Record the RFI and affected location, search the current drawings and specifications, compare conflicting sources and identify whether an authorized design decision is needed. Draft a direct answer with references, then obtain the required review before issuing it.
First make the question specific
Identify the room, grid, equipment tag or assembly. Read any markup with its surrounding detail. An RFI asking “confirm this connection” needs enough context to distinguish the item from similar connections elsewhere.
Separate a request for information already present from a request to resolve a conflict or supply a new design decision. Those questions have different owners and require different evidence.
Research the governing documents
Check plans, details, schedules, specifications and accepted changes. Record exact sheet, detail and paragraph references. Keep the source issue with the draft response so the reviewer can reproduce the search.
If one source contradicts another, present both. The date of a file alone does not establish precedence. Use the project document-control process to establish which requirement governs before relying on it.
A hypothetical response with a missing decision
Suppose an RFI asks which power supply serves an equipment item. Its schedule states one requirement while the electrical plan states another. A draft that repeats either value leaves the original question unresolved.
Describe the discrepancy, cite both sources and identify the discipline responsible for confirming the intended selection. Once the decision is made, the response should name the accepted requirement and any documents that must change. Avoid inventing the answer to make the draft sound complete.
Response preparation worksheet
| Check | Sources | Review question |
|---|---|---|
| Question and location | RFI text, markup and affected item | What exact decision is the contractor requesting? |
| Current issue | Drawing register, addenda and accepted changes | Which sources govern the condition now? |
| Existing answer | Details, schedules and specification clauses | Is an answer already stated, and can its exact reference be given? |
| Conflicting evidence | Competing drawings or requirements | Do the sources support the same answer or require reconciliation? |
| Design decision | Missing information and assigned authority | Who must decide a condition the documents do not resolve? |
| Dependent work | Receiving disciplines and procurement interfaces | Does the proposed answer affect another system or package? |
| Response review | Draft answer and project communication procedure | Has the authorized reviewer checked and approved the response? |
| Record update | Issued answer, required changes and revised sources | Can the next reviewer follow the answer into the governing documents? |
Write for the receiving team
Lead with the answer or the outstanding decision. Follow with the supporting references and any action needed. Keep unrelated observations in separate review items. A field team should be able to understand the response without interpreting a long narrative.
Use the RFI prevention guide to find document questions earlier. The dental clinic case supplies real equipment coordination examples, not issued RFI responses.
Sources and an AI pilot
AIA’s A201-2017 summary provides context on a common contract framework. Follow the communication and approval procedure on your project. Source checked October 13, 2026.
This page provides a research method and draft-response worksheet. It does not promise automatic RFI delivery or writeback. A small AI pilot can compare draft responses with your team’s accepted answers and check the citations before expanding.
Bring one task and a sample document to a free 30-minute AEC AI workflow consultation. We will diagnose the handoffs, identify a useful starting point and work through a practical example together.