The RFI Log — Minimum Required Fields
- RFI number — sequential, never reused
- Date submitted
- Drawing reference — sheet, detail, revision
- Responsible reviewer — who must answer
- Required response date — tied to the drawing release schedule
- Current status — Open, Closed, Awaiting Additional Information
- Schedule impact — what drawing production is on hold
- Actual response date and response summary
Weekly Reporting to the Fabricator
The RFI log should be reported to the fabricator (and PM if different) weekly — not just when something is closed. Open RFIs that are approaching their required response date need escalation before the deadline, not after. A weekly report that shows 8 open RFIs with 3 past their required response date is an escalation trigger — not a status item to note and move on.
Escalation When Responses Are Overdue
When an RFI response is past due, the escalation sequence should be: (1) send a written notice to the GC citing the RFI number, the past-due date, and the drawing production impact; (2) follow up verbally at the next coordination meeting; (3) if still unanswered, send a formal schedule impact notice documenting the delay attributable to the unanswered RFI. This sequence creates the documentation record needed if a delay claim becomes necessary.
Categorizing RFIs by Impact Severity
Not all open RFIs carry the same schedule weight, and managing them as a flat list obscures which items require immediate action. A practical categorization system divides open RFIs into three tiers: critical (holding a drawing package that affects the nearest fabrication release), active (holding drawings that will be needed within two weeks), and pending (questions about later phases with no immediate production impact). The weekly report to the fabricator should highlight critical RFIs at the top — the number, the drawing package affected, the required response date, and the name of the responsible reviewer. This makes it immediately clear to the fabricator's PM which items need a phone call today.
Using Platform Tools vs. Spreadsheet Tracking
For smaller projects, a well-maintained spreadsheet RFI log is sufficient — provided it is shared, current, and actually reviewed weekly. For larger projects or those using Procore, Autodesk Construction Cloud, or e-Builder, RFI tracking within the platform provides automated notifications, deadline tracking, and audit trails that a spreadsheet cannot. The platform also routes responses directly to the submitter without a manual relay step, reducing the lag between an EOR's response and the detailer receiving it. If your fabrication PM uses a platform and your detailing partner does not, agree on a submission format at kickoff rather than managing two parallel systems.
Tying RFI Responses to Drawing Releases
The most actionable RFI tracking practice is to explicitly link each open RFI to the drawing package it is blocking. When the weekly report shows 'RFI-014 — holds PKG-03 release currently planned for October 22,' the schedule consequence is legible to everyone from the detailing PM to the fabrication shop floor to the GC's project manager. This linkage also provides natural escalation criteria: any RFI that is blocking a release within 5 business days should automatically generate a written escalation notice, regardless of when the response was originally due.
Closing RFIs Properly and Documenting the Response
An RFI is closed when the response is received and the drawing or model has been updated to reflect it — not when the email arrives. The RFI log entry should record the exact text of the EOR's response, the revision in which it was incorporated, and the date the drawing was reissued. An RFI marked "Closed" where the response is "see attached sketch" without a reference to which drawing revision incorporates the sketch is not truly closed. At audit time, incomplete RFI closure is one of the most common gaps that creates disputes over whether design intent was properly implemented in the shop drawings.