This page shows the pre-commit working store (the raw extraction under review). This case was committed to OntServe on 2026-10-24 07:57; the committed record differs by design (deduplication, typing, and agent binding are applied at commit). View the committed record
Overview
Facts Discussion
Provenance Draft

PASS 1: Contextual Framework Facts Section

Case 124: Public Criticism of Proposed Public Highway Route

R Roles
1
Classes
3
Individuals
S States
3
Classes
4
Individuals
Rs Resources
1
Classes
2
Individuals

Extracted Ontology Entities

14 RDF entities extracted organized by concept type

R Roles

Roles Classes
1
changed
PublicAuthorityRole
rdfs:subClassOf Roles
New C124
Definition
Extracted from facts primary
A participant role of a state government agency that prepares engineering data, cost estimates, and route proposals for public highway projects and indicates a preferred alternative among proposed routes. It bears standing in the case as the proposing authority, with no profession-generated code obligations articulated by the case.
Properties
Text References:
"A state highway department prepared engineering data on alternate routes for a by-pass of part of the interstate highway system in the state, including cost estimates for three possible routes."
"The highway department indicated it favored route "B"."
Confidence: 0.85
Role Kind: participant
Distinguishing Features:
  • Prepares engineering data and cost estimates for alternate public highway routes
  • Indicates a favored route among the alternatives it studied
[facts] "A state highway department prepared engineering data on alternate routes for a by-pass of part of the interstate highway system in the state, including cost estimates for three possible routes. The hi..."
Field classification (triples vs literals)
Literal extractions (kept for synthesis)
  • textReferences content: A state highway department prepared engineering data on alternate routes for a by-pass of part of the interstate highway system in the state, including cost estimates for three possible routes.; The highway department indicated it favored route "B".
  • roleKind content: participant
  • distinguishingFeatures content: Prepares engineering data and cost estimates for alternate public highway routes; Indicates a favored route among the alternatives it studied
  • confidence assessment: 0.85
Roles Individuals
3
Linked
Consultant Engineer Role
C124
Text References:
"A principal of a consulting engineering firm, which had performed the engineering work on a portion of the interstate highway to which the by-pass would connect, issued a public letter, "To Whom Conce..."
"His letter stated disagreement with the cost estimates of the highway department and pointed out alleged disadvantages of the proposed route."
"The letter then suggested a fourth route ("D") which, it was claimed, would be superior to those previously suggested."
Confidence: 0.9
Actor: Consulting Engineer
Role Class: Consultant Engineer Role
Role Kind: professional
Specialty: Highway engineering
Employer: Consulting engineering firm
Technical Background: Performed the engineering work on a portion of the interstate highway to which the by-pass would connect
Additional Relationships:
  • {'type': 'publicly disputed cost estimates and route proposal of', 'target': 'State Highway Department', 'quote': 'His letter stated disagreement with the cost estimates of the highway department and pointed out alleged disadvantages of the proposed route.'}
  • {'type': 'firm performed engineering work on connecting portion of', 'target': 'Interstate highway project', 'quote': 'which had performed the engineering work on a portion of the interstate highway to which the by-pass would connect'}
Case Involvement: Issued a public letter, published in the local press, disagreeing with the highway department's cost estimates, pointing out alleged disadvantages of proposed route B, and suggesting a fourth route D claimed to be superior to those previously suggested.
Position: Principal of the consulting engineering firm
[facts] "A principal of a consulting engineering firm, which had performed the engineering work on a portion of the interstate highway to which the by-pass would connect, issued a public letter, "To Whom Conce..."
Field classification (triples vs literals)
Relations (structural triples)
  • actor: Consulting Engineer
  • attributes: {'position': 'Principal of the consulting engineering firm'}
Literal extractions (kept for synthesis)
  • textReferences content: A principal of a consulting engineering firm, which had performed the engineering work on a portion of the interstate highway to which the by-pass would connect, issued a public letter, "To Whom Concerned," which was published in the local press, discussing the alternative routes.; His letter stated disagreement with the cost estimates of the highway department and pointed out alleged disadvantages of the proposed route.; The letter then suggested a fourth route ("D") which, it was claimed, would be superior to those previously suggested.
  • roleClass content: Consultant Engineer Role
  • roleKind content: professional
  • specialty content: Highway engineering
  • employer content: Consulting engineering firm
  • technicalBackground content: Performed the engineering work on a portion of the interstate highway to which the by-pass would connect
