Responsible Charge Design Safety Obligation Engineer T Structural Modifications
O · Obligation
Individual
http://proethica.org/ontology/case/9#Responsible_Charge_Design_Safety_Obligation_Engineer_T_Structural_Modifications
Properties
Instance of
Case context
Engineer T was in responsible charge of the structural modifications design and selected a constrained-access connection detail without exploring alternatives; a construction worker suffered serious and permanent injury; Engineer T later recognized that an alternative design would have made injury far less likely.
Compliance status
unclear
Confidence
0.85
Importance
high
Obligated party
Engineer T
Obligation statement
Engineer T, as the engineer in responsible charge of the structural modifications design, was obligated to hold paramount the safety, health, and welfare of the public — including construction workers — when selecting the design approach, and to consider whether the constrained-access connection detail created foreseeable safety risks that could be mitigated through alternative design concepts.
Temporal scope
During the design phase of the structural modifications project
Relationships
competesWith
Competence Boundary Awareness Obligation Engineer T Construction Safety Doma in, Engineer T Standard of Care Compliance Ethical Sufficiency Determination
Source Evidence
Source text
Engineer T, a senior structural engineer who designs commercial buildings in the employ of XYZ Consulting Engineers, was in responsible charge of the design of major structural modifications to an existing building.
Text references
Engineer T proceeded with the project per these parameters and did not explore alternative design approaches.
Engineer T selected a straightforward approach that required making structural connections immediately beneath floor level on an upper floor, in a tightly constrained space.
Engineer T, a senior structural engineer who designs commercial buildings in the employ of XYZ Consulting Engineers, was in responsible charge of the design of major structural modifications to an existing building.
The alternative approach would have been more costly and taken more time, but it would have allowed the construction workers to make all connections while standing on the floor such that injury would have been far less likely.
TTL
@prefix case9: <http://proethica.org/ontology/case/9#> .
@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#> .
case9:Responsible_Charge_Design_Safety_Obligation_Engineer_T_Structural_Modifications a proeth:SafetyObligation,
owl:NamedIndividual ;
rdfs:label "Responsible Charge Design Safety Obligation Engineer T Structural Modifications" ;
proeth-core:competesWith case9:Competence_Boundary_Awareness_Obligation_Engineer_T_Construction_Safety_Domain,
case9:Engineer_T_Standard_of_Care_Compliance_Ethical_Sufficiency_Determination ;
proeth-core:defeasibleUnder case9:Engineer_T_Construction_Safety_Domain_Incompetence,
case9:Engineer_T_Contractually_Transferred_Safety_Responsibility,
case9:Engineer_T_Unexplored_Alternative_Design ;
proeth:casecontext "Engineer T was in responsible charge of the structural modifications design and selected a constrained-access connection detail without exploring alternatives; a construction worker suffered serious and permanent injury; Engineer T later recognized that an alternative design would have made injury far less likely." ;
proeth:compliancestatus "unclear" ;
proeth:conceptCategory "Obligation" ;
proeth:confidence "0.85" ;
proeth:derivedFromPrinciple case9:Public_Welfare_Paramount_Invoked_By_Engineer_T_Design_Selection,
case9:Public_Welfare_Paramount_Invoked_in_Engineer_T_Design_Analysis,
case9:Responsible_Charge_Engagement_Invoked_By_Engineer_T_Design_Process ;
proeth:discoveredincase "9" ;
proeth:discoveredinpass "2" ;
proeth:discoveredinsection "facts" ;
proeth:firstdiscoveredat "2026-02-24T22:35:24.786445+00:00" ;
proeth:firstdiscoveredincase "9" ;
proeth:generatedattime "2026-02-24T22:35:24.786445+00:00" ;
proeth:importance "high" ;
proeth:obligatedparty "Engineer T" ;
proeth:obligationclass "Safety Obligation" ;
proeth:obligationstatement "Engineer T, as the engineer in responsible charge of the structural modifications design, was obligated to hold paramount the safety, health, and welfare of the public — including construction workers — when selecting the design approach, and to consider whether the constrained-access connection detail created foreseeable safety risks that could be mitigated through alternative design concepts." ;
proeth:sourcetext "Engineer T, a senior structural engineer who designs commercial buildings in the employ of XYZ Consulting Engineers, was in responsible charge of the design of major structural modifications to an existing building." ;
proeth:temporalscope "During the design phase of the structural modifications project" ;
proeth:textreferences "Engineer T proceeded with the project per these parameters and did not explore alternative design approaches.",
"Engineer T selected a straightforward approach that required making structural connections immediately beneath floor level on an upper floor, in a tightly constrained space.",
"Engineer T, a senior structural engineer who designs commercial buildings in the employ of XYZ Consulting Engineers, was in responsible charge of the design of major structural modifications to an existing building.",
"The alternative approach would have been more costly and taken more time, but it would have allowed the construction workers to make all connections while standing on the floor such that injury would have been far less likely." ;
proeth:wasattributedto "Case 9 Extraction" ;
prov:generatedAtTime "2026-02-24T22:41:24.557115"^^xsd:dateTime ;
prov:wasGeneratedBy "ProEthica Case 9 Extraction" .
Metadata
Extraction details
Discovered in case
9
Discovered in pass
2
Discovered in section
facts
First discovered
2026-02-24T22:35:24.786445+00:00
First case
9
Generated
2026-02-24T22:35:24.786445+00:00
Attributed to
Case 9 Extraction
Generated
2026-02-24T22:41:24.557115
Generated by
ProEthica Case 9 Extraction