ProEthica Case 71 Ontology
type: Ontology
created: 2026-01-18T04:06:23.920885
imports: intermediate

30-day setup period before pile strength testing
type: NamedIndividual
generated at time: 2026-01-18T04:06:23.983948
was generated by: ProEthica Case 71 Auto-Commit

Adversarial Context Professional Independence
type: Capability
type: NamedIndividual
source text: [discussion] Engineer B appears to have assumed a responsibility to defend the client municipality by the selective use of data.
source text discussion: Engineer B appears to have assumed a responsibility to defend the client municipality by the selective use of data.
definition: The competency to maintain professional objectivity and fulfill engineering duties without assuming an advocacy role for the retaining client in legal or quasi-legal proceedings
generated at time: 2026-01-18T04:06:23.921302
was generated by: ProEthica Case 71 Auto-Commit

Adversarial Interest Neutrality
type: Constraint
type: NamedIndividual
source text: [discussion] Engineer B appears to have assumed a responsibility to defend the client municipality by the selective use of data. This is an egregious denial
source text discussion: Engineer B appears to have assumed a responsibility to defend the client municipality by the selective use of data. This is an egregious denial
definition: Constraint that prohibits engineers from allowing adversarial legal or quasi-legal circumstances to influence selective use of technical data
generated at time: 2026-01-18T04:06:23.940559
was generated by: ProEthica Case 71 Auto-Commit

Adversarial Relationship State
type: State
type: NamedIndividual
source text: [discussion] In this case, an adversarial relationship is established between the municipality and Engineer A to resolve the sharing of a settlement cost between the two.
source text discussion: In this case, an adversarial relationship is established between the municipality and Engineer A to resolve the sharing of a settlement cost between the two.
definition: A state where parties are in formal opposition or dispute, typically in legal or quasi-legal proceedings, which may influence professional judgment and fact presentation
generated at time: 2026-01-18T04:06:23.978714
was generated by: ProEthica Case 71 Auto-Commit

AllEngineers_TechnicalFactExposition
type: Obligation
type: NamedIndividual
source text: [discussion] Engineers must be exponents of all the available technical facts as the basis for problem solving.
source text discussion: Engineers must be exponents of all the available technical facts as the basis for problem solving.
generated at time: 2026-01-18T04:06:23.949385
was generated by: ProEthica Case 71 Auto-Commit

Case 71 Timeline
type: NamedIndividual
generated at time: 2026-01-18T04:06:23.984524
was generated by: ProEthica Case 71 Auto-Commit

Client Defense Assumption State
type: State
type: NamedIndividual
source text: [discussion] Engineer B appears to have assumed a responsibility to defend the client municipality by the selective use of data.
source text discussion: Engineer B appears to have assumed a responsibility to defend the client municipality by the selective use of data.
definition: A state where a professional has inappropriately assumed an advocacy role for their client rather than maintaining objective professional judgment
generated at time: 2026-01-18T04:06:23.979148
was generated by: ProEthica Case 71 Auto-Commit

Communication Avoidance Decision
type: Action
type: NamedIndividual
generated at time: 2026-01-18T04:06:23.985008
was generated by: ProEthica Case 71 Auto-Commit

Communication Avoidance Decision → Pile Safety Failures Identified
type: NamedIndividual
generated at time: 2026-01-18T04:06:23.985440
was generated by: ProEthica Case 71 Auto-Commit

Complete Disclosure
type: Principle
type: NamedIndividual
source text: [facts] Engineer B did not state anywhere in the report that these 19 piles, according to the pile driving records, had been driven to essential refusal and that, applying accepted wave equation calculations, the piles would have indicated a strength several multiples over the calculated load requirements. Additionally, Engineer B did not report that the dynamic test equipment had failed.
source text facts: Engineer B did not state anywhere in the report that these 19 piles, according to the pile driving records, had been driven to essential refusal and that, applying accepted wave equation calculations, the piles would have indicated a strength several multiples over the calculated load requirements. Additionally, Engineer B did not report that the dynamic test equipment had failed.
definition: Principle that engineers must fully disclose all material facts, including limitations, failures, and contrary evidence, in their professional reports and opinions
generated at time: 2026-01-18T04:06:23.960498
was generated by: ProEthica Case 71 Auto-Commit

Complete Disclosure Constraint
type: Constraint
type: NamedIndividual
source text: [facts] Engineer B did not report that the dynamic test equipment had failed.
source text facts: Engineer B did not report that the dynamic test equipment had failed.
definition: Constraint requiring engineers to report all relevant findings including equipment failures, limitations, and alternative interpretations in technical reports
generated at time: 2026-01-18T04:06:23.941047
was generated by: ProEthica Case 71 Auto-Commit

Complete Engineering Documentation
type: Capability
type: NamedIndividual
source text: [discussion] Material facts, however, were not addressed in Engineer B's report. Among them, that dynamic test equipment failed during the test
source text discussion: Material facts, however, were not addressed in Engineer B's report. Among them, that dynamic test equipment failed during the test
definition: The competency to produce engineering reports that include all material facts, test results, equipment issues, and contextual information necessary for independent expert review
generated at time: 2026-01-18T04:06:23.925281
was generated by: ProEthica Case 71 Auto-Commit

Complete Technical Reporting
type: Constraint
type: NamedIndividual
source text: [discussion] Code of Ethics which requires that engineers 'shall include all relevant and pertinent information in such report, statements or testimony.'
source text discussion: Code of Ethics which requires that engineers 'shall include all relevant and pertinent information in such report, statements or testimony.'
definition: Constraint that limits engineers from selectively omitting relevant technical data, facts, or information from engineering reports and testimony
definition: Obligation requiring engineers to include all relevant and pertinent information in reports, statements, or testimony, without selective omission of material facts
generated at time: 2026-01-18T04:06:23.941562
was generated by: ProEthica Case 71 Auto-Commit

Complete and Accurate Reporting
type: Obligation
type: NamedIndividual
source text: [facts] Engineer B did not state anywhere in the report that these 19 piles, according to the pile driving records, had been driven to essential refusal
source text facts: Engineer B did not state anywhere in the report that these 19 piles, according to the pile driving records, had been driven to essential refusal
definition: Obligation requiring professionals to include all relevant findings, data, and observations in their reports, including information that may contradict their conclusions or be unfavorable to their client's position
generated at time: 2026-01-18T04:06:23.949820
was generated by: ProEthica Case 71 Auto-Commit

Comprehensive Technical Fact Assembly
type: Capability
type: NamedIndividual
source text: [discussion] Engineers must be exponents of all the available technical facts as the basis for problem solving.
source text discussion: Engineers must be exponents of all the available technical facts as the basis for problem solving.
definition: The competency to systematically gather, compile, and present all available technical facts relevant to an engineering problem, regardless of whether they support a particular position or interest
generated at time: 2026-01-18T04:06:23.925872
was generated by: ProEthica Case 71 Auto-Commit

Construction Record Verification
type: Capability
type: NamedIndividual
source text: [facts] No effort was made by Engineer B to inquire from contractors, workers, or others on the job to verify or refute his theories
source text facts: No effort was made by Engineer B to inquire from contractors, workers, or others on the job to verify or refute his theories
definition: The competency to systematically verify, validate, and interpret construction records by cross-referencing with available witnesses, contractors, and physical evidence
generated at time: 2026-01-18T04:06:23.926359
was generated by: ProEthica Case 71 Auto-Commit

Contractor Legal Action
type: Event
type: NamedIndividual
generated at time: 2026-01-18T04:06:23.985858
was generated by: ProEthica Case 71 Auto-Commit

Critical Data Exclusion
type: Event
type: NamedIndividual
generated at time: 2026-01-18T04:06:23.986337
was generated by: ProEthica Case 71 Auto-Commit

Critical Information Omission
type: Action
type: NamedIndividual
generated at time: 2026-01-18T04:06:23.986773
was generated by: ProEthica Case 71 Auto-Commit

