BER Case 79-7
Rs · Resource
Individual
http://proethica.org/ontology/case/126#BER_Case_79-7
Properties
Instance of
Confidence
0.98
Created by
NSPE Board of Ethical Review
Document title
NSPE Board of Ethical Review Case 79-7
Importance
high
Used by
Board of Ethical Review in analyzing Engineer B's notification conduct
Used in context
Cited as the primary precedent establishing the purpose of the engineer-review-notification requirement (Section III.8.a / former Section 12(a)); its reasoning is applied analogically to resolve the current case
Version
1979
Source Evidence
Source text
In BER Case 79-7, an engineer was asked to inspect mechanical and electrical engineering work performed seven years earlier.
Text references
In BER Case 79-7, an engineer was asked to inspect mechanical and electrical engineering work performed seven years earlier.
Said the Board: 'It may be helpful for future guidance to again point out that the purpose of Section 12(a) (now Section III.8.a.) is to provide the engineer whose work is being reviewed by another engineer an opportunity to submit...comments or explanations for...technical decisions...'
We believe the reasoning cited by the Board in BER Case 79-7 are as cogent today as they were when the Board issued its opinion.
TTL
@prefix case126: <http://proethica.org/ontology/case/126#> .
@prefix owl: <http://www.w3.org/2002/07/owl#> .
@prefix proeth: <http://proethica.org/ontology/intermediate#> .
@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#> .
case126:BER_Case_79-7 a proeth:BERCasePrecedent,
owl:NamedIndividual ;
rdfs:label "BER Case 79-7" ;
proeth:conceptCategory "Resource" ;
proeth:confidence "0.98" ;
proeth:createdby "NSPE Board of Ethical Review" ;
proeth:discoveredincase "126" ;
proeth:discoveredinpass "1" ;
proeth:discoveredinsection "discussion" ;
proeth:documenttitle "NSPE Board of Ethical Review Case 79-7" ;
proeth:firstdiscoveredat "2026-03-01T10:11:05.176661+00:00" ;
proeth:firstdiscoveredincase "126" ;
proeth:generatedattime "2026-03-01T10:11:05.176661+00:00" ;
proeth:importance "high" ;
proeth:resourceclass "BER Case Precedent" ;
proeth:sourcetext "In BER Case 79-7, an engineer was asked to inspect mechanical and electrical engineering work performed seven years earlier." ;
proeth:textreferences "In BER Case 79-7, an engineer was asked to inspect mechanical and electrical engineering work performed seven years earlier.",
"Said the Board: 'It may be helpful for future guidance to again point out that the purpose of Section 12(a) (now Section III.8.a.) is to provide the engineer whose work is being reviewed by another engineer an opportunity to submit...comments or explanations for...technical decisions...'",
"We believe the reasoning cited by the Board in BER Case 79-7 are as cogent today as they were when the Board issued its opinion." ;
proeth:usedby "Board of Ethical Review in analyzing Engineer B's notification conduct" ;
proeth:usedincontext "Cited as the primary precedent establishing the purpose of the engineer-review-notification requirement (Section III.8.a / former Section 12(a)); its reasoning is applied analogically to resolve the current case" ;
proeth:version "1979" ;
proeth:wasattributedto "Case 126 Extraction" ;
prov:generatedAtTime "2026-03-01T10:31:55.141842"^^xsd:dateTime ;
prov:wasGeneratedBy "ProEthica Case 126 Extraction" .
Metadata
Extraction details
Discovered in case
126
Discovered in pass
1
Discovered in section
discussion
First discovered
2026-03-01T10:11:05.176661+00:00
First case
126
Generated
2026-03-01T10:11:05.176661+00:00
Attributed to
Case 126 Extraction
Generated
2026-03-01T10:31:55.141842
Generated by
ProEthica Case 126 Extraction