How to Write an RFI That Gets a Usable Answer
Why this matters
An RFI, a request for information, is how a contractor asks the design team a question about the drawings or specs in writing, with a number, a date and an answer that becomes part of the job record. Written well, it gets back a decision you can build from within days. Written badly, it comes back as "build per plans" or "contractor to coordinate," which is the design team telling you they could not tell what you were asking and have handed the problem back. You lose a week, the crew works around the hole, and the question gets asked again with less time to answer it.
The difference is almost never the problem. It is whether the RFI states one question, proves the conflict from the documents, and offers an answer the engineer can approve with one word. Where RFIs sit among the other instruments that change a job is covered in The Paper That Changes a Job: RFI to Change Order. This card is about writing one.
The example conflict
A tenant improvement. The mechanical plan, M-101, runs a 24x14 supply main under a steel beam on grid line C near grid 4. The structural sheet S-101 puts the bottom of that beam at 10'-2" above finished floor. The architectural ceiling plan, A-102, sets the ceiling at 9'-0". That leaves 10'-2" minus 9'-0", which is 14 in, between the ceiling and the beam. The main is 14 in deep, and the spec calls for 1 1/2 in duct wrap on all sides, so the wrapped main is 14 + 1.5 + 1.5 = 17 in tall. It does not fit by 3 in.
The completed RFI
RFI No: 007 Date issued: Mar 20
Project: Suite 210 TI
To: Architect, fwd to MEP engineer
From: [Shop], mechanical, via GC
Drawings: M-101 at C/4; detail 4/M-501;
S-101; A-102
Spec: 23 31 13 Metal Ducts
Subject: 24x14 supply main under beam at C/4
QUESTION: May the 24x14 supply main be
replaced by a 36x10 between grids
3 and 5?
CONFLICT: Bottom of beam 10'-2" AFF (S-101).
Ceiling 9'-0" AFF (A-102). Clear
space 14 in. Main 14 in deep plus
1 1/2 in wrap top and bottom
= 17 in. Short by 3 in.
PROPOSED: 36x10, area 360 sq in vs 336 now.
Wrapped height 13 in, 1 in clear.
Transitions at grids 3 and 5.
IMPACT: None anticipated if answered by
date below. Fabrication release
for this main is on hold.
NEEDED BY: Mar 27
ATTACHED: Photo 007-1, beam at C/4, looking
north, tape on beam bottom
How each field earns its place
1. Number and date. RFIs are numbered in sequence and logged, so that the answer can be cited later ("per RFI 007") and so nobody can lose one quietly. The date issued starts the clock on the response time the contract allows, which Division 01 commonly states. Skip it and an answer arriving by phone has nothing to attach to. See related: The RFI Log SOP.
2. Routing. RFIs commonly go from the trade contractor through the GC to the architect, who forwards them to the engineer. Follow the routing the contract sets, even when you know the engineer personally. Skip it and the answer you get directly from the engineer may not bind anybody, and the GC hears about your duct change from the inspector.
3. Drawing references, every one. Name each sheet that participates in the conflict and the location on it: M-101 at grid C/4, the detail on M-501, the structural sheet with the beam, the ceiling plan with the height. The reviewer has to see the conflict on their own sheets in a few minutes. A grid reference makes the location unambiguous; see related: How to Find Your Place by Column Grid and Key Plan. Skip it and the reviewer spends the first day hunting, or answers about the wrong beam.
4. Spec section. The section that governs the material in question, here 23 31 13 for metal ducts, by MasterFormat number. If your proposed answer changes something the spec controls (gauge, aspect ratio, insulation), the reviewer needs to know which section to read. See related: The MasterFormat Divisions a Service Trade Lives In.
5. One question, answerable yes or no. This is the rule that decides whether the RFI works. One RFI asks one question. "May the main be replaced by a 36x10 between grids 3 and 5?" can be answered "yes," "no," or "yes, use 40x10." Combine two questions ("Can we resize the main, and also where does the condensate drain go?") and the reply answers the easy one, defers the hard one, and the RFI is marked closed. The second question goes on RFI 008.
