Mahboobin, 10:00
L14
THE SEWER CRISIS: AN ETHICAL DILEMMA
Emily Zapinski (ejz8@pitt.edu)
INTRODUCTION
As cities become more populated, more pressure is
put on aging infrastructure to keep up with increasing
demand for electricity, clean water, public transportation,
and waste management. One main issue has arisen over the
past few years: the combined sewage system. Most sewage
systems in the United States were designed and implemented
in the early twentieth century, making them ineffective and
very difficult to replace by today’s standards. Making
changes to existing sewer systems in order to keep up with
more volumes of wastewater can be costly and difficult.
Pittsburgh is experiencing combined sewage overflows, an
event where the sewer system overflows and leaks raw
sewage into nearby rivers and streams. The sewer authority
of Pittsburgh has been tasked with coming up with a solution
that will address the issue. The process of coming up with an
effective solution is not an easy one and questions of ethics
have arisen regarding the spending of public funds as well as
a questionable method used in order to gain the approval of
the Environmental Protection Agency.
THE TASK AT HAND
The sewer system and treatment plant is one of the
most important parts of a developed area; however, many
sewer systems were designed and implemented decades ago,
using primitive technology and with the intention of
servicing only a few thousand people. Many of these early
systems built were combined sewage systems, which has,
over time, proven to be a highly ineffective method. For
areas with combined sewage systems, in which raw sewage
and storm water are transported to a water treatment plant in
a singular pipe, the rush of storm water, combined with the
sewage in the same system, results in a combined sewage
overflow. In the event of a combined sewage overflow, raw
sewage is forced out of the combined pipe system through
directly connected manholes and drainage openings. This
leakage can flow into nearby bodies of water and even flood
residential basements, resulting in contamination and the
spread of bacteria and viruses to areas that are not at all
intended to be exposed to such [1].
Like many other cities’ sewage system,
Pittsburgh’s combined sewage system was designed in the
early twentieth century. The city has grown since the sewage
system was put into place, and now many more families,
businesses, and nearby municipalities rely on Pittsburgh’s
decades-old sewage system. The damaging effects of
University of Pittsburgh, Swanson School of Engineering 1
2014-10-28
Pittsburgh’s failing sewage system become apparent when
looking at the region’s rivers. Unfortunately, the rivers
become unsanitary in the summer months due to sewage
overflow and Allegheny County must issue a river advisory
warning visitors to limit any contact with river water. River
advisories have been issued and lasted approximately 70
days every summer since 1995. Moreover, 3 Rivers Wet
Weather describes the situation as a public health issue:
“While exposure to disease-causing organisms, such as
giardia or cryptosporidium, are not considered fatal for a
healthy adult, they can be deadly for those with weaker
immune systems, the elderly and small children. In addition,
Pittsburgh’s three rivers serve as the main source of drinking
water for 90% of Allegheny County residents” [1].
The task of finding a solution is closely related to
engineering macroethics, a term used to describe the shared
goal among engineers to treat large-scale public projects
with the utmost importance because of the high number of
people impacted by the decisions and changes [2]. Engineers
and city officials are struggling to find solutions that are
viable and will stop combined sewage overflow
permanently. On one hand, the engineers and planners are
faced with what seems like an impossible situation: repairing
an old, delicate sewage system that spans for miles,
transports thousands of gallons of water, and plays a daily
role in millions of people’s lives. In addition, the engineers
must come up with a solution that does not involve repairing
the entirety of the sewage system directly, but a
supplemental aspect that will help take the heavy load off
the sewage system. The sewage system cannot be repaired or
replaced directly because it is miles underneath developed
areas, and it would be nearly impossible to reach and repair
without severely disrupting the developed areas above. One
the other hand, the residents of Pittsburgh deserve a
functioning sewer system that does not pollute the rivers and
pose a public health threat.
THE PROPOSED SOLUTION AND
SCENARIO
The push to solve Pittsburgh’s combined sewage
overflow problem came when the US Environmental
Protection Agency, the PA Department of Environmental
Protection, and the Allegheny County Health Department
issued a consent degree to the Allegheny County Sanitary
Authority (ALCOSAN), on the grounds that ALCOSAN
was not complying with the regulations laid down by the
Clean Water Act and Combined Sewer Overflow Control
Policy [3]. The Clean Water Act regulates the discharge of
Emily Zapinski
pollutants into waterways. The Clean Water Act also made it
illegal to discharge pollutants from a man-made source into
a waterway without a permit [4]. The Combined Sewage
Overflow Control Policy is an additional EPA-issued
document that acts as a guide to municipalities and officials
on how to realistically make changes to water treatment that
will result in compliance with the Clean Water Act [5].
