1. No category

Linc
15
safe
New CDM 2015 Guidance out now!
Spring
CDM 2015
SUMMARY OF KEY CHANGES
The new Construction (Design and Management)
Regulations 2015 (CDM Regs) come into force on 6
April 2015 and apply to all building and construction
projects, regardless of the size, duration and nature
of the work.
Client’s Duties Enhanced
The new Regulations recognise the influence and
importance of the client as the head of the supply
chain and as the party best placed to set standards
throughout a project.
Commercial Clients:
•
Make suitable arrangements for
managing a project. This includes
making sure that other duty holders
are appointed and sufficient
time and resources are allocated.
•
Appoint both a Principal Designer and
Principal Contractor if there will be
more than one contractor on site.
•
Ensure relevant information is pre
pared and provided to other duty
holders – the client has the main duty
for providing pre-construction
information (although the Principal
Designer is expected to help bring all
the information together);
•
Ensure the Principal Designer and
Principal Contractor carry out their
duties;
•
Work for Domestic Clients Now Included
CDM 2015 now includes work for domestic clients
however a domestic client is not required to carry
out the duties placed on a commercial client, instead
they will be transferred.
Where the project involves:
•
Only one contractor –
that contractor must carry out the
clients duties as well as their own;
•
More than one contractor –
the Principal Contractor must carry
out the clients duties as well as their
own (if a PC is not appointed then the
contractor in control of the
construction work will take on these
duties.
Replacement of the CDM Coordinator with a
Principal Designer
The new Regulations replace the CDM Coordinator
with a new role of Principal Designer. This means
that the responsibility for planning, managing,
monitoring and coordination of the pre-construction
phase – which is crucial to the management of any
successful construction project – will rest with an
existing member of the design team.
The Principal Designer can be an individual or an
organization that has:
•
A technical knowledge of the
construction industry relevant to the
project;
•
The understanding and skills to
manage and coordinate the pre-con
struction phase, including any design
work carried out after construction
begins.
Ensure welfare facilities are provided.
If a Client fails to appoint a Principal Designer or
Principal Contractor then the Client must carry out
their duties.
If Clients need help in meeting their duties they
could draw on the competent advice they are
required to have under the Management of Health
and Safety at Work Regulations
The Principal Designers role involves coordinating
the work of others in the project team to ensure
that significant and foreseeable risks are managed
throughout the design process.
They must take into account the principles of prevention and are responsible for preparing the H&S
File.
CDM 2 Less Prescriptive Definitions for
Competency
Principal Design Support
The previous explicit competence requirements have
been removed (Appendix 4 of the old ACoP). Employers will now need to prove that they provide
information, instruction, training and supervision,
with workers having their training needs assessed
against the needs of the job and employers to meet
the gap in skills and knowledge through appropriate
training.
Principal Designers will be required to undertake the
previous duties of the CDM Coordinator however
some may not feel they have adequate knowledge
and experience in relation to the Health and Safety
elements of the process. In order to assist those
Designers who will be taking on this role, Lincsafe
(Health & Safety) will be providing a service to support them.
By splitting ‘competence’ into its component parts of
skills, knowledge, training and experience, and - if
they are an organisation - organisational capability,
provides clarity for the industry to assess and
demonstrate that construction project teams have
the right attributes to deliver a healthy and safe
project.
Principal Design Support will allow organisations to
undertake the role of Principal Designer with the
reassurance that they have competent H&S support
tailored to their requirements.
Construction Phase Plans for All Projects
Written construction phase plans will be required for
all construction projects (including domestic client
work). Even where only one contractor is working
on a project a Plan must be compiled – although it
should be proportionate to the project.
Requirements Where There is More Than One
Contractor
Both a Principal Designer and Principal Contractor
must be appointed when there is more than one
contractor on a project.
Slight Change in Notification Threshold
(<20 persons)
Notification to the HSE is required by the Client
before works commence. A project is notifiable if
the construction work is scheduled to:
•
OR
•
Last longer than 30 working days AND
have more than 20 workers working
simultaneously at any point in the
project;
Exceed 500 person days
Guidance Instead of ACOP
The current Approved Code of Practice (ACoP) will
be substituted with HSE and Construction Industry
Training Board (CITB) Guidance.
Main Transitional Arrangements
When CDM 2015 comes into force on 6 April 2015,
there will be a transitional period that will run for six
months from 6 April 2015 to 6 October 2015.
For projects starting before 6 April 2015, where the
construction phase has not yet started and the client
has not yet appointed a CDM Coordinator, the client
must appoint a Principal Designer as soon as it is
practicable.
If the CDM Coordinator has already been appointed,
a Principal Designer must be appointed to replace
the CDM Coordinator by 6 October 2015, unless the
project comes to an end before then.