  • additionalRelationships content: {'type': 'publicly disputed cost estimates and route proposal of', 'target': 'State Highway Department', 'quote': 'His letter stated disagreement with the cost estimates of the highway department and pointed out alleged disadvantages of the proposed route.'}; {'type': 'firm performed engineering work on connecting portion of', 'target': 'Interstate highway project', 'quote': 'which had performed the engineering work on a portion of the interstate highway to which the by-pass would connect'}
  • caseInvolvement content: Issued a public letter, published in the local press, disagreeing with the highway department's cost estimates, pointing out alleged disadvantages of proposed route B, and suggesting a fourth route D claimed to be superior to those previously suggested.
  • confidence assessment: 0.9
City Official Route Critic
Municipal Official Role
Linked
Municipal Official Role
C124
Text References:
"An official of a city located close to the proposed route publicly criticized the proposed route "B" because he felt it would endanger the city's water supply and be a detriment to the development of ..."
"The newspaper story containing the full text of the letter from the consulting engineer also quoted the city official as favoring route "D" proposed by the consulting engineer."
Confidence: 0.9
Actor: City Official
Role Class: Municipal Official Role
Role Kind: participant
Employer: City located close to the proposed route
Additional Relationships:
  • {'type': 'publicly criticized route proposal of', 'target': 'State Highway Department', 'quote': 'An official of a city located close to the proposed route publicly criticized the proposed route "B" because he felt it would endanger the city\'s water supply and be a detriment to the development of a lake as a proposed recreation area.'}
  • {'type': 'publicly favored alternate route proposed by', 'target': 'Consulting Engineer', 'quote': 'also quoted the city official as favoring route "D" proposed by the consulting engineer'}
Case Involvement: Publicly criticized proposed route B because he felt it would endanger the city's water supply and be a detriment to the development of a lake as a proposed recreation area, and was quoted in the newspaper as favoring route D proposed by the consulting engineer.
[facts] "An official of a city located close to the proposed route publicly criticized the proposed route "B" because he felt it would endanger the city's water supply and be a detriment to the development of ..."
Field classification (triples vs literals)
Relations (structural triples)
  • actor: City Official
Literal extractions (kept for synthesis)
  • textReferences content: An official of a city located close to the proposed route publicly criticized the proposed route "B" because he felt it would endanger the city's water supply and be a detriment to the development of a lake as a proposed recreation area.; The newspaper story containing the full text of the letter from the consulting engineer also quoted the city official as favoring route "D" proposed by the consulting engineer.
  • roleClass content: Municipal Official Role
  • roleKind content: participant
  • employer content: City located close to the proposed route
  • additionalRelationships content: {'type': 'publicly criticized route proposal of', 'target': 'State Highway Department', 'quote': 'An official of a city located close to the proposed route publicly criticized the proposed route "B" because he felt it would endanger the city\'s water supply and be a detriment to the development of a lake as a proposed recreation area.'}; {'type': 'publicly favored alternate route proposed by', 'target': 'Consulting Engineer', 'quote': 'also quoted the city official as favoring route "D" proposed by the consulting engineer'}
  • caseInvolvement content: Publicly criticized proposed route B because he felt it would endanger the city's water supply and be a detriment to the development of a lake as a proposed recreation area, and was quoted in the newspaper as favoring route D proposed by the consulting engineer.
  • confidence assessment: 0.9
New C124
Text References:
"A state highway department prepared engineering data on alternate routes for a by-pass of part of the interstate highway system in the state, including cost estimates for three possible routes."
"The highway department indicated it favored route "B"."
Confidence: 0.85
Actor: State Highway Department
Role Class: State Highway Agency
Role Kind: participant
Case Involvement: Prepared engineering data on alternate routes for a by-pass of part of the interstate highway system, including cost estimates for three possible routes, and indicated it favored route B.
[facts] "A state highway department prepared engineering data on alternate routes for a by-pass of part of the interstate highway system in the state, including cost estimates for three possible routes. The hi..."
Field classification (triples vs literals)
Relations (structural triples)
  • actor: State Highway Department
Literal extractions (kept for synthesis)
  • textReferences content: A state highway department prepared engineering data on alternate routes for a by-pass of part of the interstate highway system in the state, including cost estimates for three possible routes.; The highway department indicated it favored route "B".
  • roleClass content: State Highway Agency
  • roleKind content: participant
  • caseInvolvement content: Prepared engineering data on alternate routes for a by-pass of part of the interstate highway system, including cost estimates for three possible routes, and indicated it favored route B.
  • confidence assessment: 0.85