6. The conflict, stated as numbers from the documents. Not "the duct does not fit," which is a conclusion the reviewer cannot check. State each figure and the sheet it came from, then the arithmetic: 10'-2" minus 9'-0" is 14 in; 14 plus 1 1/2 plus 1 1/2 is 17 in. A reviewer can verify that from their own sheets in a minute. Before writing, check that the documents do not already answer the question somewhere (a note, a detail, a coordination drawing). An RFI that is answered by "see general note 6" costs you credibility on the next one.
7. A proposed answer. Engineers answer faster when they are approving something than when they are designing from scratch, and your proposal shows you understand the constraints. The 36x10 keeps more area than the original (360 sq in against 336) and fits with an inch to spare (13 in wrapped against 14 in available). Note the limits of your proposal honestly. A flatter duct at the same airflow typically carries more friction per foot than a squarer one of similar area, which affects the static pressure the unit was selected for, and that is the engineer's check to make, not yours. The proposal invites it.
8. Impact. State what the delay or the answer could cost in time or money, and what is on hold. "None anticipated if answered by Mar 27" is honest and tells the reviewer what happens if they are late. Whether this note preserves any contractual right to claim time or cost is set by the contract's notice and claims provisions, which are a question for whoever manages your contracts, and the RFI is commonly not the instrument that makes the claim. Note it here anyway; a later change order is easier when the impact was flagged at the start.
9. Answer needed by. A specific date tied to something real: the fabrication release, the ceiling close-in, the inspection. Leave it out and the RFI waits behind everyone else's.
10. Evidence. A photo with a tape in frame, a marked-up sketch, the field measurement. Here the photo of the beam with a tape on its bottom flange proves the 10'-2" is real, not just a drawing number. See related: How to Field-Verify Existing Conditions Before You Order.
The vague version, and what it gets back
The same conflict, written in a hurry:
RFI No: 007
Subject: Duct at beam
Duct does not fit under the beam near C/4.
Please advise.
RESPONSE: Contractor to coordinate with
structure. Build per plans.
Read it from the reviewer's side. They do not know which beam, which duct, by how much it misses, or what you would like to do instead. Answering properly would mean doing your field work for you. "Coordinate" and "build per plans" are the only safe replies to a question with nothing in it, and they are not wrong. You still have the same 3 in problem, now a week later.
Sending it and closing it
- Log it before sending, with number, subject, date sent, date needed and who it went to.
- Keep working everything the question does not touch. Here the rest of the duct can be fabricated; only the main between grids 3 and 5 is on hold.
- Follow up on the needed-by date, not after. One line referencing the RFI number.
- When the answer arrives, read it against your question. "Approved" answers your question. "Approved, maintain 1 in clearance to ceiling grid and provide access at damper" adds requirements; read them all. An answer that adds work or cost is not authorization to do it unpaid, and it is not authorization to bill it either; it is the start of the change process the contract sets.
- Put the answer where the crew works. Note "per RFI 007" on the field set at C/4 so nobody builds the original 24x14 from the unmarked sheet. See related: How to Redline the Set as You Build.
What changes the approach
- The conflict is a code issue, not a fit issue. If the question is whether something meets code, propose the compliant option and cite the section. The answer still comes from the engineer of record through the RFI, not from an inspector's opinion on a walk, because the design is theirs to change.
- A product swap. If what you actually want is a different product than the spec names, that is commonly a substitution request, not an RFI, with its own form and timing. See related: How to Write a Substitution Request the Engineer Can Approve.
- An emergency on site. Water coming through a ceiling does not wait for an RFI. Keep people out from under the wet ceiling, and if water has reached light fixtures or devices have an electrician de-energize those circuits before anyone touches them. Close the nearest valve feeding the leak. The valve stays closed and the circuits stay off until the repair is made and an electrician has checked the wetted fixtures. Then call the GC, and write the RFI afterward to document what was done and ask how to finish it.
How to check it before you send it
Read it as the reviewer, with only the sheets you named. Can you find the conflict in five minutes, verify each figure on its own sheet, and answer the question in one word? If you need to call the writer, it is not ready. Then confirm it asks exactly one question.
References
- Division 01 of the project specifications, for RFI procedure, routing and response times
- See related: The Paper That Changes a Job: RFI to Change Order
- See related: The RFI Log SOP
- See related: How to Write a Substitution Request the Engineer Can Approve
- See related: How to Find Your Place by Column Grid and Key Plan