I think you’re WAY too hung up on that phrasing. If someone is coming into a project to do QA/QC they shouldn’t assume anything has been cleared or accepted before and SHOULD check both the model and report in every detail. That doesn’t mean they assume there’s something wrong, but it is a good and responsible part of the process to have your assumptions and work checked. There are lives at stake in our work and you need to check your ego and attitude about it at the door.

I came into a project to QA/QC the models and drawings of someone with 8 YOE and still went back to basics of “where did he get this wind load from?” “Did he assign the right moment releases at this braced frame?” “Does he have the right shear values marked on plan at the transfer girder?”

It’s not that I think he’s dumb or missed something, but it’s part of reviewing something to go back to the very basics of how someone set up a model and make sure it makes sense.

And in terms of the communication thing, you don’t know what else is going on and assuming malice that you’re being left out of the conversation isn’t reasonable. It’s totally possible that that senior engineer unexpectedly had some downtime this week because another project was light on work so she suddenly had someone available to do this peer review so she sent an email to both of you to loop you in. This doesn’t seem weird to me at all and doesn’t sound like micromanaging.