Here’s the thing about RFIs. No matter how detailed a set of plans is, there are going to be discrepancies, oversights, and existing conditions that need to be thought out, documented, and resolved. The problem is that most of the people who need to write them have never been taught how, and the people who have been taught are usually sitting in an office.
For most of my field career I either resolved these things myself and carried on, or asked a superintendent and got an answer back. For a long time I assumed the super was figuring it out. Turns out he was asking the architect or engineer, and he was using an RFI to do it. I just didn’t know that yet.
If you’re a smaller GC, RFIs can be informal enough that you don’t even realize that’s what you’re doing. But they have real consequences, financial and political, and it’s worth understanding them properly.
What an RFI actually does
An RFI, Request for Information, documents a condition that needs clarification and assigns responsibility for resolving it. That condition might be a discrepancy between plan sheets, an existing field condition that doesn’t match the drawings, or a coordination issue between structural and architectural plans.
What the RFI does is put that problem in writing, give it a timeframe for response (usually three to five days but check the contract, it might be 14), and tie it to a specific activity, plan sheet, or budget item. That last part matters. Most RFIs have financial consequences, and who is responsible for causing a change becomes very important when the owner starts asking questions.
This is also why keeping a daily log matters. The log documents what happened in the field. The RFI documents who is responsible for resolving it. Together they are how you protect yourself.
How to write one
You don’t need special software to write an RFI, but they should follow a consistent format. If you want a clean starting point, there’s a free one here.
Start with a clear subject. “Stairs” is not a subject. Which stairs? What about them? An RFI subject needs to tell you, and everyone who comes looking for it later, exactly what the issue is. You will search for these. Name them accordingly.
Describe the problem and its location. This is the most important part. Think it through fully and write it as though you’re explaining it to someone who has never been on a job site, never built anything and is mad you’re askeing them a question, because sometimes that’s exactly who’s reading it. Many people who design things have never built them. That’s not a complaint, it’s just reality, and it means the burden of clarity is on you. To be fair often in this process you find the answer and may not need to ask the RFI at all.
Include photos. A picture in this context is worth considerably more than a thousand words. Include the relevant plan sheet. Highlight the issue. Make it impossible to misunderstand.
Propose a solution. This feels counterintuitive but its vital, if you know how to fix it, why not just fix it? Because there may be engineering or design considerations, and you need a set of as-builts at the end of the job that actually reflects what was built. Your solution gives the engineer or architect a starting point and documents your thinking.
I was laying block on a job once and we didn’t have a detail for going over a window. If you’ve laid block you know there are only so many ways that detail goes, so I didn’t ask. I just dropped two #5 bars over it, bent up some hooks, and kept moving. When the engineer showed up he asked how I knew what to do. I told him I’d been doing it for fourteen years and assumed it was like every other window I’d ever built. Wrong answer. The super and my boss got chewed out. The engineer had shown up that day with a hand-drawn SSK for exactly that window. Was I right? Yes. Did it matter? Not much. That should have been an RFI.
Assign it to someone. That engineer should have been named as the responsible party. The super should have written it up, included the missing detail, and sent it to him. My boss could have written a change order for the extra rebar, if he was feeling petty. That’s how it’s supposed to work.
The part nobody talks about
Every RFI is a quiet accusation.
When you document a design oversight, you’re saying the architect didn’t think it all the way through. When you flag a structural issue, you’re saying the engineer missed something. Now nobody’s really saying that, at least not where others can hear them. Everyone misses things and construction is full of unknowns, but finger pointing is how it lands, and you should know it going in.
When an owner looks at a job that came in twenty percent over budget and you can point to three hundred RFIs, you look like you knew what you were doing you are the hero. The architect looks like they didn’t. Construction is a customer service industry. That means taking care of owners, yes, but architects send referrals too, you should always be looking to build a better relatinship. How you write these things, how detailed, how professional, how clearly you’re trying to solve the problem rather than score points, reflects on you every time.
You need RFIs. You need to document everything. But be aware of the implications when you send one. Being a clear and considered partner saves you money, saves the architect time, and saves the owner money downstream.
That said, sometimes you have to burn someone down. RFIs can absolutely do that.
Rembember though, fire is only good when the wind is on your side.