CDT Exam Dumps - Construction Documents Technologist

CSI’s CDT materials rely heavily on the AIA A201 – General Conditions of the Contract for Construction as the model for understanding roles, responsibilities, and risk allocation. In A201 (both the 2007 and 2017 editions), the default requirement for property insurance (builder’s risk) is placed on the Owner.

The relevant article states, in substance, that:

Unless otherwise provided in the contract documents, the Owner shall purchase and maintain property insurance written on an “all-risks” or equivalent builder’s risk policy.

This insurance is to cover the Work, materials, and equipment to be incorporated into the project during construction, and sometimes temporary structures and portions of the site as specified.

The parties may alter this allocation by specific agreement (for example, by assigning the responsibility to the contractor in the Supplementary Conditions or Agreement), but the baseline A201 allocation is clearly:

Owner is responsible for the property insurance,

“unless otherwise provided” in the contract documents.

Why the other options are not correct:

A. Surety, on contractor’s behalf – The surety’s role relates to bonds (bid bond, performance bond, payment bond), not to providing property insurance for the work.

C. Owner and contractor, jointly – The standard A201 language does not assign joint responsibility; it assigns it primarily to the Owner, subject to modification.

D. Contractor, unless assigned to owner – This reverses the A201 default. Only if the contract documents specifically shift the duty would the contractor procure property insurance.

Therefore, in accordance with AIA A201 as interpreted and taught in CSI’s CDT program, responsibility for property insurance for the Work rests with the Owner, unless the contract documents specifically assign it otherwise, making Option B the correct answer.

CSI/CDT identifies several formal construction phase meetings, each with a specific purpose. Among them:

Preconstruction conference – Held at the start of the project.

Preinstallation meetings – Held before specific portions of work begin (e.g., roofing, curtain wall, concrete).

Progress meetings (job meetings) – Held regularly (often weekly or monthly) during the construction phase to review overall project status, schedule, coordination issues, and actions needed.

A progress meeting is defined in A201/Division 01 and CSI guidance as a recurring meeting of the owner, contractor, architect/engineer, and key parties to:

Review work progress and status of the schedule

Address issues affecting timely and successful completion of the work

Coordinate upcoming activities and resolve questions or conflicts

Review submittals, RFIs, changes, and other administrative matters

That is exactly what the question describes: monthly meetings with the contractor and owner focused on timely and successful completion. This matches Option C – Progress meeting.

Why the other options are incorrect:

A. Workflow meeting“Workflow meeting” is not a standard CSI or AIA term for a formal contract-phase meeting. While teams may hold internal coordination meetings, the recognized contract-related recurring meeting in CSI/AIA practice is the progress meeting, not “workflow meeting.”

B. Preinstallation meetingPreinstallation meetings (sometimes called “pre-installation conferences”) are task- or trade-specific, held before a particular system or portion of work begins (e.g., roofing, masonry, fire protection). They focus on that specific work’s requirements, sequencing, and coordination—not on overall project progress each month. Therefore, they do not match the general monthly, whole-project focus described in the question.

D. Schedule monitoring meetingWhile progress meetings certainly involve schedule review and monitoring, “schedule monitoring meeting” is not the standard CSI/AIA term for the regular contract administration meeting among owner, contractor, and A/E. In standard contract documents and CSI references, the recognized name is “progress meeting.”

CSI / CDT-aligned references (no links):

CSI Project Delivery Practice Guide – discussions of construction phase meetings, including preconstruction, preinstallation, and progress meetings.

CSI Construction Specifications Practice Guide – Division 01 sections for “Project Management and Coordination” / “Construction Progress Meetings.”

CDT content referencing AIA A201 and Division 01 provisions for regular progress meetings and their agendas.

CSI’s core principle is that contract documents describe the work results required, not the internal means, methods, or subcontracting arrangements of the contractor. The contractor (or construction manager) is responsible for:

Determining how the work will be divided among trades and subcontractors.

Coordinating different trades to achieve the required results shown on the drawings and described in the specifications.

Design professionals (architects and engineers):

Organize the documents by disciplines and work results (e.g., civil, architectural, electrical), not by subcontractor or trade contract structure.

Are not responsible for dictating which subcontractor performs which portion of the work; that is the contractor’s role.

Given that:

Site electrical work appears on civil drawings, but the electrical engineer has also prepared electrical documents for the building systems.

The intent of the contract documents is still to describe what must be installed and how it must perform, not which subcontractor does it.

The only option that aligns with CSI’s stated roles and responsibilities is:

D. The electrical engineer does not need to control how the work is to be assigned to subcontractors.

Why the other options are not the “intent” of the documents:

A. The civil contractor is to place the concrete bases and the electrical contractor is to install the site lighting.This presumes a specific trade split based on drawing origin. CSI emphasizes that the contractor determines trade assignments, not the drawings themselves.

B. The civil contractor is to place the concrete bases and the site lighting, with the electrical contractor making the final connections.Again, this dictates trade assignments. The documents may show coordination between civil and electrical work, but do not prescribe how contractors must divide their subcontracts.