DesignCalculation_SafetyFactor_Constraint
type: Constraint
type: NamedIndividual
source text: [facts] Engineer B's concluding report stated that approximately 19 of the 90 piles did not meet the safety factor required by the design calculations.
source text facts: Engineer B's concluding report stated that approximately 19 of the 90 piles did not meet the safety factor required by the design calculations.
generated at time: 2026-01-18T04:06:23.942578
was generated by: ProEthica Case 71 Auto-Commit

Disclosure of Testing Limitations
type: Obligation
type: NamedIndividual
source text: [facts] Engineer B did not report that the dynamic test equipment had failed
source text facts: Engineer B did not report that the dynamic test equipment had failed
definition: Obligation requiring professionals to disclose equipment failures, methodological deviations, and other limitations that may affect the validity or reliability of test results
generated at time: 2026-01-18T04:06:23.950339
was generated by: ProEthica Case 71 Auto-Commit

Dock Construction Completion
type: Event
type: NamedIndividual
generated at time: 2026-01-18T04:06:23.987213
was generated by: ProEthica Case 71 Auto-Commit

Due Diligence in Fact-Gathering
type: Principle
type: NamedIndividual
source text: [discussion] Engineer B's failure to inquire from the contractor, workers or others on the job is a failure of fact gathering diligence.
source text discussion: Engineer B's failure to inquire from the contractor, workers or others on the job is a failure of fact gathering diligence.
definition: Principle that engineers must exercise thoroughness and care in assembling all relevant facts before rendering professional opinions or conclusions
generated at time: 2026-01-18T04:06:23.961009
was generated by: ProEthica Case 71 Auto-Commit

Due Diligence in Investigation
type: Obligation
type: NamedIndividual
source text: [facts] At no time during the development of Engineer B's report did Engineer B talk to any representative of Engineer A, even though Engineer A's on-site representatives were available
source text facts: At no time during the development of Engineer B's report did Engineer B talk to any representative of Engineer A, even though Engineer A's on-site representatives were available
definition: Obligation requiring professionals to conduct thorough investigations by consulting available sources, witnesses, and documentation before forming professional opinions or conclusions
generated at time: 2026-01-18T04:06:23.950828
was generated by: ProEthica Case 71 Auto-Commit

Dynamic Testing Equipment Operation
type: Capability
type: NamedIndividual
source text: [facts] dynamic test equipment had failed during the test
source text facts: dynamic test equipment had failed during the test
definition: The competency to properly operate, monitor, and verify functionality of dynamic testing equipment during geotechnical investigations
generated at time: 2026-01-18T04:06:23.926820
was generated by: ProEthica Case 71 Auto-Commit

EngineerA_DutyOfCare_PileDesign
type: Obligation
type: NamedIndividual
source text: [facts] Engineer A was retained by a municipality to design a dock on a supporting foundation of 90 piles
source text facts: Engineer A was retained by a municipality to design a dock on a supporting foundation of 90 piles
generated at time: 2026-01-18T04:06:23.951391
was generated by: ProEthica Case 71 Auto-Commit

EngineerA_ExpertTestimony
type: Capability
type: NamedIndividual
source text: [facts] Engineer A testified that the geotechnical firm's report expected that the piles would gain sufficient additional strength
source text facts: Engineer A testified that the geotechnical firm's report expected that the piles would gain sufficient additional strength
generated at time: 2026-01-18T04:06:23.927298
was generated by: ProEthica Case 71 Auto-Commit

EngineerA_GeotechnicalInterpretation
type: Capability
type: NamedIndividual
source text: [facts] Engineer A testified that the geotechnical firm's report expected that the piles would gain sufficient additional strength within 30 days
source text facts: Engineer A testified that the geotechnical firm's report expected that the piles would gain sufficient additional strength within 30 days
generated at time: 2026-01-18T04:06:23.927731
was generated by: ProEthica Case 71 Auto-Commit

EngineerA_PileFoundationDesign
type: Capability
type: NamedIndividual
source text: [facts] Engineer A was retained by a municipality to design a dock on a supporting foundation of 90 piles
source text facts: Engineer A was retained by a municipality to design a dock on a supporting foundation of 90 piles
generated at time: 2026-01-18T04:06:23.928184
was generated by: ProEthica Case 71 Auto-Commit

EngineerA_TechnicalFactPresentation
type: Capability
type: NamedIndividual
source text: [discussion] To test the criteria and professional judgment upon which Engineer A's conclusion, and recommendations were based
source text discussion: To test the criteria and professional judgment upon which Engineer A's conclusion, and recommendations were based
generated at time: 2026-01-18T04:06:23.928616
was generated by: ProEthica Case 71 Auto-Commit

EngineerB-AdversarialNeutrality-MunicipalityCase
type: Constraint
type: NamedIndividual
source text: [discussion] Engineer B appears to have assumed a responsibility to defend the client municipality by the selective use of data.
source text discussion: Engineer B appears to have assumed a responsibility to defend the client municipality by the selective use of data.
generated at time: 2026-01-18T04:06:23.943065
was generated by: ProEthica Case 71 Auto-Commit

EngineerB-CompleteReporting-PileDrivingTest
type: Constraint
type: NamedIndividual
source text: [discussion] Material facts, however, were not addressed in Engineer B's report. Among them, that dynamic test equipment failed during the test
source text discussion: Material facts, however, were not addressed in Engineer B's report. Among them, that dynamic test equipment failed during the test
generated at time: 2026-01-18T04:06:23.943519
was generated by: ProEthica Case 71 Auto-Commit

EngineerB-FactGathering-SiteInquiry
type: Constraint
type: NamedIndividual
source text: [discussion] Engineer B's failure to inquire from the contractor, workers or others on the job is a failure of fact gathering diligence.
source text discussion: Engineer B's failure to inquire from the contractor, workers or others on the job is a failure of fact gathering diligence.
generated at time: 2026-01-18T04:06:23.943955
was generated by: ProEthica Case 71 Auto-Commit

EngineerB-NonDeception-ReportLanguage
type: Constraint
type: NamedIndividual
source text: [discussion] the select language of the report precludes any interpretation that any or all 90 piles met the factor of safety requirement
source text discussion: the select language of the report precludes any interpretation that any or all 90 piles met the factor of safety requirement
generated at time: 2026-01-18T04:06:23.944421
was generated by: ProEthica Case 71 Auto-Commit

EngineerB_AlternativeAnalysis_Disclosure
type: Constraint
type: NamedIndividual
source text: [facts] Engineer B did not state anywhere in the report that these 19 piles...applying accepted wave equation calculations, the piles would have indicated a strength several multiples over
source text facts: Engineer B did not state anywhere in the report that these 19 piles...applying accepted wave equation calculations, the piles would have indicated a strength several multiples over
generated at time: 2026-01-18T04:06:23.944830
was generated by: ProEthica Case 71 Auto-Commit

EngineerB_ClientDefenseAssumption_Municipality
type: State
type: NamedIndividual
case involvement: Led to selective use of data that appeared to serve no purpose except to impugn Engineer A or support municipality's expert witness
source text: [discussion] Engineer B appears to have assumed a responsibility to defend the client municipality by the selective use of data. This is an egregious denial of the duties and responsibilities of a professional engineer in any setting, legal, quasi-legal or non-legal.
source text discussion: Engineer B appears to have assumed a responsibility to defend the client municipality by the selective use of data. This is an egregious denial of the duties and responsibilities of a professional engineer in any setting, legal, quasi-legal or non-legal.
generated at time: 2026-01-18T04:06:23.979568
was generated by: ProEthica Case 71 Auto-Commit

EngineerB_ClientService_RationalPresentation
type: Obligation
type: NamedIndividual
source text: [discussion] by excluding the pile driving records, Engineer B has denied himself the opportunity to present a rational for discounting their value, and thereby to serve his client.
source text discussion: by excluding the pile driving records, Engineer B has denied himself the opportunity to present a rational for discounting their value, and thereby to serve his client.
generated at time: 2026-01-18T04:06:23.951917
was generated by: ProEthica Case 71 Auto-Commit

EngineerB_Communication_OnsiteRepresentative
type: Obligation
type: NamedIndividual
source text: [discussion] It is clear that Engineer B may be criticized for his failure to communicate with Engineer A's on-site representative.
source text discussion: It is clear that Engineer B may be criticized for his failure to communicate with Engineer A's on-site representative.
generated at time: 2026-01-18T04:06:23.952487
was generated by: ProEthica Case 71 Auto-Commit

