Engineer A Coastal Risk Assessment Written Documentation Safety Recommendation
O · Obligation
Individual
http://proethica.org/ontology/case/87#Engineer_A_Coastal_Risk_Assessment_Written_Documentation_Safety_Recommendation
Properties
Instance of
CoastalRiskAssessmentWrittenDocumentationofSafetyRecommendationObligation
http://proethica.org/ontology/intermediate#CoastalRiskAssessmentWrittenDocumentationofSafetyRecommendationObligation
Case context
Engineer A determined the 100-year storm surge standard was required; Client A refused on cost grounds; written documentation of the recommendation and refusal is required
Compliance status
unclear
Confidence
0.88
Importance
high
Obligated party
Engineer A (coastal risk assessment, present case)
Obligation statement
Engineer A was obligated to document in writing the recommendation to build to the 100-year storm surge elevation, the scientific and professional basis for it including the specific data sources and algorithms applied, Client A's refusal to accept the recommendation, and Engineer A's professional objection — so that the record reflects Engineer A's compliance with the paramount public welfare obligation and preserves evidence of Engineer A's professional judgment and Client A's assumption of responsibility.
Temporal scope
Upon making the recommendation and upon Client A's refusal, and before or upon withdrawal from the project
Relationships
defeasibleUnder
Client A Cost-Based Refusal of 100-Year Storm Surge Standard
derivedFromPrinciple
Written Documentation Requirement for Safety Notification Invoked By Engineer A
Source Evidence
Source text
Engineer A has determined, based on historical weather patterns and data, that the residential development project should be built to a 100-year projected storm surge elevation.
Text references
Engineer A has determined, based on historical weather patterns and data, that the residential development project should be built to a 100-year projected storm surge elevation.
If Client A refuses to agree with Engineer A's design standard, Engineer A should withdraw from the project.
The BER must presume that Engineer A's determination is based upon a reasonable and good faith belief that a less stringent standard would place future residents, as well as the general public, at risk and have the potential to cause significant property and environmental damage.
TTL
@prefix case87: <http://proethica.org/ontology/case/87#> .
@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 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#> .
case87:Engineer_A_Coastal_Risk_Assessment_Written_Documentation_Safety_Recommendation a proeth:CoastalRiskAssessmentWrittenDocumentationofSafetyRecommendationObligation,
owl:NamedIndividual ;
rdfs:label "Engineer A Coastal Risk Assessment Written Documentation Safety Recommendation" ;
proeth-core:defeasibleUnder case87:Client_A_Cost-Based_Refusal_of_100-Year_Storm_Surge_Standard ;
proeth:casecontext "Engineer A determined the 100-year storm surge standard was required; Client A refused on cost grounds; written documentation of the recommendation and refusal is required" ;
proeth:compliancestatus "unclear" ;
proeth:conceptCategory "Obligation" ;
proeth:confidence "0.88" ;
proeth:derivedFromPrinciple case87:Written_Documentation_Requirement_for_Safety_Notification_Invoked_By_Engineer_A ;
proeth:discoveredincase "87" ;
proeth:discoveredinpass "2" ;
proeth:discoveredinsection "discussion" ;
proeth:firstdiscoveredat "2026-02-27T15:43:01.811893+00:00" ;
proeth:firstdiscoveredincase "87" ;
proeth:generatedattime "2026-02-27T15:43:01.811893+00:00" ;
proeth:importance "high" ;
proeth:obligatedparty "Engineer A (coastal risk assessment, present case)" ;
proeth:obligationclass "Coastal Risk Assessment Written Documentation of Safety Recommendation Obligation" ;
proeth:obligationstatement "Engineer A was obligated to document in writing the recommendation to build to the 100-year storm surge elevation, the scientific and professional basis for it including the specific data sources and algorithms applied, Client A's refusal to accept the recommendation, and Engineer A's professional objection — so that the record reflects Engineer A's compliance with the paramount public welfare obligation and preserves evidence of Engineer A's professional judgment and Client A's assumption of responsibility." ;
proeth:sourcetext "Engineer A has determined, based on historical weather patterns and data, that the residential development project should be built to a 100-year projected storm surge elevation." ;
proeth:temporalscope "Upon making the recommendation and upon Client A's refusal, and before or upon withdrawal from the project" ;
proeth:textreferences "Engineer A has determined, based on historical weather patterns and data, that the residential development project should be built to a 100-year projected storm surge elevation.",
"If Client A refuses to agree with Engineer A's design standard, Engineer A should withdraw from the project.",
"The BER must presume that Engineer A's determination is based upon a reasonable and good faith belief that a less stringent standard would place future residents, as well as the general public, at risk and have the potential to cause significant property and environmental damage." ;
proeth:wasattributedto "Case 87 Extraction" ;
prov:generatedAtTime "2026-02-27T16:34:23.747927"^^xsd:dateTime ;
prov:wasGeneratedBy "ProEthica Case 87 Extraction" .
Metadata
Extraction details
Discovered in case
87
Discovered in pass
2
Discovered in section
discussion
First discovered
2026-02-27T15:43:01.811893+00:00
First case
87
Generated
2026-02-27T15:43:01.811893+00:00
Attributed to
Case 87 Extraction
Generated
2026-02-27T16:34:23.747927
Generated by
ProEthica Case 87 Extraction