Basically the Principal Design Support role will be
similar to the role of CDM Coordinator where
Lincsafe are brought in at the concept phase of a
project and assist the Client and Principal Designer
in the following ways:
•
Advising the Client and Designers on
their duties;
•
Assisting Designers by helping them
to apply the principles of prevention;
•
Gathering the information required for
the pre-construction information,;
•
Notifying the HSE (where relevant);
•
Coordinating the design team and
encouraging cooperation.
Lincsafe will of course continue to support and
advise ALL duty holders as it has done over the last
23 years.
Further reading
CITB have produced Industry Guidance for each
duty holder which can be found at:
http://www.citb.co.uk/health-safety-and-other-topics/health-safety/construction-design-and-management-regulations/
HSE have released the following guidance which can
be found at:
http://www.hse.gov.uk/pubns/books/l153.htm
HSE
PROSECUTIONS
Every month we try to highlight
issues sourced from different
industries, below are this
months selection.....
E
T
A
D
UP
Construction firms prosecuted
after worker crushed by
falling conveyor
Three construction companies
have been fined after a worker
was crushed by a falling section of
conveyor at a plant in Sleaford.
The incident happened during
construction of the Sleaford Renewable Energy plant on Boston
Road on 14 February 2013 when
the 4.5 tonne conveyor section
overturned during installation.
It trapped Michael Doyle, a
49-year-old employee of Derbybased Shaw Group UK Ltd, who
suffered multiple injuries including
four cracked vertebrae, broken
ribs, a punctured lung and broken ankle. He has not returned to
work since.
Lincoln Magistrates’ Court heard
yesterday (12 March) that Shaw
Group UK Ltd had been subcontracted to install a boiler and
associated equipment , including
a conveyor system to carry large
straw bales, by Burmeister and
Wain Energy (BWE).
BWE was one of two Danish
companies, the other being Burmeister and Wain Scandinavian
Contractor (BWSC), that had
formed a consortium to design
and build the centre, which burns
straw and wood to create electricity and also to provide heat for
some local authority buildings.
Shaw Group UK Ltd had already
lifted three conveyor sections on
to a slope leading up to the boiler
by craning them on to a platform
at the bottom of the slope. Skates
were bolted to the front and rear
legs which helped keep the section of conveyor on rails as it was
dragged up the slope by manual
winches set up at the top.
In order to fix the sections of
conveyor in place workers needed
to remove the skates and used
jacks to raise the legs enough to
take the skates off and then lower
the legs down onto the rail.
This was carried out successfully
on the first three sections but as
the jacks were released, on the
lower legs of the fourth and final
section, one side lowered faster
than the other and the conveyor
swung towards two workers before violently swinging the other
way and turning on its side, trapping Mr Doyle, from Fleetwood,
Lancashire, underneath.
A Health and Safety Executive
(HSE) investigation identified
safety failings by all three companies.
Shaw Group UK Ltd had produced
a risk assessment and a plan for
the installation but it did not consider removal of the skates from
the legs of the conveyor sections
or the manual winching of the
load up the slope. The document
had been sent to BWE for checking but the company did not pick
up on the omission.
Shaw Group UK Ltd, of Stores
Road, Derby, was fined a total of
£17,350 and ordered to pay costs
of £1,710 after pleading guilty
to breaching Regulation 3(1) of
the Management of Health and
Safety at Work Regulations 1999;
Regulation 8(1)(c) of the Lifting
Operations and Lifting Equipment
Regulations 1998; and Regulation
13(2) of the Construction (Design
and Management ) Regulations
2007.
Burmeister and Wain Scandinavian Contractor, of Gydevang 35,
PO Box 235, DK3450, Allerød,
Denmark, was fined £4,670 and
ordered to pay costs of £1,710
after pleading guilty to breaching Section 3(1) of the Health and
Safety at Work etc Act 1974.
Burmeister and Wain Energy, of
Luntoftegardsvej 93A, DK 800
Kgs Lyngby, Denmark, was fined
£5,350 and ordered to pay costs
of £1,710 after admitting a breach
of Regulation 13(2) of the Construction (Design and Management) Regulations 2007.1
The lifting operation using jacks
was not carried out safely and
none of the three defendants was
managing or monitoring the work
in a way that would ensure its
safety.
The investigation also found that
BWSC failed in its responsibility
as principal contractor to ensure
work was properly assessed and
co-ordinated between the many
contractors on site.
g
http://press.hse.gov.uk/2015/construction-firms-prosecuted-after-workercrushed-by-falling-conveyor/
2014 Lincsafe (Health & Safety) Limited
Road construction firms sentenced after road worker loses arm
Three construction firms have been ordered to
pay over £400,000 in fines and costs for serious
safety failings, after a worker lost his arm when
it became trapped in poorly-guarded machinery
during a road surfacing operation in Hertfordshire.
The 53-year old road worker was preparing a
chip spreader – a machine used to scatter stone
chips on asphalt – for resurfacing works on the
A1001 in Hatfield when his left arm became
caught in the machine’s rotating auger, causing
serious injuries.