EngineerB_CompleteReporting_PileStrength
type: Obligation
type: NamedIndividual
source text: [facts] Engineer B did not state anywhere in the report that these 19 piles, according to the pile driving records, had been driven to essential refusal
source text facts: Engineer B did not state anywhere in the report that these 19 piles, according to the pile driving records, had been driven to essential refusal
generated at time: 2026-01-18T04:06:23.953110
was generated by: ProEthica Case 71 Auto-Commit

EngineerB_CompleteReporting_PileTest
type: Obligation
type: NamedIndividual
source text: [discussion] Material facts, however, were not addressed in Engineer B's report. Among them, that dynamic test equipment failed during the test
source text discussion: Material facts, however, were not addressed in Engineer B's report. Among them, that dynamic test equipment failed during the test
generated at time: 2026-01-18T04:06:23.953643
was generated by: ProEthica Case 71 Auto-Commit

EngineerB_ConsistentStatements
type: Obligation
type: NamedIndividual
source text: [facts] Previously, Engineer B had said, 'We didn't look at the pile driving records because it was not in our scope of work.'
source text facts: Previously, Engineer B had said, 'We didn't look at the pile driving records because it was not in our scope of work.'
generated at time: 2026-01-18T04:06:23.954195
was generated by: ProEthica Case 71 Auto-Commit

EngineerB_ConsultAvailableWitnesses
type: Obligation
type: NamedIndividual
source text: [facts] At no time during the development of Engineer B's report did Engineer B talk to any representative of Engineer A
source text facts: At no time during the development of Engineer B's report did Engineer B talk to any representative of Engineer A
generated at time: 2026-01-18T04:06:23.954770
was generated by: ProEthica Case 71 Auto-Commit

EngineerB_EquipmentFailureDisclosure
type: Obligation
type: NamedIndividual
source text: [facts] Engineer B did not report that the dynamic test equipment had failed
source text facts: Engineer B did not report that the dynamic test equipment had failed
generated at time: 2026-01-18T04:06:23.955299
was generated by: ProEthica Case 71 Auto-Commit

EngineerB_EquipmentFailure_Disclosure
type: Constraint
type: NamedIndividual
source text: [facts] Engineer B did not report that the dynamic test equipment had failed.
source text facts: Engineer B did not report that the dynamic test equipment had failed.
generated at time: 2026-01-18T04:06:23.945243
was generated by: ProEthica Case 71 Auto-Commit

EngineerB_ExpertReporting_Incomplete
type: Capability
type: NamedIndividual
source text: [facts] Engineer B did not report that the dynamic test equipment had failed
source text facts: Engineer B did not report that the dynamic test equipment had failed
generated at time: 2026-01-18T04:06:23.929034
was generated by: ProEthica Case 71 Auto-Commit

EngineerB_FactGatheringFailure_PileTestProgram
type: State
type: NamedIndividual
case involvement: Contributed to incomplete fact gathering and failure to obtain pile driving records
source text: [discussion] However, Engineer B's failure to inquire from the contractor, workers or others on the job is a failure of fact gathering diligence.
source text discussion: However, Engineer B's failure to inquire from the contractor, workers or others on the job is a failure of fact gathering diligence.
generated at time: 2026-01-18T04:06:23.979995
was generated by: ProEthica Case 71 Auto-Commit

EngineerB_FactGathering_Inquiry
type: Obligation
type: NamedIndividual
source text: [discussion] Engineer B's failure to inquire from the contractor, workers or others on the job is a failure of fact gathering diligence.
source text discussion: Engineer B's failure to inquire from the contractor, workers or others on the job is a failure of fact gathering diligence.
generated at time: 2026-01-18T04:06:23.955814
was generated by: ProEthica Case 71 Auto-Commit

EngineerB_FactInterpretationResponsibility
type: Capability
type: NamedIndividual
source text: [discussion] each was independently responsible for the assembly and interpretation of the facts of the pile driving
source text discussion: each was independently responsible for the assembly and interpretation of the facts of the pile driving
generated at time: 2026-01-18T04:06:23.929463
was generated by: ProEthica Case 71 Auto-Commit

EngineerB_FailedAdversarialIndependence
type: Capability
type: NamedIndividual
source text: [discussion] Engineer B appears to have assumed a responsibility to defend the client municipality by the selective use of data
source text discussion: Engineer B appears to have assumed a responsibility to defend the client municipality by the selective use of data
generated at time: 2026-01-18T04:06:23.929990
was generated by: ProEthica Case 71 Auto-Commit

EngineerB_FailedFactAssembly
type: Capability
type: NamedIndividual
source text: [discussion] Material facts, however, were not addressed in Engineer B's report
source text discussion: Material facts, however, were not addressed in Engineer B's report
generated at time: 2026-01-18T04:06:23.930527
was generated by: ProEthica Case 71 Auto-Commit

EngineerB_FailedFactGatheringDiligence
type: Capability
type: NamedIndividual
source text: [discussion] Engineer B's failure to inquire from the contractor, workers or others on the job is a failure of fact gathering diligence
source text discussion: Engineer B's failure to inquire from the contractor, workers or others on the job is a failure of fact gathering diligence
generated at time: 2026-01-18T04:06:23.930988
was generated by: ProEthica Case 71 Auto-Commit

EngineerB_FailedInterpretiveTransparency
type: Capability
type: NamedIndividual
source text: [discussion] The opportunity for expert engineering review and interpretation of the pile driving test was effectively denied by Engineer B's report
source text discussion: The opportunity for expert engineering review and interpretation of the pile driving test was effectively denied by Engineer B's report
generated at time: 2026-01-18T04:06:23.931407
was generated by: ProEthica Case 71 Auto-Commit

EngineerB_FailedRationalePresentation
type: Capability
type: NamedIndividual
source text: [discussion] by excluding the pile driving records, Engineer B has denied himself the opportunity to present a rational for discounting their value
source text discussion: by excluding the pile driving records, Engineer B has denied himself the opportunity to present a rational for discounting their value
generated at time: 2026-01-18T04:06:23.931834
was generated by: ProEthica Case 71 Auto-Commit

EngineerB_InquireJobSitePersonnel
type: Obligation
type: NamedIndividual
source text: [facts] No effort was made by Engineer B to inquire from contractors, workers, or others on the job to verify or refute his theories
source text facts: No effort was made by Engineer B to inquire from contractors, workers, or others on the job to verify or refute his theories
generated at time: 2026-01-18T04:06:23.956323
was generated by: ProEthica Case 71 Auto-Commit

EngineerB_NonCompliance_ReportingRequirements
type: State
type: NamedIndividual
case involvement: Violated Code of Ethics requirement that engineers shall include all relevant and pertinent information in reports, statements or testimony
source text: [discussion] Neither interpretation is tolerated by the Code of Ethics which requires that engineers 'shall include all relevant and pertinent information in such report, statements or testimony.'
source text discussion: Neither interpretation is tolerated by the Code of Ethics which requires that engineers 'shall include all relevant and pertinent information in such report, statements or testimony.'
generated at time: 2026-01-18T04:06:23.980453
was generated by: ProEthica Case 71 Auto-Commit

EngineerB_NonDeception_Reporting
type: Constraint
type: NamedIndividual
source text: [facts] Engineer B did not state anywhere in the report that these 19 piles, according to the pile driving records, had been driven to essential refusal
source text facts: Engineer B did not state anywhere in the report that these 19 piles, according to the pile driving records, had been driven to essential refusal
generated at time: 2026-01-18T04:06:23.945737
was generated by: ProEthica Case 71 Auto-Commit

EngineerB_ObjectiveAnalysis_SelectiveData
type: Obligation
type: NamedIndividual
source text: [discussion] This is an egregious denial of the duties and responsibilities of a professional engineer in any setting, legal, quasi-legal or non-legal.
source text discussion: This is an egregious denial of the duties and responsibilities of a professional engineer in any setting, legal, quasi-legal or non-legal.
generated at time: 2026-01-18T04:06:23.956779
was generated by: ProEthica Case 71 Auto-Commit

