DP2
Individual
http://proethica.org/ontology/case/18#DP2
Properties
Instance of
Decision Point Id
DP2
Decision question
Should Engineer B report the documented public health risk to the State Department of the Environment after being discharged from the project, and if so, how?
Focus
After being discharged from the project following escalation of the safety concern to the Water Commissioners, Engineer B possesses documented technical evidence that the water source change without concurrent treatment poses an ongoing public health risk. Engineer B must decide whether and how to report this risk to the State Department of the Environment, notwithstanding the termination of the client relationship.
Option1
Submit the original technical report and a cover letter to the water supply division of the State Department of the Environment, clearly and completely documenting the lead leaching risk and the specific population at risk, notwithstanding the discharge from the project
Option2
Seek ABC Engineers' explicit concurrence before submitting any report to the state regulatory authority, and refrain from reporting if ABC Engineers declines to authorize the submission given the firm's financial relationship with City M
Option3
Treat the discharge as terminating all professional reporting obligations and take no further action, on the basis that the client relationship has ended and the matter is now within the Commission's discretion
Role
EngineerB_StateAgencyReporting
TTL
@prefix case18: <http://proethica.org/ontology/case/18#> .
@prefix owl: <http://www.w3.org/2002/07/owl#> .
@prefix proeth: <http://proethica.org/ontology/intermediate#> .
@prefix proeth-cases: <http://proethica.org/ontology/cases#> .
@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#> .
case18:DP2 a proeth-cases:DecisionPoint,
owl:NamedIndividual ;
rdfs:label "DP2" ;
proeth:decisionPointId "DP2" ;
proeth:decisionQuestion "Should Engineer B report the documented public health risk to the State Department of the Environment after being discharged from the project, and if so, how?" ;
proeth:focus "After being discharged from the project following escalation of the safety concern to the Water Commissioners, Engineer B possesses documented technical evidence that the water source change without concurrent treatment poses an ongoing public health risk. Engineer B must decide whether and how to report this risk to the State Department of the Environment, notwithstanding the termination of the client relationship." ;
proeth:option1 "Submit the original technical report and a cover letter to the water supply division of the State Department of the Environment, clearly and completely documenting the lead leaching risk and the specific population at risk, notwithstanding the discharge from the project" ;
proeth:option2 "Seek ABC Engineers' explicit concurrence before submitting any report to the state regulatory authority, and refrain from reporting if ABC Engineers declines to authorize the submission given the firm's financial relationship with City M" ;
proeth:option3 "Treat the discharge as terminating all professional reporting obligations and take no further action, on the basis that the client relationship has ended and the matter is now within the Commission's discretion" ;
proeth:roleLabel "EngineerB_StateAgencyReporting" ;
prov:generatedAtTime "2026-02-25T15:38:12.273442"^^xsd:dateTime ;
prov:wasGeneratedBy "ProEthica Case 18 Extraction" .
Metadata
Extraction details
Generated
2026-02-25T15:38:12.273442
Generated by
ProEthica Case 18 Extraction