S States

States Classes
3
changed
PendingDecisionState
rdfs:subClassOf States
New C124
Definition
Extracted from facts primary
A temporal condition in which a public authority has prepared and presented alternatives on a public matter but has not yet chosen among them, so professional comments and route proposals occur before the decision is rendered, here the state highway department having prepared engineering data and cost estimates on alternate by-pass routes and having indicated it favors route B while the route remains unselected.
Properties
Text References:
"A state highway department prepared engineering data on alternate routes for a by-pass of part of the interstate highway system in the state, including cost estimates for three possible routes."
"The highway department indicated it favored route "B"."
Confidence: 0.85
State Category: temporal
Persistence Type: inertial
Activation Conditions: The highway department prepares alternate routes and indicates a favored route without a final selection
Termination Conditions: The route for the by-pass is finally selected
Principle Transformation: Because the route decision is still open, public professional comment and alternative proposals occur before the decision rather than as challenges to a settled outcome.
[facts] "A state highway department prepared engineering data on alternate routes for a by-pass of part of the interstate highway system in the state, including cost estimates for three possible routes. The hi..."
Field classification (triples vs literals)
Literal extractions (kept for synthesis)
  • textReferences content: A state highway department prepared engineering data on alternate routes for a by-pass of part of the interstate highway system in the state, including cost estimates for three possible routes.; The highway department indicated it favored route "B".
  • stateCategory content: temporal
  • persistenceType content: inertial
  • principleTransformation content: Because the route decision is still open, public professional comment and alternative proposals occur before the decision rather than as challenges to a settled outcome.
  • confidence assessment: 0.85
Derived (reconstructable from the graph)
  • activationConditions: The highway department prepares alternate routes and indicates a favored route without a final selection
  • terminationConditions: The route for the by-pass is finally selected
changed
Divergent Expert Opinion State
rdfs:subClassOf States
Linked
Divergent Expert Opinion State
C124
Definition
Extracted from facts primary
An epistemic condition in which qualified professionals, examining the same technical question, reach conflicting conclusions, here the state highway department favoring route B with its cost estimates while a principal of a consulting engineering firm disagrees with those estimates, points out alleged disadvantages of the proposed route, and suggests a fourth route D claimed to be superior.
Inherited from DivergentExpertOpinionState · note
An epistemic condition in which qualified professionals, examining the same technical question, reach conflicting conclusions, here one engineer's studies indicating a series of low dams as the most efficient solution while another engineer's analysis indicates one high dam as more effective and less expensive, each criticizing the analysis and findings of the other.
Properties
Text References:
"His letter stated disagreement with the cost estimates of the highway department and pointed out alleged disadvantages of the proposed route."
"The letter then suggested a fourth route ("D") which, it was claimed, would be superior to those previously suggested."
Confidence: 0.92
State Category: epistemic
Persistence Type: inertial
Activation Conditions: A consulting engineer publicly disagrees with the highway department's cost estimates and route selection
Termination Conditions: A final route decision is rendered or the technical disagreement is resolved
Principle Transformation: The condition of conflicting professional conclusions on the same routing question frames each engineer's public statements as one professional position among several rather than settled fact.
[facts] "His letter stated disagreement with the cost estimates of the highway department and pointed out alleged disadvantages of the proposed route."
Field classification (triples vs literals)
Literal extractions (kept for synthesis)
  • textReferences content: His letter stated disagreement with the cost estimates of the highway department and pointed out alleged disadvantages of the proposed route.; The letter then suggested a fourth route ("D") which, it was claimed, would be superior to those previously suggested.
  • stateCategory content: epistemic
  • persistenceType content: inertial
  • principleTransformation content: The condition of conflicting professional conclusions on the same routing question frames each engineer's public statements as one professional position among several rather than settled fact.
  • confidence assessment: 0.92
Derived (reconstructable from the graph)
  • activationConditions: A consulting engineer publicly disagrees with the highway department's cost estimates and route selection
  • terminationConditions: A final route decision is rendered or the technical disagreement is resolved
changed
PublicSafetyRiskState
rdfs:subClassOf States
Review
Public Safety Risk State
C124