The highly-experienced worker, from Rushden,
Northamptonshire who does not wish to be
named, had to have his arm amputated shortly
after the incident and has been unable to return
to work since.
The incident, on 8 March 2012, was investigated
by the Health and Safety Executive (HSE), which
prosecuted Amey LG Ltd, Lafarge Aggregates
Ltd (acting as Amey Lafarge, a joint venture
in charge of the operation) and Ashmac Construction Ltd, who provided workers to the joint
venture, for multiple safety breaches at Watford
Magistrates’ Court.
The court was told (25 March), in order to prepare the chip spreader for use, the worker
placed on the site by Ashmac Construction Ltd
started the machine and the rotation of its internal auger. During the operation of setting the
machine up for use his arm became entangled in
dangerous moving parts.
HSE’s investigation revealed a series of safety
failings on the part of all three companies.
HSE found the worker, who was not formally
trained in the use of the spreader, and his colleagues were only given one evening to familiarise themselves with the machine by Amey Lafarge when they started work on site six months
before the incident.
Ashmac Construction Ltd did not take reasonably practicable steps to ensure workers that it
placed on site had received appropriate information, instruction and training in the safe use of
the chipper they were operating.
Amey LG Ltd, of the Sherard Building, Edmund
Halley Road, Oxford, was fined £150,015 and
ordered to pay costs of £18,000 after pleading guilty to one breach of Section 3(1) of the
Health and Safety at Work etc. Act 1974.
Lafarge Aggregates Ltd, of Portland House,
Bickenhill Lane, Solihull, Birmingham, was fined
£175,015 and ordered to pay costs of £18,000
after pleading guilty to one breach of Section
3(1) of the Health and Safety at Work etc. Act
1974.
Ashmac Construction Ltd of Pavillion Court,
Pavilion Drive, Northampton, was fined £30,015
and ordered to pay costs of £18,000 after pleading guilty to a breach of section 3(1) the Health
and Safety at Work etc. Act 1974.
Following the case, HSE Inspector Gavin Bull,
said:
“This tragic incident has left a worker with lifechanging injuries. It was wholly avoidable. The
risks associated with plant operating are wellknown in the industry.”
“This incident highlights the need for workers to
receive the information, instruction and training
they need to operate plant safely and for companies to put in place measures to ensure the
plant is operated safely on site.”
For more information about safety around work
equipment and machinery visit http://www.hse.
gov.uk/work-equipment-machinery/ or call Lincsafe.1
Amey Lafarge did not give the workers any instruction or training in how to operate the machine safely, including how to secure guards, nor
were they given a copy of the operator’s manual
for the machine. In addition, there was no safe
system of work in place to ensure that the machine was set up and operated properly and that
its use was restricted to those who were trained.
The Amey Lafarge did have a risk assessment
and a site-specific method statement but these
did not reflect the reality of the controls in place
for the use of the chip spreader. Indeed, the risk
assessment described a different type of chip
spreader than the one used on site.
1
http://press.hse.gov.uk/2015/road-construction-firmssentenced-after-road-worker-loses-arm-2/
2014 Lincsafe (Health & Safety) Limited
www.lincsafe.co.uk
01673876150
Need to Know
in
w
e
n
What2s015
news...
Lincsafe inhouse news
Lincsafe understands the industry is going
through somewhat of a increase of workload
with the economey improving and adapting
to the new CDM2015 regulations.
We are here to help clients, and keen to
keep them competitive and up to date, so
please contact us if you feel you need more
tailored training in releation to the CDM
2015 Regulations or any other training.
Our 2015 Open Training dates can be found
below and also on our website where new
dates are regularly updated monthly to suit
demand http://lincsafe.co.uk/2014/11/2015open-training-dates/.
Asbestos Awareness Cat A UKATA
SMSTS REFRESHER 2 day
£65.00 pp +VAT
July 9th & 10th – £290+VAT
May 11th
December 7th & 8th £290+VAT
August 3rd
November 30th
SSSTS 2 day
IOSH Directing Safely
20th & 21st April – Cost £290.00 pp +VAT
inc Books+Certification
8th July 12th 2015 at Lincsafe H&S Ltd –
Cost £140+VATpp
SSSTS REF – one day
IOSH Managing Safely 4 day
26 & 27 May, 2 & 3 June. 2015 £450+VATpp
June 12th -£150+VAT per person
September 21st £150+VAT per person
CITB-ConstructionSkills Dates
SMSTS 5 DAY
23rd April, 30th April, 7th May, 13th May &
14th May 2015 – Cost £500+VAT
2014 Lincsafe (Health & Safety) Limited
All prices inc Books and Certification; if you
would like further information please do
contact our office on
01673 876 150
or
[email protected]
www.lincsafe.co.uk
01673876150