ProEthica Case 13 Ontology
type: Ontology
created: 2026-02-25T01:11:40.621624
imports: cases
imports: intermediate

Agent-Trustee Distinction Framework
type: Agent-TrusteeDistinctionFramework
type: NamedIndividual
concept category: Resource
confidence: 0.93
createdby: NSPE professional ethics deliberative tradition
discoveredincase: 13
discoveredinpass: 1
discoveredinsection: discussion
documenttitle: Agent-Trustee Distinction in Engineering Professional Obligations
firstdiscoveredat: 2026-02-25T00:52:29.091366+00:00
firstdiscoveredincase: 13
generatedattime: 2026-02-25T00:52:29.091366+00:00
importance: high
resourceclass: Agent-Trustee Distinction Framework
sourcetext: Cutting Edge and Wasser can act as faithful trustees by sharing with the client sustainable options for irrigation.
textreferences: Cutting Edge and Wasser can act as faithful trustees by sharing with the client sustainable options for irrigation.
textreferences: Should the client refuse and insist upon the traditional irrigation system – which is not illegal, Cutting Edge and Wasser must act as the client's agent and complete the task they accepted and were assigned.
textreferences: engineers shall act for each employer or client as faithful agents or trustees
usedby: NSPE Board of Ethical Review to resolve the tension between completing the assigned task and advocating for sustainable alternatives
usedincontext: Applied to distinguish between Wasser and Cutting Edge's role as faithful agents (required to complete the accepted irrigation task if client insists) versus faithful trustees (proactively sharing sustainable alternatives with the client to serve their best interests)
version: Current
wasattributedto: Case 13 Extraction
generated at time: 2026-02-25T01:11:40.626419
was generated by: ProEthica Case 13 Extraction

Assigned Task Refusal
type: NamedIndividual
concept category: Action
generated at time: 2026-02-25T01:11:40.638993
was generated by: ProEthica Case 13 Extraction

Assigned Task Refusal → Formal Sustainability Memorandum Submission
type: NamedIndividual
generated at time: 2026-02-25T01:11:40.639403
was generated by: ProEthica Case 13 Extraction

BER Case 05-04
type: NamedIndividual
generated at time: 2026-02-25T01:26:51.162491
was generated by: ProEthica Case 13 Extraction

BER Case 05-04 and BER Case 07-6 precedents before present case analysis and BER recommendation
type: NamedIndividual
generated at time: 2026-02-25T01:11:40.639854
was generated by: ProEthica Case 13 Extraction

BER Case 05-04 before BER Case 07-6
type: NamedIndividual
generated at time: 2026-02-25T01:11:40.639608
was generated by: ProEthica Case 13 Extraction

BER Case 05-04 before addition of sustainable development provision III.2.d (July 2007)
type: NamedIndividual
generated at time: 2026-02-25T01:11:40.639549
was generated by: ProEthica Case 13 Extraction

BER Case 05-4
type: BERCasePrecedent
type: NamedIndividual
concept category: Resource
confidence: 0.97
createdby: NSPE Board of Ethical Review
discoveredincase: 13
discoveredinpass: 1
discoveredinsection: discussion
documenttitle: NSPE Board of Ethical Review Case 05-4
firstdiscoveredat: 2026-02-25T00:52:29.091366+00:00
firstdiscoveredincase: 13
generatedattime: 2026-02-25T00:52:29.091366+00:00
importance: high
resourceclass: BER Case Precedent
sourcetext: BER Case 05-04, written before NSPE included sustainable development in the NSPE Code of Ethics, is fairly representative of the BER's earlier perspective on environmental sustainability.
textreferences: BER Case 05-04, written before NSPE included sustainable development in the NSPE Code of Ethics, is fairly representative of the BER's earlier perspective on environmental sustainability.
textreferences: In finding it was not unethical for Engineer A to fail to volunteer the fact that an anticipated commercial development could increase traffic, as well as noise and air pollution, the BER noted that 'environmental considerations are often subject to varying arguments, reflecting differing considerations and interests.'
usedby: NSPE Board of Ethical Review to illustrate the evolution of sustainability ethics in engineering
usedincontext: Cited as representative of the BER's pre-sustainable development provision perspective, where individual professional judgment was the final arbiter of environmental trade-offs and engineers were not required to volunteer environmental impact information unless deemed relevant and pertinent
version: 2005
wasattributedto: Case 13 Extraction
generated at time: 2026-02-25T01:11:40.625778
was generated by: ProEthica Case 13 Extraction

BER Case 07-6
type: BERCasePrecedent
type: NamedIndividual
concept category: Resource
confidence: 0.97
createdby: NSPE Board of Ethical Review
discoveredincase: 13
discoveredinpass: 1
discoveredinsection: discussion
documenttitle: NSPE Board of Ethical Review Case 07-6
firstdiscoveredat: 2026-02-25T00:52:29.091366+00:00
firstdiscoveredincase: 13
generatedattime: 2026-02-25T00:52:29.091366+00:00
importance: high
resourceclass: BER Case Precedent
sourcetext: Contrast BER case 05-4 with BER Case 07-6, the BER's first impression case following introduction of the sustainable development provision in the NSPE Code of Ethics.
textreferences: Contrast BER case 05-4 with BER Case 07-6, the BER's first impression case following introduction of the sustainable development provision in the NSPE Code of Ethics.
textreferences: The BER unanimously found it was unethical for Engineer A not to include information about a threat to a bird species in a written report about wetlands development.
usedby: NSPE Board of Ethical Review to demonstrate the post-2007 shift in sustainability ethics standards
usedincontext: Cited as the BER's first impression case following introduction of the sustainable development provision, establishing that engineers have an obligation to include environmental threat information (endangered species) in professional reports, marking a shift toward sustainability-informed professional judgment
version: 2007
wasattributedto: Case 13 Extraction
generated at time: 2026-02-25T01:11:40.625971
was generated by: ProEthica Case 13 Extraction

BER Case 07-6 before BER Case 15-12
type: NamedIndividual
generated at time: 2026-02-25T01:11:40.639636
was generated by: ProEthica Case 13 Extraction

BER Case 15-12
type: BERCasePrecedent
type: NamedIndividual
concept category: Resource
confidence: 0.97
createdby: NSPE Board of Ethical Review
discoveredincase: 13
discoveredinpass: 1
discoveredinsection: discussion
documenttitle: NSPE Board of Ethical Review Case 15-12
firstdiscoveredat: 2026-02-25T00:52:29.091366+00:00
firstdiscoveredincase: 13
generatedattime: 2026-02-25T00:52:29.091366+00:00
importance: medium
resourceclass: BER Case Precedent
sourcetext: In BER Case 15-12, Engineer A was a professional engineer with JKL Engineering and this firm had a contract with the state to specify the route for a road connecting two towns.
textreferences: In BER Case 15-12, Engineer A was a professional engineer with JKL Engineering and this firm had a contract with the state to specify the route for a road connecting two towns.
textreferences: It was the BER's position that Engineer A had an ethical obligation to balance the interests of all interested and relevant parties, including the state, the two towns in question, and the owners of the historic family farmhouse.
usedby: NSPE Board of Ethical Review to ground the obligation to seek creative solutions balancing competing stakeholder interests
usedincontext: Cited to illustrate the BER's position that engineers must balance competing interests of all affected parties — including property owners, municipalities, and the public — and explore creative alternative solutions rather than defaulting to the greatest good for the greatest number calculus, relevant to sustainability and competing obligations analysis
version: 2015
wasattributedto: Case 13 Extraction
generated at time: 2026-02-25T01:11:40.626121
was generated by: ProEthica Case 13 Extraction

BER Precedent Cases Established
type: NamedIndividual
concept category: Event
generated at time: 2026-02-25T01:11:40.639207
was generated by: ProEthica Case 13 Extraction

Case 13 Timeline
type: NamedIndividual
generated at time: 2026-02-25T01:11:40.639951
was generated by: ProEthica Case 13 Extraction

CausalLink_Assigned Task Refusal
type: NamedIndividual
generated at time: 2026-02-25T01:26:51.169668
was generated by: ProEthica Case 13 Extraction

CausalLink_Formal Sustainability Memorand
type: NamedIndividual
generated at time: 2026-02-25T01:26:51.169700
was generated by: ProEthica Case 13 Extraction

CausalLink_Irrigation Sketching Task Assi
type: NamedIndividual
generated at time: 2026-02-25T01:26:51.169619
was generated by: ProEthica Case 13 Extraction

CausalLink_Resort Contract Acceptance
type: NamedIndividual
generated at time: 2026-02-25T01:26:51.169549
was generated by: ProEthica Case 13 Extraction

CausalLink_Response to Wasser's Dissent
type: NamedIndividual
generated at time: 2026-02-25T01:26:51.169747
was generated by: ProEthica Case 13 Extraction

Client Loyalty Obligation On Cutting Edge Engineering
type: ClientLoyalty
type: NamedIndividual
appliedto: Irrigation system sketching assignment
appliedto: Resort project MEP contract scope
balancingwith: Environmental Stewardship in Engineering Practice
balancingwith: Public Welfare Paramount
balancingwith: Sustainable Development Advocacy Obligation
concept category: Principle
concreteexpression: Cutting Edge Engineering accepted the resort project contract including the landscape architect's irrigation system specification, creating a faithful agent obligation to execute the contracted MEP scope including irrigation system detailing
confidence: 0.87
discoveredincase: 13
discoveredinpass: 2
discoveredinsection: facts
firstdiscoveredat: 2026-02-25T00:54:10.925994+00:00
firstdiscoveredincase: 13
generatedattime: 2026-02-25T00:54:10.925994+00:00
importance: high
interpretation: The client loyalty obligation requires Cutting Edge to execute contracted work diligently, but does not require execution of work that conflicts with professional ethics or public welfare obligations — the tension must be resolved through client engagement rather than unilateral refusal
invokedby: Cutting Edge Faithful Agent Sustainability Trustee Engineer
invokedby: Engineer Jaylani MEP Firm Principal Engineer
principleclass: Client Loyalty
sourcetext: Engineer Jaylani is a firm principal for Cutting Edge Engineering and is under contract to complete the mechanical, electrical, and plumbing work for a new resort
tensionresolution: The tension is unresolved in the case facts — Jaylani must decide whether to engage the client and landscape architect about the sustainability concerns or require Wasser to proceed with the assignment
textreferences: Engineer Jaylani assigns Wasser the task of sketching out details for the irrigation system
textreferences: Engineer Jaylani is a firm principal for Cutting Edge Engineering and is under contract to complete the mechanical, electrical, and plumbing work for a new resort
wasattributedto: Case 13 Extraction
generated at time: 2026-02-25T01:11:40.628824
was generated by: ProEthica Case 13 Extraction

Competing Duties Between Contract Execution and Sustainability Obligations
type: CompetingDutiesState
type: NamedIndividual
activeperiod: From receipt of Wasser's formal memorandum through resolution of the sustainability objection
affectedparties: Cutting Edge Engineering
affectedparties: Engineer Jaylani
affectedparties: Landscape architect
affectedparties: Resort client
concept category: State
confidence: 0.87
discoveredincase: 13
discoveredinpass: 1
discoveredinsection: facts
firstdiscoveredat: 2026-02-25T00:51:20.279821+00:00
firstdiscoveredincase: 13
generatedattime: 2026-02-25T00:51:20.279821+00:00
importance: high
sourcetext: Engineer Jaylani is a firm principal for Cutting Edge Engineering and is under contract to complete the mechanical, electrical, and plumbing work
stateclass: Competing Duties State
subject: Engineer Jaylani's simultaneous obligations to execute the contracted MEP scope (including landscape architect's irrigation specification) and to adhere to professional sustainability principles under NSPE Code III.2.d
terminatedby: Not yet terminated — state is active and unresolved in the facts presented
textreferences: Engineer Jaylani is a firm principal for Cutting Edge Engineering and is under contract to complete the mechanical, electrical, and plumbing work
textreferences: NSPE Code of Ethics Professional Obligation III.2.d, 'Engineers are encouraged to adhere to the principles of sustainable development'
textreferences: Wasser argues the proposed lawn irrigation system is not consistent with several United Nations sustainable development goals
triggeringevent: Wasser's formal memorandum documenting the conflict between the irrigation specification and sustainability standards, placing Jaylani in a position of competing professional duties
urgencylevel: medium
wasattributedto: Case 13 Extraction
generated at time: 2026-02-25T01:11:40.624374
was generated by: ProEthica Case 13 Extraction

Conclusion_1
type: EthicalConclusion
type: NamedIndividual
answers question1: 1
conclusion number: 1
conclusion text: It was ethical for Engineer Jaylani to accept the irrigation system design task.
conclusion type: board_explicit
extraction reasoning: Parsed from imported case text (no LLM)
generated at time: 2026-02-25T01:26:51.164642
was generated by: ProEthica Case 13 Extraction

Conclusion_101
type: EthicalConclusion
type: NamedIndividual
answers question1: 101
answers question2: 301
cited provision1: I.4.
cited provision2: III.1.b.
conclusion number: 101
conclusion text: Beyond the Board's finding that it was ethical for Engineer Jaylani to accept the irrigation system design task, the acceptance carried with it an independent and affirmative obligation to disclose the hydrogeological study's documented water table depletion risk to the Resort Development Client before or concurrent with proceeding with the design. The faithful agent and trustee duty under NSPE Code Section I.4 does not merely require execution of the contracted scope; it requires that the client be equipped with material technical information bearing on the project's consequences. A hydrogeological study documenting measurable water table lowering in a semi-arid region constitutes precisely such material information. Acceptance of the task without disclosure of that risk reduced the client's ability to make an informed decision about the irrigation specification, and that omission represents an ethical gap the Board did not address. Engineer Jaylani's acceptance was therefore conditional on a disclosure obligation that the Board's conclusion left implicit but should have made explicit.
conclusion type: analytical_extension
generated at time: 2026-02-25T01:26:51.164988
was generated by: ProEthica Case 13 Extraction

Conclusion_102
type: EthicalConclusion
type: NamedIndividual
answers question1: 102
answers question2: 202
cited provision1: I.1.
cited provision2: I.4.
cited provision3: III.1.b.
conclusion number: 102
conclusion text: The Board's conclusion that Engineer Jaylani's acceptance was ethical implicitly rests on the premise that the landscape architect's specification authority relieves the MEP engineer of responsibility for the environmental consequences of executing that specification. This premise is ethically incomplete. While the landscape architect holds the design authority to specify the irrigation system type, Engineer Jaylani and Cutting Edge Engineering retain an independent professional duty to evaluate and communicate risks that fall within their own technical competence — including water resource engineering in a semi-arid context. Deference to another discipline's specification authority is a legitimate procedural boundary, but it cannot function as an ethical shield against disclosing known environmental risks. The MEP engineer's obligation to hold paramount the safety, health, and welfare of the public under Canon I operates independently of interdisciplinary scope boundaries. Accordingly, the Board should have clarified that acceptance of the task was ethical only insofar as it was accompanied by Jaylani's independent evaluation of the water table risk and communication of that risk to the client, regardless of the landscape architect's specification role.
conclusion type: analytical_extension
generated at time: 2026-02-25T01:26:51.165132
was generated by: ProEthica Case 13 Extraction

Conclusion_103
type: EthicalConclusion
type: NamedIndividual
answers question1: 104
answers question2: 204
cited provision1: I.1.
cited provision2: I.4.
cited provision3: III.2.d.
conclusion number: 103
conclusion text: The Board's conclusion that Engineer Jaylani's acceptance was ethical does not adequately account for the semi-arid regional context as an ethically aggravating factor. A traditional lawn irrigation system specified for a golf course in a water-abundant region presents a materially different ethical profile than the same system specified in a semi-arid region where a hydrogeological study has documented water table depletion affecting communities dependent on that resource. The geographic and hydrological context elevates the public welfare stakes beyond a routine MEP design task. The Board's failure to condition its ethical approval on the regional context risks establishing a precedent that treats all traditional irrigation system acceptances as equally permissible regardless of documented environmental harm to third-party communities. A more complete analysis would have recognized that the semi-arid context and the documented impact on historically underserved regional water users strengthens the case for proactive client disclosure, sustainable alternative advocacy, and — at a sufficiently severe threshold of documented harm — potential escalation beyond the client relationship to regulatory authorities.
conclusion type: analytical_extension
generated at time: 2026-02-25T01:26:51.165254
was generated by: ProEthica Case 13 Extraction

Conclusion_104
type: EthicalConclusion
type: NamedIndividual
answers question1: 303
answers question2: 401
cited provision1: III.2.d.
cited provision2: I.4.
conclusion number: 104
conclusion text: The Board's characterization of Engineer Intern Wasser's refusal as ethically permissible but 'extreme' reflects a proportionality judgment that deserves further unpacking. The Board appears to reason that because NSPE Code Section III.2.d frames sustainable development adherence as encouraged rather than mandatory, outright refusal of an assigned task on sustainability grounds exceeds what the code requires and therefore constitutes a disproportionate response. This reasoning is sound as far as it goes, but it does not fully engage with the question of whether Wasser's refusal was the most professionally effective response available. From a virtue ethics standpoint, practical wisdom — the capacity to identify the right action in context — would likely have counseled Wasser to complete the assigned sketching task while simultaneously submitting the sustainability memorandum and developing a concrete sustainable alternative design for presentation to Jaylani and ultimately to the client. This approach would have preserved Wasser's advocacy, demonstrated technical competence, and kept the client's choice space open without the professional friction of a subordinate task refusal. The Board's 'extreme' characterization implicitly endorses this alternative path without articulating it, and a more complete analysis would have made that preferred course of action explicit.
conclusion type: analytical_extension
generated at time: 2026-02-25T01:26:51.165420
was generated by: ProEthica Case 13 Extraction

Conclusion_105
type: EthicalConclusion
type: NamedIndividual
answers question1: 103
answers question2: 203
cited provision1: I.1.
cited provision2: II.1.f.
cited provision3: III.2.d.
conclusion number: 105
conclusion text: The Board's conclusion that Wasser's refusal was ethically permissible as a matter of personal conviction does not resolve whether Wasser's formal memorandum, standing alone, constituted a sufficient discharge of the professional obligation triggered by the hydrogeological study's findings. The memorandum addressed Jaylani internally, but the hydrogeological study documented a risk to communities dependent on the regional water table — a third-party public harm that extends beyond the firm's internal hierarchy. NSPE Code Canon I's paramount public welfare obligation and the reporting provision under Section II.1.f collectively suggest that when an engineer possesses knowledge of a condition that endangers public welfare, the obligation may extend beyond internal advocacy to notification of appropriate external authorities if internal channels fail to produce corrective action. The Board did not address whether Wasser's internal memorandum exhausted that obligation or whether — particularly given the semi-arid context and documented community water dependency — a stronger escalation duty existed. A complete analysis would have assessed whether the severity of the documented harm crossed the threshold at which internal dissent becomes insufficient and external reporting becomes obligatory.
conclusion type: analytical_extension
generated at time: 2026-02-25T01:26:51.165536
was generated by: ProEthica Case 13 Extraction

Conclusion_106
type: EthicalConclusion
type: NamedIndividual
answers question1: 304
answers question2: 203
cited provision1: I.1.
cited provision2: I.4.
cited provision3: III.2.d.
cited provision4: III.1.b.
conclusion number: 106
conclusion text: The Board's implicit conclusion that traditional lawn irrigation system design is an ethical expression of engineering work — left as 'unknown' in the explicit conclusions — is most defensible when read narrowly: the design task is not inherently unethical, but its ethical permissibility is contingent on the engineer fulfilling accompanying disclosure and advocacy obligations rather than treating permissibility as unconditional. The NSPE Code's framing of sustainable development adherence as 'encouraged' rather than mandatory in Section III.2.d does not create a genuine ethical loophole that permits engineers to proceed with designs carrying documented environmental harm without further obligation. Canon I's paramount public welfare duty operates as an independent and binding constraint that can impose affirmative obligations even where a specific code provision is permissive. Accordingly, the ethical permissibility of the traditional irrigation design is best understood as conditional: it is ethical to execute the design provided the engineer has disclosed the documented water table risk to the client, offered sustainable alternatives where technically feasible, and ensured the client's decision to proceed is informed. An unconditional finding that the design is an ethical expression of engineering work, without these conditions, would underweight the public welfare dimension that Canon I independently imposes.
conclusion type: analytical_extension
generated at time: 2026-02-25T01:26:51.165722
was generated by: ProEthica Case 13 Extraction

Conclusion_107
type: EthicalConclusion
type: NamedIndividual
answers question1: 3
answers question2: 404
cited provision1: I.1.
cited provision2: I.4.
cited provision3: III.1.b.
cited provision4: III.2.d.
conclusion number: 107
conclusion text: Even accepting that the traditional irrigation system design is an ethical expression of engineering work, the Board's implicit suggestion that Cutting Edge Engineering can complete the design by reassigning the task to another engineer or completing it through Jaylani directly does not fully resolve the firm's ethical posture going forward. The firm's most ethically complete path to task completion is not merely substituting a willing engineer for a dissenting one, but rather integrating Wasser's documented sustainability objection into the firm's client communication. Specifically, Cutting Edge Engineering should present the Resort Development Client with the hydrogeological study's findings, the sustainability concerns Wasser raised, and a developed sustainable irrigation alternative — such as a drip irrigation or greywater recycling system — alongside the traditional design, so that the client's decision to proceed with the traditional system is fully informed. This approach honors the faithful agent obligation to the client, respects the client's ultimate decision-making authority within legal bounds, satisfies the proactive risk disclosure duty triggered by the hydrogeological study, and transforms Wasser's internal dissent into a constructive client-facing advisory function. Completing the design without this client communication would be ethically deficient even if the design task itself is permissible.
conclusion type: analytical_extension
generated at time: 2026-02-25T01:26:51.165987
was generated by: ProEthica Case 13 Extraction

Conclusion_2
type: EthicalConclusion
type: NamedIndividual
answers question1: 2
conclusion number: 2
conclusion text: As a matter of personal conviction, it was ethically permissible, but extreme, for Engineer Intern Wasser to refuse the task of design development for the proposed irrigation system.
conclusion type: board_explicit
extraction reasoning: Parsed from imported case text (no LLM)
generated at time: 2026-02-25T01:26:51.164742
was generated by: ProEthica Case 13 Extraction

Conclusion_201
type: EthicalConclusion
type: NamedIndividual
answers question1: 101
answers question2: 301
cited provision1: I.4.
cited provision2: III.1.b.
conclusion number: 201
conclusion text: In response to Q101: Engineer Jaylani bore an independent obligation to disclose the hydrogeological study's findings to the Resort Development Client before proceeding with the irrigation design, regardless of Wasser's objection. NSPE Code III.1.b directs engineers to advise clients when they believe a project will not be successful, and the hydrogeological study constitutes documented technical evidence — within the MEP engineer's competence to evaluate — that the proposed irrigation system poses a measurable risk to regional water resources. The landscape architect's role as specifier does not transfer this disclosure duty away from Jaylani; an MEP engineer who possesses knowledge of a documented environmental risk falling within their technical domain retains an independent obligation to surface that risk to the client. Accepting the task without first communicating the study's findings denied the Resort Development Client a meaningful opportunity to make an informed decision about the irrigation scope, which falls short of the faithful agent and trustee standard under Code I.4. The Board's conclusion that acceptance was ethical is not necessarily wrong, but it is incomplete unless disclosure of the water table risk is treated as a condition precedent to ethically proceeding.
conclusion type: question_response
generated at time: 2026-02-25T01:26:51.166130
was generated by: ProEthica Case 13 Extraction

Conclusion_202
type: EthicalConclusion
type: NamedIndividual
answers question1: 102
answers question2: 202
cited provision1: I.1.
cited provision2: I.4.
cited provision3: III.1.b.
conclusion number: 202
conclusion text: In response to Q102: The landscape architect's authority to specify the irrigation system does not relieve Cutting Edge Engineering or Engineer Jaylani of independent professional responsibility for the environmental consequences of executing that specification. The NSPE Code's paramount public welfare obligation under Canon I operates across disciplinary boundaries; it does not yield simply because another licensed professional initiated the design decision. When an MEP engineer possesses technical knowledge — here, the hydrogeological study's findings — that a specified system will cause measurable harm to a shared natural resource in a semi-arid region, deference to the specifying discipline's authority is not a sufficient ethical defense. The engineer's role as faithful agent under I.4 is bounded by the public welfare paramount principle under I.1, meaning Jaylani's firm retained an affirmative duty to evaluate the irrigation specification against known environmental data and to flag sustainability risks that fell squarely within their technical competence, irrespective of who originated the specification.
conclusion type: question_response
generated at time: 2026-02-25T01:26:51.166232
was generated by: ProEthica Case 13 Extraction

Conclusion_203
type: EthicalConclusion
type: NamedIndividual
answers question1: 103
answers question2: 203
cited provision1: I.1.
cited provision2: II.1.f.
cited provision3: III.2.d.
conclusion number: 203
conclusion text: In response to Q103: Wasser's formal memorandum was a necessary but likely insufficient response given the severity of the documented environmental risk. The hydrogeological study's findings about water table depletion in a semi-arid region — a resource upon which surrounding communities depend — elevate the concern beyond a routine internal sustainability disagreement. NSPE Code II.1.f directs engineers with knowledge of potential code violations to report to appropriate professional bodies, and Code I.1 frames public safety, health, and welfare as paramount. While the Board characterized Wasser's refusal as permissible but extreme, the internal memorandum alone may not satisfy the full scope of Wasser's professional obligations if the water table risk rises to the level of a genuine public welfare threat. A more proportionate and complete response would have included completing the assigned task under protest — thereby preserving the employment relationship and demonstrating good faith — while simultaneously escalating the documented risk through appropriate channels, potentially including regulatory bodies with jurisdiction over water resources in the semi-arid region. The Board's framing of the refusal as 'extreme' implicitly acknowledges that the chosen response was disproportionate relative to the available alternatives, but the Board did not address whether escalation beyond the firm was warranted.
conclusion type: question_response
generated at time: 2026-02-25T01:26:51.166374
was generated by: ProEthica Case 13 Extraction

Conclusion_204
type: EthicalConclusion
type: NamedIndividual
answers question1: 104
answers question2: 204
cited provision1: I.1.
cited provision2: III.2.d.
conclusion number: 204
conclusion text: In response to Q104: The semi-arid regional context and the documented impact on communities dependent on the water table materially elevate the ethical stakes of the traditional irrigation system design. A traditional lawn irrigation system specified for a golf course in a humid region would present a categorically different ethical profile than the same system deployed in a semi-arid region where a hydrogeological study has documented measurable water table depletion affecting surrounding communities. The geographic and hydrological context is not ethically neutral. Under Canon I's paramount public welfare obligation, the relevant question is not merely whether the design is technically permissible or legally authorized, but whether its foreseeable consequences endanger the health and welfare of the public — including communities beyond the resort's property boundary who depend on the shared aquifer. The Board's conclusion that traditional irrigation system design is an ethical expression of engineering work may be defensible as a general proposition, but its application to this specific semi-arid context, with documented third-party water access impacts, requires a more demanding ethical justification than the Board explicitly provided.
conclusion type: question_response
generated at time: 2026-02-25T01:26:51.166513
was generated by: ProEthica Case 13 Extraction

Conclusion_205
type: EthicalConclusion
type: NamedIndividual
answers question1: 201
answers question2: 101
cited provision1: I.1.
cited provision2: I.4.
cited provision3: III.1.b.
conclusion number: 205
conclusion text: In response to Q201: The client loyalty obligation and the public welfare paramount principle exist in genuine tension in this case, and the threshold at which public welfare overrides faithful client service is not merely a matter of degree but of documented harm to identifiable third parties. Code I.4 requires engineers to act as faithful agents and trustees, but this obligation is explicitly bounded by the paramount duty under I.1. The hydrogeological study provides the critical evidentiary threshold: it moves the water table depletion concern from speculative environmental worry to documented, foreseeable harm. Once that threshold is crossed — that is, once an engineer possesses credible technical evidence that a client's project will harm the public — the faithful agent role cannot ethically be used to suppress or ignore that evidence. The client loyalty obligation does not dissolve, but it must be discharged in a manner consistent with the public welfare duty, meaning at minimum that the client must be informed of the documented risk and given the opportunity to choose a less harmful alternative before the engineer proceeds with the original scope.
conclusion type: question_response
generated at time: 2026-02-25T01:26:51.166606
was generated by: ProEthica Case 13 Extraction

Conclusion_206
type: EthicalConclusion
type: NamedIndividual
answers question1: 202
answers question2: 102
cited provision1: I.1.
cited provision2: I.4.
cited provision3: III.1.b.
conclusion number: 206
conclusion text: In response to Q202: Deference to another discipline's specification authority cannot ethically excuse an engineer from disclosing known environmental risks that fall within the engineer's own technical knowledge. The professional scope boundary between the landscape architect's specification role and the MEP engineer's execution role governs the division of design responsibility, but it does not govern the disclosure of known risks. These are distinct professional obligations. An MEP engineer who possesses a hydrogeological study demonstrating that a specified system will deplete a regional water table is not relieved of the duty to communicate that finding simply because the specification originated with a landscape architect. Code III.1.b and the broader faithful agent and public welfare obligations operate independently of who authored the design decision. Allowing disciplinary deference to function as a shield against risk disclosure would create a systematic ethical gap in multi-disciplinary projects — precisely the contexts where complex environmental risks are most likely to emerge across professional boundaries.
conclusion type: question_response
generated at time: 2026-02-25T01:26:51.166714
was generated by: ProEthica Case 13 Extraction

Conclusion_207
type: EthicalConclusion
type: NamedIndividual
answers question1: 203
answers question2: 304
cited provision1: I.1.
cited provision2: I.4.
cited provision3: III.2.d.
conclusion number: 207
conclusion text: In response to Q203: The tension between the sustainable development advocacy principle and the client loyalty obligation is real but resolvable without treating them as mutually exclusive. Code III.2.d frames sustainable development adherence as encouraged rather than mandatory, which means Wasser's invocation of that provision alone cannot generate a binding obligation to refuse the task or to override the client's design preference. However, the ethical analysis changes when the sustainability concern is grounded not merely in aspirational SDG alignment but in a documented hydrogeological study demonstrating measurable harm. At that point, the concern migrates from the permissive domain of III.2.d into the mandatory domain of Canon I's public welfare paramount obligation. The non-mandatory character of III.2.d does not create a loophole that permits engineers to proceed with designs carrying documented environmental harm; rather, it means that the sustainability principle alone is insufficient to override client loyalty, but the public welfare paramount principle — triggered by documented third-party harm — is sufficient and is mandatory. Wasser conflated these two distinct normative sources, which weakened the ethical force of his objection even though the underlying concern was legitimate.
conclusion type: question_response
generated at time: 2026-02-25T01:26:51.166910
was generated by: ProEthica Case 13 Extraction