Definition
Extracted from facts primary
A condition of hazard exposure in which a community faces potential harm to safety or welfare, here the condition asserted by a city official who felt the proposed route B would endanger the city's water supply and be a detriment to the development of a lake as a proposed recreation area.
Inherited from PublicSafetyRiskState · note
A condition of hazard exposure in which the public or a specific community faces potential harm to safety or welfare, such as flooding harm to residents.
Properties
Text References:
"he felt it would endanger the city's water supply and be a detriment to the development of a lake as a proposed recreation area"
Confidence: 0.8
State Category: risk
Persistence Type: inertial
Activation Conditions: Route B is proposed near the city's water supply
Termination Conditions: Route B is abandoned or the water supply concern is resolved
Principle Transformation: The asserted hazard to the city's water supply makes the community's welfare an explicit consideration in evaluating the competing routes.
[facts] "An official of a city located close to the proposed route publicly criticized the proposed route "B" because he felt it would endanger the city's water supply and be a detriment to the development of ..."
Field classification (triples vs literals)
Literal extractions (kept for synthesis)
  • textReferences content: he felt it would endanger the city's water supply and be a detriment to the development of a lake as a proposed recreation area
  • stateCategory content: risk
  • persistenceType content: inertial
  • principleTransformation content: The asserted hazard to the city's water supply makes the community's welfare an explicit consideration in evaluating the competing routes.
  • confidence assessment: 0.8
Derived (reconstructable from the graph)
  • activationConditions: Route B is proposed near the city's water supply
  • terminationConditions: Route B is abandoned or the water supply concern is resolved
States Individuals
4
changed
By-Pass Route Cost Estimate Disagreement
Divergent Expert Opinion State
Linked
Divergent Expert Opinion State
C124
Text References:
"His letter stated disagreement with the cost estimates of the highway department and pointed out alleged disadvantages of the proposed route."
"The letter then suggested a fourth route ("D") which, it was claimed, would be superior to those previously suggested."
Confidence: 0.9
State Class: Divergent Expert Opinion State
Subject: The state highway department's engineers and the principal of the consulting engineering firm, who reach conflicting conclusions on route costs and merits
Active Period: From publication of the consulting engineer's letter until the route controversy is resolved
Triggering Event: The consulting engineer's public letter states disagreement with the highway department's cost estimates and proposes route D
Terminated By: Final selection of a by-pass route or resolution of the technical disagreement
Affected Parties:
  • State highway department
  • Consulting engineering firm principal
  • City official
  • Public
Urgency Level: medium
[facts] "His letter stated disagreement with the cost estimates of the highway department and pointed out alleged disadvantages of the proposed route. The letter then suggested a fourth route ("D") which, it w..."
Field classification (triples vs literals)
Literal extractions (kept for synthesis)
  • textReferences content: His letter stated disagreement with the cost estimates of the highway department and pointed out alleged disadvantages of the proposed route.; The letter then suggested a fourth route ("D") which, it was claimed, would be superior to those previously suggested.
  • stateClass content: Divergent Expert Opinion State
  • subject content: The state highway department's engineers and the principal of the consulting engineering firm, who reach conflicting conclusions on route costs and merits
  • activePeriod content: From publication of the consulting engineer's letter until the route controversy is resolved
  • triggeringEvent content: The consulting engineer's public letter states disagreement with the highway department's cost estimates and proposes route D
  • terminatedBy content: Final selection of a by-pass route or resolution of the technical disagreement
  • affectedParties content: State highway department; Consulting engineering firm principal; City official; Public
  • confidence assessment: 0.9
  • urgencyLevel assessment: medium
changed
Published Criticism of Department Route Work
Public Criticism Of Peer Work State
Linked
Public Criticism Of Peer Work State
C124
Text References:
"issued a public letter, "To Whom Concerned," which was published in the local press, discussing the alternative routes"
Confidence: 0.92
State Class: Public Criticism Of Peer Work State
Subject: The principal of the consulting engineering firm, whose criticism of the highway department's engineering data and proposed route stands published in the local press
Active Period: From publication of the letter in the local press onward
Triggering Event: The consulting engineer issues the public letter "To Whom Concerned" and the local press publishes its full text
Terminated By: Not stated in the case facts
Affected Parties:
  • State highway department
  • Consulting engineering firm principal
  • Public
  • City official
Urgency Level: medium