EngineerB_ObjectiveExpertAnalysis
type: Obligation
type: NamedIndividual
source text: [facts] the municipality retained Engineer B to supervise the driving of several test piles
source text facts: the municipality retained Engineer B to supervise the driving of several test piles
generated at time: 2026-01-18T04:06:23.957204
was generated by: ProEthica Case 71 Auto-Commit

EngineerB_PileAnalysis_Deficient
type: Capability
type: NamedIndividual
source text: [facts] opinion was based upon the fact that the nineteen piles did not reach sufficient depth to develop the full strength when applying skin friction
source text facts: opinion was based upon the fact that the nineteen piles did not reach sufficient depth to develop the full strength when applying skin friction
generated at time: 2026-01-18T04:06:23.932291
was generated by: ProEthica Case 71 Auto-Commit

EngineerB_PileDrivingTestReport
type: Resource
type: NamedIndividual
source text: [discussion] At the conclusion of the program Engineer B reports that 19 piles do not meet the required factor of safety... Material facts, however, were not addressed in Engineer B's report.
source text discussion: At the conclusion of the program Engineer B reports that 19 piles do not meet the required factor of safety... Material facts, however, were not addressed in Engineer B's report.
generated at time: 2026-01-18T04:06:23.967622
was generated by: ProEthica Case 71 Auto-Commit

EngineerB_PileTestSupervision
type: Capability
type: NamedIndividual
source text: [facts] municipality retained Engineer B to supervise the driving of several test piles
source text facts: municipality retained Engineer B to supervise the driving of several test piles
generated at time: 2026-01-18T04:06:23.932839
was generated by: ProEthica Case 71 Auto-Commit

EngineerB_RecordVerification_Lacking
type: Capability
type: NamedIndividual
source text: [facts] At no time during the development of Engineer B's report did Engineer B talk to any representative of Engineer A
source text facts: At no time during the development of Engineer B's report did Engineer B talk to any representative of Engineer A
generated at time: 2026-01-18T04:06:23.933289
was generated by: ProEthica Case 71 Auto-Commit

EngineerB_ReportTestingMethodologyDeviations
type: Obligation
type: NamedIndividual
source text: [facts] Driving conditions were not duplicated in driving the test piles in that a vibratory hammer was used for the test piles and not used in the original driving
source text facts: Driving conditions were not duplicated in driving the test piles in that a vibratory hammer was used for the test piles and not used in the original driving
generated at time: 2026-01-18T04:06:23.957701
was generated by: ProEthica Case 71 Auto-Commit

EngineerB_ScopeLimitation_Unrecognized
type: Capability
type: NamedIndividual
source text: [facts] We didn't look at the pile driving records because it was not in our scope of work
source text facts: We didn't look at the pile driving records because it was not in our scope of work
generated at time: 2026-01-18T04:06:23.933736
was generated by: ProEthica Case 71 Auto-Commit

EngineerB_ScopeOfWork_PileDrivingRecords
type: Constraint
type: NamedIndividual
source text: [facts] We didn't look at the pile driving records because it was not in our scope of work.
source text facts: We didn't look at the pile driving records because it was not in our scope of work.
generated at time: 2026-01-18T04:06:23.946222
was generated by: ProEthica Case 71 Auto-Commit

EngineerB_SelectiveDataPresentation_PileTestReport
type: State
type: NamedIndividual
case involvement: Report excluded equipment failure and refusal data, potentially misdirecting conclusions and impugning Engineer A
source text: [discussion] Material facts, however, were not addressed in Engineer B's report. Among them, that dynamic test equipment failed during the test, and that all 19 test piles reported as failing the test were driven to refusal.
source text discussion: Material facts, however, were not addressed in Engineer B's report. Among them, that dynamic test equipment failed during the test, and that all 19 test piles reported as failing the test were driven to refusal.
generated at time: 2026-01-18T04:06:23.980922
was generated by: ProEthica Case 71 Auto-Commit

EngineerB_StakeholderConsultation_Constraint
type: Constraint
type: NamedIndividual
source text: [facts] At no time during the development of Engineer B's report did Engineer B talk to any representative of Engineer A
source text facts: At no time during the development of Engineer B's report did Engineer B talk to any representative of Engineer A
generated at time: 2026-01-18T04:06:23.946678
was generated by: ProEthica Case 71 Auto-Commit

EngineerB_VerifyDrivingRecords
type: Obligation
type: NamedIndividual
source text: [facts] We didn't look at the pile driving records because it was not in our scope of work
source text facts: We didn't look at the pile driving records because it was not in our scope of work
generated at time: 2026-01-18T04:06:23.958151
was generated by: ProEthica Case 71 Auto-Commit

EngineerB_WaveEquationAnalysis_NotApplied
type: Capability
type: NamedIndividual
source text: [facts] applying accepted wave equation calculations, the piles would have indicated a strength several multiples over the calculated load
source text facts: applying accepted wave equation calculations, the piles would have indicated a strength several multiples over the calculated load
generated at time: 2026-01-18T04:06:23.934171
was generated by: ProEthica Case 71 Auto-Commit

Engineer A's geotechnical consultant
type: Role
type: NamedIndividual
case involvement: Observed test pile driving, testified about equipment failure, noted testing conditions differed from original construction, opined that hammer drops broke pile bond and undervalued results
has active obligation: Identify testing irregularities
has active obligation: Observe testing procedures
has active obligation: Provide expert testimony
has ethical tension: Retained by party with interest in outcome, yet expected to provide objective testimony
has title: geotechnical consultant
retained by: Engineer A
source text: [facts] An independent geotechnical consultant was retained by Engineer A to observe the test.
source text facts: An independent geotechnical consultant was retained by Engineer A to observe the test.
generated at time: 2026-01-18T04:06:23.972302
was generated by: ProEthica Case 71 Auto-Commit

Engineer A's on-site representative
type: Role
type: NamedIndividual
case involvement: Present on-site during pile driving test; Engineer B failed to communicate with this representative
has active obligation: Assembly and interpretation of pile driving facts
represents: Engineer A
source text: [discussion] Engineer B may be criticized for his failure to communicate with Engineer A's on-site representative
source text discussion: Engineer B may be criticized for his failure to communicate with Engineer A's on-site representative
generated at time: 2026-01-18T04:06:23.972876
was generated by: ProEthica Case 71 Auto-Commit

Engineering_Code_of_Ethics_ReportingRequirement
type: Resource
type: NamedIndividual
source text: [discussion] Neither interpretation is tolerated by the Code of Ethics which requires that engineers 'shall include all relevant and pertinent information in such report, statements or testimony.' Note: Code III.1.f no longer exists.
source text discussion: Neither interpretation is tolerated by the Code of Ethics which requires that engineers 'shall include all relevant and pertinent information in such report, statements or testimony.' Note: Code III.1.f no longer exists.
generated at time: 2026-01-18T04:06:23.968145
was generated by: ProEthica Case 71 Auto-Commit

Engineers-FactBasedProblemSolving
type: Constraint
type: NamedIndividual
source text: [discussion] Engineers must be exponents of all the available technical facts as the basis for problem solving. Facts are not adversarial
source text discussion: Engineers must be exponents of all the available technical facts as the basis for problem solving. Facts are not adversarial
generated at time: 2026-01-18T04:06:23.947149
was generated by: ProEthica Case 71 Auto-Commit

Equipment Failure During Testing State
type: State
type: NamedIndividual
source text: [discussion] Among them, that dynamic test equipment failed during the test
source text discussion: Among them, that dynamic test equipment failed during the test
definition: A state where testing equipment has malfunctioned during a critical evaluation, potentially compromising the validity of test results
generated at time: 2026-01-18T04:06:23.981484
was generated by: ProEthica Case 71 Auto-Commit

Equipment Failures During Testing
type: Event
type: NamedIndividual
generated at time: 2026-01-18T04:06:23.987877
was generated by: ProEthica Case 71 Auto-Commit