Conclusion_208
type: EthicalConclusion
type: NamedIndividual
answers question1: 204
answers question2: 402
cited provision1: I.1.
cited provision2: I.4.
cited provision3: III.1.b.
cited provision4: III.2.d.
conclusion number: 208
conclusion text: In response to Q204: Offering green irrigation alternatives as an add-on service is ethically insufficient if the baseline traditional design is already documented to cause measurable environmental harm and that documentation has not been disclosed to the client. The proactive design alternatives obligation on Jaylani and Cutting Edge is not satisfied by merely presenting sustainable options as an upsell; it must be paired with transparent disclosure of the documented risk associated with the traditional system. Without that disclosure, the client cannot make a genuinely informed choice between alternatives, and the engineer's stewardship duty — grounded in both the public welfare paramount obligation and the faithful agent role — is only partially fulfilled. Environmental stewardship in this context requires that the client understand not just that a greener option exists, but why the baseline option poses a documented risk to regional water resources. Presenting alternatives without disclosing the hydrogeological study's findings would satisfy the letter of a proactive alternatives obligation while undermining its ethical purpose.
conclusion type: question_response
generated at time: 2026-02-25T01:26:51.167020
was generated by: ProEthica Case 13 Extraction

Conclusion_209
type: EthicalConclusion
type: NamedIndividual
answers question1: 301
answers question2: 101
cited provision1: I.4.
cited provision2: III.1.b.
conclusion number: 209
conclusion text: In response to Q301: From a deontological perspective, Engineer Jaylani's duty to disclose the hydrogeological study's findings to the Resort Development Client is not contingent on whether the traditional irrigation system design was otherwise permissible. Deontological ethics grounds obligations in the nature of the duty itself, not in its consequences. The duty to inform a client of known material risks — embedded in Code I.4's faithful agent and trustee standard and Code III.1.b's advisement obligation — is categorical: it applies whenever the engineer possesses relevant technical knowledge that the client needs to make an informed decision. The permissibility of the design task is a separate question from the completeness of the client relationship. Jaylani could ethically accept the task and simultaneously be obligated to disclose the water table risk; these are not mutually exclusive. The Board's conclusion that acceptance was ethical does not resolve whether the acceptance was accompanied by the disclosure that deontological duty required.
conclusion type: question_response
generated at time: 2026-02-25T01:26:51.167154
was generated by: ProEthica Case 13 Extraction

Conclusion_210
type: EthicalConclusion
type: NamedIndividual
answers question1: 302
answers question2: 104
cited provision1: I.1.
cited provision2: III.2.d.
conclusion number: 210
conclusion text: In response to Q302: From a consequentialist perspective, the Board's conclusion that traditional irrigation system design is an ethical expression of engineering work does not appear to have adequately weighed the long-term harm to historically underserved communities in the semi-arid region who depend on the water table the system risks depleting. A consequentialist analysis requires aggregating all foreseeable outcomes across all affected parties, not merely the immediate parties to the contract. The resort client's interest in a traditional golf course irrigation system is a near-term, localized benefit. The water table depletion documented in the hydrogeological study represents a diffuse, long-term harm distributed across communities that may lack the political or economic resources to seek redress. Consequentialist ethics would assign significant moral weight to this asymmetry — particularly where the harmed parties are historically underserved and the harm is irreversible or difficult to remediate. The Board's conclusion, if it rests on a consequentialist foundation, requires a more explicit accounting of these third-party harms before it can be considered complete.
conclusion type: question_response
generated at time: 2026-02-25T01:26:51.167289
was generated by: ProEthica Case 13 Extraction

Conclusion_211
type: EthicalConclusion
type: NamedIndividual
answers question1: 303
answers question2: 401
cited provision1: III.2.d.
conclusion number: 211
conclusion text: In response to Q303: From a virtue ethics perspective, Engineer Intern Wasser's outright refusal reflects an admirable commitment to environmental stewardship but falls short of the practical wisdom — phronesis — that virtue ethics identifies as the hallmark of genuinely virtuous professional conduct. Practical wisdom requires not merely identifying the right value but choosing the right action in the right measure at the right time. A practically wise engineer intern, confronted with a legitimate sustainability concern, would recognize that completing the assigned task while simultaneously advocating forcefully for sustainable alternatives — and escalating through appropriate channels — better serves both the environmental goal and the professional relationship than outright refusal. The Board's characterization of the refusal as 'extreme' is best understood as a judgment about this proportionality: Wasser's underlying values were sound, but the chosen expression of those values was not calibrated to the situation. Virtue ethics would also note that the refusal, by removing Wasser from the design process, may have reduced rather than increased the likelihood of a sustainable outcome, since Wasser's technical knowledge and advocacy could have been more influential from within the project than from outside it.
conclusion type: question_response
generated at time: 2026-02-25T01:26:51.167405
was generated by: ProEthica Case 13 Extraction

Conclusion_212
type: EthicalConclusion
type: NamedIndividual
answers question1: 304
answers question2: 203
cited provision1: I.1.
cited provision2: III.2.d.
conclusion number: 212
conclusion text: In response to Q304: The NSPE Code's framing of sustainable development adherence as 'encouraged' rather than mandatory in III.2.d does not create a genuine ethical loophole that permits engineers to proceed with designs carrying documented environmental harm. The permissive language of III.2.d operates within the broader normative architecture of the Code, which places the paramount public welfare obligation of Canon I at the apex of the hierarchy. When a design carries documented, foreseeable harm to public health and welfare — as evidenced by the hydrogeological study's findings — the mandatory Canon I obligation is triggered independently of III.2.d. The 'encouraged' language means that sustainability advocacy, SDG alignment, and green design preferences are not independently enforceable professional obligations; but it does not mean that engineers may ignore documented evidence of public harm simply because that harm is framed in sustainability terms. The ethical loophole concern is therefore real but narrower than it appears: III.2.d cannot independently compel refusal of a legal design task, but Canon I can and does compel disclosure of documented public harm regardless of whether the harm is characterized as a sustainability issue.
conclusion type: question_response
generated at time: 2026-02-25T01:26:51.167506
was generated by: ProEthica Case 13 Extraction

Conclusion_213
type: EthicalConclusion
type: NamedIndividual
answers question1: 401
answers question2: 303
cited provision1: I.4.
cited provision2: III.2.d.
conclusion number: 213
conclusion text: In response to Q401: The Board's ethical assessment of Wasser's refusal would very likely have differed — and been more favorable to Wasser — if Wasser had first completed the assigned irrigation sketching task and then submitted the sustainability memorandum alongside a fully developed sustainable alternative design. The Board's characterization of the refusal as 'extreme' rests implicitly on the availability of less disruptive alternatives that would have preserved both the professional relationship and the sustainability advocacy. Completing the task under protest while simultaneously presenting a credible sustainable alternative would have demonstrated practical wisdom, good faith toward the employer, and a constructive rather than obstructive approach to the environmental concern. It would also have given the Resort Development Client a concrete choice between the traditional and sustainable options, which is the outcome the Board appears to favor. The outright pre-task refusal foreclosed this possibility and shifted the ethical burden onto Wasser in a way that completing the task first would not have.
conclusion type: question_response
generated at time: 2026-02-25T01:26:51.167842
was generated by: ProEthica Case 13 Extraction

Conclusion_214
type: EthicalConclusion
type: NamedIndividual
answers question1: 402
answers question2: 101
cited provision1: I.4.
cited provision2: III.1.b.
conclusion number: 214
conclusion text: In response to Q402: If Engineer Jaylani had proactively disclosed the hydrogeological study's water table findings to the Resort Development Client before accepting the irrigation design task, the client would have had a meaningful opportunity to make an informed decision — and this disclosure would have strengthened, not undermined, the ethical basis for accepting the task. The Board's conclusion that acceptance was ethical is most defensible when read as implicitly assuming that such disclosure either occurred or would occur. Without disclosure, the acceptance is ethically incomplete because the client's apparent consent to the traditional irrigation scope was not informed consent in the full professional sense. Proactive disclosure would also have positioned Cutting Edge Engineering to present sustainable alternatives from a position of technical credibility rather than as a reactive accommodation to Wasser's objection. Whether the client would have chosen a sustainable alternative is unknowable, but the ethical obligation to disclose does not depend on the predicted outcome of that disclosure — it depends on the client's right to make an informed decision.
conclusion type: question_response
generated at time: 2026-02-25T01:26:51.168154
was generated by: ProEthica Case 13 Extraction

Conclusion_215
type: EthicalConclusion
type: NamedIndividual
answers question1: 403
answers question2: 103
cited provision1: I.1.
cited provision2: I.4.
cited provision3: II.1.a.
cited provision4: II.1.f.
conclusion number: 215
conclusion text: In response to Q403: If the hydrogeological study had concluded that the proposed irrigation system would render the regional water supply unsafe for surrounding communities — rather than merely lower the water table — that escalation of public harm would almost certainly have converted Engineer Jaylani's acceptance of the task from ethical to unethical, and would have made Wasser's refusal not merely permissible but obligatory. Canon I's paramount public welfare obligation is most clearly triggered when the harm is not merely environmental degradation but a direct threat to public health and safety. Code II.1.a directs engineers whose judgment is overruled under circumstances that endanger life or property to notify appropriate authorities. At the threshold of unsafe water supply for surrounding communities, the faithful agent obligation under I.4 would be fully subordinated to the public welfare paramount obligation under I.1, and both Jaylani and Wasser would face binding duties to refuse the scope, notify the client of the specific safety risk, and if necessary escalate to regulatory authorities. The current case sits below this threshold — the study documents water table depletion, not unsafe water supply — but the proximity of the facts to this threshold reinforces the argument that disclosure to the client was at minimum obligatory even under the actual facts.
conclusion type: question_response
generated at time: 2026-02-25T01:26:51.168480
was generated by: ProEthica Case 13 Extraction

Conclusion_216
type: EthicalConclusion
type: NamedIndividual
answers question1: 404
answers question2: 201
cited provision1: I.1.
cited provision2: I.4.
cited provision3: III.1.b.
cited provision4: III.2.d.
conclusion number: 216
conclusion text: In response to Q404: If Cutting Edge Engineering had proactively introduced green irrigation alternatives to the Resort Development Client at the outset and the client had still insisted on the traditional system, the firm's ethical obligations would have intensified in two respects. First, the firm would bear a stronger obligation to ensure that the client's insistence was documented as an informed decision made with full knowledge of the hydrogeological study's findings — not merely a preference expressed without awareness of the environmental consequences. Second, if the documented water table depletion risk rises to the level of a public welfare concern under Canon I, client insistence on the traditional system after full disclosure would not relieve the firm of its public welfare obligation; it would instead require the firm to evaluate whether proceeding with the scope is consistent with its paramount duty. The Board's suggestion that Cutting Edge is well-positioned to offer green alternatives implies that this proactive introduction is the preferred ethical path, but it does not resolve what the firm's obligations are when that path is taken and the client nonetheless chooses the environmentally harmful option. At that point, the firm faces a genuine conflict between faithful agent duty and public welfare paramount obligation that cannot be resolved by reference to client autonomy alone.
conclusion type: question_response
generated at time: 2026-02-25T01:26:51.168822
was generated by: ProEthica Case 13 Extraction

Conclusion_3
type: EthicalConclusion
type: NamedIndividual
answers question1: 3
conclusion number: 3
conclusion text: Under the facts, traditional lawn irrigation system design is an ethical expression of engineering work.
conclusion type: board_explicit
extraction reasoning: Parsed from imported case text (no LLM)
generated at time: 2026-02-25T01:26:51.164860
was generated by: ProEthica Case 13 Extraction

Conclusion_301
type: EthicalConclusion
type: NamedIndividual
answers question1: 201
answers question2: 104
cited provision1: I.1.
cited provision2: I.4.
conclusion number: 301
conclusion text: The Board resolved the tension between Client Loyalty Obligation and Public Welfare Paramount by treating the traditional irrigation system as falling below the threshold of harm that would override faithful execution of the client's contracted scope. Because the hydrogeological study documented water table depletion rather than an imminent threat to life, safety, or property in the immediate statutory sense, the Board implicitly placed the irrigation task within the zone of permissible engineering work where client loyalty governs. However, this resolution is incomplete: it does not specify the precise harm threshold at which public welfare would override client loyalty, leaving a doctrinal gap for cases where environmental harm is documented, cumulative, and community-wide rather than acute and individual. The case teaches that the paramount public welfare obligation under Canon I is not self-executing in environmental contexts — engineers and the Board must affirmatively identify the harm threshold, and the semi-arid water table scenario sits uncomfortably close to that undrawn line. The resolution here functions less as a principled synthesis and more as a default to client loyalty in the absence of an explicit regulatory prohibition, which may underweight the documented community impact on historically underserved populations dependent on the regional water table.
conclusion type: principle_synthesis
generated at time: 2026-02-25T01:26:51.168940
was generated by: ProEthica Case 13 Extraction

Conclusion_302
type: EthicalConclusion
type: NamedIndividual
answers question1: 202
answers question2: 102
cited provision1: III.1.b.
conclusion number: 302
conclusion text: The tension between Professional Scope Boundary — arising from the landscape architect's authority to specify the irrigation system — and the Proactive Risk Disclosure Obligation on Jaylani and Wasser was not resolved by the Board but was effectively dissolved by treating the two principles as operating in separate domains. The Board implicitly accepted that deference to the landscape architect's specification authority governs the design decision, while the MEP engineer's independent technical knowledge of water table risk operates in a separate advisory domain. This separation is ethically unstable. An MEP engineer who possesses technical knowledge — here, confirmed by a hydrogeological study — that a specified system will cause documented environmental harm cannot ethically discharge that knowledge simply by deferring to another discipline's specification authority. The Proactive Risk Disclosure Obligation is not extinguished by interdisciplinary deference; it is triggered precisely because the MEP engineer holds technical competence the specifying discipline may lack. The case therefore teaches that professional scope boundaries define who controls the design decision, not who bears the duty to disclose known risks. Jaylani retained an independent obligation to communicate the hydrogeological study's findings to the Resort Development Client regardless of the landscape architect's specification authority, and the Board's silence on this point represents an unresolved tension rather than a principled synthesis.
conclusion type: principle_synthesis
generated at time: 2026-02-25T01:26:51.169055
was generated by: ProEthica Case 13 Extraction

Conclusion_303
type: EthicalConclusion
type: NamedIndividual
answers question1: 203
answers question2: 304
cited provision1: I.1.
cited provision2: I.4.
cited provision3: III.2.d.
conclusion number: 303
conclusion text: The tension between the Sustainable Development Advocacy principle — invoked by Wasser through his formal memorandum — and the Client Loyalty Obligation was resolved by the Board through a normative hierarchy embedded in the NSPE Code itself: because Code Provision III.2.d frames sustainable development adherence as 'encouraged' rather than mandatory, the Board treated it as a non-binding aspiration that cannot override the binding fiduciary duty to the client under Canon I.4. This resolution carries an important but underexamined implication: the 'encouraged' framing creates a structural asymmetry in which sustainability considerations are systematically subordinated to client loyalty whenever the two conflict, regardless of the magnitude of documented environmental harm. The case teaches that the permissive language of III.2.d functions as an ethical ceiling for sustainability advocacy within the Code's current architecture — engineers may advocate for sustainable alternatives and may refuse on personal conviction, but the Code as written does not empower them to treat sustainability non-compliance as a basis for declining otherwise lawful work. However, this resolution does not foreclose the possibility that Canon I's paramount public welfare obligation independently imposes a binding sustainability duty when the environmental harm is sufficiently severe and documented — a question the Board left open by characterizing the traditional irrigation design as an ethical expression of engineering work without fully engaging the hydrogeological evidence. The case thus exposes a latent conflict between the Code's permissive sustainability provision and its mandatory public welfare canon that will require more explicit doctrinal development as environmental harms from engineering projects become more precisely quantifiable.
conclusion type: principle_synthesis
generated at time: 2026-02-25T01:26:51.169219
was generated by: ProEthica Case 13 Extraction

Conclusion_304
type: EthicalConclusion
type: NamedIndividual
answers question1: 204
answers question2: 208
cited provision1: I.1.
cited provision2: III.1.b.
cited provision3: III.2.d.
conclusion number: 304
conclusion text: The tension between the Proactive Design Alternatives Obligation on Jaylani and Cutting Edge and the Environmental Stewardship principle invoked by Wasser reveals that the Board's resolution — implicitly endorsing the offer of green alternatives as an ethically sufficient response — conflates the duty to present options with the duty to disclose documented risks. Offering sustainable alternatives as an add-on service satisfies the Proactive Design Alternatives Obligation only if the client is simultaneously informed of the specific, documented environmental consequences of the baseline traditional design. Where a hydrogeological study has already established that the traditional system will lower the water table in a semi-arid region with dependent communities, presenting alternatives without disclosing that study's findings reduces the alternatives offer to a commercial upsell rather than an informed-consent mechanism. Environmental Stewardship as a professional principle requires that the client's choice between design options be genuinely informed by the engineer's technical knowledge of consequences — not merely that alternatives exist on a menu. The case therefore teaches that the Proactive Design Alternatives Obligation and the Proactive Risk Disclosure Obligation are not independent duties that can be satisfied separately; they are jointly necessary conditions for ethical stewardship when documented environmental harm is at stake. Satisfying one without the other — offering alternatives without disclosing the hydrogeological risk, or disclosing the risk without offering alternatives — falls short of the integrated stewardship duty the Code's public welfare canon demands.
conclusion type: principle_synthesis
generated at time: 2026-02-25T01:26:51.169308
was generated by: ProEthica Case 13 Extraction

Conclusion_305
type: EthicalConclusion
type: NamedIndividual
answers question1: 303
answers question2: 401
answers question3: 103
cited provision1: III.2.d.
conclusion number: 305
conclusion text: The Board's characterization of Wasser's refusal as ethically permissible but 'extreme' reflects an implicit principle prioritization: within the NSPE Code's architecture, the virtue of practical wisdom in professional dissent favors completing assigned work while simultaneously advocating for change over outright refusal, unless the work itself crosses a mandatory ethical prohibition. Because the sustainable development provision is framed as encouraged rather than mandatory, and because the traditional irrigation design was not found to violate a binding code provision, the Board's 'extreme' characterization signals that proportionate dissent — completing the task while formally objecting and proposing alternatives — is the preferred professional response to non-mandatory sustainability concerns. This resolution teaches a broader principle about the calibration of professional conscience: the strength of a dissent response should be proportionate to the normative weight of the violated obligation. Where the obligation is mandatory and the harm is acute, refusal may be not only permissible but required. Where the obligation is aspirational and the harm is documented but not immediately catastrophic, the proportionate response is advocacy within the system rather than unilateral withdrawal from it. Wasser's refusal was not wrong in kind — personal conviction dissent is recognized — but it was disproportionate in degree relative to the non-mandatory status of the sustainability provision, and it foreclosed the more constructive path of completing the task while building the evidentiary and professional record for sustainable alternatives. The case thus teaches that the ethics of professional refusal cannot be assessed solely by the validity of the underlying concern; the proportionality of the response to the normative weight of the violated obligation is itself an independent ethical variable.
conclusion type: principle_synthesis
generated at time: 2026-02-25T01:26:51.169469
was generated by: ProEthica Case 13 Extraction

Cutting Edge Engineering Employer Relationship Role
type: EmployerRelationshipRole
type: NamedIndividual
attributes: {'firm_type': 'MEP engineering consulting firm', 'contract_scope': 'Mechanical, electrical, and plumbing engineering for resort'}
caseinvolvement: Engineering firm serving as employer to both Engineer Jaylani (principal) and Engineer Intern Wasser, under contract for MEP work on the resort project, and the institutional entity whose conduct is questioned by Wasser's sustainability objection
concept category: Role
confidence: 0.8
discoveredincase: 13
discoveredinpass: 1
discoveredinsection: facts
firstdiscoveredat: 2026-02-25T00:51:06.356763+00:00
firstdiscoveredincase: 13
generatedattime: 2026-02-25T00:51:06.356763+00:00
importance: medium
relationships: {'type': 'contractor_to', 'target': 'Resort Development Client'}
relationships: {'type': 'employer_of', 'target': 'Engineer Intern Wasser'}
relationships: {'type': 'employer_of', 'target': 'Engineer Jaylani'}
rolecategory: employer_relationship
roleclass: Employer Relationship Role
sourcetext: Engineer Jaylani is a firm principal for Cutting Edge Engineering
textreferences: Engineer Intern Wasser is a new employee at Cutting Edge
textreferences: Engineer Jaylani is a firm principal for Cutting Edge Engineering
textreferences: asserts that Cutting Edge should not do this kind of work
wasattributedto: Case 13 Extraction
generated at time: 2026-02-25T01:11:40.623702
was generated by: ProEthica Case 13 Extraction

Cutting Edge Engineering accepting the contract before Engineer Jaylani assigning Wasser the irrigation task
type: NamedIndividual
generated at time: 2026-02-25T01:11:40.639708
was generated by: ProEthica Case 13 Extraction

Cutting Edge Ethical Reasoning Sustainability Integration Capability Instance
type: EthicalReasoning
type: NamedIndividual
capabilityclass: Ethical Reasoning
capabilitystatement: Cutting Edge Engineering as a firm was required to demonstrate ethical reasoning capability to integrate sustainable development principles into the analysis of the resort irrigation system specification and determine appropriate professional response to the identified sustainability-environmental conflict
casecontext: Cutting Edge Engineering's sustainable development integration obligation required firm-level ethical reasoning capability to weigh sustainability principles against contractual obligations and client preferences
concept category: Capability
confidence: 0.83
demonstratedthrough: Obligation to actively consider and integrate sustainable development principles into the firm's analysis of the irrigation system specification following receipt of Wasser's formal memorandum
discoveredincase: 13
discoveredinpass: 2
discoveredinsection: facts
firstdiscoveredat: 2026-02-25T00:57:55.537499+00:00
firstdiscoveredincase: 13
generatedattime: 2026-02-25T00:57:55.537499+00:00
importance: high
possessedby: Cutting Edge Engineering
proficiencylevel: advanced
sourcetext: Engineer Jaylani and Cutting Edge Engineering were obligated to actively consider and integrate sustainable development principles into their analysis of the resort irrigation system specification
textreferences: Engineer Jaylani and Cutting Edge Engineering were obligated to actively consider and integrate sustainable development principles into their analysis of the resort irrigation system specification
textreferences: asserts that Cutting Edge should not do this kind of work
wasattributedto: Case 13 Extraction
generated at time: 2026-02-25T01:11:40.635359
was generated by: ProEthica Case 13 Extraction

Cutting Edge Faithful Agent Sustainability Trustee Engineer
type: MEPFirmPrincipalEngineer
type: NamedIndividual
attributes: {'firm_type': 'MEP engineering consulting firm', 'contract_status': 'Accepted contract with irrigation system specification', 'sustainability_role': 'Trustee obligated to share sustainable options with client'}
caseinvolvement: Cutting Edge Engineering accepted the resort project contract including the landscape architect's irrigation system specification, assigned the task to Engineer Intern Wasser, and bears obligations as faithful agent and trustee to complete the work while proactively offering sustainable alternatives to the client before deferring to client choice.
concept category: Role
confidence: 0.88
discoveredincase: 13
discoveredinpass: 1
discoveredinsection: discussion
firstdiscoveredat: 2026-02-25T00:52:01.154928+00:00
firstdiscoveredincase: 13
generatedattime: 2026-02-25T00:52:01.154928+00:00
importance: high
relationships: {'type': 'client_service', 'target': 'Resort Development Client'}
relationships: {'type': 'collaborates_with', 'target': 'Landscape Architect Specifier'}
relationships: {'type': 'employer', 'target': 'Wasser Engineer Intern'}
rolecategory: provider_client
roleclass: MEP Firm Principal Engineer
sourcetext: Cutting Edge accepted work with that specification in mind
textreferences: Cutting Edge (and Wasser) should follow through with the task they agreed to perform
textreferences: Cutting Edge accepted work with that specification in mind
textreferences: Cutting Edge and Wasser can act as faithful trustees by sharing with the client sustainable options for irrigation
textreferences: Should the client refuse and insist upon the traditional irrigation system – which is not illegal, Cutting Edge and Wasser must act as the client's agent and complete the task they accepted and were assigned
wasattributedto: Case 13 Extraction
generated at time: 2026-02-25T01:11:40.625073
was generated by: ProEthica Case 13 Extraction

Cutting Edge Sustainable Development Client Education Resort Irrigation
type: SustainableDevelopmentClientEducationCapability
type: NamedIndividual
capabilityclass: Sustainable Development Client Education Capability
capabilitystatement: Cutting Edge Engineering was required to exercise the capability to proactively educate the resort development client about sustainable irrigation alternatives — including rainwater harvesting, integrated water management, and green infrastructure options — in a manner that harmonized faithful agent obligations with sustainable development principles
casecontext: BER identified client education about sustainable alternatives as the optimal path for Cutting Edge to fulfill both faithful agent and sustainability obligations, rather than either silent compliance or task refusal
concept category: Capability
confidence: 0.88
demonstratedthrough: The BER's endorsement of Cutting Edge and Wasser sharing sustainable options with the client as the path that best integrates all code provisions
discoveredincase: 13
discoveredinpass: 2
discoveredinsection: discussion
firstdiscoveredat: 2026-02-25T01:04:18.192098+00:00
firstdiscoveredincase: 13
generatedattime: 2026-02-25T01:04:18.192098+00:00
importance: high
possessedby: Cutting Edge Engineering
proficiencylevel: advanced
sourcetext: Cutting Edge and Wasser can act as faithful trustees by sharing with the client sustainable options for irrigation.
textreferences: By introducing and offering sustainable alternatives to a traditional lawn irrigation system, Wasser and Cutting Edge can harmonize code provisions I.4 and III.2.d.
textreferences: Cutting Edge and Wasser can act as faithful trustees by sharing with the client sustainable options for irrigation.
textreferences: Suggesting sustainable options will inform the client; refusing to perform the task, or quitting, will not.
wasattributedto: Case 13 Extraction
generated at time: 2026-02-25T01:11:40.638146
was generated by: ProEthica Case 13 Extraction

DP1
type: DecisionPoint
type: NamedIndividual
decision point id: DP1
decision question: Was it ethical for Engineer Jaylani to accept the irrigation system design task, and did that acceptance carry an independent obligation to disclose the hydrogeological study's documented water table risk to the Resort Development Client?
focus: Whether Engineer Jaylani and Cutting Edge Engineering were obligated to accept the resort irrigation design task and, if so, whether acceptance carried an independent affirmative duty to disclose the hydrogeological study's water table depletion findings to the Resort Development Client before or concurrent with proceeding — regardless of the landscape architect's specification authority and regardless of Wasser's internal objection.
option1: Accept the irrigation design task and proactively disclose the hydrogeological study's water table depletion findings to the Resort Development Client before or concurrent with proceeding, presenting sustainable alternative irrigation options alongside the traditional design
option2: Accept the irrigation design task and proceed with executing the landscape architect's traditional irrigation specification without separately disclosing the hydrogeological study's findings to the Resort Development Client, treating the specification authority as resolving the disclosure question
option3: Decline to accept the irrigation design task on the grounds that the hydrogeological study's documented water table risk in a semi-arid region elevates the public welfare stakes beyond what faithful execution of the client's contracted scope can ethically accommodate
role label: Client Loyalty Obligation On Cutting Edge Engineering
generated at time: 2026-02-25T01:26:51.172354
was generated by: ProEthica Case 13 Extraction

DP2
type: DecisionPoint
type: NamedIndividual
decision point id: DP2
decision question: Was it ethical for Engineer Intern Wasser to refuse to perform the irrigation system design development task, and was outright refusal a proportionate professional response given the normative weight of the sustainability concern?
focus: Whether Engineer Intern Wasser's outright refusal to perform the irrigation system sketching task was an ethically proportionate response to the sustainability and environmental concerns identified — given that NSPE Code III.2.d frames sustainable development adherence as encouraged rather than mandatory — or whether a more proportionate response would have been to complete the assigned task while simultaneously submitting the formal sustainability memorandum and developing a concrete sustainable alternative design.
option1: Complete the assigned irrigation sketching task under protest while simultaneously submitting the formal sustainability memorandum with hydrogeological evidence and developing a concrete sustainable alternative irrigation design for presentation to Engineer Jaylani and the Resort Development Client
option2: Refuse outright to perform the irrigation sketching task before any design work is performed, submitting only the formal sustainability memorandum to Engineer Jaylani as the primary form of objection
option3: Perform the irrigation sketching task without objection, deferring entirely to Engineer Jaylani's authority as supervising engineer and the landscape architect's specification authority
role label: Wasser Task Refusal Proportionality Assessment
generated at time: 2026-02-25T01:26:51.172504
was generated by: ProEthica Case 13 Extraction

DP3
type: DecisionPoint
type: NamedIndividual
decision point id: DP3
decision question: Does the landscape architect's specification authority relieve Engineer Jaylani and Cutting Edge Engineering of independent professional responsibility for the environmental consequences of executing that specification, or does the MEP engineer retain an independent duty to evaluate and disclose known water table risks?
focus: Whether the landscape architect's authority to specify the traditional irrigation system relieves Cutting Edge Engineering and Engineer Jaylani of independent professional responsibility for evaluating and disclosing the environmental consequences of executing that specification — specifically the hydrogeological study's documented water table depletion risk — or whether the MEP engineer retains an independent duty to flag sustainability risks falling within their own technical competence regardless of which discipline originated the specification.
option1: Independently evaluate the hydrogeological study's water table findings within the MEP engineer's technical competence and communicate those findings to the Resort Development Client and the landscape architect, regardless of the landscape architect's specification authority over the irrigation system type
option2: Defer entirely to the landscape architect's specification authority and execute the traditional irrigation design without independently evaluating or disclosing the hydrogeological study's water table findings, treating the interdisciplinary scope boundary as resolving the disclosure question
role label: Professional Scope Boundary Question Re Landscape Architect Specification
generated at time: 2026-02-25T01:26:51.172623
was generated by: ProEthica Case 13 Extraction

