Skip to main content
Procore

M06: THE SUBMITTAL AND RFI PROCESS

  1. Last updated
  2. Save as PDF

I. Module Objective

  • Goal 1: Properly execute the submittal review process to ensure timely delivery of correct material & equipment to the project.
  • Goal 2: Minimize conflicts & rework by early pre-planning/conducting pre-conference meetings with subcontractors.
  • Goal 3: Ensure all dissimilar materials/interfaces between different scopes of work fit together & complement each other as intended.

 

II. Overview 

  • Establish, at inception, the manner in which submittals are monitored & controlled among all parties:
    • Points of Contact
    • Distribution
    • Review Durations
    • Order of Priority

  • Delays due to poor planning & communication are preventable; late deliveries & rework can be avoided.

 

III. Responsibility

  • Project Management is responsible to ensure:

    • Submittals are received in a timely manner from trade contractors.
    • Submittals are thoroughly reviewed before they are submitted to the architect.
    • Submittals are never just “rubber stamped”.

  • Accurate and timely submittal and shop drawing control is a mandatory requirement.

 

IV. Approval Process

  • Create a Submittal Log

    • Create within four weeks after award or sooner if required by Owner Contract

    • Completely understand the relevant plans, details and specs prior to each review
    • Project Startup Submittal Log must contain all items that will be required for the initial phases of the project (i.e. foundations, rebar, site work, etc.) or have a long lead time associated with them (i.e. light fixtures, windows, doors), with all remaining submittals following immediately thereafter.
    • Establish an aggressive schedule that ties to the Submittal Log
      • Anticipate dates needed for each submission
      • Anticipate re-submittals
      • Verify/stack turnaround times from consultant
      • Confirm associated lead times for material procurement as subcontractors are bought out
    • Require subs to turn in submittals within 2 weeks of receipt of subcontract wherever practical; establish required times in the Exhibit B.
    • The Procurement Schedule is derived from the Submittal Log and is a major key to project success. The submittal effort cannot be under taken without coordination with the procurement schedule. 

  • Review Against Plans, Specs, Contract Documents

    • See Section VI Below

  • Process & Submit to Architect

    • Obtain submittal electronically  Click here for Submittal Workflow Tutorial for further Instruction

    • Submittals should be coded by CSI code or as defined in specification.

    • Apply KAST Submittal Review stamp, available for download here, and complete all of the boxes.
      • Project Name
      • Status
      • By (your name)
      • Date (of review)
      • Submittal # (from Procore)
      • Spec (Specification Section)
    • File Naming
      • File names should be by spec section & Submittal Number, Example:
        • 032000-01: Building A – Foundation Reinforcement
        • 032000-02: Building B – Foundation Reinforcement
      • Re-submissions: maintain original code showing a revision. Example:
        • 032000-01.1: Building A – Foundation Reinforcement (Rev. 1)
    • Process/review and forward to architect within one week from the date received.
    • Prioritize submittals weekly at OAC meeting: what’s pending, what’s late, what’s required next week.
    • Document all commitments made during OAC.

  • Update, Record, Distribute

    • Distribute submittal to all affected subcontractors and field staff.
      • i.e. distribute approved mechanical equipment submittals to electrical, plumbing, concrete, fire protection & drywall  subcontractors.
    • Document distribution of approved submittal for record. Verbally verify receipt with key recipients
    • Extend Submittal Workflow to track city required submittals.

 

V. Reviewing Submittals Against Contract Documents

  • Why?

    • Contractual obligation to client
    • Subcontractor obligation to KAST
    • Best way to avoid delays/ensure timely delivery
    • Proactive mindset helps eliminate punch list issues
    • Prepare for maintenance/warranty turnover as project progresses

 

VI. Verifying Compliance with Contract Documents

"Contract Documents" include Plans and Specifications, as well as the Prime (Owner) Contract, Subcontracts, any Qualifications and Assumptions in the GMP or contracts, Precon and Operations RFIs, and and relevent Change Orders (Owner/PCCO or Subcontractor/CCO).  It is not enough to simply review the submittals against the plans & specs.  Any submittal review should begin with the Prime Contract first to ensure we are complying with any Qualificaitons and Assumptions therein, which take precedence over plans & specs.  While Submittals are not (typically) contract documents, it is also critical to review submittals against one another for compatibility.

