Prepare

Before posting to this discussion, be sure you have completed the assigned reading THAT IS ATTACHED TO THIS MESSAGE.

Post

The article implies that the Challenger incident outcome might have been different if Roger Boisjoly had been a licensed Professional Engineer at the time.  How might this have been a factor? 

Reply

After you post your original response, respond to at least one of your classmates’ posts, either asking questions about their responses or making thoughtful responses or comments on their responses. To make a better discussion try to engage with people who made arguments different from your own! Feel free to disagree to try to offer an opinion opposite the one they gave – you should engage in a healthy debate here! In addition, please be sure to follow up with any questions or comments posted on your original post.

As with all debates, please keep your comments civil. Disparaging comments or personal attacks will automatically be deleted and their writers will be given zeros for this discussion

RUBRIC OF GRADING

– 9.0    pts                  

Student lists and provides some insight into 5 to 6 items from the reading(s) that are applicable and relevant to the topics discussed thus far in the course; provides comprehensive, thoughtful reflection about specific actions that would be taken.

– 5.0  pts                  

Student clearly communicates their ideas and uses good structure along with proper grammar and spelling.

– 6.0  pts                  

Student provides a clear, respectful reply and critique using good structure and proper grammar and spelling. Student adds to the comments of the classmate by explaining how the classmate’s post impacted their perspective, or offering an alternative viewpoint to the classmate.

Tragic Reminders | National Society of Professional Engineers Page 1 of 8

Tragic Reminders

Home » PE Magazine » May 2016 » Tragic Reminders

May/June 2016

Tragic Reminders

Recent events such as tainted drinking water, a safety scare in the nation’s
capital, and a toxic waste release reiterate the irreplaceable role that professional
engineers play in ensuring the public health, safety, and welfare.

BY EVA KAPLAN-LEISERSON

Engineering is in the national spotlight—but
unfortunately for all the wrong reasons.
Flint’s devastating water crisis, the
unprecedented Washington, D.C., metro
shutdown, and the toxic Gold King Mine spill
are just a few recent incidents related to
engineers’ areas of focus. Unfortunately,
these are not isolated events that can be
chalked up to happenstance. Elevated lead
levels have been found in water systems
across the country; many US transit systems
face aging infrastructure challenges; and the
need for PEs in responsible charge of
engineering services, including in the federal

http://www.nspe.org/resources/pe-magazine/may-2016/tragic-reminders

LARGER VIEW IN PDF

5/9/2016

http://www.nspe.org/resources/pe-magazine/may-2016/tragic-reminders

Tragic Reminders | National Society of Professional Engineers Page 2 of 8

government, has been a longstanding advocacy issue for NSPE.

With each of the recent incidents, among the finger-pointing and blame, serious and
important questions have arisen. How can governments maintain and replace
outdated infrastructure with limited funds? And whose responsibility is it to ensure
that engineering work is both competent and ethical? PEs have long been familiar with
these concerns, but awareness is growing publically. However, another question
should be included in these broader conversations—one that is, unfortunately, usually
left out: How do we make sure professional engineers are involved in the design,
operation, and maintenance of engineering projects that affect the public health,
safety, and welfare?

The Long History of Disaster and Licensure
In 1919, a 25-foot wave of molasses flooded Boston streets after the collapse of a
steel tank holding two million gallons of the sticky stuff. Although this sounds like the
setup for a bad joke, 21 people died and more than 100 were injured. The incident,
believed to have been caused by faulty design, led to one of the first engineering
licensure laws and greater awareness of the importance of licensure to public safety.

A 2006 PE article explains that—in circumstances that bring to mind the cyclic nature
of history—the man hired to build the tank had neither engineering nor design
experience but was a treasurer for the United States Industrial Alcohol Company. He
was under pressure to get the tank built quickly (the molasses would be used in
explosives for the US government); so he cut corners.