DP4
type: DecisionPoint
type: NamedIndividual
decision point id: DP4
decision question: Does the semi-arid regional context and documented water table harm elevate the traditional irrigation design to a public welfare concern under Canon I, and does Canon I independently impose binding obligations that III.2.d's permissive language cannot override?
focus: Whether the semi-arid regional context and the hydrogeological study's documented impact on communities dependent on the regional water table elevate the traditional irrigation system design from a permissible engineering task to one that implicates the paramount public welfare obligation under Canon I — and whether the NSPE Code's framing of sustainable development adherence as 'encouraged' rather than mandatory in III.2.d creates a genuine ethical loophole permitting engineers to proceed with designs carrying documented environmental harm, or whether Canon I independently imposes a binding disclosure and advocacy obligation regardless of III.2.d's permissive language.
option1: Treat the traditional irrigation design as conditionally permissible and discharge the Canon I public welfare obligation by disclosing the hydrogeological study's water table findings to the Resort Development Client, presenting sustainable alternative irrigation designs, and documenting the client's informed decision to proceed
option2: Treat the traditional irrigation design as unconditionally permissible under III.2.d's aspirational framing and proceed with execution without conditioning acceptance on client disclosure of the hydrogeological study's findings
option3: Treat the semi-arid context and documented community water dependency as crossing the Canon I threshold that converts the design task from permissible to impermissible, and decline to execute the traditional irrigation scope unless the client modifies the specification to a sustainable alternative
role label: Environmental Stewardship Invoked By Wasser
generated at time: 2026-02-25T01:26:51.172735
was generated by: ProEthica Case 13 Extraction

DP5
type: DecisionPoint
type: NamedIndividual
decision point id: DP5
decision question: If the traditional irrigation system design is an ethical expression of engineering work, what must Cutting Edge Engineering do to complete the design ethically after Wasser's refusal — and is simple task reassignment sufficient, or must the firm integrate Wasser's objection into a proactive client disclosure and alternatives presentation?
focus: Whether Cutting Edge Engineering's most ethically complete path to completing the irrigation design — following Wasser's refusal — is to simply reassign the task to a willing engineer, or whether the firm is obligated to integrate Wasser's documented sustainability objection into its client communication by presenting the Resort Development Client with the hydrogeological study's findings, the sustainability concerns raised, and a developed sustainable irrigation alternative alongside the traditional design, so that the client's decision to proceed is fully informed.
option1: Reassign the irrigation sketching task to another engineer or complete it through Jaylani, and simultaneously present the Resort Development Client with the hydrogeological study's water table findings, Wasser's sustainability concerns, and a fully developed sustainable alternative irrigation design alongside the traditional design, documenting the client's informed decision to proceed
option2: Reassign the irrigation sketching task to another engineer or complete it through Jaylani without separately presenting the hydrogeological study's findings or sustainable alternatives to the Resort Development Client, treating task completion as the full discharge of the firm's obligation
option3: Decline to complete the irrigation design scope until the Resort Development Client has been presented with the hydrogeological study's findings and has had a meaningful opportunity to choose a sustainable alternative, conditioning further design work on that informed client decision
role label: Client Loyalty Obligation On Cutting Edge Engineering
generated at time: 2026-02-25T01:26:51.172865
was generated by: ProEthica Case 13 Extraction

DP6
type: DecisionPoint
type: NamedIndividual
decision point id: DP6
decision question: Was Wasser's formal memorandum to Engineer Jaylani a sufficient discharge of the professional obligation triggered by the hydrogeological study's water table findings, or did the severity of the documented public harm require escalation beyond the firm's internal hierarchy?
focus: Whether Wasser's formal internal memorandum to Engineer Jaylani constituted a sufficient and proportionate discharge of the professional obligation triggered by the hydrogeological study's findings about water table depletion in a semi-arid region — or whether the severity of the documented public harm, affecting communities dependent on the regional water table, created a stronger escalation obligation extending beyond the firm's internal hierarchy to regulatory bodies or public authorities if internal channels failed to produce corrective action.
option1: Submit the formal sustainability memorandum to Engineer Jaylani as a necessary first step, and if Jaylani fails to take corrective action — including client notification and sustainable alternatives presentation — escalate the documented water table risk to appropriate regulatory bodies with jurisdiction over water resources in the semi-arid region
option2: Treat the formal sustainability memorandum to Engineer Jaylani as a complete and sufficient discharge of the professional obligation triggered by the hydrogeological study's findings, without further escalation beyond the firm's internal hierarchy
option3: Complete the assigned irrigation sketching task under protest while simultaneously submitting the formal sustainability memorandum and escalating the hydrogeological study's findings directly to regulatory water resource authorities without waiting for Jaylani's response
role label: Environmental Stewardship Invoked By Wasser
generated at time: 2026-02-25T01:26:51.173020
was generated by: ProEthica Case 13 Extraction

Engineer Intern Wasser Sustainability-Objecting Engineer Intern
type: Sustainability-ObjectingEngineerIntern
type: NamedIndividual
attributes: {'license': 'Engineer Intern (EI)', 'status': 'New employee', 'specialty': 'Not specified; assigned to irrigation system task'}
caseinvolvement: New engineer intern at Cutting Edge Engineering who refused to sketch irrigation system details on sustainability and environmental grounds, citing hydrogeological study, UN SDGs, and NSPE Code III.2.d in a formal memorandum to firm principal Jaylani
concept category: Role
confidence: 0.92
discoveredincase: 13
discoveredinpass: 1
discoveredinsection: facts
firstdiscoveredat: 2026-02-25T00:51:06.356763+00:00
firstdiscoveredincase: 13
generatedattime: 2026-02-25T00:51:06.356763+00:00
importance: high
relationships: {'type': 'employed_by', 'target': 'Cutting Edge Engineering'}
relationships: {'type': 'objection_directed_to', 'target': 'Engineer Jaylani'}
relationships: {'type': 'supervised_by', 'target': 'Engineer Jaylani'}
rolecategory: employer_relationship
roleclass: Sustainability-Objecting Engineer Intern
sourcetext: Engineer Intern Wasser is a new employee at Cutting Edge
textreferences: Engineer Intern Wasser is a new employee at Cutting Edge
textreferences: In a formal memorandum to Jaylani, Wasser argues the proposed lawn irrigation system is not consistent with several United Nations sustainable development goals
textreferences: Wasser points to NSPE Code of Ethics Professional Obligation III.2.d
textreferences: Wasser refuses to perform the task and says the traditional irrigation system will waste fresh water
textreferences: asserts that Cutting Edge should not do this kind of work
textreferences: cites a recent hydrogeological study indicating that the proposed use would lower the water table
wasattributedto: Case 13 Extraction
generated at time: 2026-02-25T01:11:40.623186
was generated by: ProEthica Case 13 Extraction

Engineer Jaylani MEP Firm Principal Engineer
type: MEPFirmPrincipalEngineer
type: NamedIndividual
attributes: {'license': 'Professional Engineer (implied by firm principal status)', 'specialty': 'Mechanical, electrical, and plumbing engineering', 'firm_role': 'Principal'}
caseinvolvement: Firm principal of Cutting Edge Engineering under contract for MEP work on a resort project; assigned irrigation system sketching task to Engineer Intern Wasser; recipient of formal sustainability objection memorandum from Wasser
concept category: Role
confidence: 0.9
discoveredincase: 13
discoveredinpass: 1
discoveredinsection: facts
firstdiscoveredat: 2026-02-25T00:51:06.356763+00:00
firstdiscoveredincase: 13
generatedattime: 2026-02-25T00:51:06.356763+00:00
importance: high
relationships: {'type': 'contractor_to', 'target': 'Resort Development Client'}
relationships: {'type': 'recipient_of_objection', 'target': 'Engineer Intern Wasser'}
relationships: {'type': 'supervisor', 'target': 'Engineer Intern Wasser'}
rolecategory: provider_client
roleclass: MEP Firm Principal Engineer
sourcetext: Engineer Jaylani is a firm principal for Cutting Edge Engineering and is under contract to complete the mechanical, electrical, and plumbing work for a new resort
textreferences: Engineer Jaylani assigns Wasser the task of sketching out details for the irrigation system
textreferences: Engineer Jaylani is a firm principal for Cutting Edge Engineering and is under contract to complete the mechanical, electrical, and plumbing work for a new resort
textreferences: In a formal memorandum to Jaylani, Wasser argues...
wasattributedto: Case 13 Extraction
generated at time: 2026-02-25T01:11:40.623034
was generated by: ProEthica Case 13 Extraction

Environmental Resource Depletion Risk from Traditional Irrigation
type: EnvironmentalResourceDepletionRiskState
type: NamedIndividual
activeperiod: From project specification through client decision on irrigation approach
affectedparties: Client
affectedparties: Community
affectedparties: Cutting Edge Engineering
affectedparties: Engineer Intern Wasser
affectedparties: Future generations
concept category: State
confidence: 0.78
discoveredincase: 13
discoveredinpass: 1
discoveredinsection: discussion
firstdiscoveredat: 2026-02-25T00:52:29.788699+00:00
firstdiscoveredincase: 13
generatedattime: 2026-02-25T00:52:29.788699+00:00
importance: medium
sourcetext: One approach might be 'green' options that intelligently and cost-effectively achieve sustainability goals through such tools as natural resource conservation, integrated water management, and stormwater management
stateclass: Environmental Resource Depletion Risk State
subject: The potential water resource impact of a traditional lawn irrigation system in the project community
terminatedby: Client decision on irrigation system type following presentation of alternatives
textreferences: One approach might be 'green' options that intelligently and cost-effectively achieve sustainability goals through such tools as natural resource conservation, integrated water management, and stormwater management
textreferences: Perhaps the project is a suitable candidate for rainwater harvesting and reuse?
textreferences: sustainable development: '…the challenge of meeting human needs for natural resources, industrial products, energy, food, transportation, shelter, and effective waste management while conserving and protecting environmental quality and the natural resource base essential for future development'
triggeringevent: Specification of a traditional irrigation system that draws on water resources without conservation measures, in a context where sustainable alternatives (rainwater harvesting, integrated water management) could reduce resource depletion
urgencylevel: low
wasattributedto: Case 13 Extraction
generated at time: 2026-02-25T01:11:40.627780
was generated by: ProEthica Case 13 Extraction

Environmental Stewardship Invoked By Wasser
type: EnvironmentalStewardshipinEngineeringPractice
type: NamedIndividual
appliedto: Traditional lawn irrigation system specification for resort golf course in semi-arid southwestern US
balancingwith: Client Loyalty
balancingwith: Faithful Agent Obligation Within Ethical Limits
concept category: Principle
concreteexpression: Engineer Intern Wasser refused to sketch the traditional irrigation system and cited a hydrogeological study showing the proposed water use would lower the water table in a semi-arid region, invoking environmental stewardship as grounds for objection
confidence: 0.92
discoveredincase: 13
discoveredinpass: 2
discoveredinsection: facts
firstdiscoveredat: 2026-02-25T00:54:10.925994+00:00
firstdiscoveredincase: 13
generatedattime: 2026-02-25T00:54:10.925994+00:00
importance: high
interpretation: In this context, environmental stewardship requires engineers to surface and formally object to design specifications that credible technical evidence shows will degrade shared natural resources, even when the specification originates from another licensed professional
invokedby: Engineer Intern Wasser Sustainability-Objecting Engineer Intern
principleclass: Environmental Stewardship in Engineering Practice
sourcetext: Wasser refuses to perform the task and says the traditional irrigation system will waste fresh water, cites a recent hydrogeological study indicating that the proposed use would lower the water table
tensionresolution: Wasser resolved the tension by formally documenting the objection rather than silently complying, but the ultimate resolution requires Jaylani and the client to engage with the environmental evidence
textreferences: Wasser refuses to perform the task and says the traditional irrigation system will waste fresh water, cites a recent hydrogeological study indicating that the proposed use would lower the water table
wasattributedto: Case 13 Extraction
generated at time: 2026-02-25T01:11:40.627925
was generated by: ProEthica Case 13 Extraction

Formal Sustainability Memorandum Submission
type: NamedIndividual
concept category: Action
generated at time: 2026-02-25T01:11:40.639030
was generated by: ProEthica Case 13 Extraction

Formal Sustainability Memorandum Submission → Response to Wasser's Dissent
type: NamedIndividual
generated at time: 2026-02-25T01:11:40.639483
was generated by: ProEthica Case 13 Extraction

Historically Underserved Regional Water Access Impact
type: PublicSafetyatRisk
type: NamedIndividual
activeperiod: From identification of the hydrogeological risk through design resolution
affectedparties: Future resort guests
affectedparties: Regional communities dependent on water table
affectedparties: Regional ecosystems
concept category: State
confidence: 0.82
discoveredincase: 13
discoveredinpass: 1
discoveredinsection: facts
firstdiscoveredat: 2026-02-25T00:51:20.279821+00:00
firstdiscoveredincase: 13
generatedattime: 2026-02-25T00:51:20.279821+00:00
importance: high
sourcetext: a recent hydrogeological study indicating that the proposed use would lower the water table
stateclass: Public Safety at Risk
subject: The semi-arid region's water table and the communities dependent on it, at risk from the proposed high-consumption irrigation system
terminatedby: Design modification eliminating the water table depletion risk, or regulatory determination
textreferences: Goal 6 – Ensure availability and sustainable management of water and sanitation for all
textreferences: a new resort that will be located in a semi-arid region of the southwestern United States
textreferences: a recent hydrogeological study indicating that the proposed use would lower the water table
triggeringevent: Hydrogeological study indicating the proposed irrigation use would lower the water table in a semi-arid region, threatening water availability for the broader region
urgencylevel: medium
wasattributedto: Case 13 Extraction
generated at time: 2026-02-25T01:11:40.624714
was generated by: ProEthica Case 13 Extraction

Hydrogeological-Study-Water-Table-Impact
type: HydrogeologicalImpactStudy
type: NamedIndividual
concept category: Resource
confidence: 0.9
createdby: Unspecified hydrogeological research body
discoveredincase: 13
discoveredinpass: 1
discoveredinsection: facts
documenttitle: Recent Hydrogeological Study on Proposed Irrigation Water Usage and Water Table Effects
firstdiscoveredat: 2026-02-25T00:50:47.802985+00:00
firstdiscoveredincase: 13
generatedattime: 2026-02-25T00:50:47.802985+00:00
importance: high
resourceclass: Hydrogeological Impact Study
sourcetext: cites a recent hydrogeological study indicating that the proposed use would lower the water table
textreferences: cites a recent hydrogeological study indicating that the proposed use would lower the water table
usedby: Engineer Intern Wasser
usedincontext: Cited by Engineer Intern Wasser as empirical scientific evidence that the proposed traditional lawn irrigation system would lower the water table, providing factual grounding for the ethical argument that the project poses environmental harm and is inconsistent with sustainable water management
version: Recent (unspecified date)
wasattributedto: Case 13 Extraction
generated at time: 2026-02-25T01:11:40.622845
was generated by: ProEthica Case 13 Extraction

Hydrogeological Study Published
type: NamedIndividual
concept category: Event
generated at time: 2026-02-25T01:11:40.639171
was generated by: ProEthica Case 13 Extraction

Hydrogeological Study Published → Wasser's Sustainability Concern Triggered
type: NamedIndividual
generated at time: 2026-02-25T01:11:40.639351
was generated by: ProEthica Case 13 Extraction

I.1.
type: NamedIndividual
generated at time: 2026-02-25T01:26:51.162040
was generated by: ProEthica Case 13 Extraction

I.4.
type: NamedIndividual
generated at time: 2026-02-25T01:26:51.162098
was generated by: ProEthica Case 13 Extraction

II.1.a.
type: NamedIndividual
generated at time: 2026-02-25T01:26:51.162152
was generated by: ProEthica Case 13 Extraction

II.1.f.
type: NamedIndividual
generated at time: 2026-02-25T01:26:51.162212
was generated by: ProEthica Case 13 Extraction

III.1.b.
type: NamedIndividual
generated at time: 2026-02-25T01:26:51.162275
was generated by: ProEthica Case 13 Extraction

III.2.a.
type: NamedIndividual
generated at time: 2026-02-25T01:26:51.162315
was generated by: ProEthica Case 13 Extraction

III.2.d.
type: NamedIndividual
generated at time: 2026-02-25T01:26:51.162372
was generated by: ProEthica Case 13 Extraction

III.7.
type: NamedIndividual
generated at time: 2026-02-25T01:26:51.162409
was generated by: ProEthica Case 13 Extraction

Irrigation Sketching Task Assignment
type: NamedIndividual
concept category: Action
generated at time: 2026-02-25T01:11:40.638956
was generated by: ProEthica Case 13 Extraction

Irrigation System Assignment Permissible But Suboptimal
type: PermissibleButSuboptimalDesignAssignmentState
type: NamedIndividual
activeperiod: From task assignment through BER determination and client decision
affectedparties: Client
affectedparties: Cutting Edge Engineering
affectedparties: Engineer Intern Wasser
affectedparties: Landscape architect
concept category: State
confidence: 0.87
discoveredincase: 13
discoveredinpass: 1
discoveredinsection: discussion
firstdiscoveredat: 2026-02-25T00:52:29.788699+00:00
firstdiscoveredincase: 13
generatedattime: 2026-02-25T00:52:29.788699+00:00
importance: high
sourcetext: the community has no zoning rules, building code provisions, or other restrictions to prevent installation of an irrigation system
stateclass: Permissible But Suboptimal Design Assignment State
subject: The traditional irrigation system design task assigned to Wasser at Cutting Edge Engineering
terminatedby: Client decision to proceed with traditional or sustainable alternative system following informed presentation
textreferences: Cutting Edge providing provisions for a traditional lawn sprinkler system would be technically and legally permissible, and not unethical
textreferences: The facts do not support an engineer's required adherence to a supreme sustainable development ethic
textreferences: such a project would lie within the space of 'client choice'
textreferences: the community has no zoning rules, building code provisions, or other restrictions to prevent installation of an irrigation system
triggeringevent: Landscape architect's specification of a traditional irrigation system in a community with no zoning or code restrictions prohibiting it
urgencylevel: low
wasattributedto: Case 13 Extraction
generated at time: 2026-02-25T01:11:40.627324
was generated by: ProEthica Case 13 Extraction

Jaylani Client Choice Domain Recognition Resort Irrigation
type: ClientChoiceDomainRecognitionCapability
type: NamedIndividual
capabilityclass: Client Choice Domain Recognition Capability
capabilitystatement: Engineer Jaylani was required to correctly identify that the traditional irrigation system specification fell within the domain of legitimate client choice — given the absence of zoning restrictions, building code prohibitions, or mandatory code provisions requiring sustainable design — and to calibrate Cutting Edge's response accordingly
casecontext: Jaylani needed to assess whether the client's preference for a traditional irrigation system was within the client's legitimate authority to choose, given no legal prohibitions, before determining the appropriate professional response
concept category: Capability
confidence: 0.85
demonstratedthrough: The BER's analysis that Cutting Edge providing provisions for a traditional lawn sprinkler system would be technically and legally permissible and not unethical, reflecting the client-choice domain determination that Jaylani needed to make
discoveredincase: 13
discoveredinpass: 2
discoveredinsection: discussion
firstdiscoveredat: 2026-02-25T01:04:18.192098+00:00
firstdiscoveredincase: 13
generatedattime: 2026-02-25T01:04:18.192098+00:00
importance: high
possessedby: Engineer Jaylani
proficiencylevel: advanced
sourcetext: Based on the facts of the case, the community has no zoning rules, building code provisions, or other restrictions to prevent installation of an irrigation system.
textreferences: Based on the facts of the case, the community has no zoning rules, building code provisions, or other restrictions to prevent installation of an irrigation system.
textreferences: Cutting Edge providing provisions for a traditional lawn sprinkler system would be technically and legally permissible, and not unethical.
textreferences: such a project would lie within the space of 'client choice,' similar to how a client might choose (or not) to design and construct its project per green building options that result in LEED certification.
wasattributedto: Case 13 Extraction
generated at time: 2026-02-25T01:11:40.637585
was generated by: ProEthica Case 13 Extraction

Jaylani Cutting Edge Client Notification Sustainability Environmental Conflict
type: ClientNotificationofSustainability-EnvironmentalConflictObligation
type: NamedIndividual
casecontext: Cutting Edge Engineering received formal documentation from Engineer Intern Wasser identifying that the landscape architect's irrigation specification conflicted with sustainable development principles and posed a material environmental risk supported by a hydrogeological study; the firm's obligation to act as faithful agent and to hold public welfare paramount required client notification.
compliancestatus: unclear
concept category: Obligation
confidence: 0.85
discoveredincase: 13
discoveredinpass: 2
discoveredinsection: facts
firstdiscoveredat: 2026-02-25T00:56:04.058400+00:00
firstdiscoveredincase: 13
generatedattime: 2026-02-25T00:56:04.058400+00:00
importance: high
obligatedparty: Engineer Jaylani and Cutting Edge Engineering
obligationclass: Client Notification of Sustainability-Environmental Conflict Obligation
obligationstatement: Engineer Jaylani and Cutting Edge Engineering were obligated, having received Wasser's formal memorandum with the hydrogeological study evidence, to notify the resort development client of the sustainability-environmental conflict — including the risk of water table lowering — and to present alternative design approaches, so that the client could make an informed decision about whether to modify the landscape architect's irrigation specification.
sourcetext: cites a recent hydrogeological study indicating that the proposed use would lower the water table
temporalscope: Following receipt of Wasser's formal memorandum and review of the hydrogeological study evidence
textreferences: Engineer Jaylani and Cutting Edge Engineering, having received Wasser's formal memorandum identifying sustainability and environmental concerns
textreferences: In a formal memorandum to Jaylani, Wasser argues the proposed lawn irrigation system is not consistent with several United Nations sustainable development goals
textreferences: cites a recent hydrogeological study indicating that the proposed use would lower the water table
wasattributedto: Case 13 Extraction
generated at time: 2026-02-25T01:11:40.630337
was generated by: ProEthica Case 13 Extraction

Jaylani Cutting Edge Client Notification Sustainability Environmental Conflict Constraint
type: ClientPolicyAlignmentConstraint
type: NamedIndividual
casecontext: Engineer Jaylani received Wasser's formal memorandum identifying sustainability conflicts and hydrogeological risks. The constraint required Jaylani to communicate these findings to the resort client before proceeding with the irrigation system design.
concept category: Constraint
confidence: 0.88
constrainedentity: Engineer Jaylani and Cutting Edge Engineering
constraintclass: Client Policy Alignment Constraint
constraintstatement: Engineer Jaylani and Cutting Edge Engineering were constrained to evaluate and communicate to the resort client when the landscape architect's specified irrigation approach conflicted with sustainability principles and posed a documented hydrogeological risk — prohibiting the firm from proceeding with implementation without first ensuring the client's decision-makers were fully informed of the sustainability and environmental risk dimensions, even though the client retained ultimate authority to proceed.
discoveredincase: 13
discoveredinpass: 2
discoveredinsection: facts
firstdiscoveredat: 2026-02-25T00:57:45.526754+00:00
firstdiscoveredincase: 13
generatedattime: 2026-02-25T00:57:45.526754+00:00
importance: high
severity: high
source: NSPE Code of Ethics Section II.3.a; Section I.4; BER Case 07-6; BER Case 22-10
sourcetext: cites a recent hydrogeological study indicating that the proposed use would lower the water table
temporalscope: Upon receipt of Wasser's formal memorandum with hydrogeological study evidence
textreferences: In a formal memorandum to Jaylani, Wasser argues the proposed lawn irrigation system is not consistent with several United Nations sustainable development goals
textreferences: cites a recent hydrogeological study indicating that the proposed use would lower the water table
wasattributedto: Case 13 Extraction
generated at time: 2026-02-25T01:11:40.632018
was generated by: ProEthica Case 13 Extraction

Jaylani Cutting Edge Client Notification Water Table Sustainability Environmental Conflict
type: ClientPolicyAlignmentConstraint
type: NamedIndividual
casecontext: Engineer Intern Wasser submitted a formal memorandum with hydrogeological study evidence to Principal Jaylani identifying water table depletion risks; the BER found that Cutting Edge and Wasser can act as faithful trustees by sharing with the client sustainable options for irrigation
concept category: Constraint
confidence: 0.85
constrainedentity: Engineer Jaylani and Cutting Edge Engineering
constraintclass: Client Policy Alignment Constraint
constraintstatement: Engineer Jaylani and Cutting Edge Engineering are constrained to communicate to the resort client the hydrogeologically documented risk of water table lowering from the traditional irrigation system and the availability of sustainable alternatives, prohibiting the firm from proceeding with implementation of the traditional irrigation system without first ensuring the client's decision-makers are fully informed of the sustainability and environmental conflict.
discoveredincase: 13
discoveredinpass: 2
discoveredinsection: discussion
firstdiscoveredat: 2026-02-25T01:04:03.451495+00:00
firstdiscoveredincase: 13
generatedattime: 2026-02-25T01:04:03.451495+00:00
importance: high
severity: high
source: NSPE Code Sections I.4, II.3.a, and III.2.d; BER Case 07-6
sourcetext: Cutting Edge and Wasser can act as faithful trustees by sharing with the client sustainable options for irrigation.
temporalscope: Prior to proceeding with traditional irrigation system design following receipt of Wasser's formal memorandum with hydrogeological study
textreferences: Cutting Edge and Wasser can act as faithful trustees by sharing with the client sustainable options for irrigation.
textreferences: Furthermore, suggesting sustainable options will inform the client; refusing to perform the task, or quitting, will not.
wasattributedto: Case 13 Extraction
generated at time: 2026-02-25T01:11:40.636805
was generated by: ProEthica Case 13 Extraction

Jaylani Cutting Edge Environmental Stewardship Water Table Semi-Arid
type: WatershedProtectionDesignObligation
type: NamedIndividual
casecontext: The resort is located in a semi-arid region of the southwestern United States; a hydrogeological study indicated the proposed irrigation system would lower the water table; the water table constitutes a shared public resource analogous to a watershed requiring protection under the engineer's public welfare obligations.
compliancestatus: unclear
concept category: Obligation
confidence: 0.8
discoveredincase: 13
discoveredinpass: 2
discoveredinsection: facts
firstdiscoveredat: 2026-02-25T00:56:04.058400+00:00
firstdiscoveredincase: 13
generatedattime: 2026-02-25T00:56:04.058400+00:00
importance: high
obligatedparty: Engineer Jaylani and Cutting Edge Engineering
obligationclass: Watershed Protection Design Obligation
obligationstatement: Engineer Jaylani and Cutting Edge Engineering were obligated to ensure that the resort irrigation system design adequately protected the regional water table — a shared public resource in a semi-arid region — including accounting for the cumulative risk of water table lowering identified in the hydrogeological study, and to refrain from implementing a design known to cause such harm without client notification and consideration of alternatives.
sourcetext: cites a recent hydrogeological study indicating that the proposed use would lower the water table
temporalscope: Throughout the design phase, and specifically upon receipt of Wasser's formal memorandum identifying the hydrogeological risk
textreferences: Wasser refuses to perform the task and says the traditional irrigation system will waste fresh water
textreferences: cites a recent hydrogeological study indicating that the proposed use would lower the water table
textreferences: the resort that will be located in a semi-arid region of the southwestern United States
wasattributedto: Case 13 Extraction
generated at time: 2026-02-25T01:11:40.631073
was generated by: ProEthica Case 13 Extraction

Jaylani Cutting Edge Evolving Sustainability Standard BER Precedent Application
type: EvolvingSustainabilityStandardJudicialDeferenceConstraint
type: NamedIndividual
casecontext: The BER noted a shift in perspective from BER Case 05-4 (pre-2007, individual professional judgment as final arbiter) to BER Case 07-6 (post-2007, sustainability considerations increasingly weighted), requiring that current professional obligations be interpreted in light of this evolution
concept category: Constraint
confidence: 0.82
constrainedentity: Engineer Jaylani and Cutting Edge Engineering
constraintclass: Evolving Sustainability Standard Judicial Deference Constraint
constraintstatement: Engineer Jaylani and Cutting Edge Engineering are constrained to interpret their professional sustainability obligations in light of the post-2007 BER precedent reflecting the increasing priority of sustainability principles, prohibiting reliance on pre-sustainability-provision professional norms (such as BER Case 05-4) as sufficient authority for dismissing Wasser's sustainability concerns as outside the scope of professional ethical obligation.
discoveredincase: 13
discoveredinpass: 2
discoveredinsection: discussion
firstdiscoveredat: 2026-02-25T01:04:03.451495+00:00
firstdiscoveredincase: 13
generatedattime: 2026-02-25T01:04:03.451495+00:00
importance: medium
severity: medium
source: NSPE Code Section III.2.d (2007 addition); BER Cases 05-4, 07-6, 15-12
sourcetext: Cases 05-4 and 07-6 reflect a shift in the BER's perspective away from individual professional judgment as the final arbiter of the best balance between society's needs for certain facilities and the level of environmental degradation involved in meeting those needs.
temporalscope: Throughout the evaluation of Wasser's sustainability objection and the firm's response to the irrigation design assignment
textreferences: Cases 05-4 and 07-6 reflect a shift in the BER's perspective away from individual professional judgment as the final arbiter of the best balance between society's needs for certain facilities and the level of environmental degradation involved in meeting those needs.
textreferences: This case illustrates the increasing priority and reach of sustainability principles relative to ethical decision-making of professional engineers.
textreferences: the BER's current perspective is toward the engineer's judgment being increasingly informed by a broader and deeper emphasis on global sustainability considerations in environmental matters.
wasattributedto: Case 13 Extraction
generated at time: 2026-02-25T01:11:40.636199
was generated by: ProEthica Case 13 Extraction

Jaylani Cutting Edge Faithful Agent Sustainability Trustee Resort Client
type: FaithfulAgentObligation
type: NamedIndividual
casecontext: Cutting Edge Engineering accepted the resort project contract including the landscape architect's irrigation system specification, creating a faithful agent relationship with the client; the firm's trustee role required balancing client service with public welfare obligations triggered by the hydrogeological risk evidence.
compliancestatus: unclear
concept category: Obligation
confidence: 0.83
discoveredincase: 13
discoveredinpass: 2
discoveredinsection: facts
firstdiscoveredat: 2026-02-25T00:56:04.058400+00:00
firstdiscoveredincase: 13
generatedattime: 2026-02-25T00:56:04.058400+00:00
importance: high
obligatedparty: Engineer Jaylani and Cutting Edge Engineering
obligationclass: Faithful Agent Obligation
obligationstatement: Engineer Jaylani and Cutting Edge Engineering were obligated to act as faithful agents and trustees of the resort development client — serving the client's legitimate interests in a successful, sustainable resort development — while simultaneously fulfilling the duty to hold public welfare paramount, including by presenting the client with complete information about the environmental risks of the specified irrigation system and available sustainable alternatives.
sourcetext: Engineer Jaylani is a firm principal for Cutting Edge Engineering and is under contract to complete the mechanical, electrical, and plumbing work for a new resort
temporalscope: Throughout the project engagement, and specifically upon receipt of Wasser's formal sustainability objection
textreferences: Client Loyalty — Cutting Edge Engineering accepted the resort project contract including the landscape architect's irrigation system specification, creating a faithful agent relationship
textreferences: Engineer Jaylani is a firm principal for Cutting Edge Engineering and is under contract to complete the mechanical, electrical, and plumbing work for a new resort
wasattributedto: Case 13 Extraction
generated at time: 2026-02-25T01:11:40.630797
was generated by: ProEthica Case 13 Extraction