C. The general contractor needs to coordinate the work and verify that the electrical subcontractor bids the site electrical.While coordination of work is indeed a contractor responsibility, the phrasing here implies that the documents intend to direct which subcontractor must price which work package. CSI’s standpoint is that the contractor is free to structure subcontract bids as they see fit, as long as the required work is provided in accordance with the contract.

Thus, the intent of the contract documents is to define the required end results, not to assign work scopes among subcontractors. Option D correctly reflects that intent and the design professional’s role.

Relevant CSI-aligned references (no URLs):

CSI Project Delivery Practice Guide – roles and responsibilities of owner, design professional, and contractor; explanation that contractor controls means, methods, and subcontracting.

CSI Construction Specifications Practice Guide – distinction between describing work results and assigning work trades.

CSI CDT Body of Knowledge – contract document intent vs. contractor’s responsibility for dividing the work.

Comprehensive and Detailed Explanation From Exact Extract (CSI-based)

In Design-Bid-Build (DBB), CSI describes a clear, linear sequence of phases:

Programming and design

Procurement (bidding/negotiation and selection of contractor)

Award of the construction contract

Construction

At the end of the procurement phase, the owner has received and evaluated bids, determined the successful bidder, and is ready to award the contract. CSI’s project delivery guidance explains that the award step typically involves:

Issuing a Notice of Award or letter of intent to the successful bidder; and/or

Forwarding the owner–contractor agreement (and other contract forms) for execution.

Only after this step do the parties fully execute the contract and the owner issues a Notice to Proceed, marking the official start of the construction phase. This matches Option D:

The owner issues a letter of intent or forwards the owner-contractor agreement to the successful bidder.

Why the other options are incorrect:

A. The contractor begins negotiating agreements with subcontractors.Subcontractor negotiations and subcontracts typically occur after the contractor has been formally awarded and has a binding contract with the owner. This is not the immediate step that awards the contract for construction.

B. The owner forwards construction contract agreements to subcontractors.The owner’s contract is with the prime contractor, not with subcontractors. Subcontracts are between the prime contractor and subcontractors. The owner does not award contracts directly to subs in standard DBB.

C. The contractor and owner issue an amendment indicating the project is in the construction phase.There is normally no “amendment” to enter the construction phase. The project enters the construction phase upon execution of the owner–contractor agreement and issuance of the Notice to Proceed, not by amendment.

Key CSI References (titles only):

CSI Project Delivery Practice Guide – chapters on Design-Bid-Build and the Procurement and Contract Award processes.

CSI Construction Specifications Practice Guide – discussions on contract formation and Notice of Award/Notice to Proceed.

CSI CDT Body of Knowledge – “Project Delivery Methods” and “Procurement and Award of Contract.”

Within CSI’s project delivery framework, the Design stage (which includes schematic design and design development) is where the architect/engineer (A/E) works with the owner to evaluate options, select specific systems, and record decisions that will later be fully detailed in the construction documents.

CSI’s project-phase descriptions (as presented in the CSI Project Delivery Practice Guide and CDT study materials) explain the stages roughly as follows (paraphrased, not verbatim):

Project Conception: The owner defines a need or opportunity, explores whether a project is warranted, and considers general feasibility. The focus is on defining the reason for the project, not picking specific products or systems.

Programming: The owner’s requirements and objectives are documented—space needs, performance criteria, budget, schedule, and qualitative expectations. At this point, needs and performance requirements for systems (e.g., “energy-efficient HVAC,” “durable flooring”) are identified, but not necessarily specific named products or system configurations.

Design:

Schematic Design: General design concepts, overall configuration, and preliminary system approaches are developed; the owner begins making more concrete decisions.

Design Development: The A/E and consultants refine and confirm decisions about specific systems, materials, and assemblies, and these decisions are documented so they can be incorporated into specifications and drawings.

Construction Documents: The A/E takes those already-made decisions and fully documents them in coordinated drawings and specifications, but this phase is not usually where the majority of decisions about which specific products and systems to use are first obtained; instead, it formalizes and details what was already decided in Design.

CSI’s CDT content emphasizes that during Design Development, the A/E “confirms and documents owner decisions about materials, products, and systems” so that these can be translated into clear contract documents during the Construction Documents phase. That activity—obtaining and documenting the owner’s decisions about specific products and systems—is core to the Design stage, making Option B correct.

Why the other options are not correct under CSI’s framework:

A. Construction documentationIn the Construction Documents phase, the A/E develops the detailed drawings and specifications based on decisions made earlier. Changes and additional decisions can occur here, but CSI treats the primary “obtaining and documenting owner choices” as a Design-stage responsibility; the CD phase is about formalizing and coordinating them into contract documents.

C. Project conceptionAt conception, there often isn’t an A/E contracted yet, and the owner is still deciding whether to proceed at all. Product and system decisions would be far too early and poorly defined at this point.

D. ProgrammingProgramming focuses on what the facility must do, not on exactly how via specific products or named systems. It defines performance and functional requirements (e.g., acoustical needs, energy performance) but typically stops short of selecting specific manufacturers or detailed system configurations.

