Engineering Ethics: From the Code of Hammurabi To Current California Legal Precedent in Beacon V Som

Abstract eng:
Engineers’ conceptions of their responsibilities to their clients, third parties, and the public at large have evolved concurrently with the evolution of civilization itself. Engineers have long recognized that by satisfying their professional responsibility to avoid foreseeable harm to clients and others, they can avoid the legal consequences of failing to satisfy that fundamental duty. Recognition of this basic dynamic is partly the result of legal codes which have long made explicit the serious consequences of failing to protect the life and safety of the client. The Code of Hammurabi, dating from 1754 B.C., is an early example of the breach of duty dynamic: it dictates that a builder will receive the death penalty if the residence that he builds collapses and kills the owner. As civilization matured and evolved from the time of Hammurabi, subtle and not-so-subtle changes have been made to the breach of duty dynamic. Aside from the death penalty, the designer (and/or builder) (currently one or more institutions) faces other legal consequences if the structure it designed (and/or constructed) collapses during a foreseeable earthquake. As an example, ASCE 7-10 has reshaped the standard of performance that the structural consultant has a duty to deliver. Its commentary states that the performance target for Risk Category II facilities is (i) a 10 percent probability of collapse and (ii) a 25 percent probability of serious personal injuries, including fatalities, during a Maximum Considered Earthquake (MCE). Application of the simple breach of duty dynamic from the Code of Hammurabi would require the imposition of the most serious sanctions if a Risk Category II structure built in accordance with ASCE 7-10 in fact caused collapse and fatalities during a foreseeable MCE—in fact, if the design and construction met rock-bottom minimum code requirements for Risk Category II and was subjected to an MCE, the design professional would face a 25 percent chance of defending against charges requiring the most serious civil and criminal legal penalties, probably including institutional death. This paper will analyze how modern versions of the breach of duty dynamic have shifted away from the simple justice formula of the Code of Hammurabi; it will focus, in particular, on how the breach of duty dynamic can play out in the context of modern high-rises (say those 30 stories or more and above 135 meters in height). Illustrative hypotheticals will be based upon the design development process for a high-rise in San Francisco. Using contemporary legal standards, how can a design professional reduce the risk that their institution will receive the death penalty after their structures are exposed to strong and severe earthquakes, including foreseeable MCEs? The answer is revealed in the testimony that the owner and its design professionals develop long before their structure performs poorly in a foreseeable earthquake and, as a consequence, long before their seminal choices are subjected to legal inquiry.

• Export as: BibTeX | MARC | MARCXML | DC | EndNote | NLM | RefWorks
• Add to your basket