DP1

DecisionPoint
http://proethica.org/ontology/cases#DecisionPoint

DP1

Should Engineer B clearly identify and document all design changes on each affected sheet of the plan set — removing Engineer A's seal from altered sheets and affixing his own — or is a general notation on the title sheet of the public improvement plans sufficient to discharge his attribution and documentation obligations?

Engineer B made substantive changes to Engineer A's sealed grading plans and public improvement plans — altering housing pad elevations, street routing, storm drain systems, pipe dimensions, sewers, and utilities across a 43-sheet plan set — without signing any sheets, without noting what changes were made on the grading plans, and without removing Engineer A's seal and signature from any altered sheet. The core question is whether Engineer B was obligated to clearly identify and document those changes on each affected sheet, or whether some lesser form of notation was sufficient.

Remove Engineer A's seal from every sheet materially altered, affix Engineer B's own seal and signature to those sheets, and provide a specific itemized change log on the cover sheet of each plan set identifying the nature, location, and scope of every modification.

Place a general note on the title sheet of the public improvement plans claiming responsibility for 'revisions of the plans,' without identifying specific sheets altered, the nature of changes, or removing Engineer A's seal from any sheet — treating the title-sheet note as sufficient disclosure to alert reviewing authorities.

Add written change notations on each sheet that was modified — describing what was altered — while leaving Engineer A's seal intact and adding Engineer B's signature as a co-reviewer, on the theory that co-signature without full re-sealing adequately signals shared professional accountability for the revised content.

Engineer B