conclusion of the program Engineer B reports that 19 piles do not meet the required factor of safety for the reason that the piles were not driven to a sufficient depth
Technical engineering document that records and reports the results of pile driving tests, including load capacity, factor of safety calculations, and driving conditions
[discussion] We are inclined to the view that each was independently responsible for the assembly and interpretation of the facts of the pile driving.
We are inclined to the view that each was independently responsible for the assembly and interpretation of the facts of the pile driving.
[facts] Additionally, Engineer B did not report that the dynamic test equipment had failed.
Additionally, Engineer B did not report that the dynamic test equipment had failed.
[facts] The geotechnical consultant testified and showed that dynamic test equipment had failed during the test and that the test piles were not driven to the same depth of penetration that apparently was required for the plug to form in the original piles.
The geotechnical consultant testified and showed that dynamic test equipment had failed during the test and that the test piles were not driven to the same depth of penetration that apparently was required for the plug to form in the original piles.
Formal ethical standards and requirements governing the professional conduct of engineers, including duties related to honesty, completeness of reporting, and professional responsibility
Scope Limitation Decision → Critical Data Exclusion
The competency to recognize when assigned scope of work is insufficient for reaching valid conclusions and to communicate the need for expanded investigation
Constraint that restricts an engineer's investigation, analysis, or reporting to only those activities explicitly defined in their contractual scope, potentially limiting comprehensive assessment
A state where a professional has chosen to present only partial technical facts, excluding material information that could affect conclusions
Principle that engineering reports, statements, and testimony must include all relevant and pertinent technical information, not selectively presenting data to support predetermined conclusions
Obligation requiring engineers to be exponents of all available technical facts as the basis for problem solving, presenting facts without adversarial bias
[facts] Driving conditions were not duplicated in driving the test piles in that a vibratory hammer was used for the test piles
Driving conditions were not duplicated in driving the test piles in that a vibratory hammer was used for the test piles
[discussion] the municipality arranged for a test pile driving program and retained Engineer B to supervise the program
the municipality arranged for a test pile driving program and retained Engineer B to supervise the program
Professional engineer retained to supervise and report on testing programs designed to verify or challenge prior engineering conclusions, with responsibility for complete and accurate documentation of test results
[facts] Driving conditions were not duplicated in driving the test piles in that a vibratory hammer was used for the test piles and not used in the original driving.
Driving conditions were not duplicated in driving the test piles in that a vibratory hammer was used for the test piles and not used in the original driving.
Constraint requiring that test conditions replicate original conditions to produce valid comparative results, limiting acceptable testing procedures
Obligation requiring professionals to verify the accuracy and reliability of data upon which they base their professional conclusions, rather than dismissing or ignoring available records
expert witness testimony during mediation
initial pile driving before 30-day setup period
Provided original testimony that Engineer B's report appeared to support
test pile driving before Engineer B's report
Retained to supervise test piles, issued report stating 19 piles did not meet safety factor, failed to report equipment failure, did not apply wave equation calculations, did not consult available witnesses
Contradictory statements about scope of work vs. belief in records
Did not consult with Engineer A's representatives
Failed to report dynamic test equipment failure
Filed extra claim, sued Engineer A and municipality, settled through mediation for $300,000
Pursue extra claim for additional work/costs
[facts] there was a contractor's extra claim and Engineer A and the municipality were both sued by the contractor.
there was a contractor's extra claim and Engineer A and the municipality were both sued by the contractor.
Designed the dock foundation, was sued along with municipality, testified about geotechnical expectations, retained independent consultant to observe testing
Provide testimony regarding design expectations
Defending own design work while being objective about potential deficiencies
Financial interest in settlement outcome vs. technical accuracy
Retained Engineer A for design, was sued by contractor, retained Engineer B for testing, brought expert witnesses to mediation, shared settlement cost
Interest in minimizing settlement costs vs. fair resolution