Evidence Verification Constraint
type: Constraint
type: NamedIndividual
source text: [facts] No effort was made by Engineer B to inquire from contractors, workers, or others on the job to verify or refute his theories
source text facts: No effort was made by Engineer B to inquire from contractors, workers, or others on the job to verify or refute his theories
definition: Constraint requiring engineers to verify or investigate available evidence before drawing conclusions or issuing reports that may affect others
generated at time: 2026-01-18T04:06:23.947569
was generated by: ProEthica Case 71 Auto-Commit

Expert Concerns Raised
type: Event
type: NamedIndividual
generated at time: 2026-01-18T04:06:23.988393
was generated by: ProEthica Case 71 Auto-Commit

Expert Witness
type: Role
type: NamedIndividual
source text: [discussion] to support the original testimony of the municipality's expert witness
source text discussion: to support the original testimony of the municipality's expert witness
definition: Professional who provides expert testimony in legal or quasi-legal proceedings, offering technical opinions and interpretations to support dispute resolution
generated at time: 2026-01-18T04:06:23.973837
was generated by: ProEthica Case 71 Auto-Commit

Expert Witness Completeness
type: Capability
type: NamedIndividual
source text: [facts] Engineer B did not state anywhere in the report that these 19 piles...had been driven to essential refusal
source text facts: Engineer B did not state anywhere in the report that these 19 piles...had been driven to essential refusal
definition: The competency to provide complete, balanced expert testimony that includes all relevant findings, limitations, and alternative explanations
generated at time: 2026-01-18T04:06:23.934586
was generated by: ProEthica Case 71 Auto-Commit

Expert Witness Engagement
type: Action
type: NamedIndividual
generated at time: 2026-01-18T04:06:23.988907
was generated by: ProEthica Case 71 Auto-Commit

Fact-Based Objectivity
type: Principle
type: NamedIndividual
source text: [discussion] Engineer B appears to have assumed a responsibility to defend the client municipality by the selective use of data. This is an egregious denial of the duties and responsibilities of a professional engineer in any setting, legal, quasi-legal or non-legal.
source text discussion: Engineer B appears to have assumed a responsibility to defend the client municipality by the selective use of data. This is an egregious denial of the duties and responsibilities of a professional engineer in any setting, legal, quasi-legal or non-legal.
definition: Principle that engineering analysis must be grounded in technical facts rather than shaped by adversarial or partisan interests, maintaining independence from external pressures
generated at time: 2026-01-18T04:06:23.961513
was generated by: ProEthica Case 71 Auto-Commit

Fact-Gathering Diligence
type: Capability
type: NamedIndividual
source text: [discussion] Engineer B's failure to inquire from the contractor, workers or others on the job is a failure of fact gathering diligence.
source text discussion: Engineer B's failure to inquire from the contractor, workers or others on the job is a failure of fact gathering diligence.
definition: Constraint that limits engineers from drawing conclusions without conducting adequate investigation and inquiry from all available sources
definition: Obligation requiring engineers to conduct thorough investigation and inquiry from all available sources when gathering technical facts for professional conclusions
definition: The competency to proactively seek information from all available sources including contractors, workers, on-site representatives, and other stakeholders during engineering investigations
generated at time: 2026-01-18T04:06:23.935201
was generated by: ProEthica Case 71 Auto-Commit

Fact-Gathering Diligence Failure State
type: State
type: NamedIndividual
source text: [discussion] However, Engineer B's failure to inquire from the contractor, workers or others on the job is a failure of fact gathering diligence.
source text discussion: However, Engineer B's failure to inquire from the contractor, workers or others on the job is a failure of fact gathering diligence.
definition: A state where a professional has failed to exercise reasonable diligence in collecting relevant information from available sources
generated at time: 2026-01-18T04:06:23.981977
was generated by: ProEthica Case 71 Auto-Commit

Factor of Safety Specification
type: Resource
type: NamedIndividual
source text: [discussion] 19 piles do not meet the required factor of safety for the reason that the piles were not driven to a sufficient depth that pile friction resistance would support the load
source text discussion: 19 piles do not meet the required factor of safety for the reason that the piles were not driven to a sufficient depth that pile friction resistance would support the load
definition: Engineering standard or requirement specifying the minimum factor of safety that structural elements must achieve to be considered adequate for their intended load
generated at time: 2026-01-18T04:06:23.968634
was generated by: ProEthica Case 71 Auto-Commit

Field Investigation Omission
type: Action
type: NamedIndividual
generated at time: 2026-01-18T04:06:23.989426
was generated by: ProEthica Case 71 Auto-Commit

GeotechnicalConsultant_SkinFrictionAnalysis
type: Capability
type: NamedIndividual
source text: [facts] this would have broken the pile bond and undervalued the skin friction value reported by Engineer B's tests
source text facts: this would have broken the pile bond and undervalued the skin friction value reported by Engineer B's tests
generated at time: 2026-01-18T04:06:23.937607
was generated by: ProEthica Case 71 Auto-Commit

GeotechnicalConsultant_TestObservation
type: Capability
type: NamedIndividual
source text: [facts] geotechnical consultant testified and showed that dynamic test equipment had failed during the test
source text facts: geotechnical consultant testified and showed that dynamic test equipment had failed during the test
generated at time: 2026-01-18T04:06:23.938133
was generated by: ProEthica Case 71 Auto-Commit

Geotechnical Consultant
type: Role
type: NamedIndividual
source text: [facts] An independent geotechnical consultant was retained by Engineer A to observe the test.
source text facts: An independent geotechnical consultant was retained by Engineer A to observe the test.
definition: Specialized consultant providing expert analysis of soil conditions, pile behavior, and foundation performance, often retained to observe testing or provide expert testimony
generated at time: 2026-01-18T04:06:23.974297
was generated by: ProEthica Case 71 Auto-Commit

Geotechnical/Foundation Engineer
type: Role
type: NamedIndividual
source text: [discussion] To test the criteria and professional judgment upon which Engineer A's conclusion, and recommendations were based
source text discussion: To test the criteria and professional judgment upon which Engineer A's conclusion, and recommendations were based
definition: Professional engineer responsible for analyzing soil conditions, designing foundation systems, and making recommendations regarding pile driving and load-bearing capacity of structural foundations
generated at time: 2026-01-18T04:06:23.974748
was generated by: ProEthica Case 71 Auto-Commit

Geotechnical Testing Protocol Design
type: Capability
type: NamedIndividual
source text: [facts] test piles were not driven to the same depth of penetration that apparently was required for the plug to form in the original piles
source text facts: test piles were not driven to the same depth of penetration that apparently was required for the plug to form in the original piles
definition: The competency to design and specify testing protocols that accurately replicate original construction conditions to ensure valid comparative results
generated at time: 2026-01-18T04:06:23.937010
was generated by: ProEthica Case 71 Auto-Commit

Honesty_Case77_Discussion_Completeness
type: Principle
type: NamedIndividual
source text: [discussion] Neither interpretation is tolerated by the Code of Ethics which requires that engineers 'shall include all relevant and pertinent information in such report, statements or testimony.'
source text discussion: Neither interpretation is tolerated by the Code of Ethics which requires that engineers 'shall include all relevant and pertinent information in such report, statements or testimony.'
generated at time: 2026-01-18T04:06:23.961962
was generated by: ProEthica Case 71 Auto-Commit

Honesty_EngineerB_Contradictions
type: Principle
type: NamedIndividual
source text: [facts] When queried by Engineer A after the report was issued by Engineer B, Engineer B said: 'We just did not believe the driving records and there was also the issue of whether the pile was vented to allow air to escape from below a closure plate that was included in the pile to separate the concrete fill in the pile from the clay. The driving records look suspicious.' Previously, Engineer B had said, 'We didn't look at the pile driving records because it was not in our scope of work.'
source text facts: When queried by Engineer A after the report was issued by Engineer B, Engineer B said: 'We just did not believe the driving records and there was also the issue of whether the pile was vented to allow air to escape from below a closure plate that was included in the pile to separate the concrete fill in the pile from the clay. The driving records look suspicious.' Previously, Engineer B had said, 'We didn't look at the pile driving records because it was not in our scope of work.'
generated at time: 2026-01-18T04:06:23.962405
was generated by: ProEthica Case 71 Auto-Commit

