Engineers are required to abide by laws, just as members of every other profession are expected to.

From a distance, the law may not seem to play much of a role in this sort of occupation; however, every engineer is subject to laws whether it regards matters in the proper disposal of chemicals or something as general as considering the safety, health, and welfare of the public in the process of carrying out their work. There are laws in place that every engineer must take into account while performing his or her duties, but for engineers whose professions deal with something as publicized as the environment and water, the law strikes even closer. The work of chemical and civil engineers in wastewater treatment coincides with the law in many cases, one instance being the attempt to rid the Boston Harbor of many years of pollution. The issue of pollution in the Boston Harbor dates back to as early as the seventeenth century, with human waste, debris, and sewage being dumped directly into the harbor. For over 300 years, multiple minor attempts were made by the city of Boston to put an end to the problem. It wasnt until 1985, however, that Federal District Judge A. David Mazzone deemed the issue of the Boston Harbor as a violation of the Clean Water Act of 1972, and a real plan was put into place. Judge Mazzone subjected the Massachusetts Water Resources Authority (MWRA), a newly created public authority, to plan, design, and implement a project to finally put an end to centuries of pollution in the Boston Harbor. The MWRA was initially required to file monthly compliance reports to the court, but in December 2000, Judge Mazzone updated the court order to change the frequency of the reports to a quarterly basis. The MWRA is a public authority that deals in wastewater treatment, from providing clean water to water testing to developing treatment solutions, one of the many fields a chemical engineer can focus on. The MWRA Quarterly Compliance and Progress Report as of June 14, 2013, their latest compliance report in the Boston Harbor case, is a prime example of how the law can really play a role in the work of engineers. As the work of the MWRA generally has some effect on the public, social complexity will always be associated with it. The report is posted on the MWRAs website, providing transparency for the public there must be some form of trust between the public and public authorities in order for them to function properly. The compliance report documents important facts including activities completed, cost analyses, legal issues, and upcoming issues in the project to clean up the harbor. By requiring the compliance reports, the law basically reinforces the skills and issues within engineering projects, as much of this information should be important for an engineer to note. The text itself is not as in depth as a research paper in that it doesnt contain specific information such as flow rates of the sewage water and methods and chemicals used to treat the water before discharge. Instead, it is the backbone for responsible engineering. The considerations towards the safety, health, and welfare of not only humans, but also wildlife and the environment are specified: [The MWRA] will continue with construction through September 2013 to complete the recreational and educational amenities, including pedestrian pathways and trails, boardwalk 1(pg. 3). In the study of the rhetoric situation of the document, the writers orientation is that of a group of engineers planning out the stages of a multibillion-dollar project. The discourse of the MWRA is constrained by legal discourse that is, legal issues are more of a focus for this document. They are writing a progress report, specifically highlighting matters of importance to the court: percentages of work done, amount of money spent on specific projects, locations of wastewater storage sites, etc. This document is one of many that the MWRA must draft up in the process of the Boston Harbor cleanup project. It is the only one that is mandated by the court, which is why it describes the plan in a manner in which even the general public can understand. The tone of the document is informative rather than technical in terms of language as well as content. They document facts that are of importance to the court and the public: issues under consideration include mitigation of construction impacts to the Fitchburg Cutoff Bikepath and a bike path bridge 1(pg. 13). Content such as the specific treatment methods, grab test results, and flow rates are left out, not because they arent of any significance, but because legal discourse doesnt necessarily need or want to focus on these engineering methods of the MWRA: The

basin also provides a level of removal of pollutants associated with urban stormwater by natural treatment processes 1(pg. 3). While this report is directed towards the courts, the audience includes the general public as well. There is a reason documents like this are drafted the law requires engineers. Without the proper people to deal with issues like the Boston Harbor being in violation of the law, legal discourse can continue to place blame upon the city of Boston, but nothing will be done. There is a great deal of planning involved in successfully completing a project that extends beyond the project itself: the Authority expects to seek Board authorization when Cambridge has made further design progress toward construction 1(pgs. 11-12). There are deadline considerations, social matters, and required permissions that must be taken into account and the MWRA is being put in a position between both engineering and the law. They are taking on multiple tasks to appease multiple audiences, including their own engineers. The genre of the MWRAs compliance report is closely related to that of a policy memo. This piece of writing done by engineers demonstrates how legal discourse really shapes engineering discourse. There are many references to contracts and legal issues dealing with permits that one would not consider the responsibility of an engineer. The knowledge that engineering discourse and legal discourse are closely associated with each other is extremely valuable. To be able to write in such a manner that technical details are omitted and legal issues are brought forward would be advantageous in the industry. During my co-op experience at Northeastern Universitys Office of Environmental Health & Safety, I had the opportunity of work with engineers from the MWRA at a technical level, collecting data and testing samples. Being able to analyze the writing that is associated with their work from a legal stance has allowed me to understand the complexity associated with my career interests. Wastewater treatment is generally a public works project water is something that everyone consumes, uses, and disposes of on a daily basis. We are unable to survive without it, which is one of the many reasons why engineers interested in such an industry should, minimally, be able to write in an effective manner with regards to different audiences. Works Cited 1. Massachusetts Water Resources Authority [Internet]. Boston (MA): the Authority; 2013 June 14. MWRA Quarterly Compliance and Progress Report as of June 14, 2013; [cited 2013 September 16]. Available from: http://www.mwra.state.ma.us/quarterly/bhp/2013/q2.pdf