Suddenly, Pittsburgh’s combined sewage overflow
problem has become a federal problem. As ALCOSAN does
not have a permit that allows the combined sewage
overflows, something must be done to address the issue.
More specifically, the federal order demands that the
combined sewage overflow problem be completely remedied
by 2026 [6].
Finding a solution has proven to be no easy task for
my team of civil and environmental engineers here at
ALCOSAN. I lead the team of engineers in coming up with
solutions, and we propose the solutions to the director from
the Department of Engineered Solutions. If she approves the
plan, then we submit the plan to EPA for federal approval.
Not only do we have to come up with an effective method
that puts an end to the combined sewage overflow, but we
also need to be concerned with the financial aspect, as well
as legal issues on the city, state, and federal level.
It has taken us many years. But my team has come
up with a solution that we think could drastically improve
the combined sewage overflow situation. The solution relies
heavily on gray infrastructure, which means it involves
constructing larger collection pipes in some areas that
eventually feed into three immense underground storm water
storage tanks. ALCOSAN, the water treatment plant, will
also be expanded, so it will be able to treat larger amounts of
water at a time. Overall, the projected cost is around $2
billion, and only addresses 79 percent of the combined
sewage overflow. A previous plan accounted for 100 percent
of the problem, but at a cost of $3.6 billon, the plan was
deemed too expensive [7].
Though my team and I have worked tirelessly on
trying to come up with a solution, there is no perfect answer.
The current plan, though our best one yet, has some
significant shortcomings. The cost is very large, and the
funding will come from increased taxes, which is always a
detriment to taxpayers. The people of Pittsburgh are funding
this project, and as engineers, my team and I have to come
up with a solution that will effectively solve the sewage
issue. This has been an enormous weight to try and grapple
with. The longer it takes to find a solution, the more our
rivers are polluted. If we make a mistake in the plans or
something goes wrong with throughout the building process,
it could potentially leave residents without clean water,
while costing them even more money. Needless to say, many
engineers, myself included, are very aware of the serious
negative outcomes that could arise throughout the
completion of this project. My team and I serve the people
of Pittsburgh, and any mistakes in our work could
compromise not only our integrity as engineers, but also the
entire community of Pittsburgh.
Another issue with our proposed plan is that it lacks
green infrastructure. Green infrastructure is the use of
nature-based innovations like rain gardens, bioswales, urban
forests, and permeable pavement that help decrease the
volume of storm water that enters the sewage system. Rain
gardens, bioswales, and urban forests direct storm water into
depressed areas where water-loving plants, like perennials,
painted ferns, and white cedar trees, soak up the storm water.
If less water is directed into the sewage system during a
storm, the sewer system will be able to manage the increased
volume of water without overflowing. Many residents, nonprofit organizations, and community leaders have called for
the implementation of green infrastructure into our solution
plan in order to lower the cost and cater to wants of the
community. However, ALCOSAN is wary of incorporating
important aspects of the plan that are not guaranteed because
they rely on third parties. For example, if my team of
engineers plans around the fact that a certain volume of
water will be redirected to a rain garden built by a
community, but for some reason a complication arises and
the rain garden is not built, then the design plan is now
inaccurate and faulty. The topic of green infrastructure
presents a difficult ethical dilemma because my team serves
the community’s needs and interests, but it is also very
important to ensure that the solution we come up with will
work under a variety of conditions.
The final, and arguably most difficult hurdle that
my team and I need to overcome is the fact that in order for
construction to begin and the combined sewage overflow
problem be fixed, our plan needs to be approved by the EPA.
My team and I are a group of genuinely good engineers who
are dedicated to solving this issue and improving our
community. Unfortunately, I cannot say that this is true of
all people involved with this project. My boss has become
increasingly concerned with her job security and trying to
improve ALCOSAN’s public image. She has asked me to
skew some test results to show that out plan is more
effective than it really is, in order to get the EPA approval.
Yes, the changes would result in EPA approval, but they
would be inaccurate, and the plan would not actually solve
the combined sewage overflow problem as well as it had
claimed to. Were I to follow my boss’s orders and change
the results, I would be compromising my job, as well as the
job of every person on my team. When faced with a difficult
dilemma such as this, it is important to remember why one
became an engineer and the codes of ethics that one
promised to uphold upon becoming an engineer.
