Engineer A Military Certification Deception Prohibition Instance
O · Obligation
Individual
http://proethica.org/ontology/case/109#Engineer_A_Military_Certification_Deception_Prohibition_Instance
Properties
Instance of
Out-of-CompetenceComplianceCertificationDeceptionProhibitionObligation
http://proethica.org/ontology/intermediate#Out-of-CompetenceComplianceCertificationDeceptionProhibitionObligation
Case context
The Board determined that certifying compliance with lengthy, detailed, cross-referenced Army physical security, arms, ammunition, and explosive regulations would constitute a professional guarantee that the statements are correct — a guarantee Engineer A could not make given the impossibility of performing the required exhaustive inspection.
Compliance status
met
Confidence
0.93
Importance
high
Obligated party
Engineer A (civilian PE, Building and Grounds Division Chief)
Obligation statement
Even if Engineer A had been deemed marginally competent, Engineer A was obligated to refrain from certifying compliance with the Army arms storage regulations because such a certification would constitute a guarantee Engineer A could not substantiate, rendering it inherently misleading and deceptive.
Temporal scope
At the time of the certification request and at any future time such a request is made
Relationships
Source Evidence
Source text
even if Engineer A had the ethical competency to perform the services required, it would not have been ethically proper for Engineer A to 'certify' compliance with the military regulations as requested
Text references
A party that provides a certification of certain statements is generally providing a guarantee that the statements are correct
because it is clear that such information is clearly beyond the scope of knowledge of Engineer A (since it would be impossible for Engineer A to perform the detailed and exhaustive inspection of the facility that would be required)
even if Engineer A had the ethical competency to perform the services required, it would not have been ethically proper for Engineer A to 'certify' compliance with the military regulations as requested
such a statement, if made by Engineer A would be misleading, deceptive and, on that basis, not ethical
TTL
@prefix case109: <http://proethica.org/ontology/case/109#> .
@prefix owl: <http://www.w3.org/2002/07/owl#> .
@prefix proeth: <http://proethica.org/ontology/intermediate#> .
@prefix proeth-core: <http://proethica.org/ontology/core#> .
@prefix prov: <http://www.w3.org/ns/prov#> .
@prefix rdfs: <http://www.w3.org/2000/01/rdf-schema#> .
@prefix xsd: <http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema#> .
case109:Engineer_A_Military_Certification_Deception_Prohibition_Instance a proeth:Out-of-CompetenceComplianceCertificationDeceptionProhibitionObligation,
owl:NamedIndividual ;
rdfs:label "Engineer A Military Certification Deception Prohibition Instance" ;
proeth-core:competesWith case109:Engineer_A_Military_Authority_Certification_Direction_Resistance ;
proeth-core:defeasibleUnder case109:Engineer_A_Unverifiable_Army_Regulation_Compliance_Certification_Request ;
proeth-core:prevailsOver case109:Engineer_A_Military_Authority_Certification_Direction_Resistance ;
proeth:casecontext "The Board determined that certifying compliance with lengthy, detailed, cross-referenced Army physical security, arms, ammunition, and explosive regulations would constitute a professional guarantee that the statements are correct — a guarantee Engineer A could not make given the impossibility of performing the required exhaustive inspection." ;
proeth:compliancestatus "met" ;
proeth:conceptCategory "Obligation" ;
proeth:confidence "0.93" ;
proeth:derivedFromPrinciple <http://proethica.org/ontology/case/109#Out-of-Competence_Certification_Inherent_Deception_—_Army_Arms_Storage>,
<http://proethica.org/ontology/case/109#Professional_Certification_as_Guarantee_—_Army_Compliance_Certification> ;
proeth:discoveredincase "109" ;
proeth:discoveredinpass "2" ;
proeth:discoveredinsection "discussion" ;
proeth:firstdiscoveredat "2026-03-01T07:48:34.367018+00:00" ;
proeth:firstdiscoveredincase "109" ;
proeth:generatedattime "2026-03-01T07:48:34.367018+00:00" ;
proeth:importance "high" ;
proeth:obligatedparty "Engineer A (civilian PE, Building and Grounds Division Chief)" ;
proeth:obligationclass "Out-of-Competence Compliance Certification Deception Prohibition Obligation" ;
proeth:obligationstatement "Even if Engineer A had been deemed marginally competent, Engineer A was obligated to refrain from certifying compliance with the Army arms storage regulations because such a certification would constitute a guarantee Engineer A could not substantiate, rendering it inherently misleading and deceptive." ;
proeth:sourcetext "even if Engineer A had the ethical competency to perform the services required, it would not have been ethically proper for Engineer A to 'certify' compliance with the military regulations as requested" ;
proeth:temporalscope "At the time of the certification request and at any future time such a request is made" ;
proeth:textreferences "A party that provides a certification of certain statements is generally providing a guarantee that the statements are correct",
"because it is clear that such information is clearly beyond the scope of knowledge of Engineer A (since it would be impossible for Engineer A to perform the detailed and exhaustive inspection of the facility that would be required)",
"even if Engineer A had the ethical competency to perform the services required, it would not have been ethically proper for Engineer A to 'certify' compliance with the military regulations as requested",
"such a statement, if made by Engineer A would be misleading, deceptive and, on that basis, not ethical" ;
proeth:wasattributedto "Case 109 Extraction" ;
prov:generatedAtTime "2026-03-01T07:59:20.035898"^^xsd:dateTime ;
prov:wasGeneratedBy "ProEthica Case 109 Extraction" .
Metadata
Extraction details
Discovered in case
109
Discovered in pass
2
Discovered in section
discussion
First discovered
2026-03-01T07:48:34.367018+00:00
First case
109
Generated
2026-03-01T07:48:34.367018+00:00
Attributed to
Case 109 Extraction
Generated
2026-03-01T07:59:20.035898
Generated by
ProEthica Case 109 Extraction