Rank: New forum user 
|
I think I probably know the answer to this question but would just like a bit of clarification.
Can the client appoint two PC's on one project if the work areas or common areas overlap?
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Super forum user
|
One project = one PC, regardless of the number of work areas.
If that causes a problem, you might want to think about running each area as a definite separate project.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Super forum user
|
Hmmm. Not sure I agree.... Transmission line project had PC for forestry clearance, PC for track construction, PC for foundations concrete and steel and wiring, and another PC for substation works. All described as a single project, but with a very large number of work bases across several hundred kilometres of landscape.... Several f10s on the go. The important (and hardest) part was making sure there was only one PC in any place at any time.... Where overlaps did occur (e.g. because the track builders had to reinstate after heavy weather whilst the steel builders were on site) then a great deal of joint planning and coordination generally avoided any issues. Although there were some!.... Could have been described as four projects I suppose, but it was easier to refer to it all as a single entity....
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Forum user
|
If the project is notifiable under the current threshold then the notification page on the HSE web site will only allow you to list or nominate 1 Principal Contractor for that one particular project, you could split the project into different disciplines where indeed you could have multiple F10's but you would need to have in place clear demarcation which is an arduous task in itself
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Super forum user
|
The PC can novate but there can only be one PC per a project at any one time. Splitting up a project and having multiple PCs is not what was intended by CDM 2015. If multiple PCs were allowed there would be no one contractor taking the lead with regards regulation 13 and it is the construction industries’ accepted interpretation that there is only one PC.
It should also be noted that the wording of the regulations states “Principal Contractor” and “Contractors”.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Super forum user 
|
Interestingly I see nothing in CDM 2015 which prohibits more than one PC at any given time. It has always been the principle of CDM that there can only be one PC for each project, although the PC duty can be transferred from one PC to another PC. The former iteration of CDM 2007 ACoP L144 does state: '154 There can only be one principal contractor for a project at any one time.' However upon reviewing 2015 guidance L153 I cannot find a similar reference except where there are two or more projects at the same time, but run independently of one another as per below.
117 There may be occasions where two or more projects are taking place on the
same site at the same time, but are run independently of one another. Whatever
the circumstances, it is essential that there is clarity over who is in control
during the construction phase in any part of the site at any given time. Where
it is not possible for one principal contractor to be in overall control, those principal
contractors involved must:
(a) cooperate with one another;
(b) coordinate their work; and
(c) take account of any shared interfaces between the activities of each project
(eg shared traffic routes).
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Super forum user
|
The Interpretation Act says that unless it is clearly contrary to reality the singular includes the plural and vice-versa.
We've had lots of projects, e.g. on roads with more than one Principal Contractor working simultaneously. The art is to separate them by time and/or distance as in Steve's example.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Super forum user
|
peter gotch wrote:The Interpretation Act says that unless it is clearly contrary to reality the singular includes the plural and vice-versa.
We've had lots of projects, e.g. on roads with more than one Principal Contractor working simultaneously. The art is to separate them by time and/or distance as in Steve's example.
Peter, never new The Interpretation Act 1978 even existed - every day is a school day.
|
|
|
|
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum.
You cannot reply to topics in this forum.
You cannot delete your posts in this forum.
You cannot edit your posts in this forum.
You cannot create polls in this forum.
You cannot vote in polls in this forum.