LATCHY wrote:Can I ask would it not be pertinent to provide an initial risk assessment with the design to show that all risk have been considered and acted upon accordingly
That's completely unreasonable, in my view. You cannot document every risk. It is impossible to document every risk. Even if you mean every reasonably foreseeable risk, you'd still spend at least four times as much time documenting the decisions you've made as making the decisions in the first place.
If you did document every risk, no-one would read it - it would be a massive document.
Also, you seem to be asking that designers first produce a design where they ignored their statutory duties and common decency, in order that when they then produce a design that does consider their statutory duties and common decency they can document the differences between the two. You might want to pay a designer six times as much as necessary (once to do the design wrong, once to do the design right and four times to document every decision and difference between the two), but if so you're the first client I've ever met with that view.
(Of course, if you really do want to pay six times as much as everyone else for design work, I'll be very pleased to send you some of our marketing literature...)
The HSE has a reasonable approach to risk assessmnet during design, written up at
http://www.hse.gov.uk/co...on/cdm/faq/designers.htm under the questions 'I’m a bit confused about whether I should be using design risk assessments...' and 'I thought the Management of Health and Safety at Work Regulations 1999 (MHSWR) required risk assessments...' The key quotes (in my view) being "The consideration of hazard and risk is integrated within the design process, so there is no need to carry out a separate ’design risk assessment’." and "as the design is worked through to completion, any hazards will be eliminated and residual risks (to those who may be affected by them) reduced, so far as is reasonably practicable. This is, in effect, the application of risk assessment to the design. ... In terms of design, the significant findings of the assessment will be the finished design, together with all relevant drawings and any accompanying notes."
In manufacturing (say) no-one would consider it reasonable to require someone operating a factory to produce a risk assessment for all factory operations that might be carried out if the factory was operating on the assumption that there was no H&S statute and no social or moral obligations not to kill or maim your workers. What is the point in a documented risk assessment of a method of working you wouldn't dream of adopting because it's not safe?
I remain perpetually flummoxed why some of the people that think they are qualified to control designers believe that designers should produce documents describing the wrong way of doing something, solely to demonstrate that they've thought about what the right way to do it is.