Jaylani Cutting Edge Hybrid Sustainable Design Exploration Resort Irrigation
type: HybridDesignExplorationConstraint
type: NamedIndividual
casecontext: The BER endorsed the approach of introducing sustainable alternatives such as rainwater harvesting and reuse as a means of resolving the ethical tension between faithful agent obligation and sustainable development encouragement, rather than accepting the binary choice between traditional irrigation and task refusal
concept category: Constraint
confidence: 0.86
constrainedentity: Engineer Jaylani and Cutting Edge Engineering
constraintclass: Hybrid Design Exploration Constraint
constraintstatement: Engineer Jaylani and Cutting Edge Engineering are constrained to explore and present to the resort client whether hybrid or sustainable irrigation solutions — such as rainwater harvesting, integrated water management, and stormwater management — exist that could achieve the client's goals while mitigating water table depletion risks, before accepting the binary framing of traditional versus no irrigation system as definitive.
discoveredincase: 13
discoveredinpass: 2
discoveredinsection: discussion
firstdiscoveredat: 2026-02-25T01:04:03.451495+00:00
firstdiscoveredincase: 13
generatedattime: 2026-02-25T01:04:03.451495+00:00
importance: medium
severity: medium
source: NSPE Code Sections I.4 and III.2.d; BER analysis of present case
sourcetext: One approach might be 'green' options that intelligently and cost-effectively achieve sustainability goals through such tools as natural resource conservation, integrated water management, and stormwater management.
temporalscope: Prior to client presentation and final design selection for the resort irrigation system
textreferences: One approach might be 'green' options that intelligently and cost-effectively achieve sustainability goals through such tools as natural resource conservation, integrated water management, and stormwater management.
textreferences: Perhaps the project is a suitable candidate for rainwater harvesting and reuse?
textreferences: The point is, given Wasser's education, knowledge and passionate beliefs about sustainable development, he seems more likely to fulfill his ethical obligations and aspirations – not by refusing the task, but by performing the task with technical expertise, mature leadership and dedicated service to the client's needs.
wasattributedto: Case 13 Extraction
generated at time: 2026-02-25T01:11:40.636665
was generated by: ProEthica Case 13 Extraction

Jaylani Cutting Edge Hydrogeological Risk Escalation MEP Scope Constraint
type: HydrogeologicalRiskEscalationBeyondMEPScopeConstraint
type: NamedIndividual
casecontext: Cutting Edge Engineering's contracted scope was MEP work. The hydrogeological risk arose from the landscape architect's irrigation specification. Despite this scope boundary, the credible technical evidence of environmental harm required escalation to the client.
concept category: Constraint
confidence: 0.85
constrainedentity: Engineer Jaylani and Cutting Edge Engineering
constraintclass: Hydrogeological Risk Escalation Beyond MEP Scope Constraint
constraintstatement: Engineer Jaylani and Cutting Edge Engineering were constrained to escalate the hydrogeological risk identified in Wasser's memorandum to the resort client and landscape architect, despite the risk arising from a specification outside the firm's contracted MEP scope, because the credible technical evidence of water table depletion created a professional obligation to disclose that could not be avoided by reference to scope limitations.
discoveredincase: 13
discoveredinpass: 2
discoveredinsection: facts
firstdiscoveredat: 2026-02-25T00:57:45.526754+00:00
firstdiscoveredincase: 13
generatedattime: 2026-02-25T00:57:45.526754+00:00
importance: high
severity: high
source: NSPE Code of Ethics Section II.3.a; Section I.1; BER Case 07-6
sourcetext: Engineer Jaylani is a firm principal for Cutting Edge Engineering and is under contract to complete the mechanical, electrical, and plumbing work
temporalscope: Upon receipt of Wasser's formal memorandum with hydrogeological study evidence
textreferences: Engineer Jaylani is a firm principal for Cutting Edge Engineering and is under contract to complete the mechanical, electrical, and plumbing work
textreferences: cites a recent hydrogeological study indicating that the proposed use would lower the water table
wasattributedto: Case 13 Extraction
generated at time: 2026-02-25T01:11:40.632166
was generated by: ProEthica Case 13 Extraction

Jaylani Cutting Edge Public Safety Paramount Water Table Semi-Arid Constraint
type: PublicSafetyParamountConstraint
type: NamedIndividual
casecontext: The hydrogeological study indicated the proposed irrigation system would lower the water table in a semi-arid region, potentially affecting communities dependent on that water source. The public safety paramount constraint required Jaylani to address this risk before proceeding.
concept category: Constraint
confidence: 0.89
constrainedentity: Engineer Jaylani and Cutting Edge Engineering
constraintclass: Public Safety Paramount Constraint
constraintstatement: Engineer Jaylani and Cutting Edge Engineering were constrained by the paramount public safety obligation to ensure that the documented risk of water table depletion — which could affect communities dependent on regional water sources in a semi-arid region — was not suppressed or ignored in favor of client convenience or contract execution, requiring that the risk be disclosed and addressed before proceeding with irrigation system design.
discoveredincase: 13
discoveredinpass: 2
discoveredinsection: facts
firstdiscoveredat: 2026-02-25T00:57:45.526754+00:00
firstdiscoveredincase: 13
generatedattime: 2026-02-25T00:57:45.526754+00:00
importance: high
severity: critical
source: NSPE Code of Ethics Section I.1; Section II.1.c; BER Case 07-6
sourcetext: cites a recent hydrogeological study indicating that the proposed use would lower the water table
temporalscope: Upon receipt of Wasser's formal memorandum with hydrogeological study evidence
textreferences: Goal 6 – Ensure availability and sustainable management of water and sanitation for all
textreferences: cites a recent hydrogeological study indicating that the proposed use would lower the water table
wasattributedto: Case 13 Extraction
generated at time: 2026-02-25T01:11:40.633109
was generated by: ProEthica Case 13 Extraction

Jaylani Cutting Edge Sustainable Development Integration Resort Irrigation
type: SustainableDevelopmentIntegrationObligation
type: NamedIndividual
casecontext: Cutting Edge Engineering was contracted for MEP work on a resort in a semi-arid region; the landscape architect specified a traditional lawn irrigation system; Engineer Intern Wasser formally identified sustainability conflicts; the firm's obligation under NSPE III.2.d and the faithful agent trustee role required active consideration of sustainable alternatives.
compliancestatus: unclear
concept category: Obligation
confidence: 0.86
discoveredincase: 13
discoveredinpass: 2
discoveredinsection: facts
firstdiscoveredat: 2026-02-25T00:56:04.058400+00:00
firstdiscoveredincase: 13
generatedattime: 2026-02-25T00:56:04.058400+00:00
importance: high
obligatedparty: Engineer Jaylani and Cutting Edge Engineering
obligationclass: Sustainable Development Integration Obligation
obligationstatement: Engineer Jaylani and Cutting Edge Engineering were obligated to actively consider and integrate sustainable development principles into their analysis of the resort irrigation system — including presenting sustainable alternative irrigation approaches to the client — rather than defaulting exclusively to the traditional lawn irrigation system specified by the landscape architect, particularly given the semi-arid regional context and the hydrogeological evidence of water table risk.
sourcetext: Engineer Jaylani is a firm principal for Cutting Edge Engineering and is under contract to complete the mechanical, electrical, and plumbing work for a new resort that will be located in a semi-arid region
temporalscope: Throughout the design phase, and specifically upon receipt of Wasser's formal sustainability objection memorandum
textreferences: Engineer Jaylani is a firm principal for Cutting Edge Engineering and is under contract to complete the mechanical, electrical, and plumbing work for a new resort that will be located in a semi-arid region
textreferences: In a formal memorandum to Jaylani, Wasser argues the proposed lawn irrigation system is not consistent with several United Nations sustainable development goals
textreferences: Wasser points to NSPE Code of Ethics Professional Obligation III.2.d, 'Engineers are encouraged to adhere to the principles of sustainable development'
wasattributedto: Case 13 Extraction
generated at time: 2026-02-25T01:11:40.630492
was generated by: ProEthica Case 13 Extraction

Jaylani Cutting Edge Timely Risk Disclosure Water Table Semi-Arid Region
type: TimelyRiskDisclosureObligation
type: NamedIndividual
casecontext: A hydrogeological study cited by Engineer Intern Wasser indicated that the proposed irrigation system would lower the water table in a semi-arid region; this constituted a public welfare risk requiring timely disclosure to the client regardless of whether a complete alternative design was ready.
compliancestatus: unclear
concept category: Obligation
confidence: 0.84
discoveredincase: 13
discoveredinpass: 2
discoveredinsection: facts
firstdiscoveredat: 2026-02-25T00:56:04.058400+00:00
firstdiscoveredincase: 13
generatedattime: 2026-02-25T00:56:04.058400+00:00
importance: high
obligatedparty: Engineer Jaylani and Cutting Edge Engineering
obligationclass: Timely Risk Disclosure Obligation
obligationstatement: Engineer Jaylani and Cutting Edge Engineering were obligated to promptly disclose to the resort development client the risk of water table lowering identified in the hydrogeological study upon receiving Wasser's formal memorandum, even before a full alternative design analysis was complete, given the public welfare implications of water resource depletion in a semi-arid region.
sourcetext: cites a recent hydrogeological study indicating that the proposed use would lower the water table
temporalscope: Promptly upon receipt of Wasser's formal memorandum identifying the hydrogeological risk
textreferences: Wasser refuses to perform the task and says the traditional irrigation system will waste fresh water
textreferences: cites a recent hydrogeological study indicating that the proposed use would lower the water table
wasattributedto: Case 13 Extraction
generated at time: 2026-02-25T01:11:40.630643
was generated by: ProEthica Case 13 Extraction

Jaylani Cutting Edge Written Report Completeness Water Table Risk
type: WrittenReportCompletenessConstraint
type: NamedIndividual
casecontext: The hydrogeological study provided credible technical evidence of water table depletion risk. Any written reports or client communications regarding the irrigation system were required to include this risk information.
concept category: Constraint
confidence: 0.86
constrainedentity: Engineer Jaylani and Cutting Edge Engineering
constraintclass: Written Report Completeness Constraint
constraintstatement: Engineer Jaylani and Cutting Edge Engineering were constrained to include the hydrogeologically documented water table risk in any written communications or reports to the resort client regarding the irrigation system, prohibiting selective omission of the known environmental risk even if it had been verbally discussed internally.
discoveredincase: 13
discoveredinpass: 2
discoveredinsection: facts
firstdiscoveredat: 2026-02-25T00:57:45.526754+00:00
firstdiscoveredincase: 13
generatedattime: 2026-02-25T00:57:45.526754+00:00
importance: high
severity: high
source: NSPE Code of Ethics Section II.3.a; BER Case 07-6
sourcetext: cites a recent hydrogeological study indicating that the proposed use would lower the water table
temporalscope: Upon receipt of Wasser's formal memorandum and throughout client communication
textreferences: In a formal memorandum to Jaylani, Wasser argues the proposed lawn irrigation system is not consistent with several United Nations sustainable development goals
textreferences: cites a recent hydrogeological study indicating that the proposed use would lower the water table
wasattributedto: Case 13 Extraction
generated at time: 2026-02-25T01:11:40.632774
was generated by: ProEthica Case 13 Extraction

Jaylani Evolving Professional Standard Awareness Sustainability
type: EvolvingProfessionalStandardAwarenessCapability
type: NamedIndividual
capabilityclass: Evolving Professional Standard Awareness Capability
capabilitystatement: Engineer Jaylani was required to be aware of the 2007 addition of the sustainable development provision to the NSPE Code and the resulting shift in BER perspective toward sustainability-informed professional judgment, in order to correctly assess Cutting Edge's obligations in the resort irrigation case
casecontext: Jaylani's response to Wasser's objection required awareness that the profession's ethical standards had evolved to include sustainability considerations, even if those considerations remained encouraged rather than mandatory
concept category: Capability
confidence: 0.82
demonstratedthrough: The need to apply post-2007 NSPE Code standards and current BER perspective on sustainability rather than pre-amendment interpretations when evaluating Wasser's objection and Cutting Edge's obligations
discoveredincase: 13
discoveredinpass: 2
discoveredinsection: discussion
firstdiscoveredat: 2026-02-25T01:04:18.192098+00:00
firstdiscoveredincase: 13
generatedattime: 2026-02-25T01:04:18.192098+00:00
importance: medium
possessedby: Engineer Jaylani
proficiencylevel: advanced
sourcetext: In July 2007, the NSPE House of Delegates approved the addition of a sustainable development provision to the Code, Section III.2.d
textreferences: In July 2007, the NSPE House of Delegates approved the addition of a sustainable development provision to the Code, Section III.2.d
textreferences: This case illustrates the increasing priority and reach of sustainability principles relative to ethical decision-making of professional engineers
textreferences: the BER's current perspective is toward the engineer's judgment being increasingly informed by a broader and deeper emphasis on global sustainability considerations in environmental matters.
wasattributedto: Case 13 Extraction
generated at time: 2026-02-25T01:11:40.638013
was generated by: ProEthica Case 13 Extraction

Jaylani Faithful Agent Sustainability Harmonization Resort Project
type: FaithfulAgentSustainabilityHarmonizationCapability
type: NamedIndividual
capabilityclass: Faithful Agent Sustainability Harmonization Capability
capabilitystatement: Engineer Jaylani, as MEP firm principal, was required to exercise the capability to harmonize Cutting Edge's faithful agent obligations to the resort client with the professional encouragement to adhere to sustainable development principles — including identifying the integrative path of presenting sustainable alternatives while completing the contracted work
casecontext: As firm principal, Jaylani bore responsibility for identifying and implementing the harmonizing solution endorsed by the BER — presenting sustainable alternatives to the client while fulfilling the contracted scope
concept category: Capability
confidence: 0.86
demonstratedthrough: Jaylani's role in responding to Wasser's sustainability objection and determining how Cutting Edge should proceed with the irrigation system assignment
discoveredincase: 13
discoveredinpass: 2
discoveredinsection: discussion
firstdiscoveredat: 2026-02-25T01:04:18.192098+00:00
firstdiscoveredincase: 13
generatedattime: 2026-02-25T01:04:18.192098+00:00
importance: high
possessedby: Engineer Jaylani
proficiencylevel: advanced
sourcetext: Cutting Edge and Wasser can act as faithful trustees by sharing with the client sustainable options for irrigation.
textreferences: Cutting Edge and Wasser can act as faithful trustees by sharing with the client sustainable options for irrigation.
textreferences: It is not enough to simply look at the situation and conclude an engineer's obligation to the client/employer takes precedence over the sustainable development principles.
textreferences: Should the client refuse and insist upon the traditional irrigation system – which is not illegal, Cutting Edge and Wasser must act as the client's agent and complete the task they accepted and were assigned.
wasattributedto: Case 13 Extraction
generated at time: 2026-02-25T01:11:40.637444
was generated by: ProEthica Case 13 Extraction

Jaylani Fiduciary Duty Balancing Capability Instance
type: FiduciaryDutyBalancingCapability
type: NamedIndividual
capabilityclass: Fiduciary Duty Balancing Capability
capabilitystatement: Engineer Jaylani was required to demonstrate capability to balance fiduciary duties to the resort development client with overriding professional obligations to sustainable development and environmental protection, recognizing when client interests in the traditional irrigation system must be weighed against public welfare and sustainability imperatives
casecontext: Engineer Jaylani's faithful agent sustainability trustee role required balancing client service obligations with professional sustainability and environmental protection duties
concept category: Capability
confidence: 0.85
demonstratedthrough: Obligation to act as faithful agent and trustee of the resort client while simultaneously fulfilling sustainable development advocacy and environmental risk disclosure obligations
discoveredincase: 13
discoveredinpass: 2
discoveredinsection: facts
firstdiscoveredat: 2026-02-25T00:57:55.537499+00:00
firstdiscoveredincase: 13
generatedattime: 2026-02-25T00:57:55.537499+00:00
importance: high
possessedby: Engineer Jaylani
proficiencylevel: advanced
sourcetext: Engineer Jaylani and Cutting Edge Engineering were obligated to act as faithful agents and trustees of the resort development client — serving the client's legitimate interests while simultaneously fulfilling professional obligations to sustainable development and environmental protection
textreferences: Engineer Jaylani and Cutting Edge Engineering were obligated to act as faithful agents and trustees of the resort development client — serving the client's legitimate interests while simultaneously fulfilling professional obligations to sustainable development and environmental protection
textreferences: Engineer Jaylani is a firm principal for Cutting Edge Engineering and is under contract to complete the mechanical, electrical, and plumbing work
wasattributedto: Case 13 Extraction
generated at time: 2026-02-25T01:11:40.635051
was generated by: ProEthica Case 13 Extraction

Jaylani Risk Communication to Client Capability Instance
type: RiskCommunicationtoClientCapability
type: NamedIndividual
capabilityclass: Risk Communication to Client Capability
capabilitystatement: Engineer Jaylani was required to demonstrate capability to clearly and completely communicate the water table lowering risk identified in the hydrogeological study to the resort development client in a timely manner
casecontext: Engineer Jaylani's timely risk disclosure obligation required capability to communicate preliminary but credible hydrogeological risk findings to the client before the irrigation system design was finalized
concept category: Capability
confidence: 0.86
demonstratedthrough: Obligation to promptly disclose to the resort development client the risk of water table lowering identified in the hydrogeological study cited by Wasser
discoveredincase: 13
discoveredinpass: 2
discoveredinsection: facts
firstdiscoveredat: 2026-02-25T00:57:55.537499+00:00
firstdiscoveredincase: 13
generatedattime: 2026-02-25T00:57:55.537499+00:00
importance: high
possessedby: Engineer Jaylani
proficiencylevel: advanced
sourcetext: Engineer Jaylani and Cutting Edge Engineering were obligated to promptly disclose to the resort development client the risk of water table lowering identified in the hydrogeological study
textreferences: Engineer Jaylani and Cutting Edge Engineering were obligated to promptly disclose to the resort development client the risk of water table lowering identified in the hydrogeological study
textreferences: cites a recent hydrogeological study indicating that the proposed use would lower the water table
wasattributedto: Case 13 Extraction
generated at time: 2026-02-25T01:11:40.634892
was generated by: ProEthica Case 13 Extraction

Jaylani SDG Alignment Assessment Capability Instance
type: SustainableDevelopmentGoalAlignmentAssessmentCapability
type: NamedIndividual
capabilityclass: Sustainable Development Goal Alignment Assessment Capability
capabilitystatement: Engineer Jaylani as supervising engineer was required to evaluate the SDG alignment analysis presented in Wasser's formal memorandum and assess its implications for the firm's professional obligations
casecontext: Engineer Jaylani's supervisory response obligation required capability to evaluate the SDG alignment analysis in Wasser's memorandum and determine appropriate professional response
concept category: Capability
confidence: 0.85
demonstratedthrough: Obligation to conduct substantive review of Wasser's SDG-based sustainability objections upon receipt of the formal memorandum
discoveredincase: 13
discoveredinpass: 2
discoveredinsection: facts
firstdiscoveredat: 2026-02-25T00:57:55.537499+00:00
firstdiscoveredincase: 13
generatedattime: 2026-02-25T00:57:55.537499+00:00
importance: high
possessedby: Engineer Jaylani
proficiencylevel: advanced
sourcetext: Engineer Jaylani was obligated, upon receiving Wasser's formal memorandum identifying sustainability conflicts and hydrogeological risks, to conduct a substantive review
textreferences: Engineer Jaylani was obligated, upon receiving Wasser's formal memorandum identifying sustainability conflicts and hydrogeological risks, to conduct a substantive review
textreferences: Wasser argues the proposed lawn irrigation system is not consistent with several United Nations sustainable development goals
wasattributedto: Case 13 Extraction
generated at time: 2026-02-25T01:11:40.635207
was generated by: ProEthica Case 13 Extraction

Jaylani Semi-Arid Water Resource Engineering Competence Instance
type: Semi-AridRegionWaterResourceEngineeringCompetence
type: NamedIndividual
capabilityclass: Semi-Arid Region Water Resource Engineering Competence
capabilitystatement: Engineer Jaylani as MEP firm principal was required to possess or acquire capability to evaluate the water resource implications of the proposed irrigation system in the semi-arid southwestern US context, including assessing the hydrogeological risk evidence cited by Wasser
casecontext: Engineer Jaylani's supervisory response obligation required evaluation of water resource engineering implications of the resort irrigation system in a semi-arid region
concept category: Capability
confidence: 0.84
demonstratedthrough: Obligation to evaluate the hydrogeological study findings and assess water table lowering risk as part of the supervisory response to Wasser's formal objection
discoveredincase: 13
discoveredinpass: 2
discoveredinsection: facts
firstdiscoveredat: 2026-02-25T00:57:55.537499+00:00
firstdiscoveredincase: 13
generatedattime: 2026-02-25T00:57:55.537499+00:00
importance: high
possessedby: Engineer Jaylani
proficiencylevel: advanced
sourcetext: a new resort that will be located in a semi-arid region of the southwestern United States
textreferences: Engineer Jaylani and Cutting Edge Engineering were obligated to ensure that the resort irrigation system design adequately protected the regional water resources
textreferences: a new resort that will be located in a semi-arid region of the southwestern United States
textreferences: cites a recent hydrogeological study indicating that the proposed use would lower the water table
wasattributedto: Case 13 Extraction
generated at time: 2026-02-25T01:11:40.634627
was generated by: ProEthica Case 13 Extraction

Jaylani Supervising Engineer Sustainability Objection Response
type: SupervisingEngineerSustainabilityObjectionResponseObligation
type: NamedIndividual
casecontext: Engineer Jaylani received a formal memorandum from Engineer Intern Wasser identifying sustainability objections supported by a hydrogeological study; the case does not describe Jaylani's response, raising the question of whether the supervising engineer fulfilled this obligation.
compliancestatus: unclear
concept category: Obligation
confidence: 0.82
discoveredincase: 13
discoveredinpass: 2
discoveredinsection: facts
firstdiscoveredat: 2026-02-25T00:56:04.058400+00:00
firstdiscoveredincase: 13
generatedattime: 2026-02-25T00:56:04.058400+00:00
importance: high
obligatedparty: Engineer Jaylani
obligationclass: Supervising Engineer Sustainability Objection Response Obligation
obligationstatement: Engineer Jaylani was obligated, upon receiving Wasser's formal memorandum identifying sustainability conflicts and hydrogeological risks, to conduct a substantive review of the objection and the cited technical evidence, determine whether the concern required client notification or design modification, and communicate a reasoned response to Wasser.
sourcetext: In a formal memorandum to Jaylani, Wasser argues the proposed lawn irrigation system is not consistent with several United Nations sustainable development goals
temporalscope: Upon receipt of Wasser's formal memorandum
textreferences: Engineer Jaylani assigns Wasser the task of sketching out details for the irrigation system
textreferences: In a formal memorandum to Jaylani, Wasser argues the proposed lawn irrigation system is not consistent with several United Nations sustainable development goals
wasattributedto: Case 13 Extraction
generated at time: 2026-02-25T01:11:40.630014
was generated by: ProEthica Case 13 Extraction

Jaylani Supervising Engineer Sustainability Objection Response Procedural Constraint
type: GraduatedSubconsultantEscalationProceduralConstraint
type: NamedIndividual
casecontext: Engineer Jaylani received a formal memorandum from Engineer Intern Wasser identifying sustainability conflicts and hydrogeological risks. The procedural constraint required a graduated response beginning with internal substantive review before any external escalation.
concept category: Constraint
confidence: 0.82
constrainedentity: Engineer Jaylani
constraintclass: Graduated Subconsultant Escalation Procedural Constraint
constraintstatement: Engineer Jaylani was constrained to follow a graduated response sequence upon receiving Wasser's formal memorandum — first conducting a substantive internal review of the sustainability and hydrogeological concerns, then communicating findings to the client and landscape architect, and only thereafter determining whether external escalation was warranted — prohibiting both dismissal of the concerns without substantive review and premature external escalation that bypassed internal resolution opportunities.
discoveredincase: 13
discoveredinpass: 2
discoveredinsection: facts
firstdiscoveredat: 2026-02-25T00:57:45.526754+00:00
firstdiscoveredincase: 13
generatedattime: 2026-02-25T00:57:45.526754+00:00
importance: high
severity: high
source: NSPE Code of Ethics; BER Case 07-6; BER Case 22-10
sourcetext: In a formal memorandum to Jaylani, Wasser argues the proposed lawn irrigation system is not consistent with several United Nations sustainable development goals
temporalscope: Upon receipt of Wasser's formal memorandum
textreferences: In a formal memorandum to Jaylani, Wasser argues the proposed lawn irrigation system is not consistent with several United Nations sustainable development goals
textreferences: cites a recent hydrogeological study indicating that the proposed use would lower the water table
wasattributedto: Case 13 Extraction
generated at time: 2026-02-25T01:11:40.632362
was generated by: ProEthica Case 13 Extraction

Jaylani Sustainability Code Provision Normative Weight Assessment
type: SustainabilityCodeProvisionNormativeWeightAssessmentCapability
type: NamedIndividual
capabilityclass: Sustainability Code Provision Normative Weight Assessment Capability
capabilitystatement: Engineer Jaylani was required to correctly assess the differential normative weight of the faithful agent provision (mandatory: 'shall') versus the sustainable development provision (encouraged: 'are encouraged to') in order to correctly advise Wasser and determine Cutting Edge's obligations
casecontext: Jaylani's response to Wasser's sustainability objection required correct assessment of the normative weight of competing code provisions to determine whether task refusal was obligatory or merely permissible
concept category: Capability
confidence: 0.87
demonstratedthrough: The BER's analysis distinguishing mandatory faithful agent obligations from encouraged sustainable development adherence, which Jaylani needed to apply in responding to Wasser's objection
discoveredincase: 13
discoveredinpass: 2
discoveredinsection: discussion
firstdiscoveredat: 2026-02-25T01:04:18.192098+00:00
firstdiscoveredincase: 13
generatedattime: 2026-02-25T01:04:18.192098+00:00
importance: high
possessedby: Engineer Jaylani
proficiencylevel: advanced
sourcetext: the Code of Ethics provision to act as a faithful agent is mandatory (engineer shall act …), but adherence to sustainable development is 'encouraged.'
textreferences: The facts do not support an engineer's required adherence to a supreme sustainable development ethic.
textreferences: refusal to perform the design cannot be viewed as ethically obligatory.
textreferences: the Code of Ethics provision to act as a faithful agent is mandatory (engineer shall act …), but adherence to sustainable development is 'encouraged.'
wasattributedto: Case 13 Extraction
generated at time: 2026-02-25T01:11:40.637735
was generated by: ProEthica Case 13 Extraction

Jaylani Sustainability Objection Supervisory Response Capability Instance
type: SustainabilityObjectionSupervisoryResponseCapability
type: NamedIndividual
capabilityclass: Sustainability Objection Supervisory Response Capability
capabilitystatement: Engineer Jaylani was required to demonstrate capability to receive and respond appropriately to Wasser's formal sustainability objection memorandum, including evaluating the technical evidence and determining whether client notification obligations were triggered
casecontext: Engineer Jaylani as firm principal received Wasser's formal memorandum and was obligated to conduct a substantive review and formulate an appropriate professional response
concept category: Capability
confidence: 0.86
demonstratedthrough: Receipt of the formal memorandum from Engineer Intern Wasser documenting sustainability conflicts and hydrogeological risks requiring supervisory evaluation and response
discoveredincase: 13
discoveredinpass: 2
discoveredinsection: facts
firstdiscoveredat: 2026-02-25T00:57:55.537499+00:00
firstdiscoveredincase: 13
generatedattime: 2026-02-25T00:57:55.537499+00:00
importance: high
possessedby: Engineer Jaylani
proficiencylevel: advanced
sourcetext: Engineer Jaylani is a firm principal for Cutting Edge Engineering
textreferences: Engineer Jaylani assigns Wasser the task of sketching out details for the irrigation system
textreferences: Engineer Jaylani is a firm principal for Cutting Edge Engineering
textreferences: Engineer Jaylani was obligated, upon receiving Wasser's formal memorandum identifying sustainability conflicts and hydrogeological risks, to conduct a substantive review
wasattributedto: Case 13 Extraction
generated at time: 2026-02-25T01:11:40.634488
was generated by: ProEthica Case 13 Extraction

Jaylani Sustainability Objection Supervisory Response Resort Irrigation
type: SustainabilityObjectionSupervisoryResponseCapability
type: NamedIndividual
capabilityclass: Sustainability Objection Supervisory Response Capability
capabilitystatement: Engineer Jaylani was required to receive and respond appropriately to Wasser's formal sustainability objection — including conducting substantive review of the technical evidence, assessing the normative weight of the sustainability concerns, determining whether client notification was required, and formulating a professional response that identified the integrative path of presenting sustainable alternatives while completing the contracted work
casecontext: As firm principal, Jaylani bore primary responsibility for the supervisory response to Wasser's sustainability objection, including determining the appropriate path forward for both the firm and the client
concept category: Capability
confidence: 0.87
demonstratedthrough: Jaylani's role as supervising principal engineer responsible for determining Cutting Edge's response to Wasser's objection and the firm's approach to the resort irrigation assignment
discoveredincase: 13
discoveredinpass: 2
discoveredinsection: discussion
firstdiscoveredat: 2026-02-25T01:04:18.192098+00:00
firstdiscoveredincase: 13
generatedattime: 2026-02-25T01:04:18.192098+00:00
importance: high
possessedby: Engineer Jaylani
proficiencylevel: advanced
sourcetext: Cutting Edge and Wasser can act as faithful trustees by sharing with the client sustainable options for irrigation.
textreferences: Cutting Edge and Wasser can act as faithful trustees by sharing with the client sustainable options for irrigation.
textreferences: Should the client refuse and insist upon the traditional irrigation system – which is not illegal, Cutting Edge and Wasser must act as the client's agent and complete the task they accepted and were assigned.
textreferences: endeavoring to integrate all code of ethics provisions when developing a solution is critical.
wasattributedto: Case 13 Extraction
generated at time: 2026-02-25T01:11:40.638445
was generated by: ProEthica Case 13 Extraction

