Engineer A Cost Allocation Bias
P · Principle
Individual
http://proethica.org/ontology/case/85#Engineer_A_Cost_Allocation_Bias
Definition
Engineer A rationalized submitting incomplete design documents by asserting that federal funds would be awarded to complete the work, effectively treating anticipated third-party public funding as a justification for delivering deficient deliverables.
Properties
Instance of
CostAllocationBiasProhibitionPrinciple
http://proethica.org/ontology/intermediate#CostAllocationBiasProhibitionPrinciple
Applied to
Incomplete dam design drawings submitted under federal grant conditions
Balancing with
Faithful Agent Duty Principle
Concrete expression
Engineer A rationalized submitting incomplete design documents by asserting that federal funds would be awarded to complete the work, effectively treating anticipated third-party public funding as a justification for delivering deficient deliverables.
Confidence
0.93
Interpretation
The principle prohibits Engineer A from rationalizing deficient deliverables on the basis that remediation costs would fall on federal funding rather than the client, because the source of remediation funding does not alter the obligation to deliver complete work.
Tension resolution
The Board characterized Engineer A's federal funds comment as bordering on fraud and misrepresentation, finding no legitimate basis for the cost-allocation rationale.
Match Confidence
0.0
Matches Existing
false
Synthesis Literal
appliedTo
balancingWith
concreteExpression
confidence
interpretation
principleClass
tensionResolution
textReferences
Relationships
invokedBy
Agent Engineer A
Source Evidence
Text references
Engineer A's bold assertion that the work was incomplete, but that this was due to time pressures and his expectation that Federal funds would be awarded to complete the work is wholly unconvincing
Engineer A's comment about Federal funds borders on fraud and misrepresentation and is a clear violation of the NSPE Code
Source text
Engineer A's comment about Federal funds borders on fraud and misrepresentation and is a clear violation of the NSPE Code.
TTL
@prefix case85: <http://proethica.org/ontology/case/85#> .
@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#> .
case85:Engineer_A_Cost_Allocation_Bias a proeth:CostAllocationBiasProhibitionPrinciple,
owl:NamedIndividual ;
rdfs:label "Engineer A Cost Allocation Bias" ;
proeth-core:invokedBy case85:Agent_Engineer_A ;
proeth:appliedTo "Incomplete dam design drawings submitted under federal grant conditions" ;
proeth:balancingWith "Faithful Agent Duty Principle" ;
proeth:conceptCategory "Principle" ;
proeth:concreteExpression "Engineer A rationalized submitting incomplete design documents by asserting that federal funds would be awarded to complete the work, effectively treating anticipated third-party public funding as a justification for delivering deficient deliverables." ;
proeth:confidence "0.93" ;
proeth:interpretation "The principle prohibits Engineer A from rationalizing deficient deliverables on the basis that remediation costs would fall on federal funding rather than the client, because the source of remediation funding does not alter the obligation to deliver complete work." ;
proeth:invokedBy "Engineer A Dam Design Engineer" ;
proeth:principleClass "Cost Allocation Bias Prohibition Principle" ;
proeth:tensionResolution "The Board characterized Engineer A's federal funds comment as bordering on fraud and misrepresentation, finding no legitimate basis for the cost-allocation rationale." ;
proeth:textReferences "Engineer A's bold assertion that the work was incomplete, but that this was due to time pressures and his expectation that Federal funds would be awarded to complete the work is wholly unconvincing",
"Engineer A's comment about Federal funds borders on fraud and misrepresentation and is a clear violation of the NSPE Code" ;
proeth-prov:discoveredInCase 85 ;
proeth-prov:discoveredInPass 2 ;
proeth-prov:discoveredInSection "discussion" ;
proeth-prov:firstDiscoveredAt "2026-06-04T16:53:07.457315+00:00"^^xsd:dateTime ;
proeth-prov:firstDiscoveredInCase 85 ;
proeth-prov:matchConfidence 0.0 ;
proeth-prov:matchesExisting false ;
proeth-prov:sourceText "Engineer A's comment about Federal funds borders on fraud and misrepresentation and is a clear violation of the NSPE Code." ;
proeth-prov:synthesisLiteral "appliedTo",
"balancingWith",
"concreteExpression",
"confidence",
"interpretation",
"principleClass",
"tensionResolution",
"textReferences" ;
rdfs:comment "Engineer A rationalized submitting incomplete design documents by asserting that federal funds would be awarded to complete the work, effectively treating anticipated third-party public funding as a justification for delivering deficient deliverables." ;
skos:definition "Engineer A rationalized submitting incomplete design documents by asserting that federal funds would be awarded to complete the work, effectively treating anticipated third-party public funding as a justification for delivering deficient deliverables." ;
prov:generatedAtTime "2026-06-04T16:53:07.457315+00:00"^^xsd:dateTime ;
prov:wasAttributedTo "Case 85 Extraction",
"claude-sonnet-4-6" ;
prov:wasGeneratedBy "ProEthica Case 85 Extraction" .
Metadata
Extraction details
Discovered in case
85
Discovered in pass
2
Discovered in section
discussion
First discovered
2026-06-04T16:53:07.457315+00:00
First case
85
Generated
2026-06-04T16:53:07.457315+00:00
Attributed to
['Case 85 Extraction', 'claude-sonnet-4-6']
Generated by
ProEthica Case 85 Extraction