Jay, I personally think Construction would be a good area to base any dynamic risk assessment on because there are so many areas where this type of risk could occur. For example, an individual or group of workers have a site specific method statement and risk assessment which outlines the methodology of the work and also the types of equipment that will be used based on the original risk assessment. This task could for example could involve 'Work at Height' and the use of a fixed scaffold for instance, however when the work commences it is discovered that due to restrictions in the work area this type of scaffold cannot be used therefore an alternative piece of equipment will be considered i.e mobile tower. Now what you have to consider is how this will be managed by either the individual or the workforce. Will they report this to their management as its not in their RA/MS or will they crack on with the task putting themselves and others at risk. And this is just one small example of an unforeseen dynamic risk and how it will be managed. Thats my view anyway and if you need anymore information on how i've personally dealt with this area please do not hesitate to PM me.

Sorry Jay, but can you explain why if 'a site specific method statement and risk assessment which outlines the methodology of the work and also the types of equipment that will be used' the assessor would not have identified 'that owing to restrictions in the work area' fixed scaffolding cannot be used? Surely this would have been covered and there would be no need for a 'dynamic assessment' (am I alone in hating this phrase???).

Jay - you might like to try Power Network cabling companies. Had two on site this week and both companies arrived (one after the other) with blank RA forms - one did underground ducting/cable pulling; the other erected two pylons and re-routed overhead cables. The foreman of each company completed the Dynamic RA in consultation with my Head Sparks and me. Worked well. Rich