The objectives of this project were 1) to study the aspects of conduct and ethics related to engineering practice under the provisions of the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA) and 2) to develop a mutually agreed upon set of ethical principles. The NAFTA has requirements for addressing the practice of all professions in the three nations, including standards of conduct and ethics and the nature of disciplinary action for non-conformity with those standards. This project addressed these requirements as they relate specifically to the practice of engineering. A six-person team was established with two representatives from each nation who were senior officials in professional organizations in their own country. The team met a total of six times, first identifying the issues of cultural differences that would be faced in engineering practice. The team then researched the several ethics codes from all three nations and ultimately developed a set of common principles. These principles of ethical conduct were formally approved by the NAFTA Forum on Engineering Practice, and were subsequently included among other agreements involving engineering practice in the Engineering Mutual Recognition Document which was signed and presented to the US Free Trade Commission in June 1995. Subsequently, several seminars have been conducted and conference papers presented as a result of this project.

The Murdough Center for Engineering Professionalism at Texas Tech University has been involved in aspects of professional conduct and ethics in international engineering practice since October 1990. The National Leadership Conference of US Registration Board Chairmen and Presidents, which was hosted by the Center in October 1990, concerned engineering practice, engineering education and registration issues. In June, 1992, the Mexico/USA Engineering Roundtable I, attended by 50 engineering leaders from Mexico and the US, was hosted by the Center and concerned engineering practice in the two countries. The current NAFTA Forum on Engineering Practice, which has been officially recognized by the governments of the NAFTA nations as the group to address the engineering aspects of NAFTA, is an outgrowth of the 1992 meeting.

The NAFTA Forum on Engineering Practice has eighteen official representatives, six from each country. The representatives from the US are designated by the United States Council for International Engineering Practice (USCIEP); the representatives from Canada are designated by the Canadian Council for Professional Engineers and the representatives from Mexico are designated by several Mexico organizations: FECIC, CICM, CIEES, CONIQQ and CIME. The original eighteen representatives that make up the membership of the NAFTA Forum on Engineering Practice are:

Original Members of the NAFTA Forum on Engineering Practice

The Project

The provisions of the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA) include requirements for addressing the practice of the professions across the borders of Canada, Mexico and the United States. These requirements include "conduct and ethics." Among the various issues being considered under the NAFTA, the issue of conduct and professional ethics is an essential element in implementing the NAFTA. In fact, the ethical aspects of international engineering practice may be the thread that holds the process together in future engineering endeavors.

Thus, the objective of this project was to address the professional conduct and ethics aspect involved in the engineering relationships among the three countries. Section A of Annex 1210.5 of Chapter 12 of the North American Free Trade Agreement addresses Professional Services. Article 3 (d), conduct and ethics… standards of professional conduct and the nature of disciplinary action for non-conformity with those standards, is the primary focus of the project. Articles 3 (e) and (f) of Section A also relate to conduct and ethics and will be secondary considerations. This section of the NAFTA is included here.

NAFTA ANNEX 1210.5
Professional Services
Section A - General Provisions

Processing of Applications for Licenses and Certifications

1. Each Party shall ensure that its competent authorities, within a reasonable time after the submission by a national of another Party of an application for a license or certification:

(a) where the application is complete, make a determination on the application and inform the applicant of that determination; or

(b) where the application is not complete, inform the applicant without undue delay of the status of the application and the additional information that is required under the Party's law.

2. The Parties shall encourage the relevant bodies in their respective territories to develop mutually acceptable standards and criteria for licensing and certification of professional service providers and to provide recommendations on mutual recognition to the Commission.

3. The standards and criteria referred to in paragraph 2 may be developed with regard to the following matters:

(a) education - accreditation of schools or academic programs;

(b) examinations - qualifying examinations for licensing, including alternative methods of assessment such as oral examinations and interviews;

(c) experience - length and nature of experience required for licensing;

(d) conduct and ethics - standards of professional conduct and the nature of disciplinary action for non-conformity with those standards;

(e) professional development and re-certification - continuing education and ongoing requirements to maintain professional certification;

(f) scope of practice - extent of, or limitations on, permissible activities;

(g) local knowledge - requirements for knowledge of such matters as local laws, regulations, language, geography or climate; and

(h) consumer protection - alternatives to residency requirements, including bonding, professional liability insurance and client restitution funds, to provide for the protection of consumers.

4. On receipt of a recommendation referred to in paragraph 2, the Commission shall review the recommendation within a reasonable time to determine whether it is consistent with this Agreement. Based on the Commission's review, each Party shall encourage its respective competent authorities, where appropriate, to implement the recommendation within a mutually agreed time.

