Holdfast Training Services Trial Blog

Apologies its been so long since I lost posted, you poor people!  I found this post drafted and ready, from before I went on summer leave.  I must have neglected to actually put it on the site in the rush to get out of the door.

The Chiller Plant is nearing completion (structurally) and the steel sub contractor building it is starting to prepare for its next large steel erection task on site. Construction of the Chiller plant has been somewhat of a rehearsal for the construction of a large steel truss roof, architecturally designed to be the crown jewel of not just the JOC project but also an icon of the campus. Colloquially known as the ‘Bridge of the Enterprise’ because of its elliptical shape, it will be more of a challenge than the chiller plant. So far it has been high on peoples agenda because of the proximity to an adjacent site which will make de-confliction of crane picks impossible. Cue the start of night work. This is an interesting issue in itself because the adjacent project is c. 1 year behind schedule and so the impossible deconfliction issue is not of our making. In the ‘real world’ I am sure that there would be much less accommodation made for the late contractor and numerous claims for LDs and delays etc. However USACE is required to manage the programme and so the success of both projects must be considered.

We also had to throw the erection plan back to the PC this week. I was part of the team reviewing it and gave general input about compliance to the USACE health and safety manual (EM-385) as well as being the ‘Structural Lead’ for the JOC, whose real Structural Lead was in Hospital with his wife who had broken her fingers playing American Football. The plan seemed OK on the face of it; containing all elements required by EM-385 (the USACE H&S document). These include details of site location, material deliveries, staging and storage, co-ordination with other construction, crane type and capacity, lifting methods, pick path, site preparation descriptions, stability of the erection, certifications …etc. The main bit of concern to me was the actual description of the steel erection activities. Fairly key then.

The subbie had done a brilliant job of communicating the first stages of the job on a simple on pager with different colours corresponding to different stages of the phase.  It highlighted what the safe ‘walk away’ point was, was easy to read and clear (PSB)

Colour Coded – showing sequences

One of the sequences in detail

Unfortunately –

that’s where it stopped. I looked to the narrative for help, but it kept referencing other pages of the document, which was not paginated. It left me filling in the next stages based on assumptions and wooly assertions based on my knowledge of the project and a narrative that said ‘repeat steps 3 – 7’. To my mind totally inadequate.   The erection plan itself should be a simple document that you could give to pretty much anybody who should then be able to look through and clearly identify at what stage the construction is at, what’s coming next and at what stage it is safe to terminate construction such that what’s already been built won’t fall down. If the subbie had simply done away with the narrative and continued with ten one-pagers I think the plan would have been much better.

So what’s the point of this bit of the post? 2 things: In the army we are gently encouraged to communicate on paper in set formats. This helps, and it’s a skill/requirement we perhaps take for granted. We can add a lot of value to a site / task / project through non-technical skills like these. But secondly the most complex of tasks can be communicated through the use of some simple, well thought out sketches. In this case, it would have been a lot better to have done so.