Below is the script I used to find them, which also reports some additional false positives:
Given this I'd be OK with committing as-is in the name of matching existing project style. Then bringing up this inconsistency as a separate concern to be bulk fixed as part of implementing a new policy on what to check for and conform to when establishing acronyms in our documentation.
Otherwise the author (you) should make the change here - the committer wouldn't be expected to know to do that from the discussion.