THE ETHICAL IMPLICATIONS
In order to get a better idea of what the correct way
to process would be, I re-read the National Society of
Professional Engineer’s Code of Ethics as well as the Code
2
Emily Zapinski
of Ethics for the American Society of Civil Engineers. The
first canon listed in the National Society’s Code says that
engineers shall “Hold paramount the safety, health, and
welfare of the public” [8]. This first principle is very
relevant to the issue and decision-making process. This
project is designed to serve and better the community. That
means my team and I must be very careful in planning this
publicly funded project. The opinions and wants of the
community should be kept in mind at all times when
working to come up with an effective solution. Similarly, the
American Society of Civil Engineers’ Code says “Engineers
shall hold paramount the safety, health and welfare of the
public and shall strive to comply with the principles of
sustainable development in the performance of their
professional duties.” It goes on to say that engineers should
be committed to improving the environment and that
sustainable development “enhances the quality of life of the
general public” [9]. This canon directly relates to the issue of
green infrastructure’s in the issue. The canon clearly states
that sustainable development, which includes green
infrastructure, should be incorporated into projects.
Additionally, the public strongly supports incorporating the
green infrastructure. The canon also stresses that the safety
and welfare is the most important aspect of a project. In the
given situation, these values seem to be conflicting.
Incorporating green infrastructure could compromise public
safety. Unfortunately, there is no clear-cut answer, even
when keeping the Codes in mind.
The Codes regarding the other issue in question are
more definite. According to the NSPE Code of Ethics,
engineers should avoid deceptive acts and act responsibly
and honorably [8]. There’s no doubt that altering test results,
like my boss has asked me to do, would violate these two
canons. The ASCE Code of Ethics states that engineers
“shall act with zero-tolerance for bribery, fraud, and
corruption” [9]. The Codes clearly express that manipulating
the test results would be very wrong. They do not specify,
however, how one should proceed if asked by their boss to
be involved in fraud. Thankfully, many articles have been
written to guide engineers when they are faced with tough
ethical dilemmas.
Most engineering ethics issues are not black and
white and are tough decisions to make. When the American
Academy of Mechanical Engineers surveyed engineers
around the United States about ethical dilemmas, most said
they would discuss the issue with a supervisor. That would
be difficult, as my supervisor is the one asking me to
perform the questionable act. Others suggested confronting
the individual, which would also be difficult, because my job
depends on my boss, and I would like to keep my job. The
next popular option was to bring the issue to attention to the
senior management, which would be the managers who are
in charge of my boss [10]. Though this method has a
possibility of backfiring if my boss denies the allegations, I
agree and think that honesty is the best policy. In a different
article, Ed Harris, an ethics of engineering professor at
Texas A&M University argues that the best approach to
ethics in engineering is to stress the positive factors of
engineering accomplishments, rather than focus on methods
that prevent misconduct and abuses. A more open and
welcoming work environment can help brighten the outlook
and discourage malpractice more effectively than harsh
punishments [2]. I agree with Dr. Harris, but switching to a
more positive outlook can be difficult to achieve when you
and your team are under immense pressure to come up with
an all-inclusive, multi-billion dollar solution that will be
approved. This article was well intentioned but a little
unrealistic, given the circumstances.
Lastly, I looked up two additional articles that
seemed like they may be helpful when coming up with a
solution. The articles appeared in a newspaper and featured a
story similar to ours: a city experiencing a combined sewage
overflow problem that had been brought to the attention of
the EPA. The first article detailed this city’s outline and
solution to the combined sewage overflow issue, which
closely followed the CSO Control Policy [7]. The second
article revealed that the city’s plan had been rejected and
took an approach that focused more on the perspectives and
opinions of the surrounding community [6]. Because the
city’s plan failed to pass inspection, the articles were not of
much use to me from a technical standpoint. The articles did
help me to realize that no one expects me to come up with a
perfect solution because there is no perfect solution. The
members of the Pittsburgh community are ready and willing
to assist in any way that can. A solution needs to be
procured, but I realized that people understand the tough
position I am in and want to help.
DECISION AND RECOMMENDATION
After spending many hours thinking about and
researching my current situation, I believe I have reached
my decision, or at least what I think I will do. In regard to
dealing with my boss, I will talk to the senior management,
the people who are in charge of my boss. I feel that bringing
my boss’s questionable request to the attention of our
superiors is the correct thing to do. This will help ensure that
no one from the community is impacted by any engineer’s
bad decision. As for dealing with the community desires and
allocating the funds in a responsible way, I think safety and
welfare override the importance of green infrastructure.
