Our firm has switched to the term "record drawings" and we now use it exclusively. Several engineering organizations, particularly civil eng and geotechnical, encourage the use of "record drawings" rather than "as builts." The reason behind this is that the term "as-built drawing" has been used against engineers numerous times in court and the term seems to have a legal meaning that the "as built" drawing shows everything absolutely as it exists in the field. In reality, we can't verify every detail unless we see every weld, test every cubic foot of backfill for density, watch the contractor's every move during construction, etc. The term "record drawing" seems to have a legal meaning that to the best of our knowledge, we believe that what we're showing on the drawing is how it exists after construction.
Record Drawings here, been to court trying to defend As-Builts, I wouldn't wish that experience on anyone. Lawyers don't understand engineering, but they do understand As-Builts, believe me. Their trick is to find one thing on the as-built drawings that isn't as-built, then the attack and discredit you. Other than that, there isn't any difference between the two terms.
I finaly talked the managers into changing it to "Record Drawing". I also gave them a print of all your comments, which were very helpfull. The legality of the "As Builts" also put things into perspective.
jaymann100...BobPE nailed it. "As Built" is overly encompassing (sort of like using the terms "all" or "any" in a report), and can easily be used to obscure an issue or discredit you in court. "As Recorded" is just an action with little legal connotation (other than if you "record" it, make sure you do it right!).
