Sanchez 10:00
R14
ETHICAL ISSUES IN THE MIDDLE EAST
Sean Soltysiak (ses166@pitt.edu)
UNDERLYING SCENARIO
After completion of my four years in the engineering
program of the greatest school in the land, the University of
Pittsburgh, I was grateful enough to land a job as a civil
engineer with the Northeast Water and Supply Company. As
an employee for the company and recent college graduate, it
was my position to construct new ways to collect waste water
in a city, recycle the water through chemical processes, and
distribute it back throughout the city as a usable and
consumable source. During my time at the University of
Pittsburgh, I had studied effective ways of water collection,
recycling, and distribution. I firmly believed that my
experience and specialties in this area could greatly benefit
my new employer.
In the past decade, Northeast Water and Supply has been a
leading innovator in water management systems especially
throughout the Middle East. Governments in countries such
as Yemen, Saudi Arabia, and Iraq had hired the Northeast
Water and Supply Company to develop a water management
system to support the cities in their respective countries.
These countries, being large producers in the oil and
agriculture industries, use approximately 85% of useful water
for agriculture [1]. With the poor water management systems
currently in place, the cities cannot support the inhabitants
with enough livable water. As the situation continues to get
worse every day, pressure mounts from the various
governments to create and install a water management system
that can recycle enough water to support the communities.
During my time with the company, my team and I have
managed to design multiple management systems capable of
installation in the Middle East, such as the Branch
Configuration, the Gridded Configuration, and the Loop
Configuration [2]. Our Loop Configuration, the most famous
and successful of our designs, has been selected to be
implemented in Middle Eastern cities immediately. This
multi-billion dollar system is capable of successfully
collecting rainwater and wastewater from the city with a
series of loop drains that connect to a main treatment plant.
The water is directed to a recycling plant where it is treated
with chemicals before being redistributed throughout the city
as running water. However, while our chemical treatment
process has shown to be successful the majority of the time
through testing, there are a minority of tests in which it has
failed.
Problems in Design
The recycled water in our system undergoes a process
where it is treated with a series of chemicals such as chlorine
University of Pittsburgh, Swanson School of Engineering 1
Submission Date 2014-10-28
to destroy bacteria and other harmful microorganisms. The
second step in our recycling process is to filter out a maximum
amount of chemicals. This filtering process is intended to
strain any human induced chemicals, as well as natural
bacteria that survived the first step. Unfortunately, a flaw in
design has developed at this step. Between this step of
filtering the water, and the final step of distributing the water,
it has been detected in some cases that a minute amount of
chemicals and bacteria have persisted the treatment and
filtering. Although it is a very small amount of chemicals, it
could potentially be harmful if released into the public. This
is a direct violation of the first canon in the Code of Ethics.
Once a system has malfunctioned, there is no way to fix it at
this point in time. It has been shown through testing that a
malfunction of the system will only happen within the first
five years. If the system survives this threshold, as most
systems do, it can last up to one hundred years with no further
issues. My team and I continue to progress in the reduction of
these chemicals and bacteria within our malfunctioning
systems every day. Nevertheless, the Middle East is in
desperate need of our system in order to sustain their cities.
Mounting Pressure
I was instructed to represent my team, along with my boss,
to attend a recent meeting with leaders of the Middle Eastern
country of Yemen. The cities of Yemen, such as Sana’a, are
in frantic need of a new water system. Over the course of the
meeting, the heads of the country made it very clear that a
water system needed to be implemented immediately. They
offered substantial funding for the process and requested that
construction begin as soon as possible. Though my boss and
I precisely stated that there was indeed a flaw in our system,
the leaders would not accept this. It became apparent that with
the well-being of their cities on the line, they needed an
immediate change and were not going to accept no as an
answer.
This put our team in a precarious situation. This was
without a doubt, the greatest opportunity for the company to
gain international fame. If a project of this magnitude was
successful, it could set Northeast Water and Supply Company
on an unprecedented path to international success. The only
difficulty was, in the eyes of our team, the system in which
the government wanted to be installed was indeed not yet
ready to be released to the public and would not be ready for
some time. There was no timetable on when the system could
be complete, but my fellow engineers had discuss at least a
few more months of testing. As the situation in the cities
continued to deteriorate, this was time that they simply did not
have. While advancements in the system were being made
Sean Soltysiak
should “hold paramount the safety, health, and welfare of the
public” [4]. Under this canon, it is my duty first and foremost,
to take the citizens’ well-being into account over any
opposing factor. It has been stated in several cases throughout
the history of the code of ethics that this canon takes
precedence over all other canons. Specifically addressed in
case number 13-11, “we [NSPE Board of Directors] further
believe that matters of public health and safety must take
precedence” [4]. In my scenario, this canon directly applies.
