DP5

@prefix case6: <http://proethica.org/ontology/case/6#> . @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#> . case6:DP5 a proeth-cases:DecisionPoint, owl:NamedIndividual ; rdfs:label "DP5" ; proeth:decisionPointId "DP5" ; proeth:decisionQuestion "Did Engineer A correctly distinguish between the Firm X contract situation — procured through a compliant RFQ with extensions within authorized scope — and the Firm Z situation involving unauthorized awards, and would Engineer A have been equally obligated to report Firm X violations had they existed?" ; proeth:focus "Distinguishing Firm X's Compliant Contract from Firm Z's Non-Compliant Awards and Applying Uniform Procurement Standards" ; proeth:option1 "Treat Firm X and Firm Z situations as categorically distinct based on procurement compliance status, uphold the compliant Firm X contract, and apply the same objective compliance standard to all contracts including Firm X's extensions" ; proeth:option2 "Treat Firm X's long-term contract as ethically equivalent to Firm Z's non-compliant awards on competitive fairness grounds and recommend re-bidding the Firm X engagement to restore competitive access for other firms" ; proeth:option3 "Limit the investigation selectively to Firm Z contracts as identified in Engineer B's complaint without applying the same compliance scrutiny to Firm X's contract extensions" ; proeth:roleLabel "Engineer A" ; prov:generatedAtTime "2026-02-24T22:18:11.357199"^^xsd:dateTime ; prov:wasGeneratedBy "ProEthica Case 6 Extraction" .