DP3
Individual
http://proethica.org/ontology/case/94#DP3
Properties
Instance of
Decision Point Id
DP3
Decision question
When directly questioned by the City Planning Board about adverse traffic, noise, and air pollution impacts, should Engineer A provide complete and honest answers, and does the posture of answering only when asked satisfy the NSPE Code's objectivity and truthfulness obligations or create an ethically problematic strategic silence?
Focus
During or after Engineer A's presentation, City Planning Board members may pose direct questions about the adverse traffic, noise, and air pollution impacts of the development. Engineer A has stated a willingness to answer honestly if directly questioned. This decision point concerns whether that conditional commitment — answering only when asked — satisfies the spirit of the NSPE Code's objectivity and truthfulness requirements, or whether it constitutes a strategic silence that falls short of the engineer's public testimony obligations.
Option1
When Board members pose direct questions about traffic congestion, noise pollution, or air pollution impacts, provide full, accurate, and non-evasive answers that reflect Engineer A's complete professional knowledge of those impacts — satisfying the direct-question complete-answer obligation and the NSPE Code conformance requirement for public testimony.
Option2
Volunteer no adverse impact information proactively and, when directly questioned, provide technically accurate but narrowly scoped answers that satisfy the literal question without volunteering additional material context — a posture that may satisfy the letter of the direct-question obligation while falling short of the spirit of the NSPE Code's objectivity and truthfulness requirements.
Option3
Without waiting to be asked, affirmatively supplement the benefits-focused presentation with a disclosure of known adverse traffic, noise, and air pollution impacts — treating the public regulatory hearing context as imposing a heightened independent disclosure obligation separate from the faithful agent role owed to Developer F, consistent with the engineer's public welfare paramount duty.
Role
Engineer A — Licensed Professional Engineer Under Direct Examination by City Planning Board
TTL
@prefix case94: <http://proethica.org/ontology/case/94#> .
@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#> .
case94:DP3 a proeth-cases:DecisionPoint,
owl:NamedIndividual ;
rdfs:label "DP3" ;
proeth:decisionPointId "DP3" ;
proeth:decisionQuestion "When directly questioned by the City Planning Board about adverse traffic, noise, and air pollution impacts, should Engineer A provide complete and honest answers, and does the posture of answering only when asked satisfy the NSPE Code's objectivity and truthfulness obligations or create an ethically problematic strategic silence?" ;
proeth:focus "During or after Engineer A's presentation, City Planning Board members may pose direct questions about the adverse traffic, noise, and air pollution impacts of the development. Engineer A has stated a willingness to answer honestly if directly questioned. This decision point concerns whether that conditional commitment — answering only when asked — satisfies the spirit of the NSPE Code's objectivity and truthfulness requirements, or whether it constitutes a strategic silence that falls short of the engineer's public testimony obligations." ;
proeth:option1 "When Board members pose direct questions about traffic congestion, noise pollution, or air pollution impacts, provide full, accurate, and non-evasive answers that reflect Engineer A's complete professional knowledge of those impacts — satisfying the direct-question complete-answer obligation and the NSPE Code conformance requirement for public testimony." ;
proeth:option2 "Volunteer no adverse impact information proactively and, when directly questioned, provide technically accurate but narrowly scoped answers that satisfy the literal question without volunteering additional material context — a posture that may satisfy the letter of the direct-question obligation while falling short of the spirit of the NSPE Code's objectivity and truthfulness requirements." ;
proeth:option3 "Without waiting to be asked, affirmatively supplement the benefits-focused presentation with a disclosure of known adverse traffic, noise, and air pollution impacts — treating the public regulatory hearing context as imposing a heightened independent disclosure obligation separate from the faithful agent role owed to Developer F, consistent with the engineer's public welfare paramount duty." ;
proeth:roleLabel "Engineer A — Licensed Professional Engineer Under Direct Examination by City Planning Board" ;
prov:generatedAtTime "2026-02-28T21:06:52.155851"^^xsd:dateTime ;
prov:wasGeneratedBy "ProEthica Case 94 Extraction" .
Metadata
Extraction details
Generated
2026-02-28T21:06:52.155851
Generated by
ProEthica Case 94 Extraction