Temporary Licensing

5. Where the Parties agree, each Party shall encourage the relevant bodies in its territory to develop procedures for temporary licensing of professional services providers of another Party.

Review

6. The Commission shall periodically, and at least once every three years, review the implementation of this Section.

In order for the spirit of the NAFTA to be successfully carried out in the professional engineering services area, there was a need for the three nations to develop, as a team, a mutually acceptable set of standards and criteria under which engineers from all three nations can practice. This need involved more than just rules; it also included exploring and developing mechanisms that will convey among engineers of all three nations the fundamental responsibilities that they have toward their clients, their governments, and the public.

The Plan

The research plan included the conduct of the five phases listed and described plus this final report. The that will involve research at the team member's and advisor's home office and attendance of the team and selected advisors at meetings in the US, Mexico and Canada.

Phase I: Organize the research team and the advisors
Phase I of the work involved organizing a research team from the three nations. The team consisted of six (6) individuals, two from each of the three nations, designated by the respective nations, assisted by a group of seven (7) advisors. One of the team members from each country also served on the eighteen member NAFTA Forum on Engineering Practice. The project staff, research team members, and the advisors are listed below.

Project Staff

Team Members

Advisors

Phase II: Determine the issues to be considered
Phase II of the project involved determining the critical issues. At the first meeting on May 26-29, 1994 the research team met at the Murdough Center for Engineering Professionalism, Texas Tech University, Lubbock, Texas. At this meeting, the team determined what each nation believed were issues that should be included in the study, and prepared an outline of a brief status report on the meeting.

1) The following issues were considered important in the study:

1. The diversity of cultures
2. The responsibility of engineers to clients, governments, and the public
3. The understanding and expectations of the public regarding engineering practice
4. The understanding and expectations of the governments regarding engineering practice
5. The definition and mutual understanding of "protecting the public health, safety and welfare"
6. The nature of a set of standards and criteria related to professional conduct and ethics
7. The nature of disciplinary action for non-conformity with those standards
8. Several secondary issues

2) Status Report

The meeting consisted of a half-day general discussion (brainstorming session) on what issues needed to be addressed by the team; a half-day of listing and prioritizing the issues and developing a strategy as to how to address the issues; a full day of working sessions on the issues identified; and concluded with a short working meeting on the third day to discuss and summarize the results of the meeting.

The team, project staff and advisors identified and considered the following:

Comparison of ethics codes

• Produce a preliminary list comparing the issues from various codes from each country
• Identify the common issues
• Identify the uncommon issues
• Attempt to resolve the uncommon issues
              [Does not mean the development of a common code at this time]

Methods of enforcing current codes for temporary licensees

Issues under consideration for future discussion

Enforcement; Feasibility of Model Code; Feasibility of International Board of Ethical Review; Consistent Terminology; and Disciplinary Due Process

Phase III: Develop preliminary report to NAFTA Forum on Engineering Practice
A preliminary report and a request for suggestions were presented by the team at the NAFTA Forum on Engineering Practice at the June 1-4, 1994 meeting in Jackson Hole, Wyoming.

A preliminary list of issues on conduct and ethics was presented for the Forum’s consideration; this list is not included here since it appears in Phase IV as a more refined list.

Preliminary recommendations and questions on enforcement were also presented and discussed at the Wyoming meeting. Enforcement studies included interim recommendations and questions.

Interim Enforcement Recommendations

1. When an engineer is required to have a license to perform engineering services in a specific jurisdiction, the engineer is obligated to conform to the Code of Ethics and Rules of Professional Practice in that jurisdiction.

2. If an engineer violates the Code of Ethics or Rules of Professional Practice in a specific jurisdiction where the services are being provided, the responsible Board, Association or College in that jurisdiction shall take appropriate disciplinary action.

3. The disciplinary action shall be promptly reported to all other jurisdictions in which the engineer is licensed to practice.

a. To make implementation of this provision effective, the application for temporary or reciprocal licensing must include a complete list of jurisdictions in which the engineer holds a license.

b. A statement will be included on the licensing application that, if a disciplinary action is taken against the applicant, the applicant gives permission for distribution of information regarding the disciplinary action to all jurisdictions where the engineer is licensed.

Questions for Discussion in Wyoming

1. If an engineer, who currently has a legal right to practice in several U.S. States as well as Mexico or Canada, is involved in an engineering project in NAFTA Jurisdiction X and does something which causes Jurisdiction X to discipline the engineer:

a. Would that engineer also be disciplined by the other NAFTA jurisdictions?

b. Which jurisdictions currently exercise authority to discipline an engineer based on disciplinary action in another jurisdiction?

c. What would be an effective way to inform all other affected jurisdictions of the action taken by the NAFTA Jurisdiction X?

