Engineer A Report Completeness Advisory Memo
O · Obligation
Individual
http://proethica.org/ontology/case/14#Engineer_A_Report_Completeness_Advisory_Memo
Definition
Engineer A was obligated to include all four funding-agency-approved project delivery methodologies with their respective pros and cons in the advisory memo provided to City B, and to refrain from presenting a partial analysis that omitted Fixed-Price-Design-Build and Construction-Manager-at-Risk.
Properties
Instance of
ReportCompletenessObligation
http://proethica.org/ontology/intermediate#ReportCompletenessObligation
Case context
Engineer A provided a summary memo to City B recommending Progressive-Design-Build while omitting two of the four approved delivery methods from the analysis, in a context where Engineer A was qualified to provide construction services under the recommended method.
Compliance status
unmet
Confidence
0.91
Obligation statement
Engineer A was obligated to include all four funding-agency-approved project delivery methodologies with their respective pros and cons in the advisory memo provided to City B, and to refrain from presenting a partial analysis that omitted Fixed-Price-Design-Build and Construction-Manager-at-Risk.
Temporal scope
At the time of preparing and submitting the advisory memo to City Administrator
Match Confidence
0.0
Matches Existing
false
Synthesis Literal
caseContext
complianceStatus
confidence
obligationClass
obligationStatement
temporalScope
textReferences
Relationships
defeasibleUnder
Engineer A Partial Methodology Analysis
obligatedParty
Agent Engineer A
derivedFromPrinciple
Engineer A Report Completeness Violation
Source Evidence
Text references
by providing only a partial, comparative engineering evaluation with no analysis and a recommendation to Engineer A's benefit, the conduct constituted both incomplete and self-serving information (as in 95-5 and 99-8)
include all relevant and pertinent information
Source text
include all relevant and pertinent information
TTL
@prefix case14: <http://proethica.org/ontology/case/14#> .
@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 proeth-prov: <http://proethica.org/provenance#> .
@prefix prov: <http://www.w3.org/ns/prov#> .
@prefix rdfs: <http://www.w3.org/2000/01/rdf-schema#> .
@prefix skos: <http://www.w3.org/2004/02/skos/core#> .
@prefix xsd: <http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema#> .
case14:Engineer_A_Report_Completeness_Advisory_Memo a proeth:ReportCompletenessObligation,
owl:NamedIndividual ;
rdfs:label "Engineer A Report Completeness Advisory Memo" ;
proeth-core:defeasibleUnder case14:Engineer_A_Partial_Methodology_Analysis ;
proeth-core:obligatedParty case14:Agent_Engineer_A ;
proeth:caseContext "Engineer A provided a summary memo to City B recommending Progressive-Design-Build while omitting two of the four approved delivery methods from the analysis, in a context where Engineer A was qualified to provide construction services under the recommended method." ;
proeth:complianceStatus "unmet" ;
proeth:conceptCategory "Obligation" ;
proeth:confidence "0.91" ;
proeth:derivedFromPrinciple case14:Engineer_A_Report_Completeness_Violation ;
proeth:obligatedParty "Engineer A" ;
proeth:obligationClass "Report Completeness Obligation" ;
proeth:obligationStatement "Engineer A was obligated to include all four funding-agency-approved project delivery methodologies with their respective pros and cons in the advisory memo provided to City B, and to refrain from presenting a partial analysis that omitted Fixed-Price-Design-Build and Construction-Manager-at-Risk." ;
proeth:temporalScope "At the time of preparing and submitting the advisory memo to City Administrator" ;
proeth:textReferences "by providing only a partial, comparative engineering evaluation with no analysis and a recommendation to Engineer A's benefit, the conduct constituted both incomplete and self-serving information (as in 95-5 and 99-8)",
"include all relevant and pertinent information" ;
proeth-prov:discoveredInCase 14 ;
proeth-prov:discoveredInPass 2 ;
proeth-prov:discoveredInSection "discussion" ;
proeth-prov:firstDiscoveredAt "2026-06-04T08:47:48.914349+00:00"^^xsd:dateTime ;
proeth-prov:firstDiscoveredInCase 14 ;
proeth-prov:matchConfidence 0.0 ;
proeth-prov:matchesExisting false ;
proeth-prov:sourceText "include all relevant and pertinent information" ;
proeth-prov:synthesisLiteral "caseContext",
"complianceStatus",
"confidence",
"obligationClass",
"obligationStatement",
"temporalScope",
"textReferences" ;
rdfs:comment "Engineer A was obligated to include all four funding-agency-approved project delivery methodologies with their respective pros and cons in the advisory memo provided to City B, and to refrain from presenting a partial analysis that omitted Fixed-Price-Design-Build and Construction-Manager-at-Risk." ;
skos:definition "Engineer A was obligated to include all four funding-agency-approved project delivery methodologies with their respective pros and cons in the advisory memo provided to City B, and to refrain from presenting a partial analysis that omitted Fixed-Price-Design-Build and Construction-Manager-at-Risk." ;
prov:generatedAtTime "2026-06-04T08:47:48.914349+00:00"^^xsd:dateTime ;
prov:wasAttributedTo "Case 14 Extraction",
"claude-sonnet-4-6" ;
prov:wasGeneratedBy "ProEthica Case 14 Extraction" .
Metadata
Extraction details
Discovered in case
14
Discovered in pass
2
Discovered in section
discussion
First discovered
2026-06-04T08:47:48.914349+00:00
First case
14
Generated
2026-06-04T08:47:48.914349+00:00
Attributed to
['Case 14 Extraction', 'claude-sonnet-4-6']
Generated by
ProEthica Case 14 Extraction