Other states enacted licensure laws after their own disasters were attributed to
engineering oversights. California created its state board of examiners after the 1928
failure of the St. Francis Dam killed more than 500 people along the Santa Clara River.
And Texas launched its state board in 1937, months after hundreds died when a
school in New London exploded due to a natural gas leak attributed to faulty
engineering. As a 2007 PE article explains, “these were just two incidents that
underscored the vital role the engineering profession plays in protecting the welfare of
the public, while at the same time making clear the need for standards regulating the
practice.”

Unfortunately, however, such violent incidents are still occurring, as the 2013
explosion at a fertilizer facility in West, Texas, highlights. Fifteen people died in the
explosion and hundreds were injured, leading the Environmental Protection Agency to
consider a rule to require PEs as part of the audit team in third-party certifications.

http://www.nspe.org/resources/pe-magazine/may-2016/tragic-reminders 5/9/2016

http://www.nspe.org/resources/pe-magazine/may-2016/tragic-reminders

Tragic Reminders | National Society of Professional Engineers Page 3 of 8

NSPE and state societies have filed comments in support of these provisions, which
would ensure the involvement of competent, ethical engineers who can perform
unbiased work (read more).

This is just one of many examples of NSPE’s determination to advocate for
professional engineer oversight, to provide competency and accountability in
protecting the public.

Licensure “forces the engineer to exercise their
ethical muscle every time they place their signature
and seal on a drawing.” In addition, with the license,
the engineer has something to lose.
—MIKE CONZETT, P.E.

Penny Wise and Pound Foolish
In Flint, the facts are still coming to light; however, attempts to save money were one
factor in the tragedy that unfolded. After water quality complaints began, cost
considerations counteracted suggestions to stop using the Flint River as an interim
water source, according to the final report of the Flint Water Advisory Task Force,
which was commissioned by Michigan Governor Rick Snyder to conduct an
independent review.

The task force further found that the Flint water treatment plant and treatment
technologies were not adequate to provide safe, clean drinking water. “Flint’s lack of
reinvestment in its water distribution system contributed to the drinking water crisis
and ability to respond to water quality problems,” the report states.

A host of other players and factors helped create the issue (such as lack of proper
corrosion control). But the previous examples point to an axiom that PEs know well:
When engineering decisions are made on the basis of upfront cost, disastrous
consequences can result.

Attempting to save money in the short-term without regard to the long-term
consequences is an approach that NSPE President Tim Austin, P.E., F.NSPE, calls
penny wise and pound foolish. People often look for instant gratification solutions and
don’t worry about the longer term, he says. For instance, you can delay and defer
infrastructure maintenance but “sometimes you don’t realize the true cost until a
number of years have passed”—or a disaster results.

http://www.nspe.org/resources/pe-magazine/may-2016/tragic-reminders 5/9/2016

http://www.nspe.org/resources/pe-magazine/may-2016/tragic-reminders

Tragic Reminders | National Society of Professional Engineers Page 4 of 8

However, professional engineers offer the ability to balance considerations such as
proper design and maintenance along with cost, explains National Council of
Examiners for Engineering and Surveying President Mike Conzett, P.E., an
environmental engineer who retired as a vice president from HDR.

“A lot of it is the ‘ethical chip’ that the engineer has,” he says. PEs are ethically bound
to do the right thing and not cut corners, he points out, which could impact the end
users’ health and safety.

Licensure “forces the engineer to exercise their ethical muscle every time they place
their signature and seal on a drawing,” Conzett explains. In addition, with the license,
the engineer has something to lose.

He adds that it’s not that a licensed engineer is necessarily smarter than an
unlicensed one or that a PE would never make mistakes, but that “even though they
may work for the city, EPA, state, or a private client, by being a licensed professional,
they have a client that’s called ‘the public’ that needs to be paramount in doing their
work.”