2. Once an engineer has been disciplined in one jurisdiction, should this information be available to all other NAFTA jurisdictions, should the person apply for registration? If so, how?

At the June 1994 meeting, Forum members provided advice and guidance to the team on both ethics and enforcement issues. Their input served as the basis for the next phase.

Phase IV: Refine list of issues and conduct research on the issues identified

The team met in Mexico City September 8 - 10, 1994 to continue its deliberations on ethics and enforcement issues. A list of vital elements in the codes of ethics from all three nations was refined so the team could focus their attention on the elements in common. Several codes from each nation were studied. The table below includes only one sample code from each nation.

"P" INDICATES FOUND IN "PREAMBLE"
"1, 2, 3, ... " INDICATES REFERENCE LOCATION WITHIN THE CODE
"*" INDICATES THIS ISSUE IS NOT SPECIFIED IN THIS CODE

At the conclusion of the Mexico City meeting, the first draft of a set of Principles of Ethical Conduct in Engineering Practice under the NAFTA was developed. The draft principles were presented for discussion and input at the NAFTA Forum meeting in Ottawa, Ontario, Canada on September 22-24, 1994. This draft is included here to give an indication of how the wording evolved during the project.

Ethics - Working Draft
PRINCIPLES OF ETHICAL CONDUCT IN ENGINEERING PRACTICE
UNDER THE NORTH AMERICAN FREE TRADE AGREEMENT

The privilege of practicing engineering is entrusted to those qualified and who accept have the responsibility of for applying engineering skills, scientific knowledge and ingenuity for the advancement of human welfare and quality of life. Fundamental principles of conduct of the engineers include truth, honesty and trustworthiness in their service to society, and honourable and ethical practice showing fairness, courtesy and good faith toward clients, colleagues and others. Engineers take societal, cultural, economic, environmental and safety aspects into consideration, along with and strive for the efficient use of the world’s resources to meet long term human needs. In the practice of engineering:

1. Engineers shall hold paramount the health, safety and welfare of the general public in the practice of their profession; this principle supersedes all other principles.

2. Engineers shall practice only in their areas of competence, in a careful and diligent manner and in conformance with all applicable standards, codes and regulations.

3. Engineers shall examine the societal and environmental impact of their actions and projects, including the wise use and conservation of resources and energy, in order to make informed recommendations and decisions.

4. Engineers shall sign and take personal responsibility for only that all engineering work which they performed prepared or directly supervised. With written authorization an engineer may sign and take personal responsibility for work prepared by others but only after thorough and careful verification. Work prepared and signed by a licensed engineer may also be signed by an engineer who did not directly supervise the work, but only with the written authorization of the engineer who originally prepared the work.

5. Engineers shall act as faithful agents for their employers or clients, maintaining confidentiality, and avoid conflicts of interest. Unavoidable conflicts of interest must be disclosed to all interested parties. avoiding real or perceived conflicts of interest whenever possible, disclosing them to all interested parties when they do exist.

6. Engineers shall inform employers or clients or both of possible consequences of actions or projects, and of engineering decisions or judgments that are overruled or disregarded. When necessary to issue public statements, engineers shall do so in an objective and truthful manner.

7. Engineers should, as a part of their responsibility to the health, safety and welfare of the public, should report to the proper authorities any public works, engineering decisions or practice that endangers the health, safety and welfare of the public. Where the situation a significant risk to the public remains unresolved, an engineer may ethically report such practices the situation to the public.

8. Engineers should enhance society's awareness of engineers’ responsibilities to the public and should promote responsibility, commitment, and ethics both in the education and practice phases of engineering.

9. Engineers shall treat all persons equally and fairly, regardless of race, religion, gender, disability, age or national origin and shall avoid injuring others, their property, the reputation or employment by false or malicious action or welfare of others. [Note: Two team members say this is OK but may not be necessary]

10. Engineers should commit to life-long learning, strive to advance the body of engineering knowledge and promote opportunities for the professional advancement of colleagues.

NOTE: STRIKEOUT & ITALICIZED WORDS WERE REVISIONS IN THE TEAM-REVIEW PHASE - SEPT, 1994.

Phase V: Develop recommendations for consideration by the three nations
During this phase of the project, the draft recommendations were refined based on oral and written comments from the Forum members and others in attendance. With this input, the research continued and the documents were refined and studied in depth by the team members and selected advisors. A 2-day team meeting was then held in Puerto Vallarta, Mexico on January 24-25, 1995 to get the team and selected advisors together to finalize the recommendations.

