Three Sentences in an Incident Report
An incident report from a distribution warehouse contains three sentences: (1) "Having inspected the pallet rack, the missing bolt was noticed." (2) "The guardrail was not reattached after maintenance." (3) "An employee was struck by a falling box." The safety manager's constraints are: assign responsibility only where the record supports it; preserve the fact that no one knows who removed the guardrail; and produce a document that will survive a regulatory review, in which unspecified agency reads as concealment. The record shows a maintenance log closing the guardrail job at 14:10 with no signature, and a camera gap from 14:05 to 14:20.
1. Fix sentence 1 and state what the fix adds that the original concealed.
Read the worked answer
The original is a dangling modifier: "having inspected the pallet rack" attaches to the missing bolt, which makes the bolt the inspector.
Fixing it forces a decision about agency. If the record named an inspector, the fix would be "Having inspected the pallet rack, the technician noticed the missing bolt." The record does not name one, so the honest repairs are:
- "During the inspection of the pallet rack, a missing bolt was noticed."
- "The inspector noticed a missing bolt during the pallet inspection."
What the fix adds: a question the original avoided by accident - who noticed it, and when? A dangling modifier is not only a grammar fault; it is a place where the sentence silently declines to say who did something. Here the correction surfaces that the discovery time is unknown, which the safety manager needs to know, because the camera gap runs 14:05–14:20 and "during the inspection" may or may not fall inside it.
What the fix must not do is invent an actor to satisfy the grammar. Naming a person the record does not name trades a syntax error for a false statement in a regulatory document.
2. Sentence 2 can be made active ("Maintenance did not reattach the guardrail") or left passive. Which do the constraints require?
Read the worked answer
Leave it passive, but load it with what the record actually shows: "The guardrail was not reattached after the maintenance job was closed at 14:10 without a signature."
The evidence establishes that the reattachment did not happen and that no one is identified - a closed job ticket with no signature, plus a camera gap from 14:05 to 14:20. It establishes nothing about who. An active version naming a person would assign responsibility beyond the record, violating the first constraint.
The tempting active version - "Maintenance did not reattach the guardrail" - is the worst choice. It sounds accountable while hiding agency behind an abstract noun, which is exactly the pattern a regulator reads as evasion. Passive-plus-particulars does the opposite: it reports a state and attaches the documented specifics, letting the log carry the weight of what is known.
The governing test: does the sentence omit an agent the record establishes, or report a state the record cannot attribute? The first is evasion; the second is accuracy.
3. Sentence 3: should it be made active, and what changes if it is?
Read the worked answer
It should stay passive. Making it active would require naming who struck the employee, and the record does not support that - a box fell; no person is implicated in the fall.
What should change is not the voice but the thinness. A regulator will ask where, when, and how heavy. The camera gap gives an outer bound of 14:05–14:20, so the report should place the event inside that window if any other record narrows it, and should include the box weight if it was recorded.
The distinction worth stating in the analysis: there are two kinds of passive. Sentence 2 as originally written - bare, no time, no detail - conceals agency, because the record contains particulars that were left out. Sentence 3 accurately reports the absence of an agent, because there is none to report. The test in each case is whether the missing information exists in the record. If it does, the passive is a choice to withhold; if it does not, the passive is a description of the evidence.