The PE’s Value
In Flint, state-appointed emergency managers made key decisions, including
switching to the Flint River for water. As the task force explained, “Emergency
managers charged with financial reform do not have, nor are they supported by, the
necessary expertise to manage non-financial aspects of municipal government.”

Further, the report noted a failure “to adequately appreciate (or signal) the
complexities involved in treating Flint River water, or the potential implications of
water chemistry changes to the city’s water distribution network.”

As Michael Ellegood, P.E., senior consultant for PSMJ Resources Inc., and former
public works director for Maricopa County, Arizona, explains, “Too often we make
decisions in the country that have significant technical implications without including
qualified engineers as part of the decision-making process.” The mandate to the
engineer is, “We’re going to do this, now make it happen.”

Austin also notes the need to involve PEs more fully in public policy decisions. “They
have a lot to offer but they aren’t consulted when they should be,” he says. As to
whether they’re listened to when they are involved, “It depends on who’s doing the
listening. In some cases, the people doing the listening maybe don’t understand the

http://www.nspe.org/resources/pe-magazine/may-2016/tragic-reminders 5/9/2016

http://www.nspe.org/resources/pe-magazine/may-2016/tragic-reminders

Tragic Reminders | National Society of Professional Engineers Page 5 of 8

value that a PE plays. While PEs are not infallible, they give the public the best
opportunity to understand the consequences of complex technical decisions.”

The greater the complexity of an issue or problem, notes Austin, the broader the net of
people that need to be involved—including professional engineers.

A Sewer Ceremony?
PEs provide a long-term perspective, Ellegood explains, while officials may focus on
the next election.

He offers an analogy of a municipality that has a $3 million surplus and is faced with
the choice to replace an aging sewer system or build a new library. “Put yourself in the
position of the elected official who says, ‘Gee, who’s going to the groundbreaking of
when they tear up the street and screw up traffic to replace the sewer system, or who
will go to the groundbreaking ceremony for a new library in a disadvantaged part of
town?’”

We not only need elected officials who have the guts to make tough decisions,
Ellegood emphasizes, but also PEs need to develop relationships of trust with them to
help them make such choices.

Professional engineers have a responsibility to get more actively involved, Ellegood
believes—for instance, warning officials of the dangers of not properly maintaining
older infrastructure.

That means becoming more visible and speaking about issues in ways that don’t
alienate officials. “You’re not the opposite party,” says Ellegood. “You’re simply trying
to explain the laws of physics.”

Get to know your elected officials, he advises, particularly those at the state, county,
and municipal levels. Understand who they are, what they stand for, their knowledge
base, and their limitations. Then, when giving advice, talk to them in a way that’s
respectful and not accusatory. “These are people like you and me,” he stresses.

Awareness and Appreciation
Citizens also need to be educated about the expertise and ethical mindset that PEs
provide.

“Sometimes the public doesn’t appreciate or realize the difference between engineers
and licensed engineers,” says Conzett. “They need to know there is a difference.”

http://www.nspe.org/resources/pe-magazine/may-2016/tragic-reminders 5/9/2016

http://www.nspe.org/resources/pe-magazine/may-2016/tragic-reminders

Tragic Reminders | National Society of Professional Engineers Page 6 of 8

Licensing, as NSPE members know, means engineers have met the standards of
education, experience, and testing.

The NCEES president says he’s thought often about the best way to raise public
awareness. More disasters will bring more attention—but that shouldn’t be the
answer. Communications by societies such as NSPE can help when there is a
disaster, he says, incorporating tools such as social media to reach the younger
generations.

Ellewood suggests PEs become frequent bloggers and contributors to local news
media, keeping content objective and without political slant. “We’re not going to
become respected if we stay invisible,” he says.

NSPE President Tim Austin explains that communicating the role of the professional
engineer is “an integral part of what we’re trying to do within NSPE: build the public
awareness and appreciation for the licensed PE.”

The Society’s advocacy for the involvement of professional engineers in autonomous
vehicle development is just one manifestation of this.

