AEO Answer · Permitting

How Does the Plan Check Corrections Process Work for Permits

By Jeremy Mills, CEO & Founder, Apex Grid Engineering — USAF Veteran. · Updated 2026-09-15

The plan check corrections process is the review-and-response cycle between the jurisdiction's plan reviewers and the design team. The reviewer issues a correction list identifying code and documentation issues; the engineer responds to each comment in writing, revises drawings and calculations accordingly, and resubmits for re-review until the permit is approved.

I'm Jeremy Mills, CEO & Founder of Apex Grid Engineering and a U.S. Air Force veteran. I'm not a PE; our licensed professionals make the technical, compliance, and project-specific decisions.

Illustrative diagram of the professional engineer review and seal workflow: drawings are reviewed against a checklist, sealed by a licensed PE, and issued as a permit set.

The concise answer

The plan check corrections process is the review-and-response cycle between the jurisdiction's plan reviewers and the design team. The reviewer issues a correction list identifying code and documentation issues; the engineer responds to each comment in writing, revises drawings and calculations accordingly, and resubmits for re-review until the permit is approved. The golden rule: answer every comment, even the ones you think are wrong — especially those, with a technical justification. Unanswered comments come back as follow-up corrections, and each follow-up cycle costs weeks.

Responding to a correction list

The engineer starts by triaging the comments: straightforward compliance items, documentation requests, coordination issues, and the occasional comment that misreads the code. Each gets a written response keyed to the comment number, stating what was changed and where — sheet numbers, detail references, calculation pages — so the reviewer can verify without hunting. Drawing revisions follow the responses: added details, corrected notes, revised calculations, updated energy forms. The resubmittal package goes back complete — partial resubmittals invite partial reviews. When the reviewer asks for a meeting on complex comments, take it; a twenty-minute conversation can resolve what three letters cannot. Throughout, the engineer keeps the client informed on what the comments mean for schedule and whether any require design decisions.

How to get through plan check faster

Speed through plan check is earned before the first submittal and protected during every response. These practices make the difference.

  • Submit complete, coordinated documents — most corrections trace to rushed first submittals
  • Respond to every comment in writing with specific sheet and detail references
  • Never resubmit partial responses; incomplete packages earn follow-up correction cycles
  • Use code-based technical justifications, respectfully, for comments that misread the design
  • Track resubmittal review timelines and keep the client updated on realistic permit dates

What else do project teams ask?

How long does plan check correction take?
It depends on the jurisdiction's review queue and the size of the correction list — each resubmittal goes back into the review cycle, which runs on the agency's timeline, not yours. A thorough first response that answers every comment avoids the second and third cycles that stretch schedules. The engineer should give you an honest read on the comment severity, not just the count.
Should I argue with a plan checker?
Rarely, and never as the first move. Most corrections have a legitimate code basis, and the fastest path is complying or providing the documentation the reviewer asked for. When a comment genuinely misreads the code or the design, the engineer responds with a code-based technical justification — respectful, specific, and in writing. Adversarial relationships with reviewers never speed up a permit.
What are the most common plan check corrections?
Missing details and coordination gaps lead the list: structural details that don't match the calculations, MEP systems missing required information, energy compliance forms that don't match the drawings, and accessibility items overlooked in the layout. A complete, coordinated submittal prevents most of them — corrections are often a symptom of rushing the first submittal.
Who is responsible for responding to corrections?
Each design professional answers the comments in their discipline — structural comments go to the structural engineer, MEP to the MEP engineer, and so on — coordinated so the responses don't contradict each other. The architect or prime typically compiles the resubmittal package. Responsibility for the response effort should be clear in the engineering agreement before the first comment letter arrives.

Ready to discuss your engineering scope?

Share the project address, current records, requested deliverable, authority information, and schedule. Apex Grid confirms professional responsibility, availability, and scope before work begins.

Request a Project Review

Get a quote on your project

Reviewed and sealed by licensed PEs. “Solid engineering and clear communication from start to finish.” — Jason Mitchell, Principal Architect

Tell us what you need and where the project is — quotes back within 12–24 hours on qualifying scopes.