Independent Engineer Retention
type: Action
type: NamedIndividual
generated at time: 2026-01-18T04:06:23.989834
was generated by: ProEthica Case 71 Auto-Commit

Independent Testing Engineer
type: Role
type: NamedIndividual
source text: [facts] the municipality retained Engineer B to supervise the driving of several test piles to see whether the piles would gain sufficient strength
source text facts: the municipality retained Engineer B to supervise the driving of several test piles to see whether the piles would gain sufficient strength
definition: Professional engineer retained to conduct independent testing and evaluation of construction work, providing expert assessment of whether completed work meets design specifications
generated at time: 2026-01-18T04:06:23.975180
was generated by: ProEthica Case 71 Auto-Commit

Initial Dock Design Decision
type: Action
type: NamedIndividual
generated at time: 2026-01-18T04:06:23.990220
was generated by: ProEthica Case 71 Auto-Commit

Initial Dock Design Decision → Contractor Legal Action
type: NamedIndividual
generated at time: 2026-01-18T04:06:23.990580
was generated by: ProEthica Case 71 Auto-Commit

IntellectualHonesty_Case77_Discussion_Rationale
type: Principle
type: NamedIndividual
source text: [discussion] Further, by excluding the pile driving records, Engineer B has denied himself the opportunity to present a rational for discounting their value, and thereby to serve his client.
source text discussion: Further, by excluding the pile driving records, Engineer B has denied himself the opportunity to present a rational for discounting their value, and thereby to serve his client.
generated at time: 2026-01-18T04:06:23.962820
was generated by: ProEthica Case 71 Auto-Commit

IntellectualHonesty_EngineerB_Records
type: Principle
type: NamedIndividual
source text: [facts] Previously, Engineer B had said, 'We didn't look at the pile driving records because it was not in our scope of work.'
source text facts: Previously, Engineer B had said, 'We didn't look at the pile driving records because it was not in our scope of work.'
generated at time: 2026-01-18T04:06:23.963266
was generated by: ProEthica Case 71 Auto-Commit

Interpretive Transparency
type: Capability
type: NamedIndividual
source text: [discussion] the select language of the report precludes any interpretation that any or all 90 piles met the factor of safety requirement
source text discussion: the select language of the report precludes any interpretation that any or all 90 piles met the factor of safety requirement
definition: The competency to present engineering conclusions in language that permits alternative interpretations and expert review, rather than using selective language that forecloses other valid conclusions
generated at time: 2026-01-18T04:06:23.938585
was generated by: ProEthica Case 71 Auto-Commit

Investigative Thoroughness
type: Principle
type: NamedIndividual
source text: [facts] At no time during the development of Engineer B's report did Engineer B talk to any representative of Engineer A, even though Engineer A's on-site representatives were available to testify as to the accuracy of the pile driving records. No effort was made by Engineer B to inquire from contractors, workers, or others on the job to verify or refute his theories about why the 19 piles met driving refusal prior to predicted depth.
source text facts: At no time during the development of Engineer B's report did Engineer B talk to any representative of Engineer A, even though Engineer A's on-site representatives were available to testify as to the accuracy of the pile driving records. No effort was made by Engineer B to inquire from contractors, workers, or others on the job to verify or refute his theories about why the 19 piles met driving refusal prior to predicted depth.
definition: Principle that engineers must conduct comprehensive and diligent investigation of all available evidence and information before rendering professional opinions or conclusions
generated at time: 2026-01-18T04:06:23.963709
was generated by: ProEthica Case 71 Auto-Commit

Loyalty_Case77_Discussion_Misapplied
type: Principle
type: NamedIndividual
source text: [discussion] As an engineering document the report is incomplete and does a disservice to Engineer B's client municipality by potentially misdirecting a conclusion.
source text discussion: As an engineering document the report is incomplete and does a disservice to Engineer B's client municipality by potentially misdirecting a conclusion.
generated at time: 2026-01-18T04:06:23.964158
was generated by: ProEthica Case 71 Auto-Commit

Methodological Rigor
type: Principle
type: NamedIndividual
source text: [facts] The geotechnical consultant testified and showed that dynamic test equipment had failed during the test and that the test piles were not driven to the same depth of penetration that apparently was required for the plug to form in the original piles. Driving conditions were not duplicated in driving the test piles in that a vibratory hammer was used for the test piles and not used in the original driving.
source text facts: The geotechnical consultant testified and showed that dynamic test equipment had failed during the test and that the test piles were not driven to the same depth of penetration that apparently was required for the plug to form in the original piles. Driving conditions were not duplicated in driving the test piles in that a vibratory hammer was used for the test piles and not used in the original driving.
definition: Principle that engineers must ensure testing and evaluation methods accurately replicate relevant conditions and follow accepted scientific and engineering practices
generated at time: 2026-01-18T04:06:23.964632
was generated by: ProEthica Case 71 Auto-Commit

Municipal Infrastructure Design Engineer
type: Role
type: NamedIndividual
source text: [facts] Engineer A was retained by a municipality to design a dock on a supporting foundation of 90 piles.
source text facts: Engineer A was retained by a municipality to design a dock on a supporting foundation of 90 piles.
definition: Professional engineer retained by governmental entities to design public infrastructure projects such as docks, bridges, and foundations, responsible for structural calculations and specifications
generated at time: 2026-01-18T04:06:23.975596
was generated by: ProEthica Case 71 Auto-Commit

Municipality_EngineerA_AdversarialRelationship_SettlementDispute
type: State
type: NamedIndividual
case involvement: Created the adversarial context in which Engineer B was retained and conducted testing
source text: [discussion] In this case, an adversarial relationship is established between the municipality and Engineer A to resolve the sharing of a settlement cost between the two.
source text discussion: In this case, an adversarial relationship is established between the municipality and Engineer A to resolve the sharing of a settlement cost between the two.
generated at time: 2026-01-18T04:06:23.982534
was generated by: ProEthica Case 71 Auto-Commit

Non-Adversarial Fact Presentation
type: Capability
type: NamedIndividual
source text: [discussion] Facts are not adversarial, even if they may be conflicting. Adversarial interests, however, are polarizing to the effect that some facts may be preferred
source text discussion: Facts are not adversarial, even if they may be conflicting. Adversarial interests, however, are polarizing to the effect that some facts may be preferred
definition: The competency to present technical findings objectively without allowing adversarial interests to influence the selection or emphasis of facts
generated at time: 2026-01-18T04:06:23.939042
was generated by: ProEthica Case 71 Auto-Commit

Objective Expert Analysis
type: Obligation
type: NamedIndividual
source text: [facts] Engineer B did not state anywhere in the report that these 19 piles...applying accepted wave equation calculations, the piles would have indicated a strength several multiples over
source text facts: Engineer B did not state anywhere in the report that these 19 piles...applying accepted wave equation calculations, the piles would have indicated a strength several multiples over
definition: Obligation requiring professionals serving as expert witnesses or consultants to provide objective, unbiased analysis regardless of which party retained them
generated at time: 2026-01-18T04:06:23.958575
was generated by: ProEthica Case 71 Auto-Commit

Objective Technical Analysis
type: Obligation
type: NamedIndividual
source text: [discussion] Engineer B appears to have assumed a responsibility to defend the client municipality by the selective use of data.
source text discussion: Engineer B appears to have assumed a responsibility to defend the client municipality by the selective use of data.
definition: Obligation requiring engineers to base conclusions on complete technical facts without allowing adversarial interests to influence selective use of data
generated at time: 2026-01-18T04:06:23.958996
was generated by: ProEthica Case 71 Auto-Commit

Objectivity_Case77_Discussion_Adversarial
type: Principle
type: NamedIndividual
source text: [discussion] Engineers must be exponents of all the available technical facts as the basis for problem solving. Facts are not adversarial, even if they may be conflicting.
source text discussion: Engineers must be exponents of all the available technical facts as the basis for problem solving. Facts are not adversarial, even if they may be conflicting.
generated at time: 2026-01-18T04:06:23.965075
was generated by: ProEthica Case 71 Auto-Commit

