Have a need for a contractor to fit some window restrictors to some six floor office windows. They have supplied RAMS but im not sure If I need anything else as per the new CDM regs

cheers

CDM Regulation 2.-(1) Interpretation...will give you a definition of construction work.

However, it does not make any distinction between a small job and a large project because there is no difference except for notifiable reasons.

Every construction work project (no matter how minor) needs a CPP. If it's a multi-contractor project the Principal Contractor must prepare it (under reg 12), if it's a single-contractor site the contractor must prepare it (reg 15).

With respect to content, it needs to "set out the health and safety arrangements and site rules
taking account, where necessary, of the industrial activities taking place on the construction site
and, where applicable, must include specific measures concerning work which falls within one
or more of the categories set out in Schedule 3" (reg 12(2) ).

The CITB guiodance has some information in Annex C of the PC document (from http://www.citb.co.uk/he.../cdm-guidance-documents/ ) and has an example template at http://www.citb.co.uk/do...n-phase-plan-example.pdf

Sorry to be pedantic but a number of posts refer to the 'ACOP' when in fact it is now only guidance, minor point but still an important one.

Thanks for the replies and inbox messages, I appreciate peoples help, but im still non the wiser on my orginal query :)...

Let me phrase my question differently..

If im a Facilities manager looking after several large functioning sites (Large functioning offices and warehouses) and I need a contractor to do some work for me. e.g a roofer to fix a leaking flat roof, or an air con guy to install some air con, do I now need a CPP from the contractor as well as RAMS? (currently i would ask any contractor working at one of my buildings for RAMS if the job has an element of risk.)

The buildings in question house about 500 employees are are fully functioning, Im not refering to a building site.

Ashley thanks very much, I get it now :-) I thought that would be the case and your answer clarifies it perfectly so cheers. However it does seem a bit much for minor works Not sure how that makes a job safer especially if RAMS are already in place, seems like paper work for the sake of it... Oh well lol

Thanks agaim

“construction work” means the carrying out of any building, civil engineering or engineering construction work and includes—
(a)the construction, alteration, conversion, fitting out, commissioning, renovation, repair, upkeep, redecoration or other maintenance (including cleaning which involves the use of water or an abrasive at high pressure, or the use of corrosive or toxic substances), de-commissioning, demolition or dismantling of a structure;
(b)the preparation for an intended structure, including site clearance, exploration, investigation (but not site survey) and excavation (but not pre-construction archaeological investigations), and the clearance or preparation of the site or structure for use or occupation at its conclusion;
(c)the assembly on site of prefabricated elements to form a structure or the disassembly on site of the prefabricated elements which, immediately before such disassembly, formed a structure;
(d)the removal of a structure, or of any product or waste resulting from demolition or dismantling of a structure, or from disassembly of prefabricated elements which immediately before such disassembly formed such a structure;
(e)the installation, commissioning, maintenance, repair or removal of mechanical, electrical, gas, compressed air, hydraulic, telecommunications, computer or similar services which are normally fixed within or to a structure,


This came from Gov.uk hope it helps

IT concerns me that (once again) some in the profession choose to react to new or revised legislation by creating additional and unnecessary paperwork and bureacracy.
In essence, the CPP comprises 3 elements. Let's place them in context for the type of job the OP describes:

1 Management Arrangements: Your Site, your arrangements for control of contractors (including scrutiny at tender stages). Welfare, first aid etc. all Yours?
2. Site Rules: Already established
3. Specific risks arising - as you correctly surmise, the contractor's RAMS.

No additional paperwork required. None. Note that CDM2015 and guidance do not tall about the CPP existing in hard copy form, or all being contained within one document. HSE are constantly stressing the need for a PROPORTIONATE approach to compliance. Some of the approaches described in this thread are way OTT.

Anthony Lees (HSE Principal Inspector) was a key player in drafting CDM2015. His webinar on CDM 2015 (recording available on this Site) confirms the proportionate approach.
To take the opposite end of the spectrum: Anthony discusses the very large Project scenario (e.g. HS2 rail project) where there are likely to be multiple "sites" established. Here, he suggests that the CPP may be located at some central location, with appropriate elements only at discrete site levels.

Early days, but I do think HSE have been very clear about expectations.

Horses for courses. If I can point to an existing resource - fine. If, as a very small builder, I don't have my arrangements and standards documents established at my head office, then my simple CPP will need to address all 3 key elements -as the HSE template provides for.

Interestingly I have recently had a discussion with one of our repairs and maintenance contractor's h&s manager. He gave me his 'interpretation' of the regs and specifically the requirement for a CPP. First, he states that a CPP exists for the whole contract. Second, a CPP is not required for every job. Obviously we disagreed on the later but I did say there is a need to be sensible about minor repairs where the RAMS would suffice or a generic CPP could be utilised. However for the larger jobs I would expect to see a CPP as we know it, regardless whether the job is notifiable or not.

Whatever the outcome there is going to be a lot more bureaucracy involved both the client and the PC.

We are currently in consultation with our FM provider because they are also under the impression that a CPP for a contract is sufficent. Having seen the principal of CPP's implemented on international platforms, I would argue strongly against this, as it does not meet the intent of the legislation, to manage the risks associated with low / medium risk construction works.

The onus should be on the person engaging the Supplier / Contractor to a) agree scope of works with supplier, b) provide all building related information to enable the supplier to properly assess risk associated with works c) review of RAMS (Risk assessment / method statement) to ensure that it is reflective of the work task and include site specific related risks / controls.

In terms of assurance processes, the engager of works should than audit / inspect (where possible) to ensure that the Supplier / contractor is adhering to their RAMS.

I keep hearing from persons, about getting around the implementation of CPP, without truly understanding the principal of the change in law, and reviewing their organisation systems to ensure the safe management of suppliers / contractors.

The introduction of the CPP only adds to enable organisations to demonstrate that they are have safe systems of work in place. Having recently returned to the UK, I am disappointed by the lack of progressive thinking in terms of implementation of safety systems. The introduction of the CPP enables a more comprehensive consultation process between parties involved in low / medium construction work. The feedback we have had from other suppliers has been extremely positive, they are now receiving information from property managers that they were not getting before and the consultation regarding RAMS has resulted in more effective scoping on projects.

As an organisation, we have gained a lot By introducing this system, and it is the start of an education process to up skills our property managers and suppliers on the identification of building related risk and development of appropriate RAMS.

I totally agree with your Maint. Contractor. One sets up a management plan, oft called CPP in the regs, for a project because so much is common throughout. It is only the nuts and bolts of the specific task in a specific location that need additional information such as RAMS etc. This approach worked well with CDM 94 and 2007 so what is new? Cut the paper to the bone.

I can see the need for a management plan or execution plan, call it what you like, however the principle of CDM does not include the aggregation of all the repairs/maintenance work into one CPP.

Yes you do need a CPP for building maintenance work from the contractor. If you go on gov.uk it does list and gives an example or two of what work is covered. Are you a contractor yourself ?

This is madness, a CPP is great for a large / medium sized jobs, but when our guys unjam a door which takes 10 minutes and they have got to complete a CPP, it's just daft. No help from the HSE on a practical way of how to do this most people I speak to are doing nothing. I have tried for months to get an answer from lots of colleagues, but there does not seem to be one. I also bet that 90% of one man band builders have no idea of what a construction phase plan is, or if they do they would not complete one. "Just more pointless bureaucracy" as a friend who runs his own business told me, and I tend to agree with him.