Reading through the new CDM Regs and the specific definitions, without the additional ACOP to suggest it is not covered, it looks like maintenance work will require a CPP.

Would this be correct?

?really

As set out in Part 1, maintenance work is classed as constriction work and includes repair, upkeep, redecoration or other maintenance. So yes a CPP is required.

Yes a CPP is required whether there is a single contractor or PC. however, it should be proportionate to the scale of the project. The smaller / less complex the project, the simpler the CPP.

James,
It seemed a reasonable comment to me, maybe you are looking for problems were none exist??

Me too.

In the IOSH hosted webinar, the presentation by HSE made it clear that the HSE had no choice but to fully transpose the T & MCS Directive. There is no exception for the CPP in the directive therefore HSE could not restrict CPP to notifiable projects as it did pre CDM 2015.

Do we all really expect a small builder involved in domestic projects, say a conservatory extension to have a 100% CPP when pre CDM2015, it was unlikely that there would have been any formal plan or H & S Method Statement? Surely, the contents in CIS 80 is better than nothing.

Also, the HSE has been campaigning/targeting the small (aka busy) builder with a whole range of topics etc. listed below--all are under the heading "What you need to know as a busy builder"

http://www.hse.gov.uk/co...ction/areyou/builder.htm

Preventing injury during plasterboard handling:
Preventing injury from handling heavy blocks:
Construction dust:
Old lead paint:
Hard hats –
Running a small construction site leaflet
Manual handling leaflet
Roof work leaflet
Welfare leaflet
Excavation:
Avoiding concealed services and overhead power lines:
Basement construction:
Solar panel Installation -
Fragile roofs:
Keeping your site tidy:
Protecting the public:
Fragile roofs:



There is also "The Absolutely Essential Toolkit for the smaller construction contractor"


http://www.hse.gov.uk/pubns/conindex.htm


I prefer to view it as a glass half full rather than half empty.

I work for one of the largest FMs in UK and we are well ahead of the mark - we have a strategic team who has a member of coniac included CDM 2015 included.

As referred to in this thread, the CPP needs to be proportionate to the risk involved in maintenance projects. Risk registers will be suffice, which are widely used in the maintenance industry, as long as they make reference to the key points detailed in ACOPS and adopt CPP as name.

For small building firms I cannot see this being difficult to achieve, however, I can see a rise on the horizon of rip off health and safety consultants claiming they can wrote the CPP, like it will be as complicated as brain surgery to achieve.

Having worked in construction for a number of years, I only see this as very basic health and safety that should already be place - from what I have heard through the grape vine, the HSE are looking small companies initially, and the larger maintenance providers later in the year (phasing in up to October).

Ahah Oh ye of little faith.

A shopfitting contractor I work for requested me to do a CPC for a new Conservatory/Orangery they were about to start for his father in law.

He wanted the usual package including risk assessments and method statements, Daily safety check sheets and fire risk assessment recording form.

He has taken the role of PC and all responsibilities from the "Domestic" Client.

quote=RayRapp]

Ahh...but was this a domestic or commerical project?

I think they purposely did it quickly with few men to avoid an F10