Key CSI-aligned references (no links):

CSI Project Delivery Practice Guide – chapters on project phases (Programming, Design, Construction Documents) and owner/A/E responsibilities.

CSI CDT Body of Knowledge – sections on the Design phase and decision-making responsibilities for products and systems.

Within CSI’s project delivery discussion, Integrated Project Delivery (IPD) is defined as a highly collaborative project delivery approach where key project participants—typically owner, architect/engineer, and contractor (and often major trades and key consultants)—work together as an integrated team from very early in the project.

Core characteristics of IPD in CSI-oriented material include:

Early involvement of key participants in planning, design, and sometimes even programming.

A single, collaborative team structure (rather than traditional silos of responsibility) focusing on shared project goals (cost, schedule, quality, performance).

Shared information and decision-making, often supported by digital tools (such as BIM) so that design, cost, constructability, and operations considerations are integrated.

A focus on joint problem-solving and collective risk and reward, rather than adversarial relationships.

That description aligns directly with Option A: “A collaborative, integrated, and productive team composed of key project participants.”

Why the other options are incorrect:

B. Traditional delivery methods and team relationships…IPD is specifically a departure from traditional team relationships (like those in conventional Design-Bid-Build), which are more linear and segmented. IPD emphasizes integrated rather than traditional or separated relationships.

C. Responsibility silos for greater efficiencies…“Responsibility silos” describe the opposite of IPD. IPD seeks to break down silos, fostering shared responsibility and integrated decision-making.

D. Segregat[ing] knowledge… with paper-based communications…IPD promotes continuous, transparent information sharing, often using digital platforms and models. Segregated, paper-based communications are characteristic of older, more fragmented approaches, not IPD.

Key CSI Reference Titles (no links):

CSI Project Delivery Practice Guide – sections on Integrated Project Delivery and collaborative team structures.

CSI CDT Body of Knowledge – “Project Delivery Methods” and comparison of IPD with traditional methods.

Comprehensive and Detailed Explanation From Exact Extract (CSI-based)

Within CSI’s CDT framework, the primary national reference for organizing and presenting design and construction drawings is the U.S. National CAD Standard (NCS). The NCS is a coordinated standard developed by several organizations including the National Institute of Building Sciences (NIBS), CSI, and the AIA. It provides:

Guidelines for drawing sheet organization (titles, numbering, and content).

Layering standards (including what many people know as the AIA CAD Layer Guidelines).

Symbols, plotting conventions, and other tools that make drawings consistent and coordinated across disciplines and projects.

CSI’s project delivery and documentation guidance points design professionals and specifiers to the U.S. National CAD Standard as the key reference for how drawings should be structured and presented to support clear coordination with specifications and other contract documents.

Why the other options are not the best answer:

A. AIA CAD Layer GuidelinesThese guidelines are actually a component of the U.S. National CAD Standard, primarily addressing layer naming and organization. On their own they do not provide the full system for sheet organization, plotting, and cross-discipline coordination that the question describes. CSI and NIBS treat them as part of the broader NCS.

B. National Institute of Building SciencesNIBS is an organization, not the actual “reference document.” NIBS sponsors and publishes several standards (including the NCS and the National BIM Standard–US), but the question asks specifically for the document that includes the guidelines and tools for drawing organization and presentation. That document is the U.S. National CAD Standard, not NIBS itself.

C. National BIM Standard – United StatesThe National BIM Standard–US focuses on BIM information exchange, modeling protocols, data structures, and interoperability, not on the traditional CAD sheet organization and 2D drawing presentation. It is important, but it is not the primary reference CSI cites for the organization and presentation of drawings in the traditional contract documents sense.

Therefore, consistent with CSI CDT content, the correct answer is Option D: U.S. National CAD Standard.

CSI reference concepts:

CSI Project Delivery Practice Guide – sections on construction documents and the role of standards such as the U.S. National CAD Standard in organizing drawings.

CSI CDT body of knowledge – topics on drawing organization, coordination between drawings and specifications, and national CAD standards.

According to CSI and standard General Conditions (such as AIA A201 and EJCDC C-700, both referenced in CSI’s CDT materials), the contractor has a duty to review the contract documents for coordination and constructability, and if any errors, inconsistencies, or code violations are discovered, the contractor must promptly notify the architect/engineer (A/E) in writing before proceeding.

This requirement exists because:

The A/E is responsible for design compliance with codes.

The contractor must not proceed with work known to be contrary to applicable laws or regulations without clarification.

The contractor’s written notice triggers the A/E’s responsibility to issue clarification, correction, or instruction to maintain compliance.

Therefore, the proper action is Option A — Notify the architect/engineer in writing.

Why others are incorrect:

B. Proceed with the work – would expose both the contractor and owner to risk of code violation; explicitly prohibited by standard conditions.

C. Request a variance – is not the contractor’s responsibility; this rests with the owner or A/E.

D. Stop all work – not authorized unless directed; the contractor must first notify the A/E.

CSI Reference:

CSI Project Delivery Practice Guide, “Construction Phase — Communications and Responsibilities”; Construction Specifications Practice Guide, “General Conditions Responsibilities — Compliance with Codes.”