Royal Institute of British Architects
CDM Regulations 2015
The Principal Designer: dispelling myths
The Principal Designer is not a simple replacement for the old
administrative-led CDM Coordinator (CDM-C)
The Principal Designer is a new role, with a new design perspective and fewer
and different duties. Other previous CDM-C duties have been distributed to the
Client and Principal Contractor.
The Principal Designer does not take on more onerous responsibilities than
the CDM-C
While the duties are ultimately subject to criminal law and need to be undertaken
with professional care, they are straightforward and easily integrated within the
ability of an experienced architect or designer. Note that they need to be in
proportion to the project being undertaken. The duties are also within the legal
principle of “reasonable practicability”; otherwise known as “So far as reasonably
practicable” (SFARP).
SFARP is a legally agreed measure of proportionality for the intellectual
consideration of health and safety issues during design stages of construction or
manufacturing projects. SFARP allows a designer, within a design team, to
balance the time, cost, aesthetics and other project considerations with their duty
to avoid or minimise risks to health and safety of the operatives, users or
members of the public. SFARP also empowers the design team to make
professional value judgements.
The Principal Designer is not responsible for all design risks
Design risks need to be reviewed, highlighted and managed by the relevant
designers on the project. That said, the Principal Designer will need to coordinate
these risks with those of the other designers on the project and should also be a
designer themselves.
The Principal Designer is not responsible for performance of the entire
construction team.
The Principal Designer is just responsible for the management and organisation
of the health and safety aspects and information where there is design work being
undertaken. Sometimes the Principal Designer will also be undertaking the role of
lead designer or project lead that can attract other management responsibilities.
The Principal Designer is not a heavy-weight administration role
[Other text here]
1
If organised properly and undertaken in proportion to the project. There is no
need for the Principal Designer role to be unnecessarily onerous, but it will
require additional time and resources for coordination than acting simply as a
designer, and appropriate fees will need to be charged. The Principal Designer
role should be integrated with normal designer activities.
Misunderstood, misinterpreted or missed: important
information
Principles of prevention are referenced in the guidance.
While not new, these are often overlooked. This is because they are mostly
common sense health and safety considerations in a framework for consideration,
not a strict hierarchy, and are not overly complex.
The lead designer is an appointment between the client and the lead
designer.
The Principal Designer role is not the same as the lead designer role, but it is an
obvious fit for the two roles to be undertaken by the same designer on many
projects. If a designer is acting as both lead designer and the Principal Designer
this needs to be accurately reflected in the professional services agreement and
the different duties clearly set out in the associated schedule of professional
services.
Risk assessments need to be undertaken, but in proportion to the project
and the activity.
Any output in response to a risk assessment needs to be to the point, not
obscured in methodology. Preferably, if related to design, these should be limited
to simple tables or visual media. Risk assessments based on tabular values such
as level of risk and level of harm have been largely discredited and consigned to
history; the values are opinion based and difficult to interpret and therefore
ineffective.
Coordination of the health and safety design elements is part of normal
design work
All designers understand that designs need to be coordinated and they need to
produce a set of information capable of being put together. Often this is called
buildability. Within this information there is a strand of health and safety relevant
material, which needs to be part of the CDM processes and will need to be
identified as recorded information.
During construction there will usually be some further design work.
This further design work may be under the control of the Principal Contractor, but
is subject to the same design controls and requirements as earlier in the project.
Either the Principal Contractor or the Principal Designer must oversee this work
and ensure the same health and safety rigour as applied at all other design
stages of the project. The new CDM Regulations are simpler and more
straightforward, organised around the chronology of a construction project which
will relate to all forms of contract.
The prospect that the domestic client role will make criminals of home
owners is simply not the case.
The full implementation of the EU Directive has forced the HSE to include the
domestic client. But the Regulations fully allow for the lack of experience in the
domestic client. It is for those appointed first (i.e. designer or contractor) to ensure
the correct procedures are undertaken and that they are capable and can inform
the client of what needs to be undertaken.
Some have said that the lack of an Approved Code of Practice (ACOP) is a
problem.
Many have criticised the HSE for not producing an ACOP, as it was previously
the definitive document used in court. The HSE have reasoned that court action is
a relatively rare occurrence and have reasoned that the use of their L series legal
guidance is sufficient. There may still be a slimmed down ACOP produced
subject to further public consultation. However, the L series is currently
considered to be detailed enough and is a source of legally produced guidance
information. Previously too many different sources of guidance have resulted in
confusion. The L series guidance will be easier for the HSE to modify to keep up
with developments in the industry than an ACOP.
Others have said that the lack of defined competency requirements is a
problem.
Competency assessment, certainly for designers, has spiralled out of control. The
HSE are looking to put an end to this bureaucracy, with each professional
institution providing the training and verification needed. The RIBA will be
providing this support and engaging in all other avenues to avoid the use of
unnecessary competency checking.