Jaylani Sustainable Development Client Education Capability Instance
type: SustainableDevelopmentClientEducationCapability
type: NamedIndividual
capabilityclass: Sustainable Development Client Education Capability
capabilitystatement: Engineer Jaylani as firm principal was required to demonstrate capability to proactively educate the resort development client about sustainable irrigation alternatives and the sustainability conflicts identified in Wasser's formal memorandum
casecontext: Engineer Jaylani's client notification obligation required capability to present sustainable development alternatives and their tradeoffs to the resort client in a manner consistent with faithful agent duties
concept category: Capability
confidence: 0.85
demonstratedthrough: Obligation to notify the resort development client of the sustainability-environmental conflict identified by Wasser's memorandum and the hydrogeological study
discoveredincase: 13
discoveredinpass: 2
discoveredinsection: facts
firstdiscoveredat: 2026-02-25T00:57:55.537499+00:00
firstdiscoveredincase: 13
generatedattime: 2026-02-25T00:57:55.537499+00:00
importance: high
possessedby: Engineer Jaylani
proficiencylevel: advanced
sourcetext: Engineer Jaylani and Cutting Edge Engineering were obligated, having received Wasser's formal memorandum with the hydrogeological study evidence, to notify the resort development client
textreferences: Engineer Jaylani and Cutting Edge Engineering were obligated, having received Wasser's formal memorandum with the hydrogeological study evidence, to notify the resort development client
textreferences: Jaylani Cutting Edge Sustainable Development Integration Resort Irrigation
wasattributedto: Case 13 Extraction
generated at time: 2026-02-25T01:11:40.634759
was generated by: ProEthica Case 13 Extraction

LEED Certification Standard
type: TechnicalStandard
type: NamedIndividual
concept category: Resource
confidence: 0.85
createdby: U.S. Green Building Council
discoveredincase: 13
discoveredinpass: 1
discoveredinsection: discussion
documenttitle: Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design (LEED) Certification
firstdiscoveredat: 2026-02-25T00:52:29.091366+00:00
firstdiscoveredincase: 13
generatedattime: 2026-02-25T00:52:29.091366+00:00
importance: low
resourceclass: Technical Standard
sourcetext: such a project would lie within the space of 'client choice,' similar to how a client might choose (or not) to design and construct its project per green building options that result in LEED certification
textreferences: such a project would lie within the space of 'client choice,' similar to how a client might choose (or not) to design and construct its project per green building options that result in LEED certification
usedby: NSPE Board of Ethical Review to frame sustainable irrigation options as analogous to voluntary LEED certification choices
usedincontext: Referenced as an analogical example of voluntary green building standards representing client choice within the space of sustainable design options, used to illustrate that sustainable development provisions operate as encouraged rather than mandatory requirements
version: Current
wasattributedto: Case 13 Extraction
generated at time: 2026-02-25T01:11:40.626251
was generated by: ProEthica Case 13 Extraction

NSPE-Code-of-Ethics-Professional-Obligation-III-2-d
type: ProfessionalCode
type: NamedIndividual
concept category: Resource
confidence: 0.97
createdby: National Society of Professional Engineers
discoveredincase: 13
discoveredinpass: 1
discoveredinsection: facts
documenttitle: NSPE Code of Ethics for Engineers — Professional Obligation III.2.d
firstdiscoveredat: 2026-02-25T00:50:47.802985+00:00
firstdiscoveredincase: 13
generatedattime: 2026-02-25T00:50:47.802985+00:00
importance: high
resourceclass: Professional Code
sourcetext: Wasser points to NSPE Code of Ethics Professional Obligation III.2.d, 'Engineers are encouraged to adhere to the principles of sustainable development,' and claims the proposed lawn irrigation system does not conform to sustainability principles.
textreferences: Wasser points to NSPE Code of Ethics Professional Obligation III.2.d, 'Engineers are encouraged to adhere to the principles of sustainable development,' and claims the proposed lawn irrigation system does not conform to sustainability principles.
usedby: Engineer Intern Wasser
usedincontext: Cited by Engineer Intern Wasser in a formal memorandum to Engineer Jaylani as normative authority supporting the claim that the proposed traditional lawn irrigation system does not conform to sustainability principles and that engineers are encouraged to adhere to sustainable development principles
version: Current at time of case
wasattributedto: Case 13 Extraction
generated at time: 2026-02-25T01:11:40.622254
was generated by: ProEthica Case 13 Extraction

NSPE Canons Established
type: NamedIndividual
concept category: Event
generated at time: 2026-02-25T01:11:40.639101
was generated by: ProEthica Case 13 Extraction

NSPE Canons Established and Sustainable Development Provision Added → Formal Sustainability Memorandum Submission
type: NamedIndividual
generated at time: 2026-02-25T01:11:40.639440
was generated by: ProEthica Case 13 Extraction

NSPE Canons of Ethics origin (1946) before addition of sustainable development provision III.2.d (July 2007)
type: NamedIndividual
generated at time: 2026-02-25T01:11:40.639518
was generated by: ProEthica Case 13 Extraction

NSPE Code Section I.4 - Faithful Agent Obligation
type: ProfessionalCode
type: NamedIndividual
concept category: Resource
confidence: 0.92
createdby: National Society of Professional Engineers
discoveredincase: 13
discoveredinpass: 1
discoveredinsection: discussion
documenttitle: NSPE Code of Ethics for Engineers, Section I.4
firstdiscoveredat: 2026-02-25T00:52:29.091366+00:00
firstdiscoveredincase: 13
generatedattime: 2026-02-25T00:52:29.091366+00:00
importance: high
resourceclass: Professional Code
sourcetext: By introducing and offering sustainable alternatives to a traditional lawn irrigation system, Wasser and Cutting Edge can harmonize code provisions I.4 and III.2.d.
textreferences: By introducing and offering sustainable alternatives to a traditional lawn irrigation system, Wasser and Cutting Edge can harmonize code provisions I.4 and III.2.d.
textreferences: Wasser has an ethical obligation to act as a faithful agent to his employer, while simultaneously upholding the Code's ethical encouragement to adhere to sustainability principles.
usedby: NSPE Board of Ethical Review to evaluate Wasser's competing obligations
usedincontext: Establishes the mandatory obligation for engineers to act as faithful agents or trustees for employers and clients, creating the primary tension with the encouraged sustainable development provision in Wasser's case
version: Current
wasattributedto: Case 13 Extraction
generated at time: 2026-02-25T01:11:40.625605
was generated by: ProEthica Case 13 Extraction

NSPE Code Section II.3.a - Objectivity and Truthfulness
type: ProfessionalCode
type: NamedIndividual
concept category: Resource
confidence: 0.92
createdby: National Society of Professional Engineers
discoveredincase: 13
discoveredinpass: 1
discoveredinsection: discussion
documenttitle: NSPE Code of Ethics for Engineers, Section II.3.a
firstdiscoveredat: 2026-02-25T00:52:29.091366+00:00
firstdiscoveredincase: 13
generatedattime: 2026-02-25T00:52:29.091366+00:00
importance: medium
resourceclass: Professional Code
sourcetext: under NSPE Code Section II.3.a., engineers have an obligation to be objective and truthful in professional reports, statements, or testimony and include all relevant and pertinent information in such reports
textreferences: under NSPE Code Section II.3.a., engineers have an obligation to be objective and truthful in professional reports, statements, or testimony and include all relevant and pertinent information in such reports
usedby: NSPE Board of Ethical Review in BER Case 07-6 analysis referenced in this discussion
usedincontext: Cited in BER Case 07-6 analysis to establish engineer's obligation to include all relevant and pertinent information in professional reports, including environmental threats such as endangered species impacts
version: Current
wasattributedto: Case 13 Extraction
generated at time: 2026-02-25T01:11:40.625419
was generated by: ProEthica Case 13 Extraction

NSPE Code Section III.2.d - Sustainable Development Provision
type: SustainableDevelopmentEthicsProvision
type: NamedIndividual
concept category: Resource
confidence: 0.95
createdby: National Society of Professional Engineers House of Delegates
discoveredincase: 13
discoveredinpass: 1
discoveredinsection: discussion
documenttitle: NSPE Code of Ethics for Engineers, Section III.2.d
firstdiscoveredat: 2026-02-25T00:52:29.091366+00:00
firstdiscoveredincase: 13
generatedattime: 2026-02-25T00:52:29.091366+00:00
importance: high
resourceclass: Sustainable Development Ethics Provision
sourcetext: In July 2007, the NSPE House of Delegates approved the addition of a sustainable development provision to the Code, Section III.2.d, which read 'Engineers are encouraged to adhere to the principles of sustainable development in order to protect the environment for future generations.'
textreferences: In July 2007, the NSPE House of Delegates approved the addition of a sustainable development provision to the Code, Section III.2.d, which read 'Engineers are encouraged to adhere to the principles of sustainable development in order to protect the environment for future generations.'
textreferences: the Code of Ethics provision to act as a faithful agent is mandatory (engineer shall act …), but adherence to sustainable development is 'encouraged'
usedby: NSPE Board of Ethical Review to evaluate Wasser's sustainability-based dissent
usedincontext: Establishes the encouraged (non-mandatory) nature of sustainable development adherence, used to distinguish between ethically permissible and ethically obligatory conduct in the irrigation system design case
version: Adopted July 2007 by NSPE House of Delegates
wasattributedto: Case 13 Extraction
generated at time: 2026-02-25T01:11:40.622119
was generated by: ProEthica Case 13 Extraction

NSPE Code of Ethics
type: ProfessionalCode
type: NamedIndividual
concept category: Resource
confidence: 0.98
createdby: National Society of Professional Engineers
discoveredincase: 13
discoveredinpass: 1
discoveredinsection: discussion
documenttitle: NSPE Code of Ethics for Engineers
firstdiscoveredat: 2026-02-25T00:52:29.091366+00:00
firstdiscoveredincase: 13
generatedattime: 2026-02-25T00:52:29.091366+00:00
importance: high
resourceclass: Professional Code
sourcetext: the adjudicating body for this case is the NSPE Board of Ethical Review, so interpretation of the ethics of this case is specific to the NSPE Code of Ethics
textreferences: This interpretation is fully consistent with NSPE Code Section III.2.d where engineers are encouraged to adhere to the principles of sustainable development.
textreferences: engineers shall act for each employer or client as faithful agents or trustees, but are encouraged to adhere to the principles of sustainable development
textreferences: the adjudicating body for this case is the NSPE Board of Ethical Review, so interpretation of the ethics of this case is specific to the NSPE Code of Ethics
usedby: NSPE Board of Ethical Review in adjudicating competing obligations between faithful agency and sustainable development
usedincontext: Primary normative authority for evaluating Engineer Intern Wasser's competing obligations as faithful agent and sustainability advocate, and for determining whether refusal to perform the irrigation design task is ethically permissible or obligatory
version: Including 2007 sustainable development amendment
wasattributedto: Case 13 Extraction
generated at time: 2026-02-25T01:11:40.621972
was generated by: ProEthica Case 13 Extraction

Proactive Design Alternatives Obligation On Jaylani And Cutting Edge
type: ProactiveDesignAlternativesPresentationforPublicSafety
type: NamedIndividual
appliedto: Landscape architect specification
appliedto: Resort client irrigation system decision
balancingwith: Client Loyalty
balancingwith: Professional Scope and Interdisciplinary Boundary Respect
concept category: Principle
concreteexpression: Engineer Jaylani and Cutting Edge Engineering, having received Wasser's formal memorandum identifying sustainability and environmental concerns with the specified irrigation system, bear an obligation to identify and present alternative irrigation design approaches to the client and landscape architect, including discussion of the sustainability benefits and drawbacks of each option
confidence: 0.83
discoveredincase: 13
discoveredinpass: 2
discoveredinsection: facts
firstdiscoveredat: 2026-02-25T00:54:10.925994+00:00
firstdiscoveredincase: 13
generatedattime: 2026-02-25T00:54:10.925994+00:00
importance: high
interpretation: The principle of proactive design alternatives presentation applies here because the specified design involves foreseeable environmental risks; Jaylani should facilitate a multi-party discussion of alternatives rather than either requiring Wasser to proceed or unilaterally refusing the contracted work
invokedby: Cutting Edge Faithful Agent Sustainability Trustee Engineer
invokedby: Engineer Jaylani MEP Firm Principal Engineer
principleclass: Proactive Design Alternatives Presentation for Public Safety
sourcetext: Engineer Jaylani is a firm principal for Cutting Edge Engineering and is under contract to complete the mechanical, electrical, and plumbing work for a new resort
tensionresolution: Presenting alternatives to the client and landscape architect respects client decision-making authority while fulfilling the engineering firm's obligation to surface and address foreseeable risks
textreferences: Engineer Jaylani is a firm principal for Cutting Edge Engineering and is under contract to complete the mechanical, electrical, and plumbing work for a new resort
textreferences: cites a recent hydrogeological study indicating that the proposed use would lower the water table
wasattributedto: Case 13 Extraction
generated at time: 2026-02-25T01:11:40.629344
was generated by: ProEthica Case 13 Extraction

Proactive Risk Disclosure Obligation On Wasser Re Water Table
type: ProactiveRiskDisclosure
type: NamedIndividual
appliedto: Resort client and broader affected community
appliedto: Water table depletion risk
balancingwith: Client Loyalty
balancingwith: Faithful Agent Obligation Within Ethical Limits
concept category: Principle
concreteexpression: Engineer Intern Wasser proactively disclosed the risk of water table lowering identified in a hydrogeological study to Engineer Jaylani through a formal memorandum, rather than silently complying with the assignment or raising the concern only informally
confidence: 0.85
discoveredincase: 13
discoveredinpass: 2
discoveredinsection: facts
firstdiscoveredat: 2026-02-25T00:54:10.925994+00:00
firstdiscoveredincase: 13
generatedattime: 2026-02-25T00:54:10.925994+00:00
importance: high
interpretation: Proactive risk disclosure in this context required Wasser to formally communicate the identified environmental risk to the responsible decision-maker within the firm, grounded in technical evidence, before the risk materialized through project execution
invokedby: Engineer Intern Wasser Sustainability-Objecting Engineer Intern
principleclass: Proactive Risk Disclosure
sourcetext: In a formal memorandum to Jaylani, Wasser argues the proposed lawn irrigation system is not consistent with several United Nations sustainable development goals
tensionresolution: Wasser discharged the proactive disclosure obligation through the formal memorandum; the obligation to engage the client and landscape architect now falls on Jaylani as the responsible principal
textreferences: In a formal memorandum to Jaylani, Wasser argues the proposed lawn irrigation system is not consistent with several United Nations sustainable development goals
textreferences: cites a recent hydrogeological study indicating that the proposed use would lower the water table
wasattributedto: Case 13 Extraction
generated at time: 2026-02-25T01:11:40.629173
was generated by: ProEthica Case 13 Extraction

Professional Scope Boundary Question Re Landscape Architect Specification
type: ProfessionalScopeandInterdisciplinaryBoundaryRespect
type: NamedIndividual
appliedto: Landscape architect's irrigation system specification
appliedto: MEP engineer's contracted obligation to detail the specified system
balancingwith: Environmental Stewardship in Engineering Practice
balancingwith: Faithful Agent Obligation Within Ethical Limits
concept category: Principle
concreteexpression: The landscape architect specified the traditional lawn irrigation system within their professional domain of authority, while Engineer Intern Wasser — an MEP engineer — objected to that specification on sustainability grounds, raising the question of whether MEP engineers have standing to refuse to execute work derived from another licensed professional's specification
confidence: 0.8
discoveredincase: 13
discoveredinpass: 2
discoveredinsection: facts
firstdiscoveredat: 2026-02-25T00:54:10.925994+00:00
firstdiscoveredincase: 13
generatedattime: 2026-02-25T00:54:10.925994+00:00
importance: medium
interpretation: The landscape architect holds primary authority over irrigation system specification as part of the landscape design scope; however, when that specification creates cross-disciplinary environmental and public welfare concerns within the MEP engineer's domain of knowledge, the MEP engineer retains standing to raise those concerns formally
invokedby: Engineer Intern Wasser Sustainability-Objecting Engineer Intern
invokedby: Resort Project Landscape Architect Specifier
principleclass: Professional Scope and Interdisciplinary Boundary Respect
sourcetext: The project's landscape architect specifies a traditional lawn irrigation system for the resort's golf course as part of the project
tensionresolution: Wasser's formal memorandum is an appropriate mechanism for raising cross-disciplinary concerns without unilaterally overriding the landscape architect's specification authority
textreferences: The project's landscape architect specifies a traditional lawn irrigation system for the resort's golf course as part of the project
textreferences: asserts that Cutting Edge should not do this kind of work
wasattributedto: Case 13 Extraction
generated at time: 2026-02-25T01:11:40.628997
was generated by: ProEthica Case 13 Extraction

Public Welfare Paramount Invoked By Wasser Re Water Table
type: PublicWelfareParamount
type: NamedIndividual
appliedto: Water table depletion risk from traditional lawn irrigation in semi-arid southwestern US
balancingwith: Client Loyalty
balancingwith: Faithful Agent Obligation Within Ethical Limits
concept category: Principle
concreteexpression: Engineer Intern Wasser invoked public welfare by citing a hydrogeological study showing the proposed irrigation system would lower the water table in a semi-arid region, framing the environmental impact as a threat to public access to water resources
confidence: 0.9
discoveredincase: 13
discoveredinpass: 2
discoveredinsection: facts
firstdiscoveredat: 2026-02-25T00:54:10.925994+00:00
firstdiscoveredincase: 13
generatedattime: 2026-02-25T00:54:10.925994+00:00
importance: high
interpretation: In this context, public welfare extends beyond immediate project users to encompass the broader community's long-term access to groundwater resources, which the hydrogeological study identifies as threatened by the proposed irrigation system
invokedby: Engineer Intern Wasser Sustainability-Objecting Engineer Intern
principleclass: Public Welfare Paramount
sourcetext: cites a recent hydrogeological study indicating that the proposed use would lower the water table
tensionresolution: Wasser prioritized public welfare over faithful agent obligations by refusing the task and formally documenting the concern, consistent with NSPE Canon 1's paramountcy of public welfare
textreferences: Goal 6– Ensure availability and sustainable management of water and sanitation for all
textreferences: cites a recent hydrogeological study indicating that the proposed use would lower the water table
textreferences: the traditional irrigation system will waste fresh water
wasattributedto: Case 13 Extraction
generated at time: 2026-02-25T01:11:40.628257
was generated by: ProEthica Case 13 Extraction

QuestionEmergence_1
type: NamedIndividual
generated at time: 2026-02-25T01:26:51.169781
was generated by: ProEthica Case 13 Extraction

QuestionEmergence_10
type: NamedIndividual
generated at time: 2026-02-25T01:26:51.170317
was generated by: ProEthica Case 13 Extraction

QuestionEmergence_11
type: NamedIndividual
generated at time: 2026-02-25T01:26:51.170370
was generated by: ProEthica Case 13 Extraction

QuestionEmergence_12
type: NamedIndividual
generated at time: 2026-02-25T01:26:51.170451
was generated by: ProEthica Case 13 Extraction

QuestionEmergence_13
type: NamedIndividual
generated at time: 2026-02-25T01:26:51.170512
was generated by: ProEthica Case 13 Extraction

QuestionEmergence_14
type: NamedIndividual
generated at time: 2026-02-25T01:26:51.170573
was generated by: ProEthica Case 13 Extraction

QuestionEmergence_15
type: NamedIndividual
generated at time: 2026-02-25T01:26:51.170607
was generated by: ProEthica Case 13 Extraction

QuestionEmergence_16
type: NamedIndividual
generated at time: 2026-02-25T01:26:51.170638
was generated by: ProEthica Case 13 Extraction

QuestionEmergence_17
type: NamedIndividual
generated at time: 2026-02-25T01:26:51.170666
was generated by: ProEthica Case 13 Extraction

QuestionEmergence_18
type: NamedIndividual
generated at time: 2026-02-25T01:26:51.170721
was generated by: ProEthica Case 13 Extraction

QuestionEmergence_19
type: NamedIndividual
generated at time: 2026-02-25T01:26:51.170751
was generated by: ProEthica Case 13 Extraction

QuestionEmergence_2
type: NamedIndividual
generated at time: 2026-02-25T01:26:51.169812
was generated by: ProEthica Case 13 Extraction

QuestionEmergence_3
type: NamedIndividual
generated at time: 2026-02-25T01:26:51.169851
was generated by: ProEthica Case 13 Extraction

QuestionEmergence_4
type: NamedIndividual
generated at time: 2026-02-25T01:26:51.169929
was generated by: ProEthica Case 13 Extraction

QuestionEmergence_5
type: NamedIndividual
generated at time: 2026-02-25T01:26:51.169998
was generated by: ProEthica Case 13 Extraction

QuestionEmergence_6
type: NamedIndividual
generated at time: 2026-02-25T01:26:51.170133
was generated by: ProEthica Case 13 Extraction

QuestionEmergence_7
type: NamedIndividual
generated at time: 2026-02-25T01:26:51.170218
was generated by: ProEthica Case 13 Extraction

QuestionEmergence_8
type: NamedIndividual
generated at time: 2026-02-25T01:26:51.170255
was generated by: ProEthica Case 13 Extraction

QuestionEmergence_9
type: NamedIndividual
generated at time: 2026-02-25T01:26:51.170286
was generated by: ProEthica Case 13 Extraction

Question_1
type: EthicalQuestion
type: NamedIndividual
question number: 1
question text: Was it ethical for Cutting Edge Engineering and Engineer Jaylani to accept the irrigation system design task?
question type: board_explicit
generated at time: 2026-02-25T01:26:51.162716
was generated by: ProEthica Case 13 Extraction

Question_101
type: EthicalQuestion
type: NamedIndividual
question number: 101
question text: Did Engineer Jaylani have an independent obligation to disclose the hydrogeological study's findings about water table depletion to the resort client before accepting or proceeding with the irrigation design task, regardless of Wasser's objection?
question type: implicit
generated at time: 2026-02-25T01:26:51.162986
was generated by: ProEthica Case 13 Extraction

Question_102
type: EthicalQuestion
type: NamedIndividual
question number: 102
question text: Does the landscape architect's authority to specify the irrigation system relieve Cutting Edge Engineering and Engineer Jaylani of any professional responsibility for the environmental consequences of executing that specification, or does the MEP engineer retain an independent duty to evaluate and flag sustainability risks that fall within their technical competence?
question type: implicit
generated at time: 2026-02-25T01:26:51.163075
was generated by: ProEthica Case 13 Extraction

Question_103
type: EthicalQuestion
type: NamedIndividual
question number: 103
question text: Was Wasser's formal memorandum a sufficient and proportionate response to the identified environmental risk, or did the hydrogeological study's findings about water table depletion in a semi-arid region create a stronger obligation — one requiring escalation beyond the firm to regulatory bodies or the public — rather than merely an internal objection?
question type: implicit
generated at time: 2026-02-25T01:26:51.163201
was generated by: ProEthica Case 13 Extraction

Question_104
type: EthicalQuestion
type: NamedIndividual
question number: 104
question text: To what extent does the semi-arid regional context and the documented impact on communities dependent on the water table elevate the traditional irrigation system design from a permissible engineering task to one that implicates the paramount public welfare obligation, potentially changing the ethical calculus for both Jaylani and Wasser?
question type: implicit
generated at time: 2026-02-25T01:26:51.163291
was generated by: ProEthica Case 13 Extraction

Question_2
type: EthicalQuestion
type: NamedIndividual
question number: 2
question text: Was it ethical for Engineer Intern Wasser to refuse to perform the task of design development for the proposed irrigation system?
question type: board_explicit
generated at time: 2026-02-25T01:26:51.162804
was generated by: ProEthica Case 13 Extraction

Question_201
type: EthicalQuestion
type: NamedIndividual
question number: 201
question text: Does the Client Loyalty Obligation on Cutting Edge Engineering conflict with the Public Welfare Paramount principle invoked by Wasser regarding the water table, and if so, at what threshold of documented environmental harm does the public welfare obligation override faithful execution of the client's contracted scope?
question type: principle_tension
generated at time: 2026-02-25T01:26:51.163384
was generated by: ProEthica Case 13 Extraction

Question_202
type: EthicalQuestion
type: NamedIndividual
question number: 202
question text: Does the Professional Scope Boundary Question regarding the landscape architect's specification authority conflict with the Proactive Risk Disclosure Obligation on Wasser and Jaylani regarding the water table, and can deference to another discipline's specification ever ethically excuse an engineer from disclosing known environmental risks that fall within the engineer's own technical knowledge?
question type: principle_tension
generated at time: 2026-02-25T01:26:51.163458
was generated by: ProEthica Case 13 Extraction

Question_203
type: EthicalQuestion
type: NamedIndividual
question number: 203
question text: Does the Sustainable Development Advocacy principle invoked by Wasser through his formal memorandum conflict with the Client Loyalty Obligation on Cutting Edge Engineering, and given that NSPE Code III.2.d frames sustainable development adherence as encouraged rather than mandatory, how should an engineer weigh a non-mandatory sustainability principle against a core fiduciary duty to a client who has not been shown to be acting illegally?
question type: principle_tension
generated at time: 2026-02-25T01:26:51.163590
was generated by: ProEthica Case 13 Extraction

Question_204
type: EthicalQuestion
type: NamedIndividual
question number: 204
question text: Does the Proactive Design Alternatives Obligation on Jaylani and Cutting Edge conflict with the Environmental Stewardship principle invoked by Wasser, in the sense that merely offering green alternatives as an add-on service may be ethically insufficient if the baseline traditional design is already documented to cause measurable environmental harm — and does offering alternatives without disclosing the documented risk satisfy or fall short of the engineer's stewardship duty?
question type: principle_tension
generated at time: 2026-02-25T01:26:51.163722
was generated by: ProEthica Case 13 Extraction

Question_3
type: EthicalQuestion
type: NamedIndividual
question number: 3
question text: If the traditional lawn irrigation system design is an ethical expression of engineering work, what can Engineer Jaylani’s firm do to complete the design since Wasser refused?
question type: board_explicit
generated at time: 2026-02-25T01:26:51.162902
was generated by: ProEthica Case 13 Extraction

Question_301
type: EthicalQuestion
type: NamedIndividual
question number: 301
question text: From a deontological perspective, did Engineer Jaylani fulfill a duty to disclose the hydrogeological study's findings about water table depletion to the Resort Development Client, independent of whether the traditional irrigation system design was otherwise permissible?
question type: theoretical
generated at time: 2026-02-25T01:26:51.163840
was generated by: ProEthica Case 13 Extraction

Question_302
type: EthicalQuestion
type: NamedIndividual
question number: 302
question text: From a consequentialist perspective, did the Board's conclusion that the traditional irrigation system design is an ethical expression of engineering work adequately weigh the long-term harm to historically underserved communities in the semi-arid region who depend on the water table that the system risks depleting?
question type: theoretical
generated at time: 2026-02-25T01:26:51.163944
was generated by: ProEthica Case 13 Extraction

Question_303
type: EthicalQuestion
type: NamedIndividual
question number: 303
question text: From a virtue ethics perspective, did Engineer Intern Wasser demonstrate the professional virtue of practical wisdom by choosing outright refusal rather than completing the assigned task while simultaneously advocating for sustainable alternatives, and does the Board's characterization of the refusal as 'extreme' reflect a judgment about the proportionality of that virtue?
question type: theoretical
generated at time: 2026-02-25T01:26:51.164044
was generated by: ProEthica Case 13 Extraction

Question_304
type: EthicalQuestion
type: NamedIndividual
question number: 304
question text: From a deontological perspective, does the NSPE Code's framing of sustainable development adherence as 'encouraged' rather than mandatory create a genuine ethical loophole that permits engineers to proceed with designs that carry documented environmental harm, or does the paramount public welfare duty under Canon I independently impose a binding obligation regardless of the permissive language in Provision III.2.d?
question type: theoretical
generated at time: 2026-02-25T01:26:51.164136
was generated by: ProEthica Case 13 Extraction

Question_401
type: EthicalQuestion
type: NamedIndividual
question number: 401
question text: Would the Board's ethical assessment of Engineer Intern Wasser's refusal have differed if Wasser had first completed the assigned irrigation sketching task and then formally submitted the sustainability memorandum alongside a fully developed sustainable alternative design, rather than refusing the task outright before any design work was performed?
question type: counterfactual
generated at time: 2026-02-25T01:26:51.164212
was generated by: ProEthica Case 13 Extraction

Question_402
type: EthicalQuestion
type: NamedIndividual
question number: 402
question text: If Engineer Jaylani had proactively disclosed the hydrogeological study's water table findings to the Resort Development Client before accepting the irrigation design task, would the client have had a meaningful opportunity to choose a sustainable irrigation alternative, and would that disclosure have changed whether the Board found the acceptance of the task ethical?
question type: counterfactual
generated at time: 2026-02-25T01:26:51.164298
was generated by: ProEthica Case 13 Extraction

Question_403
type: EthicalQuestion
type: NamedIndividual
question number: 403
question text: What if the hydrogeological study had concluded not merely that the proposed irrigation system would lower the water table but that it would render the regional water supply unsafe for surrounding communities — would that escalation of public harm have converted Engineer Jaylani's acceptance of the task from ethical to unethical, and would it have made Wasser's refusal not merely permissible but obligatory?
question type: counterfactual
generated at time: 2026-02-25T01:26:51.164411
was generated by: ProEthica Case 13 Extraction

Question_404
type: EthicalQuestion
type: NamedIndividual
question number: 404
question text: If Cutting Edge Engineering had proactively introduced green irrigation alternatives to the Resort Development Client at the outset of the project — as the Board suggests the firm is positioned to do — and the client had still insisted on the traditional system, would Engineer Jaylani's firm then bear a stronger obligation to decline the irrigation scope or escalate the water table risk concern beyond the client relationship to a regulatory or public authority?
question type: counterfactual
generated at time: 2026-02-25T01:26:51.164490
was generated by: ProEthica Case 13 Extraction

ResolutionPattern_1
type: NamedIndividual
generated at time: 2026-02-25T01:26:51.170825
was generated by: ProEthica Case 13 Extraction

ResolutionPattern_10
type: NamedIndividual
generated at time: 2026-02-25T01:26:51.171181
was generated by: ProEthica Case 13 Extraction

ResolutionPattern_11
type: NamedIndividual
generated at time: 2026-02-25T01:26:51.171235
was generated by: ProEthica Case 13 Extraction

ResolutionPattern_12
type: NamedIndividual
generated at time: 2026-02-25T01:26:51.171266
was generated by: ProEthica Case 13 Extraction

ResolutionPattern_13
type: NamedIndividual
generated at time: 2026-02-25T01:26:51.171310
was generated by: ProEthica Case 13 Extraction

ResolutionPattern_14
type: NamedIndividual
generated at time: 2026-02-25T01:26:51.171341
was generated by: ProEthica Case 13 Extraction