Objectivity_EngineerB_Report
type: Principle
type: NamedIndividual
source text: [facts] Engineer B did not state anywhere in the report that these 19 piles, according to the pile driving records, had been driven to essential refusal and that, applying accepted wave equation calculations, the piles would have indicated a strength several multiples over the calculated load requirements.
source text facts: Engineer B did not state anywhere in the report that these 19 piles, according to the pile driving records, had been driven to essential refusal and that, applying accepted wave equation calculations, the piles would have indicated a strength several multiples over the calculated load requirements.
generated at time: 2026-01-18T04:06:23.965528
was generated by: ProEthica Case 71 Auto-Commit

PileDriving_FieldRecords_19Piles
type: Resource
type: NamedIndividual
source text: [discussion] all 19 test piles reported as failing the test were driven to refusal... by excluding the pile driving records, Engineer B has denied himself the opportunity to present a rational for discounting their value
source text discussion: all 19 test piles reported as failing the test were driven to refusal... by excluding the pile driving records, Engineer B has denied himself the opportunity to present a rational for discounting their value
generated at time: 2026-01-18T04:06:23.970005
was generated by: ProEthica Case 71 Auto-Commit

PileTest_EquipmentFailure_DynamicTestEquipment
type: State
type: NamedIndividual
case involvement: Material fact that was excluded from Engineer B's report, affecting validity of test conclusions
source text: [discussion] Among them, that dynamic test equipment failed during the test
source text discussion: Among them, that dynamic test equipment failed during the test
generated at time: 2026-01-18T04:06:23.983019
was generated by: ProEthica Case 71 Auto-Commit

Pile Driving Analysis
type: Capability
type: NamedIndividual
source text: [facts] applying accepted wave equation calculations, the piles would have indicated a strength several multiples over the calculated load requirements
source text facts: applying accepted wave equation calculations, the piles would have indicated a strength several multiples over the calculated load requirements
definition: The technical competency to analyze pile driving records, apply wave equation calculations, and assess load-bearing capacity through multiple analytical methods
generated at time: 2026-01-18T04:06:23.939473
was generated by: ProEthica Case 71 Auto-Commit

Pile Driving Records
type: Resource
type: NamedIndividual
source text: [discussion] by excluding the pile driving records, Engineer B has denied himself the opportunity to present a rational for discounting their value
source text discussion: by excluding the pile driving records, Engineer B has denied himself the opportunity to present a rational for discounting their value
definition: Field documentation recording the actual conditions and data from pile driving operations, including driving depth, refusal conditions, and equipment status
generated at time: 2026-01-18T04:06:23.969109
was generated by: ProEthica Case 71 Auto-Commit

Pile Driving Test Report
type: Resource
type: NamedIndividual
source text: [discussion] At the conclusion of the program Engineer B reports that 19 piles do not meet the required factor of safety for the reason that the piles were not driven to a sufficient depth
source text discussion: At the conclusion of the program Engineer B reports that 19 piles do not meet the required factor of safety for the reason that the piles were not driven to a sufficient depth
definition: Technical engineering document that records and reports the results of pile driving tests, including load capacity, factor of safety calculations, and driving conditions
generated at time: 2026-01-18T04:06:23.969535
was generated by: ProEthica Case 71 Auto-Commit

Pile Safety Failures Identified
type: Event
type: NamedIndividual
generated at time: 2026-01-18T04:06:23.990957
was generated by: ProEthica Case 71 Auto-Commit

ProfessionalAccountability_Case77_Discussion_Independent
type: Principle
type: NamedIndividual
source text: [discussion] We are inclined to the view that each was independently responsible for the assembly and interpretation of the facts of the pile driving.
source text discussion: We are inclined to the view that each was independently responsible for the assembly and interpretation of the facts of the pile driving.
generated at time: 2026-01-18T04:06:23.965951
was generated by: ProEthica Case 71 Auto-Commit

ProfessionalAccountability_ReportOmissions
type: Principle
type: NamedIndividual
source text: [facts] Additionally, Engineer B did not report that the dynamic test equipment had failed.
source text facts: Additionally, Engineer B did not report that the dynamic test equipment had failed.
generated at time: 2026-01-18T04:06:23.966354
was generated by: ProEthica Case 71 Auto-Commit

ProfessionalCompetence_TestingMethods
type: Principle
type: NamedIndividual
source text: [facts] The geotechnical consultant testified and showed that dynamic test equipment had failed during the test and that the test piles were not driven to the same depth of penetration that apparently was required for the plug to form in the original piles.
source text facts: The geotechnical consultant testified and showed that dynamic test equipment had failed during the test and that the test piles were not driven to the same depth of penetration that apparently was required for the plug to form in the original piles.
generated at time: 2026-01-18T04:06:23.966777
was generated by: ProEthica Case 71 Auto-Commit

Professional Engineering Code of Ethics
type: NamedIndividual
match confidence: 0.8
source text: [discussion] Neither interpretation is tolerated by the Code of Ethics which requires that engineers 'shall include all relevant and pertinent information in such report, statements or testimony.'
source text discussion: Neither interpretation is tolerated by the Code of Ethics which requires that engineers 'shall include all relevant and pertinent information in such report, statements or testimony.'
definition: Formal ethical standards and requirements governing the professional conduct of engineers, including duties related to honesty, completeness of reporting, and professional responsibility
generated at time: 2026-01-18T04:06:23.970520
was generated by: ProEthica Case 71 Auto-Commit

Project_FactorOfSafety_Requirement
type: Resource
type: NamedIndividual
source text: [discussion] 19 piles do not meet the required factor of safety for the reason that the piles were not driven to a sufficient depth that pile friction resistance would support the load
source text discussion: 19 piles do not meet the required factor of safety for the reason that the piles were not driven to a sufficient depth that pile friction resistance would support the load
generated at time: 2026-01-18T04:06:23.971092
was generated by: ProEthica Case 71 Auto-Commit

Scope Limitation Decision
type: Action
type: NamedIndividual
generated at time: 2026-01-18T04:06:23.991323
was generated by: ProEthica Case 71 Auto-Commit

Scope Limitation Decision → Critical Data Exclusion
type: NamedIndividual
generated at time: 2026-01-18T04:06:23.991758
was generated by: ProEthica Case 71 Auto-Commit

Scope Limitation Recognition
type: Capability
type: NamedIndividual
source text: [facts] We didn't look at the pile driving records because it was not in our scope of work
source text facts: We didn't look at the pile driving records because it was not in our scope of work
definition: The competency to recognize when assigned scope of work is insufficient for reaching valid conclusions and to communicate the need for expanded investigation
generated at time: 2026-01-18T04:06:23.939991
was generated by: ProEthica Case 71 Auto-Commit

Scope of Work Limitation
type: Constraint
type: NamedIndividual
source text: [facts] We didn't look at the pile driving records because it was not in our scope of work.
source text facts: We didn't look at the pile driving records because it was not in our scope of work.
definition: Constraint that restricts an engineer's investigation, analysis, or reporting to only those activities explicitly defined in their contractual scope, potentially limiting comprehensive assessment
generated at time: 2026-01-18T04:06:23.947985
was generated by: ProEthica Case 71 Auto-Commit

Selective Data Presentation State
type: State
type: NamedIndividual
source text: [discussion] Material facts, however, were not addressed in Engineer B's report. Among them, that dynamic test equipment failed during the test, and that all 19 test piles reported as failing the test were driven to refusal.
source text discussion: Material facts, however, were not addressed in Engineer B's report. Among them, that dynamic test equipment failed during the test, and that all 19 test piles reported as failing the test were driven to refusal.
definition: A state where a professional has chosen to present only partial technical facts, excluding material information that could affect conclusions
generated at time: 2026-01-18T04:06:23.983468
was generated by: ProEthica Case 71 Auto-Commit

Settlement Agreement Reached
type: Event
type: NamedIndividual
generated at time: 2026-01-18T04:06:23.992235
was generated by: ProEthica Case 71 Auto-Commit