[facts] "A principal of a consulting engineering firm, which had performed the engineering work on a portion of the interstate highway to which the by-pass would connect, issued a public letter, "To Whom Conce..."
Field classification (triples vs literals)
Literal extractions (kept for synthesis)
  • textReferences content: issued a public letter, "To Whom Concerned," which was published in the local press, discussing the alternative routes
  • stateClass content: Public Criticism Of Peer Work State
  • subject content: The principal of the consulting engineering firm, whose criticism of the highway department's engineering data and proposed route stands published in the local press
  • activePeriod content: From publication of the letter in the local press onward
  • triggeringEvent content: The consulting engineer issues the public letter "To Whom Concerned" and the local press publishes its full text
  • terminatedBy content: Not stated in the case facts
  • affectedParties content: State highway department; Consulting engineering firm principal; Public; City official
  • confidence assessment: 0.92
  • urgencyLevel assessment: medium
changed
Pending By-Pass Route Selection
PendingDecisionState
New C124
Text References:
"A state highway department prepared engineering data on alternate routes for a by-pass of part of the interstate highway system in the state, including cost estimates for three possible routes."
"The highway department indicated it favored route "B"."
Confidence: 0.85
State Class: Pending Public Decision State
Subject: The by-pass route selection for the interstate highway system, on which the highway department has indicated a favored route but no final choice is stated
Active Period: From the highway department's preparation of engineering data on alternate routes until a route is finally selected
Triggering Event: The highway department prepares engineering data and cost estimates on three possible routes and indicates it favors route B
Terminated By: Final selection of the by-pass route
Affected Parties:
  • State highway department
  • City official
  • Consulting engineering firm principal
  • Public
Urgency Level: medium
[facts] "A state highway department prepared engineering data on alternate routes for a by-pass of part of the interstate highway system in the state, including cost estimates for three possible routes. The hi..."
Field classification (triples vs literals)
Literal extractions (kept for synthesis)
  • textReferences content: A state highway department prepared engineering data on alternate routes for a by-pass of part of the interstate highway system in the state, including cost estimates for three possible routes.; The highway department indicated it favored route "B".
  • stateClass content: Pending Public Decision State
  • subject content: The by-pass route selection for the interstate highway system, on which the highway department has indicated a favored route but no final choice is stated
  • activePeriod content: From the highway department's preparation of engineering data on alternate routes until a route is finally selected
  • triggeringEvent content: The highway department prepares engineering data and cost estimates on three possible routes and indicates it favors route B
  • terminatedBy content: Final selection of the by-pass route
  • affectedParties content: State highway department; City official; Consulting engineering firm principal; Public
  • confidence assessment: 0.85
  • urgencyLevel assessment: medium
changed
Review
Public Safety Risk State
C124
Text References:
"he felt it would endanger the city's water supply and be a detriment to the development of a lake as a proposed recreation area"
Confidence: 0.8
State Class: Public Safety Risk State
Subject: The city's water supply and the proposed lake recreation area, which the city official felt route B would endanger and harm, an asserted rather than established hazard
Active Period: While route B remains under consideration as the favored route
Triggering Event: The highway department indicates it favors route B near the city
Terminated By: Abandonment of route B or resolution of the water supply concern
Affected Parties:
  • City residents
  • City official
  • State highway department
Urgency Level: medium
[facts] "An official of a city located close to the proposed route publicly criticized the proposed route "B" because he felt it would endanger the city's water supply and be a detriment to the development of ..."
Field classification (triples vs literals)
Literal extractions (kept for synthesis)
  • textReferences content: he felt it would endanger the city's water supply and be a detriment to the development of a lake as a proposed recreation area
  • stateClass content: Public Safety Risk State
  • subject content: The city's water supply and the proposed lake recreation area, which the city official felt route B would endanger and harm, an asserted rather than established hazard
  • activePeriod content: While route B remains under consideration as the favored route
  • triggeringEvent content: The highway department indicates it favors route B near the city
  • terminatedBy content: Abandonment of route B or resolution of the water supply concern
  • affectedParties content: City residents; City official; State highway department
  • confidence assessment: 0.8
  • urgencyLevel assessment: medium

