3rd May 2006, 04:38 PM
Achingknees
The second ACOP was produced in 2001 and came into force in February 2002. Entitled 'Managing Health and Safety in Construction' it is available from HSE for ?9.50.
In the introductory section (working from memory here) is a list of activities that are deemed not to be 'construction' and to which therefore the CDM Regs. do not apply. These include 'archaeological investigations'. This made explicit a view that had been put forward earlier by various HSE Inspectors in response to questions from archaeological contractors as well as IFA and SCAUM.
To the best of my knowledge this assertion by HSE has never been tested in case law, and the case law that has come through on the CDM Regs. suggests that the prosecuting authority will adopt a 'scatter-gun' approach and go after everyone involved at all levels.
As far as I can see, this would only ever work for projects where archaeology is carried out ahead of the main part of construction (in the same way that advance geotechnical work is not considered to be construction). If the archaeologists are on site in the middle of other construction work it would be fairly idiotic to exclude them from the main H & S system that is in place.
The current HSE drive (apart from revising the whole CDM set-up anyway in early 2007) is to target 'Designers' and remind them
of their responsibilities. In terms of archaeology it is likely that anyone involved in the production and agreement of the WSI could be seen as a 'Designer', including me (the consultant) as well as the curator if the WSI is based on a Brief supplied by, or has been signed off by, the curator.
You and I may well be in agreement that archaeology is now part of the construction industry, but the view of the HSE may carry more weight in this matter. If they are correct, none of the H & S Regulations produced specifically for the construction industry would be legally applicable to archaeological work.
Beamo
The second ACOP was produced in 2001 and came into force in February 2002. Entitled 'Managing Health and Safety in Construction' it is available from HSE for ?9.50.
In the introductory section (working from memory here) is a list of activities that are deemed not to be 'construction' and to which therefore the CDM Regs. do not apply. These include 'archaeological investigations'. This made explicit a view that had been put forward earlier by various HSE Inspectors in response to questions from archaeological contractors as well as IFA and SCAUM.
To the best of my knowledge this assertion by HSE has never been tested in case law, and the case law that has come through on the CDM Regs. suggests that the prosecuting authority will adopt a 'scatter-gun' approach and go after everyone involved at all levels.
As far as I can see, this would only ever work for projects where archaeology is carried out ahead of the main part of construction (in the same way that advance geotechnical work is not considered to be construction). If the archaeologists are on site in the middle of other construction work it would be fairly idiotic to exclude them from the main H & S system that is in place.
The current HSE drive (apart from revising the whole CDM set-up anyway in early 2007) is to target 'Designers' and remind them
of their responsibilities. In terms of archaeology it is likely that anyone involved in the production and agreement of the WSI could be seen as a 'Designer', including me (the consultant) as well as the curator if the WSI is based on a Brief supplied by, or has been signed off by, the curator.
You and I may well be in agreement that archaeology is now part of the construction industry, but the view of the HSE may carry more weight in this matter. If they are correct, none of the H & S Regulations produced specifically for the construction industry would be legally applicable to archaeological work.
Beamo