Technical Completeness
type: Principle
type: NamedIndividual
source text: [discussion] Material facts, however, were not addressed in Engineer B's report. Among them, that dynamic test equipment failed during the test, and that all 19 test piles reported as failing the test were driven to refusal.
source text discussion: Material facts, however, were not addressed in Engineer B's report. Among them, that dynamic test equipment failed during the test, and that all 19 test piles reported as failing the test were driven to refusal.
definition: Principle that engineering reports, statements, and testimony must include all relevant and pertinent technical information, not selectively presenting data to support predetermined conclusions
generated at time: 2026-01-18T04:06:23.967191
was generated by: ProEthica Case 71 Auto-Commit

Technical Fact Exposition
type: Obligation
type: NamedIndividual
source text: [discussion] Engineers must be exponents of all the available technical facts as the basis for problem solving. Facts are not adversarial, even if they may be conflicting.
source text discussion: Engineers must be exponents of all the available technical facts as the basis for problem solving. Facts are not adversarial, even if they may be conflicting.
definition: Obligation requiring engineers to be exponents of all available technical facts as the basis for problem solving, presenting facts without adversarial bias
generated at time: 2026-01-18T04:06:23.959420
was generated by: ProEthica Case 71 Auto-Commit

TestPile_MethodologyReplication_Constraint
type: Constraint
type: NamedIndividual
source text: [facts] Driving conditions were not duplicated in driving the test piles in that a vibratory hammer was used for the test piles
source text facts: Driving conditions were not duplicated in driving the test piles in that a vibratory hammer was used for the test piles
generated at time: 2026-01-18T04:06:23.948449
was generated by: ProEthica Case 71 Auto-Commit

Test Pile Driving
type: Event
type: NamedIndividual
generated at time: 2026-01-18T04:06:23.992719
was generated by: ProEthica Case 71 Auto-Commit

Test Program Supervisor
type: Role
type: NamedIndividual
source text: [discussion] the municipality arranged for a test pile driving program and retained Engineer B to supervise the program
source text discussion: the municipality arranged for a test pile driving program and retained Engineer B to supervise the program
definition: Professional engineer retained to supervise and report on testing programs designed to verify or challenge prior engineering conclusions, with responsibility for complete and accurate documentation of test results
generated at time: 2026-01-18T04:06:23.976011
was generated by: ProEthica Case 71 Auto-Commit

Testing Methodology Constraint
type: Constraint
type: NamedIndividual
source text: [facts] Driving conditions were not duplicated in driving the test piles in that a vibratory hammer was used for the test piles and not used in the original driving.
source text facts: Driving conditions were not duplicated in driving the test piles in that a vibratory hammer was used for the test piles and not used in the original driving.
definition: Constraint requiring that test conditions replicate original conditions to produce valid comparative results, limiting acceptable testing procedures
generated at time: 2026-01-18T04:06:23.948914
was generated by: ProEthica Case 71 Auto-Commit

Verification of Source Data
type: Obligation
type: NamedIndividual
source text: [facts] We didn't look at the pile driving records because it was not in our scope of work
source text facts: We didn't look at the pile driving records because it was not in our scope of work
definition: Obligation requiring professionals to verify the accuracy and reliability of data upon which they base their professional conclusions, rather than dismissing or ignoring available records
generated at time: 2026-01-18T04:06:23.959957
was generated by: ProEthica Case 71 Auto-Commit

construction before contractor lawsuit
type: NamedIndividual
generated at time: 2026-01-18T04:06:23.993165
was generated by: ProEthica Case 71 Auto-Commit

dock design before construction
type: NamedIndividual
generated at time: 2026-01-18T04:06:23.993604
was generated by: ProEthica Case 71 Auto-Commit

expert witness testimony during mediation
type: NamedIndividual
generated at time: 2026-01-18T04:06:23.993999
was generated by: ProEthica Case 71 Auto-Commit

initial pile driving before 30-day setup period
type: NamedIndividual
generated at time: 2026-01-18T04:06:23.994372
was generated by: ProEthica Case 71 Auto-Commit

lawsuit before mediation settlement
type: NamedIndividual
generated at time: 2026-01-18T04:06:23.994726
was generated by: ProEthica Case 71 Auto-Commit

mediation before test pile program
type: NamedIndividual
generated at time: 2026-01-18T04:06:23.995077
was generated by: ProEthica Case 71 Auto-Commit

municipality's expert witness
type: Role
type: NamedIndividual
case involvement: Provided original testimony that Engineer B's report appeared to support
has active obligation: Provide expert testimony
retained by: municipality
source text: [discussion] to support the original testimony of the municipality's expert witness
source text discussion: to support the original testimony of the municipality's expert witness
generated at time: 2026-01-18T04:06:23.978271
was generated by: ProEthica Case 71 Auto-Commit

test pile driving before Engineer B's report
type: NamedIndividual
generated at time: 2026-01-18T04:06:23.995411
was generated by: ProEthica Case 71 Auto-Commit

Engineer B
type: Role
type: NamedIndividual
case involvement: Retained to supervise test piles, issued report stating 19 piles did not meet safety factor, failed to report equipment failure, did not apply wave equation calculations, did not consult available witnesses
has active obligation: Evaluate pile adequacy
has active obligation: Prepare concluding report
has active obligation: Supervise test pile driving
has ethical tension: Contradictory statements about scope of work vs. belief in records
has ethical tension: Did not consult with Engineer A's representatives
has ethical tension: Did not verify pile driving records
has ethical tension: Failed to report dynamic test equipment failure
has ethical tension: Selective reporting of findings
has title: Engineer
retained by: municipality
source text: [facts] the municipality retained Engineer B to supervise the driving of several test piles
source text facts: the municipality retained Engineer B to supervise the driving of several test piles
generated at time: 2026-01-18T04:06:23.973339
was generated by: ProEthica Case 71 Auto-Commit

expert witnesses
type: Role
type: NamedIndividual
generated at time: 2026-01-18T04:06:23.977003
was generated by: ProEthica Case 71 Auto-Commit

independent geotechnical consultant
type: Role
type: NamedIndividual
generated at time: 2026-01-18T04:06:23.977405
was generated by: ProEthica Case 71 Auto-Commit

contractor
type: Role
type: NamedIndividual
case involvement: Filed extra claim, sued Engineer A and municipality, settled through mediation for $300,000
has active obligation: Pursue extra claim for additional work/costs
source text: [facts] there was a contractor's extra claim and Engineer A and the municipality were both sued by the contractor.
source text facts: there was a contractor's extra claim and Engineer A and the municipality were both sued by the contractor.
sued: Engineer A
sued: municipality
generated at time: 2026-01-18T04:06:23.976546
was generated by: ProEthica Case 71 Auto-Commit

Engineer A
type: Role
type: NamedIndividual
case involvement: Designed the dock foundation, was sued along with municipality, testified about geotechnical expectations, retained independent consultant to observe testing
has active obligation: Coordinate with geotechnical experts
has active obligation: Defend design calculations
has active obligation: Provide testimony regarding design expectations
has ethical tension: Defending own design work while being objective about potential deficiencies
has ethical tension: Financial interest in settlement outcome vs. technical accuracy
has specialization: dock and pile foundation design
has title: Engineer
retained: independent geotechnical consultant
retained by: municipality
source text: [facts] Engineer A was retained by a municipality to design a dock on a supporting foundation of 90 piles.
source text facts: Engineer A was retained by a municipality to design a dock on a supporting foundation of 90 piles.
sued by: contractor
generated at time: 2026-01-18T04:06:23.971655
was generated by: ProEthica Case 71 Auto-Commit

municipality
type: Role
type: NamedIndividual
brought in: expert witnesses
case involvement: Retained Engineer A for design, was sued by contractor, retained Engineer B for testing, brought expert witnesses to mediation, shared settlement cost
has active obligation: Defend against contractor claims
has active obligation: Investigate construction issues
has ethical tension: Interest in minimizing settlement costs vs. fair resolution
retained: Engineer A
retained: Engineer B
source text: [facts] Engineer A was retained by a municipality to design a dock on a supporting foundation of 90 piles.
source text facts: Engineer A was retained by a municipality to design a dock on a supporting foundation of 90 piles.
sued by: contractor
generated at time: 2026-01-18T04:06:23.977786
was generated by: ProEthica Case 71 Auto-Commit