ResolutionPattern_15
type: NamedIndividual
generated at time: 2026-02-25T01:26:51.171387
was generated by: ProEthica Case 13 Extraction

ResolutionPattern_16
type: NamedIndividual
generated at time: 2026-02-25T01:26:51.171442
was generated by: ProEthica Case 13 Extraction

ResolutionPattern_17
type: NamedIndividual
generated at time: 2026-02-25T01:26:51.171507
was generated by: ProEthica Case 13 Extraction

ResolutionPattern_18
type: NamedIndividual
generated at time: 2026-02-25T01:26:51.171548
was generated by: ProEthica Case 13 Extraction

ResolutionPattern_19
type: NamedIndividual
generated at time: 2026-02-25T01:26:51.171593
was generated by: ProEthica Case 13 Extraction

ResolutionPattern_2
type: NamedIndividual
generated at time: 2026-02-25T01:26:51.170893
was generated by: ProEthica Case 13 Extraction

ResolutionPattern_20
type: NamedIndividual
generated at time: 2026-02-25T01:26:51.171669
was generated by: ProEthica Case 13 Extraction

ResolutionPattern_21
type: NamedIndividual
generated at time: 2026-02-25T01:26:51.171748
was generated by: ProEthica Case 13 Extraction

ResolutionPattern_22
type: NamedIndividual
generated at time: 2026-02-25T01:26:51.171784
was generated by: ProEthica Case 13 Extraction

ResolutionPattern_23
type: NamedIndividual
generated at time: 2026-02-25T01:26:51.171853
was generated by: ProEthica Case 13 Extraction

ResolutionPattern_24
type: NamedIndividual
generated at time: 2026-02-25T01:26:51.171894
was generated by: ProEthica Case 13 Extraction

ResolutionPattern_25
type: NamedIndividual
generated at time: 2026-02-25T01:26:51.171945
was generated by: ProEthica Case 13 Extraction

ResolutionPattern_26
type: NamedIndividual
generated at time: 2026-02-25T01:26:51.171988
was generated by: ProEthica Case 13 Extraction

ResolutionPattern_27
type: NamedIndividual
generated at time: 2026-02-25T01:26:51.172028
was generated by: ProEthica Case 13 Extraction

ResolutionPattern_28
type: NamedIndividual
generated at time: 2026-02-25T01:26:51.172066
was generated by: ProEthica Case 13 Extraction

ResolutionPattern_29
type: NamedIndividual
generated at time: 2026-02-25T01:26:51.172114
was generated by: ProEthica Case 13 Extraction

ResolutionPattern_3
type: NamedIndividual
generated at time: 2026-02-25T01:26:51.170943
was generated by: ProEthica Case 13 Extraction

ResolutionPattern_30
type: NamedIndividual
generated at time: 2026-02-25T01:26:51.172155
was generated by: ProEthica Case 13 Extraction

ResolutionPattern_31
type: NamedIndividual
generated at time: 2026-02-25T01:26:51.172204
was generated by: ProEthica Case 13 Extraction

ResolutionPattern_4
type: NamedIndividual
generated at time: 2026-02-25T01:26:51.170974
was generated by: ProEthica Case 13 Extraction

ResolutionPattern_5
type: NamedIndividual
generated at time: 2026-02-25T01:26:51.171003
was generated by: ProEthica Case 13 Extraction

ResolutionPattern_6
type: NamedIndividual
generated at time: 2026-02-25T01:26:51.171033
was generated by: ProEthica Case 13 Extraction

ResolutionPattern_7
type: NamedIndividual
generated at time: 2026-02-25T01:26:51.171060
was generated by: ProEthica Case 13 Extraction

ResolutionPattern_8
type: NamedIndividual
generated at time: 2026-02-25T01:26:51.171087
was generated by: ProEthica Case 13 Extraction

ResolutionPattern_9
type: NamedIndividual
generated at time: 2026-02-25T01:26:51.171146
was generated by: ProEthica Case 13 Extraction

Resort Contract Acceptance
type: NamedIndividual
concept category: Action
generated at time: 2026-02-25T01:11:40.638911
was generated by: ProEthica Case 13 Extraction

Resort Contract Acceptance → Irrigation Sketching Task Assignment
type: NamedIndividual
generated at time: 2026-02-25T01:11:40.639308
was generated by: ProEthica Case 13 Extraction

Resort Development Client Developer Client
type: DeveloperClient
type: NamedIndividual
attributes: {'sector': 'Private resort development', 'location': 'Semi-arid region, southwestern United States'}
caseinvolvement: Private client commissioning a new resort in a semi-arid southwestern US region, for which Cutting Edge Engineering is contracted to perform MEP work including irrigation system design
concept category: Role
confidence: 0.82
discoveredincase: 13
discoveredinpass: 1
discoveredinsection: facts
firstdiscoveredat: 2026-02-25T00:51:06.356763+00:00
firstdiscoveredincase: 13
generatedattime: 2026-02-25T00:51:06.356763+00:00
importance: medium
relationships: {'type': 'client_of', 'target': 'Cutting Edge Engineering'}
relationships: {'type': 'project_owner', 'target': 'Resort Project'}
rolecategory: provider_client
roleclass: Developer Client
sourcetext: a new resort that will be located in a semi-arid region of the southwestern United States
textreferences: a new resort that will be located in a semi-arid region of the southwestern United States
textreferences: under contract to complete the mechanical, electrical, and plumbing work for a new resort
wasattributedto: Case 13 Extraction
generated at time: 2026-02-25T01:11:40.623498
was generated by: ProEthica Case 13 Extraction

Resort Development Client Irrigation Decision Maker
type: ResortDevelopmentClient
type: NamedIndividual
attributes: {'project_type': 'Resort development in semi-arid region', 'decision_authority': 'Final choice over irrigation system approach', 'regulatory_context': 'No zoning or building code restrictions on traditional irrigation'}
caseinvolvement: The resort development client commissioned the multi-discipline project including the irrigation system specification, retains authority to accept or reject sustainable alternatives proposed by Cutting Edge and Wasser, and bears the right to insist on a traditional irrigation system if it is legally and technically permissible.
concept category: Role
confidence: 0.87
discoveredincase: 13
discoveredinpass: 1
discoveredinsection: discussion
firstdiscoveredat: 2026-02-25T00:52:01.154928+00:00
firstdiscoveredincase: 13
generatedattime: 2026-02-25T00:52:01.154928+00:00
importance: medium
relationships: {'type': 'client', 'target': 'Cutting Edge MEP Firm'}
relationships: {'type': 'client', 'target': 'Wasser Engineer Intern'}
relationships: {'type': 'commissioned', 'target': 'Landscape Architect Specifier'}
rolecategory: provider_client
roleclass: Resort Development Client
sourcetext: Should the client refuse and insist upon the traditional irrigation system – which is not illegal, Cutting Edge and Wasser must act as the client's agent and complete the task they accepted and were assigned
textreferences: Should the client refuse and insist upon the traditional irrigation system – which is not illegal, Cutting Edge and Wasser must act as the client's agent and complete the task they accepted and were assigned
textreferences: Suggesting sustainable options will inform the client; refusing to perform the task, or quitting, will not
textreferences: such a project would lie within the space of 'client choice,' similar to how a client might choose (or not) to design and construct its project per green building options that result in LEED certification
wasattributedto: Case 13 Extraction
generated at time: 2026-02-25T01:11:40.625261
was generated by: ProEthica Case 13 Extraction

Resort Project Landscape Architect Specifier
type: LandscapeArchitectSpecifier
type: NamedIndividual
attributes: {'license': 'Landscape Architect (implied)', 'specialty': 'Landscape architecture and irrigation system specification'}
caseinvolvement: Specified a traditional lawn irrigation system for the resort golf course, triggering the sustainability objection from Engineer Intern Wasser
concept category: Role
confidence: 0.85
discoveredincase: 13
discoveredinpass: 1
discoveredinsection: facts
firstdiscoveredat: 2026-02-25T00:51:06.356763+00:00
firstdiscoveredincase: 13
generatedattime: 2026-02-25T00:51:06.356763+00:00
importance: medium
relationships: {'type': 'specification_implemented_by', 'target': 'Cutting Edge Engineering'}
relationships: {'type': 'specifier_for', 'target': 'Resort Development Client'}
rolecategory: provider_client
roleclass: Landscape Architect Specifier
sourcetext: The project's landscape architect specifies a traditional lawn irrigation system for the resort's golf course as part of the project
textreferences: The project's landscape architect specifies a traditional lawn irrigation system for the resort's golf course as part of the project
wasattributedto: Case 13 Extraction
generated at time: 2026-02-25T01:11:40.623315
was generated by: ProEthica Case 13 Extraction

Response to Wasser's Dissent
type: NamedIndividual
concept category: Action
generated at time: 2026-02-25T01:11:40.639065
was generated by: ProEthica Case 13 Extraction

Sustainability Standard Conflict in Irrigation Assignment
type: SustainabilityStandardConflictState
type: NamedIndividual
activeperiod: From Wasser's identification of the sustainability conflict through BER resolution
affectedparties: Cutting Edge Engineering
affectedparties: Engineer Intern Wasser
affectedparties: Landscape architect client
concept category: State
confidence: 0.91
discoveredincase: 13
discoveredinpass: 1
discoveredinsection: discussion
firstdiscoveredat: 2026-02-25T00:52:29.788699+00:00
firstdiscoveredincase: 13
generatedattime: 2026-02-25T00:52:29.788699+00:00
importance: high
sourcetext: This case illustrates the increasing priority and reach of sustainability principles relative to ethical decision-making of professional engineers
stateclass: Sustainability Standard Conflict State
subject: The tension between the traditional irrigation system specification and UN SDG sustainability principles as perceived by Wasser
terminatedby: BER determination that the task is not unethical and that sustainable alternatives should be presented rather than the task refused
textreferences: This case illustrates the increasing priority and reach of sustainability principles relative to ethical decision-making of professional engineers
textreferences: engineers are encouraged to adhere to the principles of sustainable development in order to protect the environment for future generations
textreferences: this case engages the engineering profession's ethical obligation to respond to complex sustainability challenges
triggeringevent: Wasser's assessment that designing a traditional irrigation system conflicts with UN Sustainable Development Goals and NSPE Code Section III.2.d sustainability provisions
urgencylevel: medium
wasattributedto: Case 13 Extraction
generated at time: 2026-02-25T01:11:40.627564
was generated by: ProEthica Case 13 Extraction

Sustainable Development Advocacy Invoked By Wasser Via Formal Memorandum
type: SustainableDevelopmentAdvocacyObligation
type: NamedIndividual
appliedto: MEP firm's contracted scope of work
appliedto: Traditional lawn irrigation system specification
balancingwith: Employer authority over work assignments
balancingwith: Faithful Agent Obligation Within Ethical Limits
concept category: Principle
concreteexpression: Engineer Intern Wasser formally memorialized sustainability objections in a written memorandum to Engineer Jaylani, citing UN Sustainable Development Goals 6, 11, and 15, and NSPE Code of Ethics Professional Obligation III.2.d as the basis for refusing to sketch the irrigation system details
confidence: 0.88
discoveredincase: 13
discoveredinpass: 2
discoveredinsection: facts
firstdiscoveredat: 2026-02-25T00:54:10.925994+00:00
firstdiscoveredincase: 13
generatedattime: 2026-02-25T00:54:10.925994+00:00
importance: high
interpretation: Wasser interpreted the NSPE's 'encouraged to adhere' language as sufficient normative basis to formally object to an assigned task, grounding the objection in both international sustainability frameworks and professional code provisions
invokedby: Engineer Intern Wasser Sustainability-Objecting Engineer Intern
principleclass: Sustainable Development Advocacy Obligation
sourcetext: In a formal memorandum to Jaylani, Wasser argues the proposed lawn irrigation system is not consistent with several United Nations sustainable development goals
tensionresolution: Wasser chose formal documentation over silent compliance or unilateral abandonment, which is the appropriate procedural mechanism for raising sustainability concerns within a professional firm hierarchy
textreferences: Engineers are encouraged to adhere to the principles of sustainable development
textreferences: Goal 11– Make cities and human settlements inclusive, safe, resilient and sustainable
textreferences: Goal 15– Protect, restore, and promote sustainable use of terrestrial ecosystems, sustainably manage forests, combat desertification, and halt and reverse land degradation, and halt biodiversity loss
textreferences: Goal 6– Ensure availability and sustainable management of water and sanitation for all
textreferences: In a formal memorandum to Jaylani, Wasser argues the proposed lawn irrigation system is not consistent with several United Nations sustainable development goals
textreferences: claims the proposed lawn irrigation system does not conform to sustainability principles
wasattributedto: Case 13 Extraction
generated at time: 2026-02-25T01:11:40.628110
was generated by: ProEthica Case 13 Extraction

Sustainable Development Provision Added
type: NamedIndividual
concept category: Event
generated at time: 2026-02-25T01:11:40.639137
was generated by: ProEthica Case 13 Extraction

Sustainable Engineering Design Standard - Water Management
type: SustainableEngineeringDesignStandard
type: NamedIndividual
concept category: Resource
confidence: 0.8
createdby: Professional engineering and sustainable design community
discoveredincase: 13
discoveredinpass: 1
discoveredinsection: discussion
documenttitle: Sustainable Water Management and Green Infrastructure Design Standards
firstdiscoveredat: 2026-02-25T00:52:29.091366+00:00
firstdiscoveredincase: 13
generatedattime: 2026-02-25T00:52:29.091366+00:00
importance: medium
resourceclass: Sustainable Engineering Design Standard
sourcetext: One approach might be 'green' options that intelligently and cost-effectively achieve sustainability goals through such tools as natural resource conservation, integrated water management, and stormwater management.
textreferences: One approach might be 'green' options that intelligently and cost-effectively achieve sustainability goals through such tools as natural resource conservation, integrated water management, and stormwater management.
textreferences: Perhaps the project is a suitable candidate for rainwater harvesting and reuse?
usedby: NSPE Board of Ethical Review to identify the technical pathway for harmonizing faithful agency with sustainable development encouragement
usedincontext: Referenced as the technical knowledge base enabling Wasser to propose sustainable alternatives to traditional irrigation, including rainwater harvesting, integrated water management, and stormwater management as concrete design options that fulfill both client service and sustainability obligations
version: Emerging professional consensus
wasattributedto: Case 13 Extraction
generated at time: 2026-02-25T01:11:40.626597
was generated by: ProEthica Case 13 Extraction

Traditional Irrigation System Specified
type: NamedIndividual
concept category: Event
generated at time: 2026-02-25T01:11:40.639242
was generated by: ProEthica Case 13 Extraction

Traditional Irrigation System Sustainability Conflict
type: SustainabilityStandardConflictState
type: NamedIndividual
activeperiod: From Wasser's initial refusal and formal memorandum through resolution of the specification dispute
affectedparties: Cutting Edge Engineering
affectedparties: Engineer Intern Wasser
affectedparties: Engineer Jaylani
affectedparties: Landscape architect
affectedparties: Regional water table users and communities
affectedparties: Resort client
concept category: State
confidence: 0.9
discoveredincase: 13
discoveredinpass: 1
discoveredinsection: facts
firstdiscoveredat: 2026-02-25T00:51:20.279821+00:00
firstdiscoveredincase: 13
generatedattime: 2026-02-25T00:51:20.279821+00:00
importance: high
sourcetext: Wasser argues the proposed lawn irrigation system is not consistent with several United Nations sustainable development goals including but not limited to Goal 6, Goal 11, and Goal 15
stateclass: Sustainability Standard Conflict State
subject: The landscape architect's specified traditional lawn irrigation system for the resort golf course
terminatedby: Not yet terminated — state is active and unresolved in the facts presented
textreferences: NSPE Code of Ethics Professional Obligation III.2.d, 'Engineers are encouraged to adhere to the principles of sustainable development'
textreferences: Wasser argues the proposed lawn irrigation system is not consistent with several United Nations sustainable development goals including but not limited to Goal 6, Goal 11, and Goal 15
textreferences: Wasser claims the proposed lawn irrigation system does not conform to sustainability principles
triggeringevent: Wasser's formal memorandum to Jaylani alleging the irrigation system conflicts with UN SDGs and NSPE Code III.2.d, supported by a hydrogeological study
urgencylevel: medium
wasattributedto: Case 13 Extraction
generated at time: 2026-02-25T01:11:40.623898
was generated by: ProEthica Case 13 Extraction

UN-SDG-Goal-11-Sustainable-Cities
type: UNSustainableDevelopmentGoalsFramework
type: NamedIndividual
concept category: Resource
confidence: 0.95
createdby: United Nations General Assembly
discoveredincase: 13
discoveredinpass: 1
discoveredinsection: facts
documenttitle: UN Sustainable Development Goal 11 — Make cities and human settlements inclusive, safe, resilient and sustainable
firstdiscoveredat: 2026-02-25T00:50:47.802985+00:00
firstdiscoveredincase: 13
generatedattime: 2026-02-25T00:50:47.802985+00:00
importance: medium
resourceclass: UN Sustainable Development Goals Framework
sourcetext: Goal 11– Make cities and human settlements inclusive, safe, resilient and sustainable
textreferences: Goal 11– Make cities and human settlements inclusive, safe, resilient and sustainable
usedby: Engineer Intern Wasser
usedincontext: Cited by Engineer Intern Wasser in a formal memorandum as a normative benchmark supporting the argument that the proposed irrigation system is inconsistent with sustainable and resilient settlement development
version: UN 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development
wasattributedto: Case 13 Extraction
generated at time: 2026-02-25T01:11:40.622511
was generated by: ProEthica Case 13 Extraction

UN-SDG-Goal-15-Terrestrial-Ecosystems
type: UNSustainableDevelopmentGoalsFramework
type: NamedIndividual
concept category: Resource
confidence: 0.95
createdby: United Nations General Assembly
discoveredincase: 13
discoveredinpass: 1
discoveredinsection: facts
documenttitle: UN Sustainable Development Goal 15 — Protect, restore, and promote sustainable use of terrestrial ecosystems, sustainably manage forests, combat desertification, and halt and reverse land degradation, and halt biodiversity loss
firstdiscoveredat: 2026-02-25T00:50:47.802985+00:00
firstdiscoveredincase: 13
generatedattime: 2026-02-25T00:50:47.802985+00:00
importance: medium
resourceclass: UN Sustainable Development Goals Framework
sourcetext: Goal 15– Protect, restore, and promote sustainable use of terrestrial ecosystems, sustainably manage forests, combat desertification, and halt and reverse land degradation, and halt biodiversity loss
textreferences: Goal 15– Protect, restore, and promote sustainable use of terrestrial ecosystems, sustainably manage forests, combat desertification, and halt and reverse land degradation, and halt biodiversity loss
usedby: Engineer Intern Wasser
usedincontext: Cited by Engineer Intern Wasser in a formal memorandum as a normative benchmark supporting the argument that the proposed irrigation system in a semi-arid region contributes to desertification, land degradation, and biodiversity loss
version: UN 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development
wasattributedto: Case 13 Extraction
generated at time: 2026-02-25T01:11:40.622694
was generated by: ProEthica Case 13 Extraction

UN-SDG-Goal-6-Water-Sanitation
type: UNSustainableDevelopmentGoalsFramework
type: NamedIndividual
concept category: Resource
confidence: 0.95
createdby: United Nations General Assembly
discoveredincase: 13
discoveredinpass: 1
discoveredinsection: facts
documenttitle: UN Sustainable Development Goal 6 — Ensure availability and sustainable management of water and sanitation for all
firstdiscoveredat: 2026-02-25T00:50:47.802985+00:00
firstdiscoveredincase: 13
generatedattime: 2026-02-25T00:50:47.802985+00:00
importance: high
resourceclass: UN Sustainable Development Goals Framework
sourcetext: Wasser argues the proposed lawn irrigation system is not consistent with several United Nations sustainable development goals including but not limited to Goal 6– Ensure availability and sustainable management of water and sanitation for all
textreferences: Wasser argues the proposed lawn irrigation system is not consistent with several United Nations sustainable development goals including but not limited to Goal 6– Ensure availability and sustainable management of water and sanitation for all
usedby: Engineer Intern Wasser
usedincontext: Cited by Engineer Intern Wasser in a formal memorandum as a normative benchmark demonstrating that the proposed traditional lawn irrigation system is inconsistent with internationally recognized sustainable water management principles
version: UN 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development
wasattributedto: Case 13 Extraction
generated at time: 2026-02-25T01:11:40.622384
was generated by: ProEthica Case 13 Extraction

Undisclosed Water Table Risk to Client
type: UndisclosedRiskState
type: NamedIndividual
activeperiod: From Wasser's identification of the hydrogeological study through Jaylani's decision about client communication
affectedparties: Engineer Jaylani
affectedparties: Landscape architect
affectedparties: Regional water users
affectedparties: Resort client
concept category: State
confidence: 0.85
discoveredincase: 13
discoveredinpass: 1
discoveredinsection: facts
firstdiscoveredat: 2026-02-25T00:51:20.279821+00:00
firstdiscoveredincase: 13
generatedattime: 2026-02-25T00:51:20.279821+00:00
importance: high
sourcetext: Wasser cites a recent hydrogeological study indicating that the proposed use would lower the water table
stateclass: Undisclosed Risk State
subject: The hydrogeologically documented risk of water table lowering has been raised internally but not yet communicated to the resort client or landscape architect
terminatedby: Jaylani communicates the risk to the client and landscape architect, or client is otherwise informed
textreferences: Engineer Jaylani is a firm principal for Cutting Edge Engineering and is under contract
textreferences: Wasser cites a recent hydrogeological study indicating that the proposed use would lower the water table
triggeringevent: Wasser's citation of the hydrogeological study in the formal memorandum to Jaylani, creating a known risk that has not yet been disclosed to the client
urgencylevel: medium
wasattributedto: Case 13 Extraction
generated at time: 2026-02-25T01:11:40.624543
was generated by: ProEthica Case 13 Extraction

Wasser Client Education Through Sustainable Options Constraint Instance
type: ClientEducationThroughSustainableOptionsConstraint
type: NamedIndividual
casecontext: Wasser refused to sketch irrigation details rather than proposing sustainable alternatives such as drip irrigation or rainwater harvesting systems, which would have fulfilled the sustainability advocacy obligation without breaching the faithful agent duty.
concept category: Constraint
confidence: 0.91
constrainedentity: Engineer Intern Wasser
constraintclass: Client Education Through Sustainable Options Constraint
constraintstatement: Engineer Intern Wasser was constrained from refusing to perform the irrigation system design task as the primary means of fulfilling sustainability obligations — the obligation to adhere to sustainable development principles required Wasser to present sustainable alternatives to the supervising engineer and client rather than refusing to perform the assigned work.
discoveredincase: 13
discoveredinpass: 2
discoveredinsection: facts
firstdiscoveredat: 2026-02-25T00:57:45.526754+00:00
firstdiscoveredincase: 13
generatedattime: 2026-02-25T00:57:45.526754+00:00
importance: high
severity: high
source: NSPE Code of Ethics Section III.2.d; BER Case 22-10
sourcetext: Wasser refuses to perform the task and says the traditional irrigation system will waste fresh water
temporalscope: At the time of task assignment and throughout the project engagement
textreferences: Engineers are encouraged to adhere to the principles of sustainable development
textreferences: Wasser refuses to perform the task and says the traditional irrigation system will waste fresh water
textreferences: asserts that Cutting Edge should not do this kind of work
wasattributedto: Case 13 Extraction
generated at time: 2026-02-25T01:11:40.631376
was generated by: ProEthica Case 13 Extraction

Wasser Complete Design Alternative Presentation Sustainable Irrigation
type: CompleteDesignAlternativePresentationConstraint
type: NamedIndividual
casecontext: Wasser's formal memorandum identified sustainability conflicts but did not present complete sustainable alternative design options with comparative analysis, which would have been the appropriate professional response to the sustainability concern.
concept category: Constraint
confidence: 0.83
constrainedentity: Engineer Intern Wasser
constraintclass: Complete Design Alternative Presentation Constraint
constraintstatement: Engineer Intern Wasser was constrained, in presenting sustainability objections to Engineer Jaylani, to present sustainable alternative design approaches — such as drip irrigation, rainwater harvesting, or greywater reuse systems — completely and objectively, including their costs, feasibility in the semi-arid context, and performance characteristics, rather than simply refusing to perform the assigned task without proposing workable alternatives.
discoveredincase: 13
discoveredinpass: 2
discoveredinsection: facts
firstdiscoveredat: 2026-02-25T00:57:45.526754+00:00
firstdiscoveredincase: 13
generatedattime: 2026-02-25T00:57:45.526754+00:00
importance: medium
severity: medium
source: NSPE Code of Ethics Section II.3.a; BER Case 22-10; BER Case 21-7
sourcetext: In a formal memorandum to Jaylani, Wasser argues the proposed lawn irrigation system is not consistent with several United Nations sustainable development goals
temporalscope: At the time of formal memorandum submission and task refusal
textreferences: In a formal memorandum to Jaylani, Wasser argues the proposed lawn irrigation system is not consistent with several United Nations sustainable development goals
textreferences: Wasser refuses to perform the task
wasattributedto: Case 13 Extraction
generated at time: 2026-02-25T01:11:40.632500
was generated by: ProEthica Case 13 Extraction

Wasser Cutting Edge Client Choice Space Permissible Design Constraint
type: EncouragedvsMandatoryCodeProvisionScopeConstraint
type: NamedIndividual
casecontext: The BER found that because the community has no zoning rules, building code provisions, or other restrictions preventing installation of an irrigation system, providing provisions for a traditional lawn sprinkler system would be technically and legally permissible and not unethical — placing it within the space of client choice similar to LEED certification decisions
concept category: Constraint
confidence: 0.9
constrainedentity: Engineer Intern Wasser and Cutting Edge Engineering
constraintclass: Encouraged vs Mandatory Code Provision Scope Constraint
constraintstatement: Wasser and Cutting Edge are constrained from treating the encouraged sustainable development provision (Section III.2.d) as a mandatory basis for refusing to design a traditional irrigation system that falls within the client's permissible design choice space — analogous to a client's choice not to pursue LEED certification — establishing that the absence of zoning, building code, or other legal restrictions places the irrigation system design within the space of client choice that engineers must respect.
discoveredincase: 13
discoveredinpass: 2
discoveredinsection: discussion
firstdiscoveredat: 2026-02-25T01:04:03.451495+00:00
firstdiscoveredincase: 13
generatedattime: 2026-02-25T01:04:03.451495+00:00
importance: high
severity: high
source: NSPE Code Section III.2.d; BER analysis of present case
sourcetext: Based on the facts of the case, the community has no zoning rules, building code provisions, or other restrictions to prevent installation of an irrigation system.
temporalscope: Throughout the project engagement and Wasser's refusal period
textreferences: Based on the facts of the case, the community has no zoning rules, building code provisions, or other restrictions to prevent installation of an irrigation system.
textreferences: Cutting Edge providing provisions for a traditional lawn sprinkler system would be technically and legally permissible, and not unethical.
textreferences: This interpretation is fully consistent with NSPE Code Section III.2.d where engineers are encouraged to adhere to the principles of sustainable development.
textreferences: such a project would lie within the space of 'client choice,' similar to how a client might choose (or not) to design and construct its project per green building options that result in LEED certification.
wasattributedto: Case 13 Extraction
generated at time: 2026-02-25T01:11:40.636488
was generated by: ProEthica Case 13 Extraction

Wasser Cutting Edge Client Insistence Agent Completion Irrigation Task
type: ClientEducationThroughSustainableOptionsConstraint
type: NamedIndividual
casecontext: Engineer Intern Wasser refused to sketch irrigation system details for a resort golf course traditional lawn irrigation system specified by the landscape architect; Cutting Edge accepted the contract with that specification; the BER found that after presenting sustainable alternatives, completion of the assigned task is required if the client insists
concept category: Constraint
confidence: 0.88
constrainedentity: Engineer Intern Wasser and Cutting Edge Engineering
constraintclass: Client Education Through Sustainable Options Constraint
constraintstatement: Once Wasser and Cutting Edge present sustainable irrigation alternatives to the resort client and the client insists upon the traditional system, Wasser and Cutting Edge are constrained to complete the accepted and assigned irrigation design task as faithful agents, and may not continue to refuse performance on sustainability grounds after the client has exercised informed decision-making authority over a technically and legally permissible design choice.
discoveredincase: 13
discoveredinpass: 2
discoveredinsection: discussion
firstdiscoveredat: 2026-02-25T01:04:03.451495+00:00
firstdiscoveredincase: 13
generatedattime: 2026-02-25T01:04:03.451495+00:00
importance: high
severity: high
source: NSPE Code Section I.4 (faithful agent obligation); BER Case analysis of present case
sourcetext: Should the client refuse and insist upon the traditional irrigation system – which is not illegal, Cutting Edge and Wasser must act as the client's agent and complete the task they accepted and were assigned.
temporalscope: Following client presentation of sustainable alternatives and client insistence on traditional system
textreferences: Cutting Edge (and Wasser) should follow through with the task they agreed to perform.
textreferences: Should the client refuse and insist upon the traditional irrigation system – which is not illegal, Cutting Edge and Wasser must act as the client's agent and complete the task they accepted and were assigned.
wasattributedto: Case 13 Extraction
generated at time: 2026-02-25T01:11:40.635545
was generated by: ProEthica Case 13 Extraction

Wasser Cutting Edge Comprehensive Code Integration Faithful Agent Sustainability
type: ComprehensiveCodeIntegrationConstraint
type: NamedIndividual
casecontext: Engineer Intern Wasser and Cutting Edge Engineering faced apparent conflict between faithful agent obligation and sustainable development encouragement; the BER found that endeavoring to integrate all code provisions is critical and that a solution honoring both obligations was available through sustainable alternative presentation
concept category: Constraint
confidence: 0.86
constrainedentity: Engineer Intern Wasser and Cutting Edge Engineering
constraintclass: Comprehensive Code Integration Constraint
constraintstatement: Wasser and Cutting Edge are constrained from concluding that the faithful agent obligation (Section I.4) automatically supersedes the sustainable development encouragement (Section III.2.d) without first exploring whether an integrative solution — such as presenting sustainable irrigation alternatives — exists that honors both obligations simultaneously, prohibiting simplistic hierarchical resolution of the apparent code conflict.
discoveredincase: 13
discoveredinpass: 2
discoveredinsection: discussion
firstdiscoveredat: 2026-02-25T01:04:03.451495+00:00
firstdiscoveredincase: 13
generatedattime: 2026-02-25T01:04:03.451495+00:00
importance: high
severity: medium
source: NSPE Code Sections I.4 and III.2.d; BER analysis of present case
sourcetext: It is not enough to simply look at the situation and conclude an engineer's obligation to the client/employer takes precedence over the sustainable development principles.
temporalscope: Throughout the project engagement and ethical tension resolution process
textreferences: It is not enough to simply look at the situation and conclude an engineer's obligation to the client/employer takes precedence over the sustainable development principles.
textreferences: This case helps to illustrate that endeavoring to integrate all code of ethics provisions when developing a solution is critical.
wasattributedto: Case 13 Extraction
generated at time: 2026-02-25T01:11:40.636033
was generated by: ProEthica Case 13 Extraction

