Change Notation Specificity Violation by Engineer B on Title Sheet
P · Principle
Individual
http://proethica.org/ontology/case/173#Change_Notation_Specificity_Violation_by_Engineer_B_on_Title_Sheet
Properties
Instance of
ChangeNotationSpecificityRequirementinSuccessorDesignObligation
http://proethica.org/ontology/intermediate#ChangeNotationSpecificityRequirementinSuccessorDesignObligation
Applied to
Engineer B's title sheet notation on the public improvement plan set
Balancing with
Client Loyalty
Concrete expression
Engineer B's notation on the title sheet of the public improvement plans that he was 'taking responsibility for the revisions of the plans' was found ethically insufficient because it failed to identify with specificity the changes made to grading plans, housing pads, street routing, storm drains, pipe dimensions, sewers, and utilities, rendering the notation virtually meaningless as a professional accountability mechanism
Confidence
0.93
Importance
high
Interpretation
A blanket title-sheet disclaimer of responsibility for 'revisions' without specifying what was revised fails to serve the public record function of engineering documentation and does not constitute meaningful professional accountability
Invoked by
NSPE Board of Ethical Review
Tension resolution
The Board found that the existence of some notation did not cure the ethical deficiency — the specificity of the notation is itself an ethical requirement, not merely a formality
Source Evidence
Source text
Engineer B's failure to state with specificity what those changes in fact were made such a notation on the title sheet virtually meaningless.
Text references
His failure to do so constituted a form of deception which places him in violation of Section III.3.a.
It is clear that Engineer B had an ethical obligation to make all necessary notations of changes which he had made with respect to the grading plans, housing pads, routing of streets, storm drains, pipe dimensions, sewers, and utilities.
We acknowledge that Engineer B did in fact note on the title sheet of the public improvement plans that he was taking responsibility for the 'revisions of the plans.' However, as we have indicated, Engineer B's failure to state with specificity what those changes in fact were made such a notation on the title sheet virtually meaningless.
TTL
@prefix case173: <http://proethica.org/ontology/case/173#> .
@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#> .
case173:Change_Notation_Specificity_Violation_by_Engineer_B_on_Title_Sheet a proeth:ChangeNotationSpecificityRequirementinSuccessorDesignObligation,
owl:NamedIndividual ;
rdfs:label "Change Notation Specificity Violation by Engineer B on Title Sheet" ;
proeth:appliedto "Engineer B's title sheet notation on the public improvement plan set" ;
proeth:balancingwith "Client Loyalty" ;
proeth:conceptCategory "Principle" ;
proeth:concreteexpression "Engineer B's notation on the title sheet of the public improvement plans that he was 'taking responsibility for the revisions of the plans' was found ethically insufficient because it failed to identify with specificity the changes made to grading plans, housing pads, street routing, storm drains, pipe dimensions, sewers, and utilities, rendering the notation virtually meaningless as a professional accountability mechanism" ;
proeth:confidence "0.93" ;
proeth:discoveredincase "173" ;
proeth:discoveredinpass "2" ;
proeth:discoveredinsection "discussion" ;
proeth:firstdiscoveredat "2026-03-01T14:28:53.714541+00:00" ;
proeth:firstdiscoveredincase "173" ;
proeth:generatedattime "2026-03-01T14:28:53.714541+00:00" ;
proeth:importance "high" ;
proeth:interpretation "A blanket title-sheet disclaimer of responsibility for 'revisions' without specifying what was revised fails to serve the public record function of engineering documentation and does not constitute meaningful professional accountability" ;
proeth:invokedby "NSPE Board of Ethical Review" ;
proeth:principleclass "Change Notation Specificity Requirement in Successor Design Obligation" ;
proeth:sourcetext "Engineer B's failure to state with specificity what those changes in fact were made such a notation on the title sheet virtually meaningless." ;
proeth:tensionresolution "The Board found that the existence of some notation did not cure the ethical deficiency — the specificity of the notation is itself an ethical requirement, not merely a formality" ;
proeth:textreferences "His failure to do so constituted a form of deception which places him in violation of Section III.3.a.",
"It is clear that Engineer B had an ethical obligation to make all necessary notations of changes which he had made with respect to the grading plans, housing pads, routing of streets, storm drains, pipe dimensions, sewers, and utilities.",
"We acknowledge that Engineer B did in fact note on the title sheet of the public improvement plans that he was taking responsibility for the 'revisions of the plans.' However, as we have indicated, Engineer B's failure to state with specificity what those changes in fact were made such a notation on the title sheet virtually meaningless." ;
proeth:wasattributedto "Case 173 Extraction" ;
prov:generatedAtTime "2026-03-01T14:41:54.491415"^^xsd:dateTime ;
prov:wasGeneratedBy "ProEthica Case 173 Extraction" .
Metadata
Extraction details
Discovered in case
173
Discovered in pass
2
Discovered in section
discussion
First discovered
2026-03-01T14:28:53.714541+00:00
First case
173
Generated
2026-03-01T14:28:53.714541+00:00
Attributed to
Case 173 Extraction
Generated
2026-03-01T14:41:54.491415
Generated by
ProEthica Case 173 Extraction