How Priority Levels Work

Introduction

In the world of construction document review, prioritization is key to addressing critical issues efficiently while maintaining project momentum. CHECKSET’s Enhanced Mark-Up System introduces a structured hierarchy of Priority Levels designed to help clients focus on the most pressing concerns first. By tagging comments with appropriate priority levels, we enable teams to filter, sort, and resolve comments systematically. This white paper provides a detailed explanation of each priority level and its significance within the review process.

Priority Levels Defined

CHECKSET’s Enhanced Mark-Up System categorizes comments into three priority levels, ranked from most critical (Level 03) to least critical (Level 01). This hierarchy ensures that clients can allocate their resources effectively, addressing the most impactful issues first.

Level 03 - Critical Priority

Definition:
Level 03 comments represent the highest level of priority within the Enhanced Mark-Up System. These comments highlight critical issues that, if left unresolved, could significantly impact the project’s budget, schedule, or long-term compliance. They often involve errors or omissions that would result in immediate and substantial consequences during construction, such as non-compliance with building codes or severe life-safety risks. These issues typically demand immediate attention to prevent costly change orders, legal exposure, or delays. Level 03 comments also often feature prominently in the “Top Ten Critical Findings” list to ensure they receive the necessary focus from the project team.

• Common Characteristics:
  • Issues that lead to non-compliance with building codes, resulting in potential legal or financial exposure.
  • Errors that could cause significant delays or result in costly change orders during construction.
  • Problems with life-safety systems, such as inadequate fire ratings, improper egress paths, or missing safety equipment.
• Examples:
  • Non-compliant fire-rated assemblies.
  • Missing structural supports that compromise building integrity.
  • Improper accessibility clearances that violate ADA regulations.
• Why It Matters:
  • Level 03 comments directly influence the project’s viability, making their resolution essential to avoid major disruptions.
• Special Note:
  • These comments are typically included in the “Top Ten Critical Findings” list compiled by the lead reviewer to ensure they receive the highest visibility.

Level 02 - Moderate Priority

Definition:
Level 02 comments address mid-level issues that, while not immediately critical, could still lead to complications during the construction process if left unaddressed. These comments often pertain to areas where additional clarification or documentation is required to avoid RFIs (Requests for Information) or minor conflicts between disciplines. They frequently involve building performance issues, incomplete details, or gaps in coordination that could create inefficiencies or miscommunication on-site. Although less urgent than Level 03, resolving Level 02 issues in a timely manner ensures smoother project execution and avoids cumulative delays.

• Common Characteristics:
  • Issues related to incomplete or under-documented detailing that affect building performance.
  • Coordination gaps between disciplines, leading to potential conflicts during construction.
• Examples:
  • Missing exit signs on a reflected ceiling plan (RCP).
  • Missing floor drains on a slab plan.
  • Thermal bridging issues in a detail that could compromise energy efficiency.
• Why It Matters:
  • While less urgent than Level 03, these comments still require timely resolution to avoid unnecessary RFIs, which can disrupt construction timelines.

Level 01 - Low Priority

Definition:
Level 01 comments are assigned to minor issues that, while not critical to the project’s success, can improve the overall clarity, quality, and professionalism of construction documentation. These comments often address errors related to drafting conventions, such as mislabeled drawings or formatting inconsistencies, which might not directly affect construction outcomes but could create minor inefficiencies or confusion. By resolving these low-priority issues, teams can ensure a more polished and cohesive documentation set that reflects well on the project’s quality and attention to detail.

• Common Characteristics:
  • Errors related to drafting conventions, such as mislabeled drawings or missing keynotes.
  • Inconsistencies in sheet legends or minor formatting issues.
  • Comments categorized under “Documentation Issues” frequently fall into this priority level.
• Examples:
  • Mislabeled detail references.
  • Missing items in the sheet legend.
  • Overlapping annotations that obscure important information.
• Why It Matters:
  • Addressing these comments improves the overall quality and professionalism of the documentation, reducing minor inefficiencies during project execution.

Conclusion

CHECKSET’s Priority Levels provide a clear framework for managing construction document reviews effectively. By categorizing comments into three distinct levels—Critical, Moderate, and Low Priority—we empower clients to focus their efforts on the most impactful issues first. This structured approach not only enhances project efficiency but also reduces risks, minimizes disruptions, and ensures higher-quality outcomes.

Through the Enhanced Mark-Up System, CHECKSET enables teams to navigate the complexities of construction document review with confidence and precision. Our priority-based hierarchy is a vital tool for maintaining momentum, optimizing resources, and achieving successful project delivery.

‍