DP4

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

DP4

Upon discovering that Engineer B materially altered his sealed plans without removing his seal or providing adequate attribution, should Engineer A report the unauthorized alteration directly to the state engineering licensing authority, or should Engineer A first attempt collegial engagement with Engineer B to demand correction before escalating to regulatory authorities?

Engineer A's signed and sealed plan set was materially altered by Engineer B, who left Engineer A's seal intact on all sheets, made no per-sheet notations on the grading plans, and provided only a vague title-sheet disclaimer on the public improvement plans. Upon discovering this, Engineer A faces the question of what affirmative steps he must take — given that his seal continues to represent him as the responsible engineer for the technical content of documents he did not author in their current form, and given that the scope and pattern of Engineer B's omissions suggest conduct beyond inadvertent error.

Report the unauthorized alteration of his sealed plans directly to the state engineering licensing authority without first seeking collegial engagement with Engineer B, on the grounds that the sustained and systematic nature of Engineer B's omissions across both plan sets constitutes a serious rather than inadvertent violation that removes any obligation of collegial deference before regulatory escalation.

Contact Engineer B directly to demand in writing that Engineer B remove Engineer A's seal from all altered sheets, affix his own seal, and provide specific change documentation — reserving the right to report to licensing authorities only if Engineer B refuses or fails to correct the documents within a reasonable time, treating the violation as potentially correctable through collegial engagement.

Contact both the client and Engineer B simultaneously with a written demand that the attribution and seal status of all altered documents be corrected — recognizing that the client's transfer of the sealed plans was an enabling condition for the violation — and report to licensing authorities only if both parties fail to remedy the situation, treating the client's cooperation as a practical prerequisite for effective correction.

Engineer A