Posted By David Bruce From the reading through the draft regs and acop it is clear that the P.S. becomes CDM-Co-ordinator automatically on ongoing projects when the regulations come into effect. Similarly the CDM Co-ordinator is responsible for creating the H&S File as stated in his duties under the regulations. My question is what happens for ongoing projects where it was agreed intially that the principal contractor would produce the H&S File? I have a few projects like this. My concern is that we quoted originally on the basis that the contractor would assemble this information. Are we now required to take on this additional duty to comply and lose money. Or are we permitted to work to our contract with the contractor continuing to produce this?

Posted By Bob Youel the same conditions can apply re H&S file if they are small/short works - contracts additionally [without reading the regs] the H&S file should be complied by the clients rep P-Super/Coo irrespective so your agreement was outside the regs in the first place

Posted By B J Mann Signed up to the forum just for this as it is one of my little bugbears. Surely the new regulations are being introduced primarily to correct the "misinterpretation" of the old ones? The old ones put the duty to "ensure" a Health & Safety File was "produced" on the Planning Supervisor. Surely the old regulations made clear what they meant when they put a duty on Principal Contractors to pass on relevant documentation to the Planning Supervisor to collate into a H&S File? Surely the new regulations only clarify this. EG the draft ACoP points out that it may be more appropriate for a Design & Build Contractor to take on the compilation of the File from the (former) Planning Supervisor? I'd really like to know how we got into a siutuation where the Planning Supervisor made sure the designers designed out risks and ensured that the designers recorded any residual risks, ideally on the design drawings. Did the same with any of the client's long term suppliers and nominated contractors, often involved in the project before the Principal Contractor. Reviewed surveys, asbestos reports, existing (never seen one in four years) H&S Files, etc. "Produced" a standard Pre Construction H&S Plan and delivered it to the Principal Contractor (in our case effectively often only providing attendance to the client's nominated subcontractors who'd been on board the project for months, and we find that the PCH&SP is identical to those from other Planning Supervisors and clients for other projects apart from the site address and one or two details such as location or layout, often wrong because the PS hadn't ammended all of the few paragraphs they deigned to personalise to the project - in fact one PS asked me to fill in the address as he didn't have it!). And used the Pre Construction H&S Plan to pass on to the Principal Contractor the "duty" of: a) Providing Risk Assessments and Method Statements, etc for risks that were either insignificant or even non-existant on the project in question. b) Producing a H&S File which was really an O&M manual that buried the H&S information in the O&M documentation which the client and Planning Supervisor had access to long before we came on board (one subcontractor asked why I was asking him for information that he'd supplied direct months before on equipment that he had trained the Clients staff on already when he'd never been asked for it in the previous 405 jobs he's done for the client!).

Posted By holyterror72 The HSE, believe it or not, review all of their rules and regulations as time moves on. Your rants and raves smack of the retail industry (correct me if Im wrong). In fact the chances are Ive worked with you in the past. If a PS is appointed late their whole involvement is pointless. How can they help 'design out' risk if the project 'starts on Monday'. Hence the reason you get generic, useless information. If theory jobs with short notice should be turned away but people have to eat. Hence the reason contractors start without sufficent information. They shouldn't but they do. Ive worked in a lot of sectors and retail, by all accounts, is terrible. Its all so fast track it should have been done yesterday. I try to avoid bad Clients now a days, especially from that sector (I can name a lot) I do agree that the role of the PS has been disappointing. But under CDM so has the Client (generally don't give a **** about H&S, etc as long as the price and deadline are ok), designer (doesn't inform Clients of duties, wont design out features due to looking pretty, does it matter it is on the 20th storey), Principal Contractor (lots of generic paperwork which is possibly ok but demonstrates little to no knowledge of H&S practice once on site). The whole thing is a bit of a mess really. I think one of the issues is that CDM covers jobs from low value to millions and the associated paperwork should be directly proportional. H&S Files are generally combined with O&M information as, especially on low cost/complexity projects, there is very little to put in them. It 'pads it out'. The PS should at the Pre Com meeting ask all the contractors what to expect and sought out what they can get. If the PS hasn't known about certain documentation it may be that its not been known about or that it is so obvious it isnt required for the File (probably is for the O&M though. CDM's impact on shop fit projects is low but on bigger, high rise projects it is totally different. I can safely say that you wouldn't know what the PS has done because design issues have been dealt with before the contractor gets a sniff of the plans. Which is how it should be. Any swearing you have to do please email me directly and I will give you my mobile number.