  • Is it complete? Are all specified items included?

    • Product data

    • Samples/mock-ups

    • Color charts/finish selections

    • NOA’s/product approvals

    • Certifications/Qualifications- Ex. Welder certificates

    • Material test reports- static coefficient of friction for tile

    • Field tests- mil thickness, adhesion test, air/water infiltration tests

    • Operation/maintenance manuals

    • Extended warranties

    • MSDS

    • Delegate (Specialty) Engineering

    • Placement drawings- PT cables, expansion joint assemblies

    • Special storage requirements

    • Mold prevention measures to consider

  • Is it specified?

    • Understand the type of specification:

      • Descriptive/Non-Proprietary spec- most common

      • Proprietary spec- sole (single) source

      • Basis of Design product spec

      • Performance spec

    • Are there any Division 1 shop drawing requirements?

    • Is there a domestic product requirement?

    • If imported material is provided, are there any support documentation requirements?

      • Example: not readily available, substantially more cost, hazardous material concern

  • Are all dimensions verified?

    • Are HM frame throat sizes correct?

    • Are elevator front finishes at each level correct?

    • Are the required NOA tolerances met? Are there any conflicts with other standards that may be more stringent?

    • Have FHA clearances been verified? (ex. cabinets/countertops, electrical outlets)

    • Are field measurements required or will we guarantee dimensions or opening sizes? (ex. windows, storefront, casework, stone countertops)

  • Are all items necessary to make style or color selections included? Are cost considerations for certain selections noted?

  • Have all quantities been verified?

    • Are Fire/smoke dampers located at all rated walls?

    • Is back-up support rebar shown for PT cables?

    • Are all door openings marked & accounted for?

  • Do voltages, HP ratings and phases for equipment by others match electrical drawings?

    • VFD’s

    • Elevators

    • Irrigations pumps/time clocks

    • Fire pump

    • Garage exhaust systems

    • HVAC equipment

 

VII. Verifying Compliance with Subcontract/Purchase Order Requirements

  • Is it what we bought? And everything we bought?

    • Potential gray areas:

      • Door/frame/finish hardware/security system/electrical interface
      • Tie-ins, rainwater leaders, underground domestic/fire lines
    • Focus on interface between subs; consider transition pieces that need to be provided.

  • Are there any assembly/special shipping instructions on how we need to receive it?

    • Examples: PT cable, bundles, items that may not fit thru openings or in the elevator, generators, HVAC equipment.

 

VIII. Owner/Architect Input

  • What is/is not required?

    • GC & A/E share responsibility for review
    • Defining A/E’s role:
      • Limited to verifying it conforms to the design concept shown in the Contract Documents
      • General conformance only to plans & specs
      • Occurs with reasonable promptness to avoid delays
      • Be aware of A/E attempts to reduce exposure by using disclaimers:
        • “Examined”
        • “Reviewed”
        • “No objection, no exception”
        • “Not rejected with lengthy disclaimer”
      • These disclaimers do not alter A/E responsibility, however, the GC is equally responsible for full compliance

  • A/E is NOT responsible for:

    • Accuracy/completeness of items such as dimensions or quantities
    • Installation instructions or manufacturer’s requirements
    • Performance requirements of equipment
    • Safety precautions
    • Construction means, methods, techniques, or sequences
    • Delegate (Specialty) Engineer requirements

  • Is Owner Input Required?

    • Owner input is required for signage, keying schedules, security systems, color & style selections and finishes

 

IX. Trade/Subcontractor Input

  • Specs often pieced together from different sources or built around one product-sometimes written by that manufacturer

    • This can create incompatible items
    • Verify all components are compatible with each other and work together
    • Elevators
    • Finish hardware
    • Security access control

  • Who installs the product? Is it furnish only?

    • Rebar, tilt wall accessories, HM frames, doors & hardware, toilet accessories, fire extinguisher cabinets, trusses, VFD’s, motor starters

  • Who connects/attaches to material or equipment?