Rs Resources

Resources Classes
1
changed
Reference Material
rdfs:subClassOf Resources
Linked
Reference Material
C124
Definition
Extracted from facts primary
Documentation supporting professional practice with technical and procedural knowledge, such as engineering data, cost estimates, route studies, and published professional correspondence relied on by parties evaluating engineering alternatives.
Inherited from ReferenceMaterial · note
Handbooks, manuals, guides, and other documentation supporting professional practice with technical and procedural knowledge.
Properties
Text References:
"A state highway department prepared engineering data on alternate routes for a by-pass of part of the interstate highway system in the state, including cost estimates for three possible routes."
Confidence: 0.85
Resource Category: reference_material
[facts] "A state highway department prepared engineering data on alternate routes for a by-pass of part of the interstate highway system in the state, including cost estimates for three possible routes."
Field classification (triples vs literals)
Literal extractions (kept for synthesis)
  • textReferences content: A state highway department prepared engineering data on alternate routes for a by-pass of part of the interstate highway system in the state, including cost estimates for three possible routes.
  • resourceCategory content: reference_material
  • confidence assessment: 0.85
Resources Individuals
2
Highway Department Route Data
Reference Material
Linked
Reference Material
C124
Text References:
"A state highway department prepared engineering data on alternate routes for a by-pass of part of the interstate highway system in the state, including cost estimates for three possible routes."
"His letter stated disagreement with the cost estimates of the highway department and pointed out alleged disadvantages of the proposed route."
Confidence: 0.85
Resource Class: Reference Material
Document Title: engineering data on alternate routes
Topic: alternate by-pass routes and cost estimates for the interstate highway system
Used By: State highway department
[facts] "A state highway department prepared engineering data on alternate routes for a by-pass of part of the interstate highway system in the state, including cost estimates for three possible routes."
Field classification (triples vs literals)
Relations (structural triples)
  • usedBy: State highway department
Literal extractions (kept for synthesis)
  • textReferences content: A state highway department prepared engineering data on alternate routes for a by-pass of part of the interstate highway system in the state, including cost estimates for three possible routes.; His letter stated disagreement with the cost estimates of the highway department and pointed out alleged disadvantages of the proposed route.
  • resourceClass content: Reference Material
  • documentTitle content: engineering data on alternate routes
  • topic content: alternate by-pass routes and cost estimates for the interstate highway system
  • confidence assessment: 0.85
To Whom Concerned Letter
Reference Material
Linked
Reference Material
C124
Text References:
"issued a public letter, "To Whom Concerned," which was published in the local press, discussing the alternative routes"
"The newspaper story containing the full text of the letter from the consulting engineer also quoted the city official as favoring route "D" proposed by the consulting engineer."
Confidence: 0.8
Resource Class: Reference Material
Document Title: To Whom Concerned
Topic: alternative by-pass routes, disagreement with highway department cost estimates, and proposal of route D
Used By: City official
[facts] "A principal of a consulting engineering firm, which had performed the engineering work on a portion of the interstate highway to which the by-pass would connect, issued a public letter, "To Whom Conce..."
Field classification (triples vs literals)
Relations (structural triples)
  • usedBy: City official
Literal extractions (kept for synthesis)
  • textReferences content: issued a public letter, "To Whom Concerned," which was published in the local press, discussing the alternative routes; The newspaper story containing the full text of the letter from the consulting engineer also quoted the city official as favoring route "D" proposed by the consulting engineer.
  • resourceClass content: Reference Material
  • documentTitle content: To Whom Concerned
  • topic content: alternative by-pass routes, disagreement with highway department cost estimates, and proposal of route D
  • confidence assessment: 0.8
Pass 1: Contextual Framework - Facts
Review extracted entities, then continue to the next step
Continue to Discussion Review
Case texts: National Society of Professional Engineers, Board of Ethical Review.

NOTE: The NSPE Board of Ethical Review considers ethical cases involving either real or hypothetical matters submitted to it from NSPE members, other engineers, public officials, and members of the public. The BER reviews each case in the context of the NSPE Code of Ethics and earlier BER opinions. The facts contained in each case do not necessarily represent all of the pertinent facts submitted to or reviewed by the BER and shall not be considered a direct evaluation of any real matter that may have been submitted.

Each opinion is intended as guidance to individual practicing engineers, students, and the public. In regard to the question of application of the NSPE Code of Ethics to engineering organizations (e.g., corporations, partnerships, sole proprietorships, government agencies, and university engineering departments), the specific business form or type should not negate nor detract from the conformance of individuals to the Code. The NSPE Code deals with professional services, which must be performed by real persons. Real persons in turn establish and implement policies within business structures.

This opinion is for educational purposes only and is not legal advice. It may be reprinted without further permission, provided that this statement is included before or after the text of the case and appropriate attribution is provided to the National Society of Professional Engineers' Board of Ethical Review.

© Licensed under the GNU GPL v3