Wasser Cutting Edge Sustainable Alternative Advocacy Ethical Tension Resolution
type: ClientEducationThroughSustainableOptionsConstraint
type: NamedIndividual
casecontext: Engineer Intern Wasser refused to perform the irrigation design task; the BER found that the preferred ethical resolution pathway was to introduce sustainable alternatives to the client rather than refuse the task, leveraging Wasser's education and passionate beliefs about sustainable development
concept category: Constraint
confidence: 0.91
constrainedentity: Engineer Intern Wasser and Cutting Edge Engineering
constraintclass: Client Education Through Sustainable Options Constraint
constraintstatement: Wasser and Cutting Edge are constrained to resolve the tension between the faithful agent obligation and the sustainable development encouragement by introducing and presenting sustainable irrigation alternatives to the client — such as rainwater harvesting, integrated water management, and stormwater management — rather than through task refusal or project withdrawal, establishing that the sustainability advocacy obligation is fulfilled through technical expertise and client education.
discoveredincase: 13
discoveredinpass: 2
discoveredinsection: discussion
firstdiscoveredat: 2026-02-25T01:04:03.451495+00:00
firstdiscoveredincase: 13
generatedattime: 2026-02-25T01:04:03.451495+00:00
importance: high
severity: high
source: NSPE Code Sections I.4 and III.2.d; BER analysis of present case
sourcetext: By introducing and offering sustainable alternatives to a traditional lawn irrigation system, Wasser and Cutting Edge can harmonize code provisions I.4 and III.2.d.
temporalscope: Prior to and during client presentation of design alternatives for the resort irrigation system
textreferences: By introducing and offering sustainable alternatives to a traditional lawn irrigation system, Wasser and Cutting Edge can harmonize code provisions I.4 and III.2.d.
textreferences: Suggesting sustainable options for an irrigation system as a means to resolving the ethical tension presented in this case is a path the BER endorses.
textreferences: given Wasser's education, knowledge and passionate beliefs about sustainable development, he seems more likely to fulfill his ethical obligations and aspirations – not by refusing the task, but by performing the task with technical expertise, mature leadership and dedicated service to the client's needs.
wasattributedto: Case 13 Extraction
generated at time: 2026-02-25T01:11:40.635865
was generated by: ProEthica Case 13 Extraction

Wasser Encouraged Provision Non-Mandatory Refusal Constraint
type: EncouragedvsMandatoryCodeProvisionScopeConstraint
type: NamedIndividual
casecontext: Engineer Intern Wasser refused to sketch irrigation system details and submitted a formal memorandum citing NSPE Code III.2.d as authority for the refusal, despite the provision being encouraged rather than mandatory.
concept category: Constraint
confidence: 0.88
constrainedentity: Engineer Intern Wasser
constraintclass: Encouraged vs Mandatory Code Provision Scope Constraint
constraintstatement: Engineer Intern Wasser was constrained from treating NSPE Code Section III.2.d — an encouraged, non-mandatory provision — as a sufficient normative basis for outright refusal to perform the assigned irrigation system sketching task, because the provision's encouraged status limits its capacity to ground a mandatory professional obligation to refuse.
discoveredincase: 13
discoveredinpass: 2
discoveredinsection: facts
firstdiscoveredat: 2026-02-25T00:57:45.526754+00:00
firstdiscoveredincase: 13
generatedattime: 2026-02-25T00:57:45.526754+00:00
importance: high
severity: high
source: NSPE Code of Ethics Section III.2.d; BER Case 22-10
sourcetext: Engineers are encouraged to adhere to the principles of sustainable development
temporalscope: At the time of task assignment and formal memorandum submission
textreferences: Engineers are encouraged to adhere to the principles of sustainable development
textreferences: Wasser points to NSPE Code of Ethics Professional Obligation III.2.d
textreferences: Wasser refuses to perform the task
wasattributedto: Case 13 Extraction
generated at time: 2026-02-25T01:11:40.631237
was generated by: ProEthica Case 13 Extraction

Wasser Engineer Intern Dissent Calibration Resort Irrigation
type: EngineerInternDissentCalibrationCapability
type: NamedIndividual
capabilityclass: Engineer Intern Dissent Calibration Capability
capabilitystatement: Engineer Intern Wasser demonstrated limited dissent calibration capability — correctly identifying a sustainability concern warranting objection but incorrectly calibrating the response as task refusal rather than the more proportionate and effective path of performing the task while proposing sustainable alternatives
casecontext: BER found Wasser's refusal was permissible but not obligatory, and identified the alternative path of performing the task with sustainable advisory as more likely to achieve ethical objectives
concept category: Capability
confidence: 0.86
demonstratedthrough: Wasser's refusal to sketch irrigation system details, which the BER found was ethically permissible as personal conviction but not ethically obligatory, and not the optimal path to achieving sustainability objectives
discoveredincase: 13
discoveredinpass: 2
discoveredinsection: discussion
firstdiscoveredat: 2026-02-25T01:04:18.192098+00:00
firstdiscoveredincase: 13
generatedattime: 2026-02-25T01:04:18.192098+00:00
importance: high
possessedby: Engineer Intern Wasser
proficiencylevel: basic
sourcetext: As a matter of personal conviction, Wasser can dissent and not perform the task (i.e., dissent is ethically permissible), but if Cutting Edge's position does not align with Wasser's view, this would create significant career issues for Wasser.
textreferences: As a matter of personal conviction, Wasser can dissent and not perform the task (i.e., dissent is ethically permissible), but if Cutting Edge's position does not align with Wasser's view, this would create significant career issues for Wasser.
textreferences: Suggesting sustainable options will inform the client; refusing to perform the task, or quitting, will not.
textreferences: refusal to perform the design cannot be viewed as ethically obligatory.
wasattributedto: Case 13 Extraction
generated at time: 2026-02-25T01:11:40.637268
was generated by: ProEthica Case 13 Extraction

Wasser Engineer Intern Formal Objection Formulation Capability Instance
type: EngineerInternFormalObjectionFormulationCapability
type: NamedIndividual
capabilityclass: Engineer Intern Formal Objection Formulation Capability
capabilitystatement: Engineer Intern Wasser demonstrated capability to formulate and communicate a formal professional objection through a written memorandum citing specific normative frameworks and technical evidence, channeled through appropriate supervisory channels
casecontext: Wasser formulated the formal objection after being assigned the irrigation system sketching task, choosing to document concerns in writing rather than simply refusing or complying without objection
concept category: Capability
confidence: 0.87
demonstratedthrough: Preparation and submission of a formal memorandum to Engineer Jaylani documenting sustainability objections with citations to UN SDGs, NSPE Code III.2.d, and a hydrogeological study
discoveredincase: 13
discoveredinpass: 2
discoveredinsection: facts
firstdiscoveredat: 2026-02-25T00:57:55.537499+00:00
firstdiscoveredincase: 13
generatedattime: 2026-02-25T00:57:55.537499+00:00
importance: high
possessedby: Engineer Intern Wasser
proficiencylevel: intermediate
sourcetext: In a formal memorandum to Jaylani, Wasser argues the proposed lawn irrigation system is not consistent with several United Nations sustainable development goals
textreferences: In a formal memorandum to Jaylani, Wasser argues the proposed lawn irrigation system is not consistent with several United Nations sustainable development goals
textreferences: Wasser refuses to perform the task and says the traditional irrigation system will waste fresh water
wasattributedto: Case 13 Extraction
generated at time: 2026-02-25T01:11:40.633842
was generated by: ProEthica Case 13 Extraction

Wasser Environmental Risk Escalation Water Table Hydrogeological Study
type: EnvironmentalRiskEscalationBeyondScopeObligation
type: NamedIndividual
casecontext: The landscape architect specified a traditional lawn irrigation system; Wasser identified a hydrogeological study showing the proposed water use would lower the water table, posing a public welfare risk in a semi-arid region, and escalated this concern to Jaylani through a formal memorandum.
compliancestatus: met
concept category: Obligation
confidence: 0.9
discoveredincase: 13
discoveredinpass: 2
discoveredinsection: facts
firstdiscoveredat: 2026-02-25T00:56:04.058400+00:00
firstdiscoveredincase: 13
generatedattime: 2026-02-25T00:56:04.058400+00:00
importance: high
obligatedparty: Engineer Intern Wasser
obligationclass: Environmental Risk Escalation Beyond Scope Obligation
obligationstatement: Engineer Intern Wasser was obligated to escalate the credible environmental risk identified in the hydrogeological study — that the proposed irrigation system would lower the water table in a semi-arid region — to Engineer Jaylani, even though the irrigation specification originated from the landscape architect outside Wasser's direct scope of work.
sourcetext: Wasser refuses to perform the task and says the traditional irrigation system will waste fresh water, cites a recent hydrogeological study indicating that the proposed use would lower the water table
temporalscope: Upon discovery of the hydrogeological study findings and assignment of the irrigation sketching task
textreferences: Wasser refuses to perform the task and says the traditional irrigation system will waste fresh water, cites a recent hydrogeological study indicating that the proposed use would lower the water table
textreferences: cites a recent hydrogeological study indicating that the proposed use would lower the water table
wasattributedto: Case 13 Extraction
generated at time: 2026-02-25T01:11:40.629683
was generated by: ProEthica Case 13 Extraction

Wasser Fact-Grounded Hydrogeological Study Sustainability Objection Constraint
type: Fact-GroundedOpinionConstraint
type: NamedIndividual
casecontext: Engineer Intern Wasser cited a hydrogeological study in the formal memorandum to Principal Jaylani as empirical evidence supporting the sustainability objection to the traditional irrigation system; the BER's analysis of BER Case 07-6 established that engineers must include all relevant and pertinent information in professional reports and ground opinions in established facts
concept category: Constraint
confidence: 0.85
constrainedentity: Engineer Intern Wasser
constraintclass: Fact-Grounded Opinion Constraint
constraintstatement: Wasser is constrained to ground sustainability objections in established technical facts — specifically the hydrogeological study documenting water table risk — rather than expressing sustainability concerns as unverified personal preferences, prohibiting the presentation of sustainability objections without supporting technical evidence.
discoveredincase: 13
discoveredinpass: 2
discoveredinsection: discussion
firstdiscoveredat: 2026-02-25T01:04:03.451495+00:00
firstdiscoveredincase: 13
generatedattime: 2026-02-25T01:04:03.451495+00:00
importance: medium
severity: medium
source: NSPE Code Section II.3.a (objectivity and truthfulness); BER Case 07-6
sourcetext: under NSPE Code Section II.3.a., engineers have an obligation to be objective and truthful in professional reports, statements, or testimony and include all relevant and pertinent information in such reports.
temporalscope: Throughout the preparation and submission of the formal memorandum to Engineer Jaylani
textreferences: The BER unanimously found it was unethical for Engineer A not to include information about a threat to a bird species in a written report about wetlands development.
textreferences: under NSPE Code Section II.3.a., engineers have an obligation to be objective and truthful in professional reports, statements, or testimony and include all relevant and pertinent information in such reports.
wasattributedto: Case 13 Extraction
generated at time: 2026-02-25T01:11:40.636341
was generated by: ProEthica Case 13 Extraction

Wasser Fact-Grounded Opinion Hydrogeological Study Constraint
type: Fact-GroundedOpinionConstraint
type: NamedIndividual
casecontext: Wasser cited the hydrogeological study as empirical support for the water table risk claim, which satisfies the fact-grounded opinion requirement for that specific claim. However, Wasser's broader assertion that the firm should not do this kind of work extended beyond the factual basis of the study.
concept category: Constraint
confidence: 0.87
constrainedentity: Engineer Intern Wasser
constraintclass: Fact-Grounded Opinion Constraint
constraintstatement: Engineer Intern Wasser was constrained to ground their sustainability objection and environmental risk claims in established facts and completed professional analysis — specifically the hydrogeological study — rather than in personal preference or unverified assertions, and was constrained from overstating the normative authority of the UN SDGs as binding professional obligations.
discoveredincase: 13
discoveredinpass: 2
discoveredinsection: facts
firstdiscoveredat: 2026-02-25T00:57:45.526754+00:00
firstdiscoveredincase: 13
generatedattime: 2026-02-25T00:57:45.526754+00:00
importance: medium
severity: medium
source: NSPE Code of Ethics Section II.3.a; BER Case 07-6
sourcetext: cites a recent hydrogeological study indicating that the proposed use would lower the water table
temporalscope: At the time of formal memorandum submission to Engineer Jaylani
textreferences: In a formal memorandum to Jaylani, Wasser argues the proposed lawn irrigation system is not consistent with several United Nations sustainable development goals
textreferences: cites a recent hydrogeological study indicating that the proposed use would lower the water table
wasattributedto: Case 13 Extraction
generated at time: 2026-02-25T01:11:40.631865
was generated by: ProEthica Case 13 Extraction

Wasser Fact-Grounded Technical Opinion Capability Instance
type: Fact-OpinionThresholdDiscriminationCapability
type: NamedIndividual
capabilityclass: Fact-Opinion Threshold Discrimination Capability
capabilitystatement: Engineer Intern Wasser demonstrated capability to ground the sustainability objection in established technical facts — specifically the hydrogeological study — rather than mere personal opinion, correctly calibrating the objection to confirmed technical evidence
casecontext: Wasser grounded the formal objection in the hydrogeological study findings when preparing the memorandum to Engineer Jaylani
concept category: Capability
confidence: 0.85
demonstratedthrough: Citation of a completed hydrogeological study as the factual basis for the water table lowering risk claim, distinguishing this from unsupported personal sustainability preferences
discoveredincase: 13
discoveredinpass: 2
discoveredinsection: facts
firstdiscoveredat: 2026-02-25T00:57:55.537499+00:00
firstdiscoveredincase: 13
generatedattime: 2026-02-25T00:57:55.537499+00:00
importance: high
possessedby: Engineer Intern Wasser
proficiencylevel: intermediate
sourcetext: cites a recent hydrogeological study indicating that the proposed use would lower the water table
textreferences: Engineer Intern Wasser was obligated to ground their sustainability objection in established facts and completed professional analysis — specifically the hydrogeological study
textreferences: cites a recent hydrogeological study indicating that the proposed use would lower the water table
wasattributedto: Case 13 Extraction
generated at time: 2026-02-25T01:11:40.634018
was generated by: ProEthica Case 13 Extraction

Wasser Fact-Grounded Technical Opinion Hydrogeological Study Citation
type: Fact-GroundedTechnicalOpinionObligation
type: NamedIndividual
casecontext: Wasser cited a specific hydrogeological study as the technical basis for the sustainability objection, grounding the opinion in factual evidence rather than unsupported assertion; this fulfilled the fact-grounded technical opinion obligation.
compliancestatus: met
concept category: Obligation
confidence: 0.85
discoveredincase: 13
discoveredinpass: 2
discoveredinsection: facts
firstdiscoveredat: 2026-02-25T00:56:04.058400+00:00
firstdiscoveredincase: 13
generatedattime: 2026-02-25T00:56:04.058400+00:00
importance: medium
obligatedparty: Engineer Intern Wasser
obligationclass: Fact-Grounded Technical Opinion Obligation
obligationstatement: Engineer Intern Wasser was obligated to ground their sustainability objection in established facts and completed professional analysis — specifically the hydrogeological study — rather than expressing opinions based solely on general sustainability preferences, and to include all relevant and pertinent technical information in the formal memorandum to Engineer Jaylani.
sourcetext: cites a recent hydrogeological study indicating that the proposed use would lower the water table
temporalscope: At the time of preparing and submitting the formal memorandum to Engineer Jaylani
textreferences: In a formal memorandum to Jaylani, Wasser argues the proposed lawn irrigation system is not consistent with several United Nations sustainable development goals
textreferences: cites a recent hydrogeological study indicating that the proposed use would lower the water table
wasattributedto: Case 13 Extraction
generated at time: 2026-02-25T01:11:40.630935
was generated by: ProEthica Case 13 Extraction

Wasser Faithful Agent Sustainability Harmonization
type: FaithfulAgentSustainabilityHarmonizationCapability
type: NamedIndividual
capabilityclass: Faithful Agent Sustainability Harmonization Capability
capabilitystatement: Engineer Intern Wasser possessed, but did not fully exercise, the capability to harmonize faithful agent obligations with sustainability encouragements — initially treating them as irreconcilable rather than identifying an integrative path
casecontext: Wasser objected to the traditional irrigation system assignment on sustainability grounds but did not initially identify the path of performing the task while simultaneously proposing sustainable alternatives to the client
concept category: Capability
confidence: 0.85
demonstratedthrough: Wasser's refusal to perform the irrigation task reflected awareness of the tension but insufficient capability to identify the harmonizing solution of proposing sustainable alternatives while completing the assigned work
discoveredincase: 13
discoveredinpass: 2
discoveredinsection: discussion
firstdiscoveredat: 2026-02-25T01:04:18.192098+00:00
firstdiscoveredincase: 13
generatedattime: 2026-02-25T01:04:18.192098+00:00
importance: high
possessedby: Engineer Intern Wasser
proficiencylevel: basic
sourcetext: Wasser has an ethical obligation to act as a faithful agent to his employer, while simultaneously upholding the Code's ethical encouragement to adhere to sustainability principles.
textreferences: Wasser has an ethical obligation to act as a faithful agent to his employer, while simultaneously upholding the Code's ethical encouragement to adhere to sustainability principles.
textreferences: he seems more likely to fulfill his ethical obligations and aspirations – not by refusing the task, but by performing the task with technical expertise, mature leadership and dedicated service to the client's needs.
wasattributedto: Case 13 Extraction
generated at time: 2026-02-25T01:11:40.636973
was generated by: ProEthica Case 13 Extraction

Wasser Hydrogeological Risk Identification Capability Instance
type: HydrogeologicalRiskIdentificationCapability
type: NamedIndividual
capabilityclass: Hydrogeological Risk Identification Capability
capabilitystatement: Engineer Intern Wasser demonstrated capability to identify and apply hydrogeological study findings as credible technical evidence of environmental risk posed by the proposed irrigation system
casecontext: Wasser identified and cited hydrogeological evidence when formulating the formal objection to the traditional irrigation system specification in a semi-arid region
concept category: Capability
confidence: 0.87
demonstratedthrough: Citation of a recent hydrogeological study indicating that the proposed irrigation use would lower the water table as technical support for the sustainability objection
discoveredincase: 13
discoveredinpass: 2
discoveredinsection: facts
firstdiscoveredat: 2026-02-25T00:57:55.537499+00:00
firstdiscoveredincase: 13
generatedattime: 2026-02-25T00:57:55.537499+00:00
importance: high
possessedby: Engineer Intern Wasser
proficiencylevel: intermediate
sourcetext: cites a recent hydrogeological study indicating that the proposed use would lower the water table
textreferences: cites a recent hydrogeological study indicating that the proposed use would lower the water table
wasattributedto: Case 13 Extraction
generated at time: 2026-02-25T01:11:40.633505
was generated by: ProEthica Case 13 Extraction

Wasser Interdisciplinary Scope Boundary Navigation Capability Instance
type: InterdisciplinaryScopeBoundaryNavigationCapability
type: NamedIndividual
capabilityclass: Interdisciplinary Scope Boundary Navigation Capability
capabilitystatement: Engineer Intern Wasser demonstrated partial capability to navigate interdisciplinary scope boundaries by channeling the objection to the landscape architect's specification through the supervisory channel (Engineer Jaylani) rather than directly challenging the landscape architect
casecontext: Wasser's objection concerned a specification originating from the landscape architect, and the formal memorandum was appropriately directed to the supervising engineer rather than the landscape architect directly
concept category: Capability
confidence: 0.82
demonstratedthrough: Directing the formal memorandum to Engineer Jaylani rather than directly to the landscape architect, respecting the supervisory chain while raising concerns about a cross-disciplinary specification
discoveredincase: 13
discoveredinpass: 2
discoveredinsection: facts
firstdiscoveredat: 2026-02-25T00:57:55.537499+00:00
firstdiscoveredincase: 13
generatedattime: 2026-02-25T00:57:55.537499+00:00
importance: medium
possessedby: Engineer Intern Wasser
proficiencylevel: basic
sourcetext: The project's landscape architect specifies a traditional lawn irrigation system for the resort's golf course as part of the project
textreferences: In a formal memorandum to Jaylani, Wasser argues the proposed lawn irrigation system is not consistent with several United Nations sustainable development goals
textreferences: The project's landscape architect specifies a traditional lawn irrigation system for the resort's golf course as part of the project
wasattributedto: Case 13 Extraction
generated at time: 2026-02-25T01:11:40.634181
was generated by: ProEthica Case 13 Extraction

Wasser Interdisciplinary Scope Boundary Respect Landscape Architect Specification
type: InterdisciplinaryScopeBoundaryRespectinEnvironmentalObjectionObligation
type: NamedIndividual
casecontext: The landscape architect specified the traditional lawn irrigation system within their professional domain; Wasser objected on sustainability grounds and refused to implement the specification, raising the question of whether the refusal appropriately respected the landscape architect's professional scope while still fulfilling the environmental risk disclosure duty.
compliancestatus: partial
concept category: Obligation
confidence: 0.77
discoveredincase: 13
discoveredinpass: 2
discoveredinsection: facts
firstdiscoveredat: 2026-02-25T00:56:04.058400+00:00
firstdiscoveredincase: 13
generatedattime: 2026-02-25T00:56:04.058400+00:00
importance: medium
obligatedparty: Engineer Intern Wasser
obligationclass: Interdisciplinary Scope Boundary Respect in Environmental Objection Obligation
obligationstatement: Engineer Intern Wasser was obligated to respect the landscape architect's professional authority over the irrigation specification by channeling the sustainability objection through Engineer Jaylani rather than treating the objection as a unilateral authority to override the landscape architect's specification, while still fulfilling the duty to formally communicate the identified environmental risks.
sourcetext: The project's landscape architect specifies a traditional lawn irrigation system for the resort's golf course as part of the project
temporalscope: At the time of assignment of the irrigation sketching task
textreferences: In a formal memorandum to Jaylani, Wasser argues the proposed lawn irrigation system is not consistent with several United Nations sustainable development goals
textreferences: The project's landscape architect specifies a traditional lawn irrigation system for the resort's golf course as part of the project
textreferences: Wasser refuses to perform the task
wasattributedto: Case 13 Extraction
generated at time: 2026-02-25T01:11:40.630175
was generated by: ProEthica Case 13 Extraction

Wasser Interdisciplinary Specification Authority Deference Landscape Architect
type: InterdisciplinarySpecificationAuthorityDeferenceConstraint
type: NamedIndividual
casecontext: The landscape architect specified the traditional lawn irrigation system as part of the project. Wasser's objection was directed at the specification itself rather than channeled through the supervising engineer to the landscape architect through appropriate interdisciplinary coordination.
concept category: Constraint
confidence: 0.84
constrainedentity: Engineer Intern Wasser
constraintclass: Interdisciplinary Specification Authority Deference Constraint
constraintstatement: Engineer Intern Wasser was constrained from treating the landscape architect's traditional irrigation specification as subject to unilateral override or as a basis for refusing to execute the assigned MEP-adjacent task, because the landscape architect held legitimate professional authority over the irrigation specification within their own scope of practice.
discoveredincase: 13
discoveredinpass: 2
discoveredinsection: facts
firstdiscoveredat: 2026-02-25T00:57:45.526754+00:00
firstdiscoveredincase: 13
generatedattime: 2026-02-25T00:57:45.526754+00:00
importance: medium
severity: medium
source: NSPE Code of Ethics; interdisciplinary professional authority norms
sourcetext: The project's landscape architect specifies a traditional lawn irrigation system for the resort's golf course as part of the project.
temporalscope: At the time of task assignment
textreferences: Cutting Edge should not do this kind of work
textreferences: The project's landscape architect specifies a traditional lawn irrigation system for the resort's golf course as part of the project.
textreferences: Wasser refuses to perform the task
wasattributedto: Case 13 Extraction
generated at time: 2026-02-25T01:11:40.631570
was generated by: ProEthica Case 13 Extraction

Wasser Low-Probability High-Consequence Water Table Risk Disclosure Constraint
type: Low-ProbabilityHigh-ConsequenceRiskDisclosureConstraint
type: NamedIndividual
casecontext: The hydrogeological study indicated the proposed irrigation use would lower the water table in a semi-arid region, potentially affecting communities dependent on that water source. Wasser was constrained to disclose this risk fully to the supervising engineer.
concept category: Constraint
confidence: 0.87
constrainedentity: Engineer Intern Wasser
constraintclass: Low-Probability High-Consequence Risk Disclosure Constraint
constraintstatement: Engineer Intern Wasser was constrained to disclose the hydrogeologically documented risk of water table lowering — a risk with potentially high consequences for historically underserved regional water users — to the supervising engineer with full consequence profile information, prohibiting omission or minimization of the risk on the basis of uncertainty about its probability.
discoveredincase: 13
discoveredinpass: 2
discoveredinsection: facts
firstdiscoveredat: 2026-02-25T00:57:45.526754+00:00
firstdiscoveredincase: 13
generatedattime: 2026-02-25T00:57:45.526754+00:00
importance: high
severity: high
source: NSPE Code of Ethics Section II.3.a; Section I.1; hydrogeological study evidence
sourcetext: cites a recent hydrogeological study indicating that the proposed use would lower the water table
temporalscope: At the time of formal memorandum submission to Engineer Jaylani
textreferences: Goal 6 – Ensure availability and sustainable management of water and sanitation for all
textreferences: cites a recent hydrogeological study indicating that the proposed use would lower the water table
wasattributedto: Case 13 Extraction
generated at time: 2026-02-25T01:11:40.632638
was generated by: ProEthica Case 13 Extraction

Wasser Mandatory vs Encouraged Code Provision Tension
type: EncouragedvsMandatoryCodeProvisionTensionState
type: NamedIndividual
activeperiod: From Wasser's refusal of the irrigation design task through BER resolution of the case
affectedparties: Cutting Edge Engineering
affectedparties: Engineer Intern Wasser
affectedparties: Landscape architect client
concept category: State
confidence: 0.9
discoveredincase: 13
discoveredinpass: 1
discoveredinsection: discussion
firstdiscoveredat: 2026-02-25T00:52:29.788699+00:00
firstdiscoveredincase: 13
generatedattime: 2026-02-25T00:52:29.788699+00:00
importance: high
sourcetext: the Code of Ethics provision to act as a faithful agent is mandatory (engineer shall act …), but adherence to sustainable development is 'encouraged'
stateclass: Encouraged vs Mandatory Code Provision Tension State
subject: Engineer Intern Wasser's professional obligations at Cutting Edge Engineering
terminatedby: BER determination that Wasser should present sustainable alternatives rather than refuse the task, harmonizing both provisions
textreferences: This case is also about competing ethical obligations, specifically an engineer's right to dissent in the belief that an assigned task is unethical
textreferences: Wasser has an ethical obligation to act as a faithful agent to his employer, while simultaneously upholding the Code's ethical encouragement to adhere to sustainability principles
textreferences: the Code of Ethics provision to act as a faithful agent is mandatory (engineer shall act …), but adherence to sustainable development is 'encouraged'
triggeringevent: Wasser's recognition that his mandatory faithful agent obligation (NSPE Code I.4) conflicts with his encouraged sustainable development obligation (NSPE Code III.2.d) in the context of the irrigation system assignment
urgencylevel: medium
wasattributedto: Case 13 Extraction
generated at time: 2026-02-25T01:11:40.626771
was generated by: ProEthica Case 13 Extraction

Wasser NSPE Sustainable Development Code Application Capability Instance
type: NSPESustainableDevelopmentCodeProvisionApplicationCapability
type: NamedIndividual
capabilityclass: NSPE Sustainable Development Code Provision Application Capability
capabilitystatement: Engineer Intern Wasser demonstrated capability to identify and invoke NSPE Code III.2.d as normative support for the sustainability objection, applying the sustainable development provision to the specific irrigation system design context
casecontext: Wasser applied NSPE Code III.2.d when preparing the formal memorandum objecting to the traditional irrigation system specification
concept category: Capability
confidence: 0.87
demonstratedthrough: Citation of NSPE Code of Ethics Professional Obligation III.2.d in the formal memorandum to Engineer Jaylani as a basis for the sustainability objection
discoveredincase: 13
discoveredinpass: 2
discoveredinsection: facts
firstdiscoveredat: 2026-02-25T00:57:55.537499+00:00
firstdiscoveredincase: 13
generatedattime: 2026-02-25T00:57:55.537499+00:00
importance: high
possessedby: Engineer Intern Wasser
proficiencylevel: intermediate
sourcetext: Wasser points to NSPE Code of Ethics Professional Obligation III.2.d, 'Engineers are encouraged to adhere to the principles of sustainable development,' and claims the proposed lawn irrigation system does not conform to sustainability principles
textreferences: Wasser points to NSPE Code of Ethics Professional Obligation III.2.d, 'Engineers are encouraged to adhere to the principles of sustainable development,' and claims the proposed lawn irrigation system does not conform to sustainability principles
wasattributedto: Case 13 Extraction
generated at time: 2026-02-25T01:11:40.633703
was generated by: ProEthica Case 13 Extraction

Wasser NSPE Sustainable Development Code Provision Application Resort
type: NSPESustainableDevelopmentCodeProvisionApplicationCapability
type: NamedIndividual
capabilityclass: NSPE Sustainable Development Code Provision Application Capability
capabilitystatement: Engineer Intern Wasser demonstrated awareness of NSPE Code Section III.2.d and its sustainable development principles but required more refined capability to correctly apply the provision's normative weight and scope in the context of the resort irrigation assignment
casecontext: Wasser invoked sustainability principles correctly as a basis for professional concern but needed more refined capability to apply the provision's normative weight correctly in determining the appropriate response
concept category: Capability
confidence: 0.86
demonstratedthrough: Wasser's citation of sustainability principles as grounds for objecting to the irrigation task, reflecting awareness of the provision but incomplete application of its 'encouraged' rather than mandatory character
discoveredincase: 13
discoveredinpass: 2
discoveredinsection: discussion
firstdiscoveredat: 2026-02-25T01:04:18.192098+00:00
firstdiscoveredincase: 13
generatedattime: 2026-02-25T01:04:18.192098+00:00
importance: high
possessedby: Engineer Intern Wasser
proficiencylevel: basic
sourcetext: Engineers are encouraged to adhere to the principles of sustainable development in order to protect the environment for future generations.
textreferences: Engineers are encouraged to adhere to the principles of sustainable development in order to protect the environment for future generations.
textreferences: This case engages the engineering profession's ethical obligation to respond to complex sustainability challenges.
textreferences: This case is also about competing ethical obligations, specifically an engineer's right to dissent in the belief that an assigned task is unethical.
wasattributedto: Case 13 Extraction
generated at time: 2026-02-25T01:11:40.638307
was generated by: ProEthica Case 13 Extraction