Over 1,000 person-hours were spent in developing the final document including a preamble and ten statements.

This phase of the work finalized the recommendations for official consideration by the three nations on both ethics and enforcement. Most of the "Enforcement" recommendations were incorporated into appropriate sections of the Forum document. The enforcement recommendations were:

Enforcement Provisions Related To Engineering Practice
Under The North American Free Trade Agreement

The NAFTA Principles of Ethical Conduct in Engineering Practice are intended as guidelines to the engineering profession in each NAFTA nation and as an inspiration to engineers practicing in those nations. It is recognized that the practice of engineering in each nation is governed by the existing statutes in each local jurisdiction, namely:

An engineer who is licensed to perform engineering services in a specific jurisdiction is obligated to conform to the Code of Ethics and Rules and Regulations of Professional Practice of that jurisdiction.

The licensing authority will take appropriate disciplinary action if an engineer violates the Code of Ethics or Rules and Regulations of Professional Practice of that jurisdiction.

Provisions:

1. Each jurisdiction shall require an engineer to maintain a current list of all jurisdictions in which a license is held, to transmit that list to those jurisdictions, and to provide that information to a jurisdiction to which an application is submitted.

2. Each jurisdiction shall promptly report sanctions to all other jurisdictions in which the engineer is licensed to practice.

3. A jurisdiction shall take appropriate action, subject to due process, related to a sanction that is reported to them by another jurisdiction.

4. An application for licensure must include disclosure of sanctions related to engineering practice in other jurisdictions. Information regarding sanctions will be considered in the licensing process.

5. An application for licensure must include the applicant’s written permission to distribute and exchange information regarding sanctions between all involved jurisdictions.

6. Failure to fully disclose or provide any of the required information may be the basis for denial of the license to practice engineering, or sanctions, including revocation of the license.

Implementation of the above provisions would be facilitated by:

1. establishment of one source of information in each nation of licensure status and sanctions, if any, of all licensed engineers;

2. creation of a list of consistent terminology defining terms related to sanctions; and

3. development of communication mechanisms to assist engineers in understanding their responsibilities when licensed in various jurisdictions.

Recommendations of the research team and staff on "Principles of Conduct and Ethics Related to Engineering Practice Under the NAFTA" were presented to the 18 member NAFTA Forum on Engineering Practice representing the cognizant organizations in the three nations. The recommendations were formally approved by vote of the Forum at their meeting in Puerto Vallarta, Mexico on January 28, 1995.

The following final Conclusions and Recommendations on the Principles of Ethical Conduct in Engineering Practice under the North American Free Trade Agreement were subsequently included among other matters related to engineering practice in Canada, Mexico, and USA. The NAFTA Forum document, including the Principles of Ethical Conduct, was presented to the US Free Trade Commission by the NAFTA Forum on Engineering Practice in June 1995 in Washington DC. The project director and several team members attended the Washington meeting and observed as the Mutual Recognition Document was signed and presented to the US Trade Commissioner, Mickey Kantor.

PRINCIPLES OF ETHICAL CONDUCT IN ENGINEERING PRACTICE
UNDER THE NORTH AMERICAN FREE TRADE AGREEMENT

The privilege of practicing engineering is entrusted to those qualified and who have the responsibility for applying engineering skills, scientific knowledge and ingenuity for the advancement of human welfare and quality of life. Fundamental principles of conduct of engineers include truth, honesty and trustworthiness in their service to society, and honorable and ethical practice showing fairness, courtesy and good faith toward clients, colleagues and others. Engineers take societal, cultural, economic, environmental and safety aspects into consideration, and strive for the efficient use of the world’s resources to meet long term human needs. In the practice of engineering:

1. Engineers shall hold paramount the health, safety and welfare of the public in the practice of their profession.

2. Engineers shall practice only in their areas of competence, in a careful and diligent manner and in conformance with standards, laws, codes, and rules and regulations applicable to engineering practice.

3. Engineers shall examine the societal and environmental impact of their actions and projects, including the wise use and conservation of resources and energy, in order to make informed recommendations and decisions.

4. Engineers shall issue public statements only in an objective and truthful manner. If representing a particular interest, the engineer shall clearly identify that interest.

5. Engineers shall sign and take responsibility for all engineering work which they prepared or directly supervised. An engineer may sign work prepared by others, but only with their knowledge and after sufficient review and verification to justify taking responsibility for that work.