Stopping the combined sewage overflows in a safe manner is
the main concern of this project, however I do think a
community outreach program could be very beneficial and I
would like to incorporate green infrastructure into the design
plan in any way possible.
As for my advice on engineers who are facing
tough ethical dilemmas, I would say that a lot of people are
struggling with this and are under pressure. You are
certainly not the only person experiencing this hardship.
Remember that people will understand and will want to help,
3
Emily Zapinski
[7] D. Hopey. (2014). “EPA Calls Alcosan’s $2 Billion
Sewer System Proposal Deficient.” Pittsburgh Post-Gazette.
(online article).
http://www.post-gazette.com/local/city/2014/01/31/Federalofficials-say-Alcosan-s-sewer-upgrade-plan-doesn-t-go-farenough/stories/201401310158.
[8] National Society of Professional Engineers. (2013).
“NSPE Code of Ethics for Engineers.” (online article).
http://www.nspe.org/resources/ethics/code-ethics.
[9] American Society of Civil Engineers. (2012). “Code of
Ethics.” (online article).
http://www.asce.org/Ethics/Code-of-Ethics/.
[10] M. MacRae. (2012). “Do the Right Thing.” ASME.org.
(online article).
https://www.asme.org/engineeringtopics/articles/engineering-ethics/do-the-right-thing.
if you reach out to them. Remember why you became an
engineer and remember the Codes of Ethics you promised to
uphold. Once integrity is lost, it can never be made up, so do
the right thing.
CONCLUSION
Pittsburgh’s sewage system is failing, and as
engineers at the Allegheny County Sewer Authority, it is up
to my team and I to come up with a solution. The carefully
designed solution that will stop combined sewer overflows is
not small feat. It is the result of years of research and will
require billions of dollars of taxes. That means a large part
of the issue means spending the publicly raised funds in a
way that both tackles the issue effectively and addresses the
wants of the community. The health and safety of the public
is overall most important, but the opinions of the community
should not be cast aside. Though the project needs approval
from the EPA, the approval should stem from the fact that
our solution is effective and will work for the benefit of the
community, not because test results were changed. Overall,
the topic of ethics in engineering isn’t always easy or simple,
but thankfully there are many resources available to
engineers who are struggling to do the right thing.
ADDITIONAL SOURCES
National Society of Engineers. (2014). “Public Health and
Safety—Delay in Addressing Fire Code Violations.” (online
case study).
http://www.nspe.org/sites/default/files/BER%20Case%20No
%2013-11-FINAL.pdf.
National Institute for Engineering Ethics. (2013). “The
Leaning Tower: A Timely Dilemma.” (online case study).
http://www.depts.ttu.edu/murdoughcenter/products/cases.ph
p.
WebGuru. (200). “The Cost of Integrity.” (online case
study).
http://www.webguru.neu.edu/professionalism/casestudies/cost-integrity.
RESOURCES
[1] 3 Rivers Wet Weather. (2014). “About the Wet Weather
Issue”
(publicly-funded
and
available
research).
http://www.3riverswetweather.org/about-wet-weather-issue.
[2] M. Crawford. (2012). “Engineers Must Embrace
Aspirational Ethics.” ASME.org. (online article).
https://www.asme.org/engineeringtopics/articles/engineering-ethics/engineers-must-embraceaspirational-ethics.
[3] Allegheny County Sewer Authority. (2012).
“ALCOSAN Draft Wet Weather Plan.” (online article).
http://www.alcosan.org/WetWeatherIssues/ALCOSANDraft
WetWeatherPlan/tabid/175/Default.aspx.
[4] The Environmental Protection Agency. (2010).
“Summary of the Clean Water Act.” (publicly-funded
research).
http://www2.epa.gov/laws-regulations/summary-cleanwater-act.
[5] The Environmental Protection Agency. (2011). “CSO
Control Policy.” (publicly-funded research).
http://water.epa.gov/polwaste/npdes/cso/CSO-ControlPolicy.cfm.
[6] K. Riely. (2014). “Alcosan Adding Green Element to
Sewer System Fix.” Pittsburgh Post-Gazette. (online
article).
http://www.postgazette.com/local/region/2014/02/16/Alcosan-adding-greenelement-to-sewer-system-fix/stories/201402160103.
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
I’d like to thank Naomi Anderson for being a true
inspiration, as well as my father, who works with
wastewater.
4
Mahboobin, 10:00
L14
University of Pittsburgh, Swanson School of Engineering 5
2014-10-28