Record Drawings vs. As-Built Drawings: Different Documents, Different Obligations
On any construction project, the drawings used to actually build the project (the construction documents) and the drawings that describe what was actually built by the end (the final record) are different. Changes happen during construction — field-routed utilities avoid unexpected obstacles, minor dimensional adjustments are made in the field, change orders modify scope. The final state of the building typically differs from the original design drawings in dozens or hundreds of details.
Capturing those differences is the purpose of as-built drawings and record drawings. These two terms get used interchangeably in casual conversation, but they're different documents with different originating parties and different levels of precision.
As-built drawings are typically maintained by the contractor during construction. The contractor takes a set of the original contract drawings and marks them up as changes happen — a pipe rerouted to avoid a beam, a conduit relocated to clear a duct, a dimension adjusted to match the field condition. The marked-up set is the as-built record.
As-built drawings are typically red-line markups on print sets (or their digital equivalent in construction management software). They're not drafted to the precision of construction documents — they're field-recorded observations. They capture the general condition accurately but may not have dimensional precision.
The contractor's contract typically requires maintenance of as-builts throughout construction and delivery of the final as-built set at closeout. AIA A201 general conditions make this part of the contractor's responsibilities.
Record drawings are typically produced by the architect or engineer of record at closeout, based on the contractor's as-built markups. The architect reviews the contractor's as-builts, incorporates the changes into clean drafted drawings, and produces a formal record set that becomes the "as-constructed" drawings for the building.
Record drawings are drafted to the same standards as the original construction documents — line quality, dimensioning, notation consistency. They're the document the owner uses long-term for facility management, renovations, and understanding the building. They're what gets filed as the official project record.
Note that not every project produces record drawings. On smaller projects or projects where the architect isn't retained for closeout, the contractor's as-built markups may be the final record. On larger commercial projects, the owner typically requires the cleaner record drawings as a deliverable.
Contracts vary in how specific they are about the closeout drawing deliverable. Well-drafted contracts specify:
Closeout drawing deliverables the contract should cover
- Who maintains as-builts during construction (contractor is standard)
- Format of the as-builts (redlines on print sets, digital markups in BIM/software, or both)
- Frequency of as-built updates (typically continuous during construction with monthly review)
- Who produces record drawings at closeout (architect is standard if required; contractor otherwise)
- Format and quantity of record drawings delivered (sets of prints, digital files in specified format)
- Whether BIM models must be updated to reflect final condition (common on projects with BIM)
- Timing of delivery (substantial completion, final completion, or prior to final payment)
When the contract is ambiguous, closeout drawing disputes can delay final payment. The owner wants the detailed record for facility management; the contractor wants to deliver what the contract specifies and not more. Clear up-front drafting avoids the negotiation at closeout.
The changes that should flow from field reality into as-built and then record drawings include:
Get AP insights in your inbox
A short monthly roundup of construction AP + accounting posts. No spam, ever.
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Changes captured in as-builts and record drawings
- Routing changes — pipes, ducts, conduits that were rerouted during installation
- Dimensional changes — where field conditions required minor adjustments from plan
- Equipment substitutions — when a different model or make was used (approved via submittal substitution)
- Change orders — both cost-impact and non-cost changes that affected the physical work
- Clarifications from RFIs — where the RFI response directed something different from the original drawings
- Field conditions discovered during construction — where the design assumed one condition and the field revealed another
- Subsurface conditions encountered — for below-grade work, where actual conditions differed from drawings
Each of these needs to be marked on the as-built set as it happens. Trying to reconstruct all changes at closeout from memory or records is unreliable and time-consuming. The continuous discipline of marking up as things happen is what makes the closeout deliverable accurate.
As-builts maintained continuously are a five-minute-a-day discipline. As-builts reconstructed at closeout are a multi-week reconstruction that often produces inaccurate documents. The up-front discipline is always cheaper than the retrospective reconstruction.
On projects using Building Information Modeling (BIM), the as-built and record drawing process has evolved. Rather than marking up print sets, the contractor updates the BIM model with as-installed conditions — final routing, equipment locations, field changes. The updated BIM becomes the record, and traditional 2D drawings are extracted from it.
BIM-based as-builts have a significant advantage for facility management: the owner gets a coordinated 3D model of the building that can drive maintenance, future renovation planning, and operational optimization. The tradeoff is the BIM modeling discipline is more demanding than traditional redline markups — updating the model requires software skills and time that not every contractor has built into their pay-app process.
Contracts that require BIM-based as-builts should specify the Level of Development (LOD) expected for the final model. LOD 500 is typically the full as-built specification, but LOD 300 or 350 may be acceptable depending on owner needs. Getting this specification right upfront prevents a closeout dispute about how detailed the delivered model has to be.
Final payment typically requires closeout document delivery, and as-builts and record drawings are usually on the required list. The contract should specify which are required and when. If record drawings are required and the architect is producing them, the contractor can't be held up on final payment for a deliverable that's not their responsibility — but they can be held up on the as-built markups they owe.
For AP, closeout document tracking should separately identify contractor-owed deliverables (as-builts, O&M manuals, warranties) from architect-owed deliverables (record drawings, if applicable). Payment triggers tied to the contractor's deliverables can flow even if architect deliverables are outstanding.
As-built drawings are the contractor's field-maintained record of what actually got built. Record drawings are the architect's cleaned-up version at closeout. They're different documents with different production paths and different levels of precision. Contracts should specify which is required, who produces it, the format, and the timing. Continuous maintenance during construction beats retrospective reconstruction every time. BIM-based approaches are changing the practice but also raising the complexity of the deliverable. Clear contract language and continuous discipline are what make closeout smooth.
Written by
Marcus Reyes
Construction Industry Lead
Spent twelve years running AP at a $120M general contractor before joining Covinly. Lives in the world of AIA G702/G703, retainage schedules, and lien waiver deadlines. Writes about the construction-specific workflows that generic AP tools get wrong.
View all posts