Although I know the system is safe in most cases, it is
definitely not one hundred percent successful every time. It
would be an extremely risky product to release to the public
until all the kinks are worked out.
It is also indicated as a professional obligation under the
NSPE Code of Ethics that “engineers shall advise their clients
or employers when they believe a project will not be
successful” [4]. Many times throughout this process I have
admitted to people above me, i.e. my boss, government
leaders, etc. that the release of our Loop system at this time
may be unsuccessful. Therefore, I am fulfilling this part of my
ethical duty, even though they continue to press onward in an
effort to install our current system. Ultimately the project is
under my judgment when to be installed, regardless of the
mass amount of pressure from my leaders.
every day, a simple breach in the system after it is installed
could lead to an engineering tragedy.
Bottom Line
In the meetings between my boss and I that followed upon
our return to the United States, he described his outlook for
the project going forward. He described that as the leader of
my team, the project was under my discretion. It was my job
to oversee that the system continued to progress. However, he
made it apparent that it needed to be installed immediately.
The opportunity to construct the system throughout Middle
Eastern countries was a gigantic breakthrough for the
company. He stated the ample funding that the countries were
willing to provide in order to get the construction of the
process underway immediately. If I could not accomplish the
task of providing the Middle East with an acceptable system
within the next few days, he specified, somebody else would
need to take over my position.
As my team continued to prepare the system for
installation in the Middle East, I was careful to review the
engineering code. It was apparent from the beginning that
releasing a possibly malfunctioning system to the public
violates the code of ethics. Also, under a project of this
magnitude, press conferences with the media could leak the
truth of a malfunctioning system under the third canon. I must
be truthful with the public about the ongoing operation,
including answering any questions about a possible
malfunction to the system. The third wrinkle in my dilemma
is the violation of different principles. Although not required
to obey these by law, violating these different principles could
lead to damaging my reputation as a professional engineer.
Third Canon
Although it is a fundamental principle of life to be honest
and trustworthy, it is required of every engineer by the Code
of Ethics. Under the third canon of the Code of Professional
Ethics for Chemical Engineers it states that “engineers shall
issue public statements only in an objective and truthful
manner” [5]. At the moment this canon does not directly apply
to my situation nor am I in violation of it. It is apparent in the
future, being the leader of a project with this magnitude, that
it would be my position to issue many public statements on
the description of the system along with the benefits to
society. Throughout these statements I would be obligated to
abide by the third canon and release information about the
system in place. This would include releasing information
about the possible malfunction of the system. Even though the
system we are to install most likely will be free of any
malfunctions, this slight risk could potentially damage my
reputation as an engineer. Even if there was no malfunction
to the system after it had been installed, I would have admitted
to a blatant violation of the first canon. The new system would
be an obvious violation to the first canon as it endangers the
public with possible bacteria and chemicals being distributed
throughout the running water. If I admitted this fact to the
public after it was constructed would determine if I violate the
third canon.
ETHICAL CHALLENGES
Our team has developed a system that is successful a
majority of the time. That is, on most occasions, no chemicals
or bacteria are released from the treatment center and
circulated through the recycled water. This system would be
acceptable if it intended to create non-potable water.
However, the intent of our Loop system is to create a standard
of water that can be classified as “purified recycled water” [3].
That is, the highest grade recycled water can achieve. It is
only under this classification that our recycled water can be
distributed as safe for consumption within the cities. At this
point in time, our system cannot purify water to that extent
every single time. It can achieve that goal on most occasions,
except for a fraction of times when the systems malfunctions.
First Canon
It is my job as leader of the project and group, to see that
this system is safe to the public. As an engineer, it is my
professional obligation to abide by the code of ethics. The
main dilemma in this situation, falls under canon number one
in the NSPE Code of Ethics. This canon states that engineers
Violation of Principles
Although the Code of Ethics describes many situations and
expectations in which the engineer is expected to observe;
2
Sean Soltysiak
there are underlying principles in which different codes are
derived from. These principles are not required to be followed
by law. Nevertheless, it is in an engineer’s best interest to
obey these principles in order to gain credibility and goo
recognition. If I were to implement our current system
throughout cities in the Middle East, I would be in violation
of two distinct principles.
The first is the Principle of the Common Good which reads
“recognition of situations in which the pursuit of rational selfinterest by each individual leads to outcomes that are
irrational and harmful to the interests of all individuals
involved” [6]. By establishing a system which was possibly
harmful to others in order for myself to acquire wealth or
gratification would be sacrilegious to this principle. The
leaders of the Yemen government clearly explained that they
had the funds in order for my team and I to complete this
project with ease. Although a bonus or bride was never
mentioned at the meeting, it seemed as if it could be in the
making if the project were successful.
