Engineer A Interdisciplinary Threshold Recognition Hydraulic Referral Tidal Crossing
O · Obligation
Individual
http://proethica.org/ontology/case/88#Engineer_A_Interdisciplinary_Threshold_Recognition_Hydraulic_Referral_Tidal_Crossing
Properties
Instance of
InterdisciplinaryThresholdRecognitionforSpecializedHydraulicReferralObligation
http://proethica.org/ontology/intermediate#InterdisciplinaryThresholdRecognitionforSpecializedHydraulicReferralObligation
Case context
Engineer A, while not a hydrodynamic modeling specialist, possessed sufficient understanding of hydraulics and coastal engineering to judge that the tidal crossing upgrade posed material upstream flood risk requiring specialized analysis.
Compliance status
met
Confidence
0.88
Importance
high
Obligated party
Engineer A
Obligation statement
Engineer A was obligated to apply sufficient cross-disciplinary understanding of hydrology, hydraulics, and coastal modeling to form a reasonable professional judgment that the proposed tidal crossing upgrade created sufficient potential for flooding of upstream properties to merit detailed specialized evaluation — and upon forming that judgment, to recommend engagement of a specialized subconsultant.
Temporal scope
Upon identifying the potential upstream flood risk from the tidal crossing upgrade
Relationships
defeasibleUnder
Engineer A Climate Impact Judgment Activation
derivedFromPrinciple
Interdisciplinary Competence Threshold Invoked by BER Discussion Section
Source Evidence
Source text
Engineer A need not necessarily be a modelling expert.
Text references
Based on the facts in this case, it is clear that Engineer A has such an understanding of the broad project issues.
Engineer A need not necessarily be a modelling expert.
However, Engineer A needs to have sufficient understanding of hydrology, hydraulics, and coastal modeling to form a reasonable judgment that there is sufficient potential for flooding of other properties to merit a detailed, complex evaluation of future conditions.
TTL
@prefix case88: <http://proethica.org/ontology/case/88#> .
@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#> .
case88:Engineer_A_Interdisciplinary_Threshold_Recognition_Hydraulic_Referral_Tidal_Crossing a proeth:InterdisciplinaryThresholdRecognitionforSpecializedHydraulicReferralObligation,
owl:NamedIndividual ;
rdfs:label "Engineer A Interdisciplinary Threshold Recognition Hydraulic Referral Tidal Crossing" ;
proeth-core:defeasibleUnder case88:Engineer_A_Climate_Impact_Judgment_Activation ;
proeth:casecontext "Engineer A, while not a hydrodynamic modeling specialist, possessed sufficient understanding of hydraulics and coastal engineering to judge that the tidal crossing upgrade posed material upstream flood risk requiring specialized analysis." ;
proeth:compliancestatus "met" ;
proeth:conceptCategory "Obligation" ;
proeth:confidence "0.88" ;
proeth:derivedFromPrinciple case88:Interdisciplinary_Competence_Threshold_Invoked_by_BER_Discussion_Section ;
proeth:discoveredincase "88" ;
proeth:discoveredinpass "2" ;
proeth:discoveredinsection "discussion" ;
proeth:firstdiscoveredat "2026-02-26T00:21:20.043237+00:00" ;
proeth:firstdiscoveredincase "88" ;
proeth:generatedattime "2026-02-26T00:21:20.043237+00:00" ;
proeth:importance "high" ;
proeth:obligatedparty "Engineer A" ;
proeth:obligationclass "Interdisciplinary Threshold Recognition for Specialized Hydraulic Referral Obligation" ;
proeth:obligationstatement "Engineer A was obligated to apply sufficient cross-disciplinary understanding of hydrology, hydraulics, and coastal modeling to form a reasonable professional judgment that the proposed tidal crossing upgrade created sufficient potential for flooding of upstream properties to merit detailed specialized evaluation — and upon forming that judgment, to recommend engagement of a specialized subconsultant." ;
proeth:sourcetext "Engineer A need not necessarily be a modelling expert." ;
proeth:temporalscope "Upon identifying the potential upstream flood risk from the tidal crossing upgrade" ;
proeth:textreferences "Based on the facts in this case, it is clear that Engineer A has such an understanding of the broad project issues.",
"Engineer A need not necessarily be a modelling expert.",
"However, Engineer A needs to have sufficient understanding of hydrology, hydraulics, and coastal modeling to form a reasonable judgment that there is sufficient potential for flooding of other properties to merit a detailed, complex evaluation of future conditions." ;
proeth:wasattributedto "Case 88 Extraction" ;
prov:generatedAtTime "2026-02-26T00:31:11.072163"^^xsd:dateTime ;
prov:wasGeneratedBy "ProEthica Case 88 Extraction" .
Metadata
Extraction details
Discovered in case
88
Discovered in pass
2
Discovered in section
discussion
First discovered
2026-02-26T00:21:20.043237+00:00
First case
88
Generated
2026-02-26T00:21:20.043237+00:00
Attributed to
Case 88 Extraction
Generated
2026-02-26T00:31:11.072163
Generated by
ProEthica Case 88 Extraction