Posted By B J Mann >> The HSE, believe it or not, review all of their rules and regulations as time moves on. I believe they do. But historically the regulations have involved more complication, paperwork and bureaucracy (which may, or may not, be a natural, or even, to some extent, a good thing). However, "believe it or not" they have not currently reviewed any of their rules and regulations: what they have reviewed is the Clients', and, more specifically, the Planning Supervisors', "interpretation" of them. >> Your rants and raves smack of the retail industry (correct me if Im wrong). In fact the chances are Ive worked with you in the past. I hope your "little rants and raves" weren't directed at moi, holyterror. And feel free to point out where I have indulged in "Any swearing". >> If a PS is appointed late their whole involvement is pointless. How can they help 'design out' risk if the project 'starts on Monday'. Well spotted. However, as I mentioned on the other thread I helpfully linked to: "Strangely though most of them seem to be arms of the Project Manager/ QS/ Designer for the project who, presumably, weren't "appointed late"!" Pity you hadn't spotted that. Even more strangely the one man bands and small independent Planning Supervisors I've worked with and met try to do the best they can in the circumstances. Tailoring requirements (and costs) to the size and complexity of the job. The arms of the big consultancy practices seem to brainwash their clients into thinking there is a lot more to their role than there is, but despite that come in at the last minute and try to justify "their" role by offloading lots of paperwork onto the Principal Contractor. >> Hence the reason you get generic, useless information. If theory jobs with short notice should be turned away but people have to eat. Hence the reason contractors start without sufficent information. They shouldn't but they do. Stranger still, given that they don't have time to generate more than a generic pre construction plan, that they seem to have plenty of time to generate correspondence insisting the Principal Contractor should be "Providing Risk Assessments and Method Statements, etc for risks that were either insignificant or even non-existant on the project in question.". And where would they have found time to review such made-up padding if it had been generated? Did you actually do me the courtesy of reading my post before responding with your "rants and raves"? >> Ive worked in a lot of sectors and retail, by all accounts, is terrible. Its all so fast track it should have been done yesterday. I try to avoid bad Clients now a days, especially from that sector (I can name a lot). Feel free to explain where those clients got the idea that the Planning Supervisor arm of their consultants should post out a generic pre construction "plan" at the last minute (or later) tucked away at the back of which was the Planning Supervisors "agreements" that the Principal Contractor should generate half a forest of paperwork on non-existent or negligible construction "risks" (contrary to the old regs) and the other half of the forest on non-existent or negligible post-construction risks", buried within a load of stuff which shouldn't be in the H&S File (again, contrary to old regs)? >> I do agree that the role of the PS has been disappointing. But under CDM so has the Client (generally don't give a **** about H&S, etc as long as the price and deadline are ok) Again, why does the "client" insist on all the above bumf, which, eventually, directly or indirectly, he will have to waste his money on, and which, inevitably, will delay the project? >> designer (doesn't inform Clients of duties Thought that was the Planning Supervisors role? >> wont design out features due to looking pretty, does it matter it is on the 20th storey) Thought it was the Planning Supervisors role to ensure they did? >> Principal Contractor (lots of generic paperwork which is possibly ok but demonstrates little to no knowledge of H&S practice once on site). GI-GO If the pre-construction plan is a pig's ear why would you expect its development to turn it into a silk purse? >> The whole thing is a bit of a mess really. I think one of the issues is that CDM covers jobs from low value to millions and the associated paperwork should be directly proportional. Again, that is what the old regs tell you it should be. The Principal Contractor doesn't want to go over the top. The Client wouldn't want to pay the costs of over the top paperwork. So why do we have paperwork so over the top that the HSE has had to reissue the regs in even clearer terms? Which, basically, was my original question. Which, in your own sweet way, you've gone a long way towards answering. >> H&S Files are generally combined with O&M information as, especially on low cost/complexity projects, there is very little to put in them. It 'pads it out'. Sigh............. Again, the real, significant, risks, AREN'T SUPPOSED TO BE "padded out"! Who wants them padded out? More to the point: WHY! >> The PS should at the Pre Com meeting ask all the contractors what to expect and sought out what they can get. If the PS hasn't known about certain documentation it may be that its not been known about or that it is so obvious it isnt required for the File (probably is for the O&M though. Eh? See above. And most of what the Planning Supervisor asks for, in my experience, can't, or shouldn't, be provided by the Principal Contractor, or, if it can, is already in the possesion of the Client, or his consultants, including the Planning Supervisor. >> CDM's impact on shop fit projects is low but on bigger, high rise projects it is totally different. I can safely say that you wouldn't know what the PS has done because design issues have been dealt with before the contractor gets a sniff of the plans. Which is how it should be. But I thought when you said: >> designer (doesn't inform Clients of duties, wont design out features due to looking pretty, does it matter it is on the 20th storey) Do try to make up your mind! And I thought when you also said: >> The whole thing is a bit of a mess really. I think one of the issues is that CDM covers jobs from low value to millions and the associated paperwork should be directly proportional. You were admitting that CDM's impact on small projects was high and noticed, but not beneficially so. Have I missed anything? >> Any swearing you have to do please email me directly and I will give you my mobile number. What on earth makes you think I would want to talk to you? And I'm still waiting for you to point out where I have been swearing? PS If you had actually bothered to read "my" "rants and raves" you might have spotted that I was paraphrasing, or even quoting what has been said here, in old HSE guidance, or even the old regs.

Posted By B J Mann Apology accepted.

Posted By Crim So does that mean just continue with the project and the PS and PC will assume the new title as the job progresses beyond 6/4/07 and then to ensure competence within 12 months?