    • MEP’s- generators/ATS/shroud/muffler/fuel piping hook-up
    • Irrigation pump/controller
    • Elevators- FA or access control interface
    • Precast concrete/structural steel connections
    • Electric hand dryers

  • Check compatibility

    • Do sealers/curing/form release compounds need to be removed/dissipated prior to applying coatings or adhesives?
    • Have the concrete/stucco cure times been established before applying floor adhesives or paint primers?
    • Steel bar joist prep with areas receiving sprayed fireproofing
    • Is the roof mastic compatible with application of stucco systems?
    • Fiber mesh in concrete mix with surface to receive urethane coating
    • Expansion joint/traffic coating systems- what is the specified substrate prep? (ex. pressure clean, shot blast, acid etch)
    • Any crack treatments to consider

  • Coordination of openings/penetrations/recesses with other trades

    • Primary & secondary scupper locations
    • Precast products/tilt wall panels-doors, windows, MEP rough-in
    • Sliding glass door pockets
    • Slab depressions- mud bed tile work and recessed entry mats
    • Residential appliance clearances

  • Environmental/climate controlled limitations in spec prior to delivery:

    • What is required?
    • Building must be enclosed
    • Wet work complete
    • HVAC in operation
    • RH maintained at occupancy levels
    • Slab moisture requirements

  • Make notes on the submittal.

    • Review carefully against Exhibit B,Owner Contract, and Q&A for increased/changed scope.  Click here for Submittal Workflow Tutorial for further Instructions

  • Warranties- Confirm the submittal matches contract requirements

    • Extended warranties continue to increase
    • Examples:
      • Division 6- manufactured casework-up to 5 years
      • Division 7- firestop-up to 5 years; joint sealants- up to 20 years for silicones or 6 years for urethane; waterproofing/traffic coatings-up to 10 years; roofing-up to 20 years NDL from manufacturer, 5 years for installer.
      • Division 8- windows/storefronts/sliding glass doors- up to 5 years; interior doors- up to 2 years; finish hardware- up to 10 years.
      • Division 9- tile-up to 5 years; gypsum board systems- up to 3 years; cementitious backer board- up to 30 years; suspended acoustical ceilings- up to 10 years for sagging rust.
      • Division 10- blinds, signage- up to 3 years; fire extinguishers, lockers, mailboxes, shower enclosures- up to 5 years.
    • Sole (single) source warranties to consider:
      • NDL roof/lightweight concrete or tapered rigid insulation
      • Firestop- does the spec call for a single source product and installer?
      • Windows/sealants- is written confirmation needed from manufacturer?

 

X. General Contractor Input to Consider During Submittal Review

  • Documents operate “as a whole” in regard to ambiguities.

  • What is mentioned in one section is required even if not called for in another section.

  • Example: tolerances may differ between trades

    • Tunnel form, cast-in-place, masonry vs stucco specs

    • NOA tolerances
    • Conflicts with referenced standards such as AVI 117 & 301 (floor finish tolerances)

  • Order of priority of documents to resolve ambiguities

    • Do large scale override plans or smaller scale details?

    • Does spec take precedence over plans?
    • Do we have input during contract negotiation?
    • Consider the following typical order of document precedence:
      • OCO’s (which often incorporate RFI responses and drawing revisions)
      • Q&A
      • Owner Contract
      • General Conditions
      • Other Exhibits
      • Addenda
      • Drawings
      • Specifications

  • Most stringent method/most expensive material presumed- not used often, but is available to owner

    • Fire treated lumber requirement within walls

    • Topsoil requirements
    • Different metal roof flashings shown (ex. galvanized vs. stainless or aluminum)

  • Substitutions vs. “or equal”

    • Potential Exposures
      • “Or equal” is not considered a change in the contract
      • “Substitution” is considered sufficiently different. It is viewed as a change in the work. Refrain from suggesting; We take on potential “design” exposure should conflicts be discovered later.
      • Potential Concerns:
        • Time limitations on substitution requests…30 days after NTP?
        • Conditions to satisfy: time, money, energy conservation benefits
        • Are there any revisions to design drawings required? If so, who pays for it?
        • Is the AHJ’s approval required? Are there potential code clearances to consider?
        • Compatibility/coordination with all adjoining work
        • Who is accountable for unforeseen impacts that may be found later?
        • Who is responsible if unforeseen impacts are found later and do not meet/exceed intended results outlined in specs?
        • Why take this design risk?
      • Bottom Line
        • Must be equal in all respects or we could have some “design” exposure
        • We may not have adequate insurance in place to cover this.
      • If required, follow specific procedures in contract for all substitutions. See Attachment 3 for typical Substitution Form.[PG2] 
    • Deviations from Contract
      • A/E  is responsible for general arrangement only of specified products
      • Hence the need for detailed shop drawings
      • Despite prior approval form A/E, deviations that change contract requirements on a submittal remain an exposure to Kast.
      • To mitigate exposure, clearly identify, cloud and mark any item as a “deviation” from the contract to be approved as such by the designer.
      • Otherwise, we may not be relieved from full compliance with contract including errors and omissions discovered later.
      • Submittals, approved or otherwise, never become contract documents without being incorporated via Change Order.