Wasser Personal Conviction Dissent Permissibility Boundary Irrigation Refusal
type: SubordinateRefusalProportionalityConstraint
type: NamedIndividual
casecontext: Engineer Intern Wasser refused to sketch irrigation system details and submitted a formal memorandum to Principal Jaylani; the BER found that while dissent is ethically permissible as personal conviction, it is not ethically obligatory and carries career consequences
concept category: Constraint
confidence: 0.87
constrainedentity: Engineer Intern Wasser
constraintclass: Subordinate Refusal Proportionality Constraint
constraintstatement: Wasser's refusal to perform the irrigation system design task is permissible as a matter of personal conviction but is not ethically obligatory, and Wasser is constrained from characterizing the refusal as an ethical mandate when the applicable code provision (Section III.2.d) is encouraged rather than mandatory — and must accept the significant career consequences of exercising personal conviction over professional obligation.
discoveredincase: 13
discoveredinpass: 2
discoveredinsection: discussion
firstdiscoveredat: 2026-02-25T01:04:03.451495+00:00
firstdiscoveredincase: 13
generatedattime: 2026-02-25T01:04:03.451495+00:00
importance: medium
severity: medium
source: NSPE Code Section III.2.d (encouraged sustainable development provision); BER analysis of present case
sourcetext: As a matter of personal conviction, Wasser can dissent and not perform the task (i.e., dissent is ethically permissible), but if Cutting Edge's position does not align with Wasser's view, this would create significant career issues for Wasser.
temporalscope: Throughout the period of Wasser's refusal to perform the assigned irrigation design task
textreferences: As a matter of personal conviction, Wasser can dissent and not perform the task (i.e., dissent is ethically permissible), but if Cutting Edge's position does not align with Wasser's view, this would create significant career issues for Wasser.
textreferences: refusal to perform the design cannot be viewed as ethically obligatory
wasattributedto: Case 13 Extraction
generated at time: 2026-02-25T01:11:40.635708
was generated by: ProEthica Case 13 Extraction

Wasser Precedent Based Ethical Reasoning BER Cases Sustainability
type: Precedent-BasedEthicalReasoningCapability
type: NamedIndividual
capabilityclass: Precedent-Based Ethical Reasoning Capability
capabilitystatement: Engineer Intern Wasser would have benefited from capability to identify and apply relevant BER precedents — including Cases 05-4, 07-6, and 15-12 — to correctly calibrate the ethical weight of sustainability considerations and the appropriate professional response in the resort irrigation context
casecontext: Correct application of BER precedent would have helped Wasser understand that sustainability considerations inform but do not absolutely override professional judgment, and that the integrative path was the ethically preferred response
concept category: Capability
confidence: 0.83
demonstratedthrough: The BER's analysis drawing on Cases 05-4, 07-6, and 15-12 to establish the current professional standard for sustainability-informed engineering judgment, which Wasser needed to apply
discoveredincase: 13
discoveredinpass: 2
discoveredinsection: discussion
firstdiscoveredat: 2026-02-25T01:04:18.192098+00:00
firstdiscoveredincase: 13
generatedattime: 2026-02-25T01:04:18.192098+00:00
importance: medium
possessedby: Engineer Intern Wasser
proficiencylevel: basic
sourcetext: Contrast BER case 05-4 with BER Case 07-6, the BER's first impression case following introduction of the sustainable development provision in the NSPE Code of Ethics.
textreferences: Cases 05-4 and 07-6 reflect a shift in the BER's perspective away from individual professional judgment as the final arbiter
textreferences: Contrast BER case 05-4 with BER Case 07-6, the BER's first impression case following introduction of the sustainable development provision in the NSPE Code of Ethics.
textreferences: In BER Case 15-12, Engineer A was a professional engineer with JKL Engineering
wasattributedto: Case 13 Extraction
generated at time: 2026-02-25T01:11:40.638848
was generated by: ProEthica Case 13 Extraction

Wasser SDG Alignment Assessment Capability Instance
type: SustainableDevelopmentGoalAlignmentAssessmentCapability
type: NamedIndividual
capabilityclass: Sustainable Development Goal Alignment Assessment Capability
capabilitystatement: Engineer Intern Wasser demonstrated capability to evaluate the proposed irrigation system against specific UN Sustainable Development Goals and articulate points of conflict with supporting normative citations
casecontext: Wasser applied this capability when assigned to sketch irrigation system details for a resort golf course in a semi-arid region, identifying specific SDG conflicts and documenting them formally
concept category: Capability
confidence: 0.88
demonstratedthrough: Preparation of formal memorandum citing SDG Goals 6, 11, and 15 as frameworks against which the traditional lawn irrigation system was found deficient
discoveredincase: 13
discoveredinpass: 2
discoveredinsection: facts
firstdiscoveredat: 2026-02-25T00:57:55.537499+00:00
firstdiscoveredincase: 13
generatedattime: 2026-02-25T00:57:55.537499+00:00
importance: high
possessedby: Engineer Intern Wasser
proficiencylevel: intermediate
sourcetext: Wasser argues the proposed lawn irrigation system is not consistent with several United Nations sustainable development goals including but not limited to Goal 6– Ensure availability and sustainable management of water and sanitation for all, Goal 11– Make cities and human settlements inclusive, safe, resilient and sustainable, and Goal 15– Protect, restore, and promote sustainable use of terrestrial ecosystems
textreferences: Wasser argues the proposed lawn irrigation system is not consistent with several United Nations sustainable development goals including but not limited to Goal 6– Ensure availability and sustainable management of water and sanitation for all, Goal 11– Make cities and human settlements inclusive, safe, resilient and sustainable, and Goal 15– Protect, restore, and promote sustainable use of terrestrial ecosystems
wasattributedto: Case 13 Extraction
generated at time: 2026-02-25T01:11:40.633379
was generated by: ProEthica Case 13 Extraction

Wasser Scope of Practice Boundary MEP Irrigation Constraint
type: ScopeofPracticeBoundaryConstraint
type: NamedIndividual
casecontext: Wasser was assigned to sketch irrigation system details within the MEP scope. The scope boundary constrained Wasser to perform that task while not preventing Wasser from raising the out-of-scope hydrogeological risk through appropriate channels.
concept category: Constraint
confidence: 0.84
constrainedentity: Engineer Intern Wasser
constraintclass: Scope of Practice Boundary Constraint
constraintstatement: Engineer Intern Wasser was constrained to operate within the scope of the MEP engineering engagement at Cutting Edge Engineering — including the obligation to perform assigned tasks within that scope — while simultaneously being constrained not to use scope boundaries as justification for omitting safety-critical disclosures about the hydrogeological risk identified in the study.
discoveredincase: 13
discoveredinpass: 2
discoveredinsection: facts
firstdiscoveredat: 2026-02-25T00:57:45.526754+00:00
firstdiscoveredincase: 13
generatedattime: 2026-02-25T00:57:45.526754+00:00
importance: medium
severity: medium
source: NSPE Code of Ethics; Cutting Edge Engineering MEP contract scope
sourcetext: Engineer Jaylani is a firm principal for Cutting Edge Engineering and is under contract to complete the mechanical, electrical, and plumbing work
temporalscope: Throughout the project engagement
textreferences: Engineer Jaylani assigns Wasser the task of sketching out details for the irrigation system
textreferences: Engineer Jaylani is a firm principal for Cutting Edge Engineering and is under contract to complete the mechanical, electrical, and plumbing work
wasattributedto: Case 13 Extraction
generated at time: 2026-02-25T01:11:40.633244
was generated by: ProEthica Case 13 Extraction

Wasser Self-Interest Prohibition Sustainability Design Decision Constraint
type: Self-InterestProhibitioninClientDesignDecisionConstraint
type: NamedIndividual
casecontext: Wasser's outright refusal to perform the task and assertion that Cutting Edge should not do this kind of work extended beyond permissible advocacy into conduct that attempted to override the client's and landscape architect's design authority through personal preference.
concept category: Constraint
confidence: 0.82
constrainedentity: Engineer Intern Wasser
constraintclass: Self-Interest Prohibition in Client Design Decision Constraint
constraintstatement: Engineer Intern Wasser was constrained from using personal preference for sustainable design approaches to unilaterally override the client's and landscape architect's design selection decision — once Wasser had formally communicated sustainability concerns through the memorandum, the constraint required cessation of advocacy through task refusal and prohibited conduct that would constitute unilateral interference with the client's design authority.
discoveredincase: 13
discoveredinpass: 2
discoveredinsection: facts
firstdiscoveredat: 2026-02-25T00:57:45.526754+00:00
firstdiscoveredincase: 13
generatedattime: 2026-02-25T00:57:45.526754+00:00
importance: medium
severity: medium
source: NSPE Code of Ethics Section II.5.b; BER Case 22-10
sourcetext: Wasser refuses to perform the task
temporalscope: After submission of formal memorandum to Engineer Jaylani
textreferences: Engineers are encouraged to adhere to the principles of sustainable development
textreferences: Wasser refuses to perform the task
textreferences: asserts that Cutting Edge should not do this kind of work
wasattributedto: Case 13 Extraction
generated at time: 2026-02-25T01:11:40.632965
was generated by: ProEthica Case 13 Extraction

Wasser Subordinate Refusal Proportionality Sustainability Objection
type: SubordinateRefusalProportionalityConstraint
type: NamedIndividual
casecontext: Wasser both refused to perform the task and asserted that Cutting Edge should not do this kind of work at all — a firm-wide withdrawal advocacy that exceeded the proportionate response warranted by an encouraged, non-mandatory sustainability provision.
concept category: Constraint
confidence: 0.86
constrainedentity: Engineer Intern Wasser
constraintclass: Subordinate Refusal Proportionality Constraint
constraintstatement: Engineer Intern Wasser was constrained to calibrate the intensity of their sustainability objection proportionately to the normative weight of NSPE Code III.2.d — an encouraged provision — and the severity of the identified harm, prohibiting the disproportionate response of outright task refusal and firm-wide withdrawal advocacy when the provision is non-mandatory and the harm, while real, does not constitute an immediate public safety emergency.
discoveredincase: 13
discoveredinpass: 2
discoveredinsection: facts
firstdiscoveredat: 2026-02-25T00:57:45.526754+00:00
firstdiscoveredincase: 13
generatedattime: 2026-02-25T00:57:45.526754+00:00
importance: high
severity: high
source: NSPE Code of Ethics Section III.2.d; Section I.4; BER Case 22-10
sourcetext: Wasser refuses to perform the task
temporalscope: At the time of task refusal and formal memorandum submission
textreferences: Engineers are encouraged to adhere to the principles of sustainable development
textreferences: Wasser refuses to perform the task
textreferences: asserts that Cutting Edge should not do this kind of work
wasattributedto: Case 13 Extraction
generated at time: 2026-02-25T01:11:40.631730
was generated by: ProEthica Case 13 Extraction

Wasser Subordinate Task Refusal on Sustainability Grounds
type: SubordinateTaskRefusalState
type: NamedIndividual
activeperiod: From Wasser's documented refusal through BER determination that refusal is permissible but not obligatory
affectedparties: Cutting Edge Engineering
affectedparties: Engineer Intern Wasser
affectedparties: Landscape architect client
concept category: State
confidence: 0.92
discoveredincase: 13
discoveredinpass: 1
discoveredinsection: discussion
firstdiscoveredat: 2026-02-25T00:52:29.788699+00:00
firstdiscoveredincase: 13
generatedattime: 2026-02-25T00:52:29.788699+00:00
importance: high
sourcetext: Engineer Intern Wasser was assigned a design task to include provisions for a 'traditional' irrigation system
stateclass: Subordinate Task Refusal State
subject: Engineer Intern Wasser's refusal to perform the irrigation system design task assigned by Cutting Edge Engineering
terminatedby: BER determination that Wasser should perform the task while presenting sustainable alternatives
textreferences: As a matter of personal conviction, Wasser can dissent and not perform the task (i.e., dissent is ethically permissible), but if Cutting Edge's position does not align with Wasser's view, this would create significant career issues for Wasser
textreferences: Engineer Intern Wasser was assigned a design task to include provisions for a 'traditional' irrigation system
textreferences: refusal to perform the design cannot be viewed as ethically obligatory
triggeringevent: Wasser's objection to designing a traditional irrigation system on sustainability grounds, citing UN SDGs and NSPE Code Section III.2.d
urgencylevel: medium
wasattributedto: Case 13 Extraction
generated at time: 2026-02-25T01:11:40.626965
was generated by: ProEthica Case 13 Extraction

Wasser Sustainability Code Provision Normative Weight Assessment
type: SustainabilityCodeProvisionNormativeWeightAssessmentCapability
type: NamedIndividual
capabilityclass: Sustainability Code Provision Normative Weight Assessment Capability
capabilitystatement: Engineer Intern Wasser demonstrated partial but incomplete capability to assess the differential normative weight of sustainability versus faithful agent provisions — correctly identifying a sustainability concern but incorrectly treating the encouraged sustainability provision as creating an absolute obligation sufficient to justify task refusal
casecontext: Wasser needed to correctly assess that the sustainability provision's 'encouraged' language did not create an absolute obligation overriding the mandatory faithful agent duty, and that task refusal was permissible but not obligatory
concept category: Capability
confidence: 0.85
demonstratedthrough: Wasser's refusal to perform the irrigation task, which reflected an overweighting of the encouraged sustainability provision relative to the mandatory faithful agent obligation
discoveredincase: 13
discoveredinpass: 2
discoveredinsection: discussion
firstdiscoveredat: 2026-02-25T01:04:18.192098+00:00
firstdiscoveredincase: 13
generatedattime: 2026-02-25T01:04:18.192098+00:00
importance: high
possessedby: Engineer Intern Wasser
proficiencylevel: basic
sourcetext: the Code of Ethics provision to act as a faithful agent is mandatory (engineer shall act …), but adherence to sustainable development is 'encouraged.'
textreferences: The facts do not support an engineer's required adherence to a supreme sustainable development ethic.
textreferences: refusal to perform the design cannot be viewed as ethically obligatory.
textreferences: the Code of Ethics provision to act as a faithful agent is mandatory (engineer shall act …), but adherence to sustainable development is 'encouraged.'
wasattributedto: Case 13 Extraction
generated at time: 2026-02-25T01:11:40.637874
was generated by: ProEthica Case 13 Extraction

Wasser Sustainable Alternative Generation Resort Irrigation
type: SustainableAlternativeGenerationCapability
type: NamedIndividual
capabilityclass: Sustainable Alternative Generation Capability
capabilitystatement: Engineer Intern Wasser possessed the technical knowledge and sustainability expertise to generate viable sustainable alternatives to the traditional irrigation system — including rainwater harvesting, integrated water management, and green infrastructure options — that could achieve the client's functional objectives with reduced environmental impact
casecontext: BER identified Wasser as uniquely positioned to introduce sustainable irrigation alternatives to the resort client, leveraging his sustainability knowledge rather than simply refusing the task
concept category: Capability
confidence: 0.87
demonstratedthrough: Wasser's sustainability education and passionate beliefs about sustainable development, which the BER identified as positioning him to introduce sustainable alternatives to the client
discoveredincase: 13
discoveredinpass: 2
discoveredinsection: discussion
firstdiscoveredat: 2026-02-25T01:04:18.192098+00:00
firstdiscoveredincase: 13
generatedattime: 2026-02-25T01:04:18.192098+00:00
importance: high
possessedby: Engineer Intern Wasser
proficiencylevel: intermediate
sourcetext: given Wasser's education, knowledge and passionate beliefs about sustainable development, he seems more likely to fulfill his ethical obligations and aspirations – not by refusing the task, but by performing the task with technical expertise, mature leadership and dedicated service to the client's needs.
textreferences: By introducing and offering sustainable alternatives to a traditional lawn irrigation system, Wasser and Cutting Edge can harmonize code provisions I.4 and III.2.d.
textreferences: Perhaps the project is a suitable candidate for rainwater harvesting and reuse?
textreferences: given Wasser's education, knowledge and passionate beliefs about sustainable development, he seems more likely to fulfill his ethical obligations and aspirations – not by refusing the task, but by performing the task with technical expertise, mature leadership and dedicated service to the client's needs.
wasattributedto: Case 13 Extraction
generated at time: 2026-02-25T01:11:40.637111
was generated by: ProEthica Case 13 Extraction

Wasser Sustainable Alternative Presentation Opportunity
type: SustainableAlternativePresentationOpportunityState
type: NamedIndividual
activeperiod: From BER identification of Wasser's unique position through potential client presentation of sustainable alternatives
affectedparties: Cutting Edge Engineering
affectedparties: Engineer Intern Wasser
affectedparties: Landscape architect client
concept category: State
confidence: 0.88
discoveredincase: 13
discoveredinpass: 1
discoveredinsection: discussion
firstdiscoveredat: 2026-02-25T00:52:29.788699+00:00
firstdiscoveredincase: 13
generatedattime: 2026-02-25T00:52:29.788699+00:00
importance: high
sourcetext: the Board believes Engineer Intern Wasser could be in a unique position to meaningfully serve the client – and his company
stateclass: Sustainable Alternative Presentation Opportunity State
subject: Engineer Intern Wasser's position relative to the irrigation system design assignment
terminatedby: Presentation of sustainable alternatives to client, followed by client decision
textreferences: By introducing and offering sustainable alternatives to a traditional lawn irrigation system, Wasser and Cutting Edge can harmonize code provisions I.4 and III.2.d
textreferences: Perhaps the project is a suitable candidate for rainwater harvesting and reuse?
textreferences: Suggesting sustainable options for an irrigation system as a means to resolving the ethical tension presented in this case is a path the BER endorses
textreferences: the Board believes Engineer Intern Wasser could be in a unique position to meaningfully serve the client – and his company
triggeringevent: BER recognition that Wasser's sustainability expertise and positional access create an opportunity to present rainwater harvesting, integrated water management, and other sustainable irrigation alternatives to the client
urgencylevel: medium
wasattributedto: Case 13 Extraction
generated at time: 2026-02-25T01:11:40.627121
was generated by: ProEthica Case 13 Extraction

Wasser Sustainable Development Advocacy Communication to Jaylani
type: SustainableDevelopmentAdvocacyCommunicationObligation
type: NamedIndividual
casecontext: Engineer Intern Wasser was assigned to sketch details for a traditional lawn irrigation system for a resort golf course in a semi-arid region; Wasser identified sustainability and environmental concerns supported by a hydrogeological study and memorialized them in a formal memorandum to Engineer Jaylani.
compliancestatus: met
concept category: Obligation
confidence: 0.88
discoveredincase: 13
discoveredinpass: 2
discoveredinsection: facts
firstdiscoveredat: 2026-02-25T00:56:04.058400+00:00
firstdiscoveredincase: 13
generatedattime: 2026-02-25T00:56:04.058400+00:00
importance: high
obligatedparty: Engineer Intern Wasser
obligationclass: Sustainable Development Advocacy Communication Obligation
obligationstatement: Engineer Intern Wasser was obligated to formally communicate sustainability objections to Engineer Jaylani with supporting technical evidence when assigned the irrigation system sketching task, identifying the conflict with UN SDGs and NSPE III.2.d and the hydrogeological risk to the water table.
sourcetext: In a formal memorandum to Jaylani, Wasser argues the proposed lawn irrigation system is not consistent with several United Nations sustainable development goals
temporalscope: Upon assignment of the irrigation sketching task and identification of the sustainability conflict
textreferences: In a formal memorandum to Jaylani, Wasser argues the proposed lawn irrigation system is not consistent with several United Nations sustainable development goals
textreferences: Wasser points to NSPE Code of Ethics Professional Obligation III.2.d, 'Engineers are encouraged to adhere to the principles of sustainable development,' and claims the proposed lawn irrigation system does not conform to sustainability principles
wasattributedto: Case 13 Extraction
generated at time: 2026-02-25T01:11:40.629505
was generated by: ProEthica Case 13 Extraction

Wasser Sustainable Development Advocate Engineer Intern
type: Sustainability-ObjectingEngineerIntern
type: NamedIndividual
attributes: {'license': 'Engineer Intern', 'specialty': 'MEP / irrigation system design', 'sustainability_conviction': 'Strong personal belief in sustainable development principles', 'assigned_task': 'Traditional lawn irrigation system design'}
caseinvolvement: Engineer Intern Wasser was assigned to design a traditional irrigation system for a resort project in a semi-arid region, objected on sustainability grounds, and the BER analyzed whether refusal or proactive sustainable advocacy was the appropriate ethical response, concluding that advocacy and task performance with sustainable alternatives offered was the preferred path.
concept category: Role
confidence: 0.92
discoveredincase: 13
discoveredinpass: 1
discoveredinsection: discussion
firstdiscoveredat: 2026-02-25T00:52:01.154928+00:00
firstdiscoveredincase: 13
generatedattime: 2026-02-25T00:52:01.154928+00:00
importance: high
relationships: {'type': 'client_service', 'target': 'Resort Development Client'}
relationships: {'type': 'employer', 'target': 'Cutting Edge MEP Firm'}
relationships: {'type': 'supervised_by', 'target': 'MEP Firm Principal Engineer'}
rolecategory: employer_relationship
roleclass: Sustainability-Objecting Engineer Intern
sourcetext: Engineer Intern Wasser was assigned a design task to include provisions for a 'traditional' irrigation system
textreferences: By introducing and offering sustainable alternatives to a traditional lawn irrigation system, Wasser and Cutting Edge can harmonize code provisions I.4 and III.2.d
textreferences: Engineer Intern Wasser was assigned a design task to include provisions for a 'traditional' irrigation system
textreferences: Wasser has an ethical obligation to act as a faithful agent to his employer, while simultaneously upholding the Code's ethical encouragement to adhere to sustainability principles
textreferences: given Wasser's education, knowledge and passionate beliefs about sustainable development, he seems more likely to fulfill his ethical obligations and aspirations – not by refusing the task, but by performing the task with technical expertise, mature leadership and dedicated service to the client's needs
wasattributedto: Case 13 Extraction
generated at time: 2026-02-25T01:11:40.624900
was generated by: ProEthica Case 13 Extraction

Wasser Sustainable Development Client Education Capability Instance
type: SustainableDevelopmentClientEducationCapability
type: NamedIndividual
capabilityclass: Sustainable Development Client Education Capability
capabilitystatement: Engineer Intern Wasser demonstrated nascent capability to identify the need to educate the client about sustainable development alternatives, implicitly advocating through the formal memorandum that the client should be informed about the sustainability conflicts with the traditional irrigation system
casecontext: Wasser's formal objection implicitly called for client education about sustainable irrigation alternatives as part of the sustainability advocacy
concept category: Capability
confidence: 0.8
demonstratedthrough: Assertion in the formal memorandum that Cutting Edge should not do this kind of work, implying the client should be advised about sustainable alternatives
discoveredincase: 13
discoveredinpass: 2
discoveredinsection: facts
firstdiscoveredat: 2026-02-25T00:57:55.537499+00:00
firstdiscoveredincase: 13
generatedattime: 2026-02-25T00:57:55.537499+00:00
importance: medium
possessedby: Engineer Intern Wasser
proficiencylevel: basic
sourcetext: asserts that Cutting Edge should not do this kind of work
textreferences: Wasser argues the proposed lawn irrigation system is not consistent with several United Nations sustainable development goals
textreferences: asserts that Cutting Edge should not do this kind of work
wasattributedto: Case 13 Extraction
generated at time: 2026-02-25T01:11:40.634335
was generated by: ProEthica Case 13 Extraction

Wasser Task Refusal Proportionality Assessment
type: EngineerInternTaskRefusalProportionalityObligation
type: NamedIndividual
casecontext: Wasser refused outright to sketch the irrigation system details and simultaneously issued a formal memorandum; the ethical basis (NSPE III.2.d) uses 'encouraged' language rather than mandatory prohibition, raising the question of whether outright refusal was proportionate to the normative weight of the obligation.
compliancestatus: partial
concept category: Obligation
confidence: 0.8
discoveredincase: 13
discoveredinpass: 2
discoveredinsection: facts
firstdiscoveredat: 2026-02-25T00:56:04.058400+00:00
firstdiscoveredincase: 13
generatedattime: 2026-02-25T00:56:04.058400+00:00
importance: medium
obligatedparty: Engineer Intern Wasser
obligationclass: Engineer Intern Task Refusal Proportionality Obligation
obligationstatement: Engineer Intern Wasser was obligated to calibrate the form and intensity of their objection proportionately to the normative weight of the sustainability concern — recognizing that NSPE III.2.d uses 'encouraged' rather than mandatory language — and to communicate concerns formally while remaining available to perform the task if Engineer Jaylani and the client made an informed decision to proceed, rather than issuing an outright refusal as the primary response.
sourcetext: Wasser refuses to perform the task
temporalscope: At the time of assignment of the irrigation sketching task
textreferences: In a formal memorandum to Jaylani, Wasser argues the proposed lawn irrigation system is not consistent with several United Nations sustainable development goals
textreferences: Wasser points to NSPE Code of Ethics Professional Obligation III.2.d, 'Engineers are encouraged to adhere to the principles of sustainable development'
textreferences: Wasser refuses to perform the task
wasattributedto: Case 13 Extraction
generated at time: 2026-02-25T01:11:40.629840
was generated by: ProEthica Case 13 Extraction

Wasser Task Refusal and Formal Objection
type: SubordinateTaskRefusalState
type: NamedIndividual
activeperiod: From Wasser's initial refusal through resolution by Jaylani (reassignment, design change, or other action)
affectedparties: Cutting Edge Engineering
affectedparties: Engineer Intern Wasser
affectedparties: Engineer Jaylani
concept category: State
confidence: 0.91
discoveredincase: 13
discoveredinpass: 1
discoveredinsection: facts
firstdiscoveredat: 2026-02-25T00:51:20.279821+00:00
firstdiscoveredincase: 13
generatedattime: 2026-02-25T00:51:20.279821+00:00
importance: high
sourcetext: Wasser refuses to perform the task and says the traditional irrigation system will waste fresh water
stateclass: Subordinate Task Refusal State
subject: Engineer Intern Wasser's refusal to sketch irrigation system details and formal memorandum to Principal Jaylani
terminatedby: Not yet terminated — state is active and unresolved in the facts presented
textreferences: In a formal memorandum to Jaylani, Wasser argues the proposed lawn irrigation system is not consistent with several United Nations sustainable development goals
textreferences: Wasser asserts that Cutting Edge should not do this kind of work
textreferences: Wasser refuses to perform the task and says the traditional irrigation system will waste fresh water
triggeringevent: Jaylani's assignment of irrigation system sketching task to Wasser, followed by Wasser's explicit refusal and formal memorandum
urgencylevel: medium
wasattributedto: Case 13 Extraction
generated at time: 2026-02-25T01:11:40.624048
was generated by: ProEthica Case 13 Extraction

Wasser performing irrigation task with sustainable alternatives before client decision to accept or refuse sustainable options
type: NamedIndividual
generated at time: 2026-02-25T01:11:40.639887
was generated by: ProEthica Case 13 Extraction

Wasser's Sustainability Concern Triggered
type: NamedIndividual
concept category: Event
generated at time: 2026-02-25T01:11:40.639276
was generated by: ProEthica Case 13 Extraction

Wasser's assignment to sketch irrigation details before Wasser's refusal and formal memorandum to Jaylani
type: NamedIndividual
generated at time: 2026-02-25T01:11:40.639737
was generated by: ProEthica Case 13 Extraction

Wasser's formal memorandum to Jaylani before Jaylani and Cutting Edge deciding how to respond
type: NamedIndividual
generated at time: 2026-02-25T01:11:40.639819
was generated by: ProEthica Case 13 Extraction

Water Table Depletion Risk from Irrigation Design
type: EnvironmentalResourceDepletionRiskState
type: NamedIndividual
activeperiod: From identification of the hydrogeological study through design modification or regulatory determination
affectedparties: Communities in the semi-arid region
affectedparties: Cutting Edge Engineering
affectedparties: Engineer Jaylani
affectedparties: Regional water table users
affectedparties: Resort client
concept category: State
confidence: 0.88
discoveredincase: 13
discoveredinpass: 1
discoveredinsection: facts
firstdiscoveredat: 2026-02-25T00:51:20.279821+00:00
firstdiscoveredincase: 13
generatedattime: 2026-02-25T00:51:20.279821+00:00
importance: high
sourcetext: Wasser cites a recent hydrogeological study indicating that the proposed use would lower the water table
stateclass: Environmental Resource Depletion Risk State
subject: The proposed traditional lawn irrigation system's documented risk of lowering the regional water table in a semi-arid region
terminatedby: Not yet terminated — state is active and unresolved in the facts presented
textreferences: Wasser cites a recent hydrogeological study indicating that the proposed use would lower the water table
textreferences: a new resort that will be located in a semi-arid region of the southwestern United States
textreferences: the project's landscape architect specifies a traditional lawn irrigation system for the resort's golf course as part of the project
textreferences: the traditional irrigation system will waste fresh water
triggeringevent: Wasser's citation of a recent hydrogeological study indicating the proposed irrigation use would lower the water table
urgencylevel: high
wasattributedto: Case 13 Extraction
generated at time: 2026-02-25T01:11:40.624221
was generated by: ProEthica Case 13 Extraction

addition of sustainable development provision III.2.d (July 2007) before BER Case 07-6
type: NamedIndividual
generated at time: 2026-02-25T01:11:40.639579
was generated by: ProEthica Case 13 Extraction

client refusal of sustainable options (hypothetical) before Cutting Edge completing the traditional irrigation system task
type: NamedIndividual
generated at time: 2026-02-25T01:11:40.639920
was generated by: ProEthica Case 13 Extraction

landscape architect specifying traditional irrigation system before Cutting Edge Engineering accepting the contract
type: NamedIndividual
generated at time: 2026-02-25T01:11:40.639665
was generated by: ProEthica Case 13 Extraction

recent hydrogeological study before Wasser's refusal and formal memorandum
type: NamedIndividual
generated at time: 2026-02-25T01:11:40.639769
was generated by: ProEthica Case 13 Extraction