6. Engineers shall act as faithful agents for their employers or clients and maintain confidentiality; they shall avoid conflicts of interest whenever possible, disclosing unavoidable conflicts.
7. Engineers shall ensure that a client is aware of the engineer’s professional concerns regarding particular actions or projects, and of the consequences of engineering decisions or judgments that are overruled or disregarded. An employee engineer shall initially express those concerns to the employer.

8. Engineers shall appropriately report any public works, engineering decisions or practice that endanger the health, safety and welfare of the public. When, in an engineer’s judgment, a significant risk to the public remains unresolved, that engineer may ethically make the concerns known publicly.

9. Engineers shall commit to life-long learning, strive to advance the body of engineering knowledge and should encourage other engineers to do likewise.

10. Engineers shall promote responsibility, commitment, and ethics both in the education and practice phases of engineering; they should enhance society's awareness of engineers’ responsibilities to the public and encourage the communication of these principles of ethical conduct among engineers.

HISTORY OF MEETINGS AND PRESENTATIONS REGARDING ETHICS UNDER THE NORTH AMERICAN FREE TRADE AGREEMENT

June 1992 – Lubbock, Texas: Engineering Roundtable I was the first formal meeting and was dedicated to professional issues related to the practice of engineering under NAFTA. It was held at the Murdough Center for Engineering Professionalism at Texas Tech University.

November 1992 – Cuernavaca, Mexico: Engineering Roundtable II was hosted by the Mexican engineers. This meeting included engineering representatives from Canada.

June 1993 – Austin, Texas: Engineering Roundtable III* resulted in the formation of the "NAFTA Forum on Engineering Practice" made up of 18 official representatives, six from each nation. The USA delegation consisted of representatives from ABET, NSPE, and NCEES. TSPE Past President and State Board member Dave Dorchester was one of the original US official representatives on the NAFTA Forum. TSPE Past President and current State Board Chairman Jose Guerra is now serving as an official representative.

September 1993-- Edmonton, Canada (NAFTA Forum)
August 1993 – Edinburg, Texas (TSPE-ASCE/FECIC-CICM Joint Engineering Conference) *
January 1994 – Cancun, Mexico (NAFTA Forum)
May 1994 – Lubbock, Texas (NSF/NAFTA Ethics Team Meeting #1)
June 1994 – Houston, Texas (TSPE-ASCE/FECIC-CICM Joint Engineering Conference) *
June 1994 – Jackson Hole, Wyoming (NAFTA Forum & NSF/NAFTA Ethics Team Meeting #2)
September 1994 – Mexico City, Mexico (NSF/NAFTA Ethics Team Meeting #3)
September 1994 – Ottawa, Canada (NAFTA Forum & NSF/NAFTA Ethics Team Meeting #4)
January 1995 – Puerto Vallarta, Mexico (NSF/NAFTA Ethics Team Meeting #5 & NAFTA Forum)
April 1996 – Lubbock, Texas (Eighth Annual Murdough Symposium)
June 1995 – Washington, DC (NAFTA Forum) Mutual Recognition Document signed
August 1995 – Mexico City (Roundtable Meeting on Academic Issues)
February 1996 – Huatulco, Mexico (NAFTA Forum)
June 1996 – Richardson, Texas (Roundtable Meeting on Academic & Professional Practice Issues)
April 1996 -- Ashland, Oregon, Oregon Society of Engineers
April 1996, Klamath Falls, Oregon, American Society for Engineering Education, Northwest Section
October 1996, Puebla, Mexico, International Conference of the Society for Philosophy and Technology
October 1996, Dallas, Texas, Water Environment Federation Annual Conference
November 1996, Washington, DC, ASCE National Convention

* These meetings involved the following topics: 1) Environmental Improvements, 2) Energy Infrastructure, 3) Urban Infrastructure, 4) Border Project Development and 5)Transportation and Communication Infrastructure.

[Bold print indicates dates and locations of meetings of the NSF/NAFTA Ethics team.]

Reference Materials

1. Code of Ethics, Canadian Council of Professional Engineers Guideline, Canadian Engineering Qualifications Board, Ottawa, Ontario
2. Code of Ethics for Engineers, National Society of Professional Engineers, 1993
3. Code of Professional Engineering Ethics, World Federation of Engineering Organizations, October 1993
4. Code of Ethics, The Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers, Inc., 1990
5. Code of Ethics, The American Society of Civil Engineers, October 1980.
6. Codigo de Etica Profesional, Colegio de Ingenieros Civiles de Mexico, A.C., , translated to English by Carlos O. Ruiz, P.E.
7. Codigo de etica Profssional del Ingeniero Civil, Federacion de Ingenieros Civiles de la Republica Mexicana
8. Colegio de Ingenieros Mecanicos & Electricistas, excerpt from manual on ethics