 

XI. Potential Scheduling Impacts


  • See Module 7 where the procurement schedule is covered in detail.

  • Know which submittals expect to go thru multiple review cycles

    • Windows, storefront/curtain walls, casework/cabinets, finish hardware, hollow metal doors & frames, catch basins/drainage/sewer structures

  • Long Lead items

    • Steel bar joists, windows, MEP equipment, overseas items, cabinets, flooring, doors, frames & hardware, items that may require mock-up’s for final approval

  • Early Need items

    • Foundation rebar, soil stabilization, augercast piles, vibro, dewatering/wells, below-grade waterproofing, below-grade conduit & piping

  • Special finishes or custom color selections

    • Special light fixtures, glass railings, decorative stainless steel doors, or frameless glass doors, anything out of the ordinary

  • Performance requirements…i.e. Delegate (Specialty) Engineering

    • Factor in adequate time for BIM/Coordination, engineering, bldg. department review, and separate permit requirements

      • Shoring/re-shoring plans

      •  Seawalls, docks, & other marine work
      • Post tension cables
      • Exterior light gage metal framing & trusses
      • Handrails & railings
      • Sliding glass doors
      • Aluminum entrances & storefronts
      • Pools
      • Fire protection systems
      • Fire alarm systems

 

XII. Coordination with Contiguous Work

  • Code Clearances-FHA/ADA

    • Framing or finished dimensions; are dimensions taken from center, face of drywall, or face of framing?

  • Attachments to dissimilar materials or interface between two trades

    • Review carefully “by others” or “NIC” noted on shop drawings for undefined substrates between different scopes of work.

  • Do not accept attachment references to unknown or unclear substrate “by others”

    • Have the subcontractor clearly define all substrate attachments.

    • Examples:

      • Window attachments- are wood bucks to be installed or are the windows directly fixed to concrete/wood framing? Clarify type of attachment (ex. Type 304 stainless steel)
      • Roof/expansion joint details
      • Stucco systems (especially over exterior framed systems)
      • Cabinet attachments
      • Toilet partition support systems & attachments

  • Importance of well written Exhibit “B’s” to the submittal process

    • Review all added notes on submittal with Exhibit B and Owner contract (i.e. Q&A)

    • Look for items that may involve one design discipline, but may not be coordinated with another.

    • Examples:
      • Are the hand dryers coordinated with electrical components?
      • Are the irrigation time clocks/controllers coordinated with electrical components?
    • Example Submittal Review- Hollow Metal Doors & Frames
      • Verify minimum gage for each exterior & interior door/each exterior & interior frame, and level of use if defined in spec.
      • Verify throat thicknesses with finished wall dimensions.
      • Verify fire rated label requirements coordinated with life safety plans and egress routes.
      • Are there any thermal requirements for exterior glass lites?
      • Are there any special acoustical requirements or min STC?
      • Is bituminous coating addressed in spec? Are we applying it in the shop or in the field by others?
      • Coordinate maximum size of vision lites in rated walls.
      • Verify door louver requirements for return air with HVAC drawings.
      • Verify required door undercuts.
      • Are there any fusible links required, if in rated walls?
      • Verify that the type of frame anchor is coordinated for CMU, afterwards in CIP concrete, or drywall partition?
      • Verify that finish hardware is coordinated with any reinforcing plates
      • Is seamless construction called for in spec?
      • Do egress doors have a minimum of 32” clear width?
      • Are doors wider than 48” constructed accordingly with proper gage material?
      • Is the level of zinc coating clear for all exterior doors (ex. G60, G90)?
      • Is the grouting of frames addressed for frames that are not going up with masonry?

