Maybe it's splitting hairs, but when you say in retrospect you would have done something differently and maybe it was not handled properly, whether or not you want to call that an error or whatever, my point remains.
My concern , and I want to hear a little more clearly, is what you're doing with respect to the classification of buildings, and secondly, how you're going to handle documents at various security clearance levels.
I don't accept, and I hope you don't accept, that blueprints being found in the garbage or being abandoned in some way that somebody else can pick up is acceptable, particularly if we say that maybe in retrospect those blueprints should have been classified.
Is there a policy, or are you looking at a policy, to handle documents of different security levels in such a way that this type of behaviour would be prevented? And can I ask what consequences there would be for individuals who would breach those new protocols, if established?