Austin believes PEs have to find opportunities to communicate their value, and do so
with some humility. “We have to do it in a manner that helps build public trust,” he
says. That starts at the individual level, he believes—perhaps person by person.

Become more visible and speak about issues in ways
that don’t alienate officials. “You’re not the opposite
party. You’re simply trying to explain the laws of
physics.”
—MICHAEL ELLEGOOD, P.E.

Constant Vigilance
All 50 states, US territories, and the District of Columbia have engineering licensing
laws on the books. Unfortunately, that doesn’t guarantee the use of professional
engineers in responsible charge of projects. Certain areas are exempt from state
licensure laws (industry and the federal government, for example). And challenges to
licensure and other important issues such as qualifications-based selection occur
regularly.

http://www.nspe.org/resources/pe-magazine/may-2016/tragic-reminders 5/9/2016

http://www.nspe.org/resources/pe-magazine/may-2016/tragic-reminders

Tragic Reminders | National Society of Professional Engineers Page 7 of 8

Any given month, NSPE’s website highlights actions the Society has taken against
such efforts. In March NSPE submitted a letter against a Louisiana bill that would
weaken licensure requirements in the state, and in February took action against
efforts to erode qualifications-based selection in Kansas. (See Executive Director
Mark Golden’s Outlook column, for more on threats to licensure and the need for
aggressive advocacy.)

The vital PE role of “protecting the public health, safety, and welfare” is repeated so
often it can start to lose its meaning and feel cliché. But both recent and historic
examples demonstrate how relevant the phrase remains.

In 1995, NSPE’s Engineering Times interviewed Roger Boisjoly, P.E., one of the
engineers who warned of the possible O-ring failure prior to the explosion of the space
shuttle Challenger. The engineers’ recommendations were overruled by senior
managers, and seven people died as a result.

Boisjoly wasn’t licensed at the time, but he earned his PE afterwards. As he said in the
interview, “Now picture the scenario of me having a PE license when this happened,
and me taking the Code of Ethics and … saying, ‘Look! This is what the Code says, this
is what I’m obligated to do.’ That’s a powerful threat, especially if my colleagues also
have PE licenses.”

After the Challenger events and fallout, the professional engineer was diagnosed with
post-traumatic stress disorder. But later he used the experience to speak to others
about engineering ethics.

As he explained in the interview, “I believe in the philosophy that you need to tell
people what they need to know, not what they want to hear. [Engineers] have got to
stand up and fight for what they know is right.”

The stakes were high then, and they remain so now. Real human lives depend on such
action.

Read Michael Ellegood’s NSPE Blog post on the Flint crisis at
www.nspe.org/resources/blogs/nspe-blog.

Go to http://flintwaterstudy.org for a link to the Flint Water Advisory Task Force report
and other updates from the Virginia Tech team of engineers and others who uncovered
the issue and are now working toward solutions.

http://www.nspe.org/resources/pe-magazine/may-2016/tragic-reminders 5/9/2016

http://www.nspe.org/resources/pe-magazine/may-2016/tragic-reminders

http:http://flintwaterstudy.org

www.nspe.org/resources/blogs/nspe-blog

Tragic Reminders | National Society of Professional Engineers Page 8 of 8

More From NSPE

• NSPE has offered its support and resources to Flint and Michigan. Read the
January statement in “Latest News”;

• View the Society’s position statements on infrastructure, PEs in responsible
charge of engineering, and licensure of federal engineers;

• Access NSPE’s professional policies on ethics, recognition of the engineering
function within government, and industrial exemptions;

• Learn more about NSPE’s work regarding autonomous vehicles, licensure of
federal engineers, and challenges to professional licensure.

http://www.nspe.org/resources/pe-magazine/may-2016/tragic-reminders 5/9/2016

http://www.nspe.org/resources/pe-magazine/may-2016/tragic-reminders