Our project would also be in violation of the Principle of
Right Relationship or Responsible Stewardship. This
principle follows “the unsustainable use of an aquifer or the
biological degradation of a watershed and its dependent
ecosystems are forms of environmental malpractice” [6].
Presently our system is capable of the use of an artificial
aquifer to recycle water for the community. In few cases
however, it is unsustainable. The contradiction of this
principle would lead to a violation.
for public use. I cannot approve the system until it
continuously passes standard tests without concern. This
process could take anywhere between a week and a year.
Considering the immense amount of pressure from my boss
and the Yemen government officials, this decision is certainly
going to be unpopular. While the decision may cost me my
job, I believe it is the correct and ethical way to approach the
problem.
RECOMMENDATIONS TO ENGINEERS
As opportunities in the workplace come along, such as
this one, it is important to stay true to yourself and your goals
as an engineer. According to Clemson University Engineering
Code of Ethics, it is a good idea to take a step back and
understand if the decision you are about to make is moral,
ethical, and lawful. If your decision obeys all three of those
requirements, you may proceed with the plan [7].
In my scenario, it would certainly be unethical to install a
system in Yemen as it currently runs. The system directly
violates the first canon of endangering the public. It would put
myself on a path to violate the third canon if I described the
system as “safe” to the public. While the system may be safe,
we cannot tell for certain at this time. I would also be morally
wrong to install a system that violates the Principle of the
Common Good and the Principle of Right Relationship or
Responsible Stewardship. Although very tempting, allowing
myself to install a risky system for public use and taking
financial gains is extremely immoral.
Therefore, I will inform my boss that if I am to be the one
to install the system that I will need to make sure it is
completely safe and properly functioning before construction
begins. It would be against my will, right, and moral to
endanger the public under my supervision. Although my boss
wants to install the system as soon as possible, it is not ready
3
Sean Soltysiak
REFERENCES
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
[1] A. Barton. (2014). “Water in Crisis – Middle East” Crisis
Spotlight. (Online Article) http://thewaterproject.org/waterin-crisis-middle-east
I would like to thank my Engineering 0011 team of Sravan
and Pat for keeping me on track throughout the writing of this
paper. Their support was essential to the creation of this
article. Also, this paper would not be possible without the help
of the online Libguide for helping me find the best sources
available to supply for this document. Thank you.
[2] M. Jolly, L. Sebastian Bryson, L. Ormsbee. (2014).
“Research Database of Water Distribution System Models”
Journal of Water Resources Planning and Management
(Online Article)
http://ascelibrary.org/doi/abs/10.1061/%28ASCE%29WR.19
43-5452.0000352
[3] J. Bleijie. (2013). “Non-potable Water” Workplace
Health and Safety (Online Article)
http://www.deir.qld.gov.au/workplace/hazards/dangers/nonpotable-water/index.htm#.VE_fFvnF98G
[4] NSPE Executive Committee. (2014). “NSPE Code of
Ethics for Engineers” National Society of Professional
Engineers (Online Article)
http://www.nspe.org/resources/ethics/code-ethics
[5] CHBME Executive Committee. (2013). “Code of
Professional Ethics” American Institute of Chemical
Engineers (Online Article)
http://chbme.eng.usf.edu/graduate/docs/Code%20of%20Prof
essional%20Ethics.pdf
[6] B. Jennings, P. Heltne, K. Kintzele. (2009). “Principles of
Water Ethics” Center for Humans & Nature (Online Article)
http://www.humansandnature.org/principles-of-water-ethicsarticle-35.php
[7] P. Mack. (2005). “Professional ethics is different from
personal morality.” Engineering Ethics (Online Article)
http://www.clemson.edu/caah/history/FacultyPages/PamMac
k/lec122/engeth.htm
ADDITIONAL SOURCES
“Case No. 13-11” (2014). National Society of Professional
Engineers (Online Article)
http://www.nspe.org/sites/default/files/BER%20Case%20No
%2013-11-FINAL.pdf
Dr. Ron Buckman. “Ye Olde Water Main (Case 1033)”
Texas Tech University Ethics Cases (Oline Article)
http://www.depts.ttu.edu/murdoughcenter/products/cases.ph
p
“Honesty’s Always the Best Policy” (2007). Northeastern
University WebGuru (Online Article)
http://www.webguru.neu.edu/professionalism/casestudies/honestys-always-best-policy
4