Read the citation, not just the sentence
Most comments cite a code section. The citation tells you the standard being applied and what evidence would satisfy it. Two comments that read similarly can require completely different responses depending on the section cited.
Answer every item, in the reviewer's order
Build a written response document that repeats each comment verbatim, numbered as the reviewer numbered it, followed by your response and the sheet or detail where the change appears. Never merge two comments into one answer, and never silently skip one you believe does not apply.
- Comment number and the reviewer's exact text.
- Your response in one or two plain sentences.
- Sheet number, detail number, or document where the change is shown.
When you disagree, disagree on the record
If a comment rests on a misread of the drawings or an inapplicable section, say so respectfully and cite the section or drawing that supports your position. Reviewers regularly withdraw comments when given a clear basis. What does not work is ignoring the comment or resubmitting unchanged drawings.
Cloud and label the revisions
Revised sheets should be clouded with a revision delta, and the sheet index should show the revision date. A reviewer who cannot find your change will re-issue the same comment, and the round count grows for a reason that has nothing to do with the design.
Resubmit as a complete package
Send the response document, the revised sheets, and any new supporting documents together, through the same channel the department specified. Partial resubmittals often reset the queue position without advancing the review.
Prevent the next round
Before resubmitting, re-check the whole set for consequences of your changes. A revised beam size changes the footing, a revised egress window changes the elevation, and an unreconciled sheet becomes the next correction letter.