Reilly M. Karful, a wastewater process engineer with Slud, Gefl, Owsdown & Hill (SGOH), has spent the last few weeks designing an equalization tank for the wastewater treatment plant for the town of Whiteside. It so happens that the existing extended aeration treatment plant is located inside one room of a pre-engineered metal building, except for the headworks, which consist of a screen. The design that Reilly is proposing includes installing a new tank inside the treatment room and relocating the screen on top of the tank. During a design review, the reviewer, Yvonne Moore-Karful (distant relation to Reilly) of the architectural firm Plansem & Drawsem, notices that sewage plant headworks are covered by National Fire Protection Association (NFPA) Code Section 820, which requires certain areas to be Class I, Division 1 or Class I, Division 2; i.e., "explosion proof." Concerned about the potential problem, Yvonne calls to let Reilly know that moving the screen into the treatment room would require the room to be classified as explosion proof, and she follows up this call with a memo and her notations on the design drawings. Reilly decides to double-check this information and he reviews NFPA 820 himself. The code indeed appears to require the headworks and the existing treatment room to be explosion proof because the plant does not have primary settling tanks. Reilly informs the project manager at SGOH, Dante McWaves, about the matter, and gives him a copy of Yvonne's memo. With Reilly in his office, Dante phones the client, Bull Parker, the town commissioner, to make him aware of Reilly's concerns. Bull happens to be cleaning his shotgun when he gets Dante's call. News of cost increases and delays does not please Bull, and he pointedly reminds Dante that the project is behind-schedule, that Whiteside needs this addition to the wastewater treatment plant to avoid non-compliance with State regulations, and that Whiteside is not a wealthy town. As he trips the action on the shotgun, as if to place a shell in the chamber (Dante hears this over the phone), Bull tells Dante that he'll have the County Fire Code Official, Bobby Burns, get back to Dante. Reilly notices the color drain from Dante's face and that his hands visibly shake as he hangs up the phone. Within minutes, the fire code official calls and informs Dante that the existing room is already explosion proof. What luck! The problem is solved and Dante, still pale yet with obvious relief, informs Reilly that he doesn't want to bother Bullwith any more problems. Dante then clearly and unequivocally directs Reilly to finish the project. But Reilly is concerned. While Bobby Burns' statement satisfies Dante, Reilly suspects the fire code official could be wrong. Though Reilly has limited experience with fire codes, he has noticed that the electrical sockets, light switches, lighting fixtures, and junction boxes appear normal and don't give the appearance of being explosion proof. While part of him wants to pursue the matter, he also realizes that exploring his doubts about the existing room being explosion proof will not only further stress out Dante, but could result in additional project delays, in Whiteside having to fund an expensive retrofit to bring their existing facility up to code, and in further annoying Bull. What, if anything, should Reilly do?

1. (Answer the question(s) at the bottom of the particular case study) - What, if anything, should Reilly do?
2. What are the perceived consequences or risks associated with the decision you made?
   • In your opinion, why (or how) did the benefits of your decision out-weigh the risks?
3. How would you communicate your final decisions to the pertinent parties?
4. What do you think are some potential responses you will receive from those parties, and how would you prepare to handle them?