XIII. Request for Information (RFI) Process

RFIs (Requests for Information) are an important part of the construction management process.  Once fully responded to and formally incorporated into the contract documents through the change order process, they supersede even the prime contract, qualifications, clarifications & assumptions to the prime contract, and contract documents (drawings and specifications)!  It is important, therefore, that the writing, distribution, and posting of RFIs be done with this outcome in mind.  Every time you write an RFI you should be writing it as if you (or our President, Vice Presidents, or Project Executives) may be called upon to read it out loud on the stand in a court of law.

RFI writing is equal parts art and science, with the ultimate goal being to document the question and response that is best for the project and to protect the interests of KAST, our subcontractors, our clients, and the design team.  RFIs should be viewed as the documentation of the issue and the resolution, which have been established via meetings, phone calls, and other verbal communication.  Poorly-written RFIs create more work for those on the receiving end and as a result often lead to delayed responses.  Conversely, RFIs that include a complete picture of the issue tend to be answered rapidly.  The following guidelines should be adhered to in order to achieve the desired result.  RFIs should be written with the assumption that the reader knows nothing about the project, or possibly even construction.  The RFI author should create a story with the RFI that any reasonable person could understand and follow.

Best practice is to view the RFI not as a means of communication, but as a means of documenting a solution already discussed and agreed upon by the relevant parties (Architect, Owner, Trade Contractors, AHJ, etc.).  This does not mean that you should not submit the RFI immediately upon discovering the issue, but instead is a mindset regarding RFIs that helps all involved to understand the best application.

  •  RFIs (Requests for Information) are an important part of the construction management process.

    • Once fully responded to and formally incorporated into the contract documents through the change order process, they supersede:
      • The prime contract
      • Qualifications, clarifications and assumptions to the prime contract
      • Drawings
      • Specifications
    • Every time you write an RFI you should be writing it as if you (or our President, Vice Presidents, or Project Executives) may be called upon to read it out loud on the stand in a court of law.
    • RFI writing is equal parts art and science, with the ultimate goal being to facilitate a timely response that is best for the project and to protect the interests of KAST, our subcontractors, our clients, and the design team.
    • Poorly-written RFIs create more work for those on the receiving end and as a result often lead to delayed responses.
    • Conversely, RFIs that include a complete picture of the issue tend to be answered rapidly.
    • Click here for KAST's RFI Workflow 
    • Click here for instructions on how to create and process RFIs in Procore.

  • All RFIs should include a reference to the contract documents when available.

