Can a PE seal work AI helped draft? What the boards say in 2026

Short answer: under every rule and policy we found, yes, as long as you were in responsible charge of the work and AI was a tool rather than the decision-maker. No board we found bans AI-assisted drafting. Several now say in writing what they expect from you. Here is what each one says, current as of October 2026.

This is a plain-English summary, not legal advice. Your own state board and your professional liability insurer have the final word.

ASCE: AI is a tool, and it can't be held accountable

The American Society of Civil Engineers (ASCE) adopted Policy Statement 573 on July 18, 2024. Three lines matter most:

• "AI cannot serve as a replacement for the professional judgement of a licensed Professional Engineer."
• "AI cannot be held accountable."
• "AI remains a tool that has great potential to enhance civil engineering processes."

The statement does not spell out verification steps. ASCE's AI roadmap, called AI RACE (AI Roadmap for Application in Civil Engineering), was refined at a summit on Aug 31 to Sep 1, 2026, with publication planned for fall 2026. Its oversight section asks the right question, "Many know AI cannot be held accountable. But how?", but the published summary had no guidance aimed at small firms.

NSPE: about people who build AI, not daily use

The National Society of Professional Engineers' Position Statement 03-1774 was adopted in September 2023 and revised in February 2026. It focuses on licensure for people who build or oversee AI systems that affect public safety, plus verification, transparency and continuing education. It does not address sealing or engineers' everyday use of AI tools. Don't cite it as either permission or a prohibition for drafting.

Texas: not banned, and you answer for what you seal

The Texas Board of Professional Engineers and Land Surveyors (TBPELS) approved Policy Advisory Opinion No. 71 on November 14, 2024. It says the engineering and surveying statutes and rules do not "directly ban the use of AI software," that "licensees are ultimately responsible for any work product they sign and seal," and that licensees should not use AI on a project "in which they do not already have established competence." It also asks licensees to understand how a tool uses and stores data, so client data stays confidential, and finds that existing rules "adequately address" AI.

North Carolina: the most specific rules so far

The North Carolina Board of Examiners for Engineers and Surveyors (NCBELS) approved Guidelines on the Use of AI in Engineering and Surveying Services on July 16, 2025. The key points:

• The licensee keeps responsible charge "over all aspects of the work" and must be able to reproduce the output without AI.
• "Only use data that a licensee has verified as accurate and complete."
• Keep detailed records of AI inputs, methods, tool assessments and validation steps, enough to support a claim of responsible charge.
• The seal rule still applies: no licensee may sign or seal a document or plan unless they were in responsible charge.

The guidelines do not address disclosure to clients or confidentiality.

In the board's Fall 2025 bulletin (Dec 2025), the board chair said engineers in responsible charge should set up "methods for reviewing, validating, and documenting AI-generated outputs." The same bulletin lists no AI-related disciplinary cases for December 2024 through November 2025.

Florida: judgment stays with you

The Florida Board of Professional Engineers (FBPE) wrote in October 2025: "AI can assist your work, but it cannot replace your professional judgment or accountability." It warns against stamping work without meaningful oversight and adds: "As the tools evolve faster than the rules, PEs must use them carefully."

Utah and other states

As of October 2026 we found no AI guidance from Utah's Division of Professional Licensing (DOPL) or its engineering board. The DOPL engineering page covers the PE, SE and PLS licenses only. NCEES (National Council of Examiners for Engineering and Surveying) adopted Position Statement 6.10 on responsible AI use in 2025. Idaho's board shared it with licensees in January 2026 and noted it "has not been adopted into Idaho law or rule" (Idaho IPELS, Jan 2026). It says licensed professionals "retain ultimate responsibility for decisions" and calls for "clear documentation of methodologies, data sources, and assumptions." We found no AI language in NCEES model rules. If you practice in Utah, the existing responsible-charge and seal rules apply as they always have. If your state has published something, follow it over anything here.

What this means in practice

Taken together, the guidance points to a routine that works in any state.

1. Keep AI on drafting, not deciding

Minutes, memos, comment logs, response-letter drafts and proposals are text an engineer can read line by line. Calculations and code-compliance decisions are poor fits; our guide to AI in small engineering firms explains why.

2. Keep a record for each AI-assisted document

A short log entry like this is one practical way to keep the records North Carolina describes:

Keep it in the project folder next to the deliverable, where it will be found if anyone asks.

3. Make sure you could do it without AI

North Carolina's reproducibility test is a good habit everywhere. The engineer should be able to explain and redo every answer without the tool.

4. Write the policy down once

A one-page policy should cover approved tools and account types, what may never be pasted in (such as client data your contract restricts), who reviews what, and where records live. Revisit it when your board publishes guidance.

5. Ask your insurer

ACEC's 2025 research summary lists professional liability among firms' main barriers to AI. Send your policy to your professional liability insurer and ask whether they want anything added. It is a short email that answers the question before a claim does.

What is still open

• Disclosure. None of the guidance we read says whether you must tell a client that AI helped draft a document. Check your contracts.
• Confidentiality. North Carolina's guidelines don't address it. Your contracts and your AI tool's data terms do, so read both.
• Utah. No guidance yet. We will update this post if that changes.

---

Want a starting point for your own firm? Start a free conversation and we'll walk through the record-keeping routine using one of your own documents.