Home > Uncategorized > HSE and Quality Control

HSE and Quality Control

This blog aims to explore some of the issues associated with working with subcontractor who have little experience working for a Tier 1 contractor. It will look at a number of examples that have come to light recently on site, relating to both quality control and health and safety.

In my first blog (20 Apr 15) I mentioned the fact that one of the risks identified by John Holland (JH) was the use of subcontractors not accustomed to working with JH procedures, this has now begun to be an issue on site. The first case was highlighted in the previous blog and involved the rejection of too loads of concrete due to the lack of an adequate Inspection Test Plan (ITP). The impact of this was a two week delay on the program for the first greenhouse and it contributed to 25% wastage of concrete (the decision on who is to pay for this is still to be confirmed). The delay was caused by the failure within Van der Hoven (VDH) to agree what standard the structures were designed and constructed to and thus what tolerances had to be used. This led to numerous conflicting tolerances, some of which the construction force were unable to meet. In the end the ITP was developed by JH and given to them in order to progress works.

Foundations 1

Pillar Foundation – Yes the hair pin is supposed to be in the centre

Foundations 2

Wall Foundations

Further issues have now arisen relating to the welding procedures used by VDH. Hot water is supplied to the greenhouses to provide heating and is supplied by a series of insulated pipes, each greenhouse requires around 1800m of pipe which is supplied in 8m lengths and is welded together prior to getting lowered into the ground. The welders were brought in from Holland by VDH and started to work onsite on 27 Apr 15, with no notice given to JH. When questioned about this no ITP, welding procedures, proof of qualifications or hot works permit were produced, so JH was forced to suspend the works. On further investigation only one of the welders was able to provide his qualification certificate and this had expired. VDH then insisted that the welds were being done to EN13941 Class A standard. Part of this standard requires that the all full penetration butt welds joints are radiographed, when asked to produce the results of these tests VDH were unable to. In the follow on discussions it transpired that VDH were not testing the joints because they knew they would not pass; but it was ok because the welders have done this many times before and they rarely leak.

Pipes 1Pipes 2

Insulated Pipes – In welding position and in the ground

The JH PM on site made the decison that in order not to cause further delays the welders could continue, but they were to produce a sample joint that was to be tested using magnetic particle inspection in Holland. This came to a head last week when the welders left site on leave and failed to return, preferring to stay in Holland where they can get guaranteed work and not be required to produce tests samples. Now VDH are in the process of recruiting a new team, with the correct qualifications in place, but clearly this is going to have an impact on time.

Van der Hoven Response

VDH are used to constructing greenhouses; they have a vast amount of experience across the globe but to date have worked directly for the client, usually a farmer. Therefore they are not used to working for a Tier 1 contractor such as JH and it is clear that their organisation is not able to cope with these additional demands. The VDH project team is currently split, with a PM and quality controller based in Holland (where the majority of the component parts are being manufactured) and a second PM in Australia. So far the PM in Australia has taken the majority of the blame for the issues on site; the first was a VDH employee who was sent back to Holland, the second was an Australian who was fired, and the third is another Australian, who took over last week. It should also be noted that the quality control role was implemented at the request of JH, as was the site safety advisor, prior to this there was no single point of contact for either within VDH.

John Holland Response

JH is also adapting as an organisation, on this project there is no organic workforce and JH is primarily managing subcontractors. The JH approach so far has been to give VDH as much support as possible both in terms of quality control and on site management. This has involved the preparation of documents as well as running workshops with individuals on site and via teleconferences. However this clearly comes at some expense in terms of time and resources to JH and so cannot continue for the next 12 months. In addition so far this approach has had limited effect and with future work activities including trenching, welding at height and the fitting of glass from raised platforms, it is an area that needs to be addressed urgently.

The Way Forward

The question is how do we now move forward? Should JH continue to produce the documentation for VDH or do we risk becoming a self-licking lollipop organisation? VDH are fully aware of what needs to be done in order to complete the work satisfactory to JH standards however they continually fail to do so. Is this a conscious decision on their behalf? I’m not sure, the amount of work it generates for both us and them makes me think not.  But then again could VDH be lining us up for a massive VO or EOT claim, despite the contract clearly stating they must conform to JH procedures.

From my limited experience dealing local employed construction forces (by limited I mean watching via UAV feed as contractors tried to repair Bridge TOM at the same time as civilians were using it) and from Daz’s presentation on construction in Kenya last year, I imagine that many of the themes in this blog resonate with how construction is carried out in the military environment and will therefore become issues for all PET officers in the future.

Weekend Activities

I had a long weekend off a few weeks ago and decided to take the family to Port Lincoln, which is about 4 hours south west along the coast. The town is famous for sea food and diving with great white sharks, the latter of which I got the chance to experience and can recommend to you all.

Last Sunday I came in to work to work on TMR 1 away from the distractions of home: instead I ended up rounding up cows that had strayed on to site though the perimeter fence and were in danger of wondering into open trenches.

This weekend I took the trip to Adelaide about 3 hours south east, and took the opportunity to go to Ikea (hey!!).

Categories: Uncategorized
  1. Rich Garthwaite's avatar
    Rich Garthwaite
    02/06/2015 at 9:57 am

    I’m surprised the JHG PM made the decision to crack on without the correct people, process or documentation in place. Who would have carried the can for re-work if the VDH guys hadn’t walked and their subsequent work had found to be defective?

  2. 02/06/2015 at 11:47 pm

    By the time the decision was made the procedure and documentation were in place. Ultimately VDH are responsible for the pipework and any subsequent repair work, however when we have more services and concrete pathways going over the top of their trenches this would be easier said than done.

    • 03/06/2015 at 7:39 am

      Hi Matt, interesting stuff and I think similar issues to what Guz has with Mcalpine and Harringtons. Was there a pre qualification questionnaire completed by VDH? Did the tender process include the requirements of working practices of subcontractors?

  3. 03/06/2015 at 11:08 am

    Damo, VDH were nominated by the client. The client had planned on running the whole project themselves but were forced to use a Tier 1 prime contractor by the financiers. They had already approached VDH and Aalborg, the company doing the CSP, before John Holland got the contract.

  4. guzkurzeja's avatar
    guzkurzeja
    03/06/2015 at 3:27 pm

    I sympathise massively. Our lightning protection sub-contractors are a small outfit that we’ve inherited when our structural frame sub-contractor went bust. It’s only about 8 blokes and I swear they’re making it up as they go along. All their paperwork is either wrong, late or non-existent.

    Additionally our structural sub-contractor were also nominated by the client and we had loads of program and quality issues with them before they went bust!

  5. 04/06/2015 at 1:30 pm

    Matt, sorry for hijacking your blog.

    Guz, forgive me for not going back through your blogs to understand yor contract. Is you project ‘Design and Build’ and if so why was the client nominating subbies? Also do you think the ongoing program and quality issues were due to corner cutting because they knew they were going under or just a general state of the business?

  1. No trackbacks yet.

Leave a reply to Damian Warren Cancel reply