    • Examples of references include drawings, specifications, ASIs or other change documents, or contract provisions.
    • Be sure to add the Location and Discipline from the appropriate dropdown boxes in the RFI tool
      • if the issue affects more than one location, choose the location that occurs first on the construction schedule
      • If the issue is more broad (e.g. partition types, etc.) choose the "Bldg" location
      • When selecting Discipline, if more than one is affected, choose the primary affected
    • Dates should always be included for the document referenced so that in the future it is clear exactly which version of a document is being referenced
      • The date should match the date received, as shown on the date received stamp, or date executed when contract references are made.
      • Examples of proper citations:
        • Detail 5 on Sheet A701 (Rec 3 4/22/17, KAST Rec’d 5/6/2017) shows…
        • Specification Section 085200.5.4.a (Rev 4 9/22/17, KAST Rec’d 10/25/2017) states…
        • Architect’s Supplemental Instruction #4 (KAST Rec’d 9/21/13) included sheet S501 (Rev 5 7/15/17 KAST Rec’d 9/16/17) which shows…
        • Q&A #3 from the GMP Agreement (executed 4/5/15) qualifies...
      • Grid intersections, room, door, window, etc. numbers and any other clarifying bits of information should be included as well.
        • Example: Door 5-1001 at gridline A.1 along the north wall of Room 1001 as shown on sheet A-101 (Rev 4 2/22/17 KAST Rec’d 4/15/17)...
      • For RFIs involving a singular reference, or a conflict between two reference documents, the reference should appear at the beginning of the RFI 
      • Example
        • “Detail 5 on Sheet A701 (Rev 7 4/7/17 KAST Rec’d 5/6/2017) shows the frame of Window 5-400 to be constructed from wood, while Specification Section 085200.5.4.a (Rev 1 11/16/16 KAST Rec’d 10/25/2017) states that all window frames are to be constructed of aluminum.
        • Please Clarify if the window frame in question should be constructed of wood or aluminum
        • If wood, please provide a specification section for same.”
      • As you can see from the above, when more than one question, or a question and a follow-on question, are asked the questions should be clearly delineated and numbered.
    • For RFIs involving numerous references, the RFI should begin with a simple explanation of the problem (consider it the “TL;DR” or “too long, didn’t read” version), followed by the request(s), and completed with a list of all reference documents.
      • Example:
      • Summary:
        • The Ductwork in Corridor 5200 at Grid Intersection G-5 is too large to fit in the ceiling space provided due to the concrete beam above.
      • Request:
        • Please provide a solution to this conflict.
      • Reference:
        • -Sheet RC501 (Rev 8 6/22/12KAST Rec’d 8/21/17) shows the ACT ceiling height in Corridor 5200 to be 10’-0” AFF, which gives 10’-2” to top of ceiling framing.
        • Sheet S601 (Rev 2 1/15/17 KAST Rec’d 1/21/17) shows beam B14 along Gridline G and the Level 06 top of slab elevation to be 75’ (15’ above the Level 05 slab).
        • -Beam Schedule on S750 (Rev 6 9/30/17 KAST Rec’d 10/10/17) shows beam B14 to be 48” deep, putting the bottom of beam at 11’-0”, or 10” above top of ceiling framing.
        • Sheet M501 (Rev 10 10/17/17 KAST Rec’d 11/15/17) shows the ductwork running down the Corridor at this location to be 14” tall, which gives an insulated height of 18”.

  • Whenever possible, include attachments that clearly outline the problem to the RFI.

    • The use of the snapshot or camera tool in Bluebeam allows you to do this very quickly.
    • You may easily create a new document and include various snapshots from the drawings and specifications to aid the respondent in understanding the issue and clarify the question for those who may not be familiar with the project.
    • BLUEBEAM SNAPSHOT GUIDE

  • The use of various project management software solutions have changed the way we submit RFIs. 

    However, this does not change our need to be clear on the documents that we are submitting, and ensuring they are directed to the right entities and answered in a timely fashion. The intent is not to simply submit the RFI, the intent is to submit the RFI in such a way as to get the response we require in time to affect the work in place while limiting impacts to the schedule and budget.  To do this requires that we discuss the issues with those involved, not just rely on the software tool to communicate.

    • Subcontractors
      • When a Subcontractor or Vendor submits an RFI it is important to discuss the content of the RFI with the person who submitted it to KAST. 
      • We do this both to understand any technical aspects of the RFI that may not be immediately clear, but also to resolve and grammatical or language issues that exist within the RFI.
      • Subcontractor RFIs typically do not meet the KAST standards, and you must edit their question as needed prior to submitting to the Architect.
        • best practice is to help teach the sub the KAST format so that they begin to create RFIs properly.
      • Subcontractor RFIs also often contain attachments of their own.  Whenever possible and wherever feasible, the color of those markups should be set to a color other than red prior to forwarding on as the Architect will typically use red in their markups, and we do not want to cause confusion in the final closed RFI package.
    • Owner
      • Sometimes the RFIs we submit may affect the Owner or Developer, or other items that they are working on.  It is a good idea to discuss directly with the Owner any RFIs related to finish selections, permitting, AHJs, any design professionals that are not under the Architect (Interior Design and sometimes Civil, as examples), telecom providers, etc.
    • Every attempt should be made to contact the appropriate design professional prior to the issuance of an RFI so that the issue can be discussed with them prior to issuing the RFI.
    • In the event that a solution is reached in those discussions, the RFI can be issued as a “confirming RFI” which should include reference to the discussion.
    • In the case of a discussion between only one or two people, the reference should be worded as:
      • Please confirm, per discussion between Fred Jones (KAST) and Bob Smith (BRPH) on 9/14/2017, that the window frame shown in Detail 5 on Sheet A701 (KAST Rec’d 5/6/2014) shall be constructed of aluminum and not wood.
    • When the discussion occurs at a formal meeting or within a larger group, full reference to the attendees and meeting should be made as follows, and should appear in the same section of the RFI as the “reference”.
      • Example:
        • At 3 PM on 5 May 2017 a meeting was held at the KAST jobsite office between Fred Jones, Billy Thompson & Tom Calhoun (KAST), Bob Smith & Cindy Lopez (BRPH), Tim Francis (ABC MEP Designs), Frank Hernandez (Frank’s Ductwork) and Frank Callahan & Susan Lawrence (XYZ Developer) to discuss the 42x14 ductwork in Corridor 5200 as shown on Sheet M501 (KAST Rec’d 11/15/11)and the ceiling below as shown on RC501 (KAST Rec’d 8/21/12).
        •  Please confirm, per Bob Smith (BRPH), that the ceiling in this corridor shall be lowered to 9’-0” AFF between 10’ east of Gridline F and 10’ west of Gridline H

