Firm A Screening Committee Qualification Deficiency Identification
S · State
Individual
http://proethica.org/ontology/case/162#Firm_A_Screening_Committee_Qualification_Deficiency_Identification
Properties
Instance of
Client-IdentifiedQualificationDeficiencyMandatoryUpgrade-or-WithdrawState
http://proethica.org/ontology/intermediate#Client-IdentifiedQualificationDeficiencyMandatoryUpgrade-or-WithdrawState
Active period
From the moment the screening committee publicly indicated that additional technical support was required, through Firm A's decision to revise its joint venture composition
Affected parties
Firm A
Other competing firms
Screening committee
Utility authority
Confidence
0.9
Importance
high
Subject
Firm A's proposed joint venture team in the active QBS procurement
Terminated by
Firm A's revision of its joint venture team to upgrade qualifications, followed by the authority permitting all firms to revise submissions equally
Triggering event
Screening committee's public comments indicating that additional technical support was required by the client
Urgency level
high
Source Evidence
Source text
Firm A might be held in violation if it did not make a reasonable effort to upgrade the qualifications of the joint venture for the assignment once it was indicated that additional technical support was required by the client
Text references
Firm A might be held in violation if it did not make a reasonable effort to upgrade the qualifications of the joint venture for the assignment once it was indicated that additional technical support was required by the client
When that aspect was indicated on behalf of the client by the screening committee Firm A had no ethical choice but to upgrade its qualifications through either internal or external revisions in its proposal, or eliminate itself from further consideration
TTL
@prefix case162: <http://proethica.org/ontology/case/162#> .
@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#> .
case162:Firm_A_Screening_Committee_Qualification_Deficiency_Identification a proeth:Client-IdentifiedQualificationDeficiencyMandatoryUpgrade-or-WithdrawState,
owl:NamedIndividual ;
rdfs:label "Firm A Screening Committee Qualification Deficiency Identification" ;
proeth:activeperiod "From the moment the screening committee publicly indicated that additional technical support was required, through Firm A's decision to revise its joint venture composition" ;
proeth:affectedparties "Firm A",
"Other competing firms",
"Screening committee",
"Utility authority" ;
proeth:conceptCategory "State" ;
proeth:confidence "0.9" ;
proeth:discoveredincase "162" ;
proeth:discoveredinpass "1" ;
proeth:discoveredinsection "discussion" ;
proeth:firstdiscoveredat "2026-03-02T02:38:29.060171+00:00" ;
proeth:firstdiscoveredincase "162" ;
proeth:generatedattime "2026-03-02T02:38:29.060171+00:00" ;
proeth:importance "high" ;
proeth:sourcetext "Firm A might be held in violation if it did not make a reasonable effort to upgrade the qualifications of the joint venture for the assignment once it was indicated that additional technical support was required by the client" ;
proeth:stateclass "Client-Identified Qualification Deficiency Mandatory Upgrade-or-Withdraw State" ;
proeth:subject "Firm A's proposed joint venture team in the active QBS procurement" ;
proeth:terminatedby "Firm A's revision of its joint venture team to upgrade qualifications, followed by the authority permitting all firms to revise submissions equally" ;
proeth:textreferences "Firm A might be held in violation if it did not make a reasonable effort to upgrade the qualifications of the joint venture for the assignment once it was indicated that additional technical support was required by the client",
"When that aspect was indicated on behalf of the client by the screening committee Firm A had no ethical choice but to upgrade its qualifications through either internal or external revisions in its proposal, or eliminate itself from further consideration" ;
proeth:triggeringevent "Screening committee's public comments indicating that additional technical support was required by the client" ;
proeth:urgencylevel "high" ;
proeth:wasattributedto "Case 162 Extraction" ;
prov:generatedAtTime "2026-03-02T02:57:21.175466"^^xsd:dateTime ;
prov:wasGeneratedBy "ProEthica Case 162 Extraction" .
Metadata
Extraction details
Discovered in case
162
Discovered in pass
1
Discovered in section
discussion
First discovered
2026-03-02T02:38:29.060171+00:00
First case
162
Generated
2026-03-02T02:38:29.060171+00:00
Attributed to
Case 162 Extraction
Generated
2026-03-02T02:57:21.175466
Generated by
ProEthica Case 162 Extraction