  • Before closing an RFI, confirm that the response given by the design team:

    • Is compatible with field conditions/conditions shown in the contract documents or approved submittals/previous RFI responses
    • Clearly and fully answers all questions asked
    • Any associated schedule or cost implications are considered and justifiable
    • if the RFI was initiated by someone other than you (aother KAST employee, subcontractor, vendor, etc.) verify with that person that the response is sufficient BEFORE closing the RFI.

  • Responding to a subcontractor's RFI

    • In some instances, subcontractors ask questions that may appear to be clear in the current documents.  Often this is due to the subcontractor working from a previous revision, or simply not being familiar with the drawings.  In these cases, KAST has the ability to respond to a RFI that has been submitted.
      • It is good practice to ​​​​​​call subcontractor to discuss question and respond to the RFI as "per conversation on MM/DD/YY the information requested can be found on sheet A-101".
      • Only reference contract documents and only the location that it can be found within the particular contract document 
        • e.g. " Please reference sheet A-101 - Detail 8" / "Please reference spec section 03 30 10 for material to be used"
      • Do not provide direction by directly answering the question with materials, dimensions, Colors, etc.
        • e.g.  "Wall is Blue" / "The ceiling height is 11-6" / "Provide 18'x18" porcelain tile - Mosiac blue" 

  • Close and distribute the RFI to the affected parties.

    • Be sure to mark the appropriate response as the “Official Response”
    • Include all KAST PM/Field staff
    • Send to all relevant subcontractors that may be affected by the response
    • Call all subcontractors affected by the RFI and confirm they are aware of the response
    •  RFI CLOSING INSTRUCTIONS 

  • RFI Responses Including Full Sheets

    clipboard_e65b9954c60db84ef1a213572780e2324.png

    • Oftentimes RFI responses include full sheets as attachments
    • Refer to Module 12 for instructions as to how to process 
    • if the RFI# is not indicated in the Revision box of the drawings, add it to the top of the date stamp

 

XIV. RFI Writing Checklist

  1. Have you properly connected the issue to the contract documents?

    • Is the proper drawing cited?
    • Are the proper specifications cited?
    • Have you checked the Prime Contract, Qualifications & Assumptions and Clarifications?

  2. If the RFI originated with a subcontractor:

    • Have you CALLED the subcontractor to discuss the RFI?
    • Have you fully investigated the RFI for merit?
    • Have you re-written the RFI into professional language?
    • Have you separated all individual issues into separate RFIs?

  3. Have you re-written the RFI to follow KAST standards?

  4. Have you cited all necessary and relevant contract documents, including the KAST received date?

  5. Have you CALLED the designer directly to discuss possible solutions?

  6. Have you clearly asked, and numbered, any multiple-question RFIs?

XV. RFI Posting Checklist

  1. Have you posted the response to the appropriate location(s)?

    • All drawings missing information previously
    • All drawings where the RFI has changed the information
    • Any relevant specifications
    • Ask yourself: “Where would a subcontractor or superintendent look to find this information?”

  2. Does your RFI post convey the proper information?

    • Absolute dimensions, not relative? (i.e. “8’-2” AFF” not “2in lower”)
    • No extraneous information

  3. Does your RFI post cloud cover the appropriate area?

 [RS1]Create a link to the Procurement Schedule in the Scheduling Module

 [PG2]Attachment?