Full-Time Site Safety and Health Officer (SSHO)

bodenlok said:

Would EM_385 be considered an attachment?

That is the pertinent question.  Does the contract incorporate the EM?  Contractors are responsible for complying with the terms of their contracts.  If the EM is not actually  incorporated in the contract, I say contractors do not have to comply.  In this regard, see FAR 52.236-13(c).

bodenlok said:

Question is, if EM_385 states "full-time responsibility" do the specifications take precedence?  I haven't found a FAR that really addresses EM_385 or the like.  Would EM_385 be considered an attachment?

FAR 52.236-13 - Accident Prevention reads in part the following.    

"(c) If this contract is for construction or dismantling, demolition or removal of improvements with any Department of Defense agency or component, the Contractor shall comply with all pertinent provisions of the latest version of U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Safety and Health Requirements Manual, EM 385-1-1, in effect on the date of the solicitation."

(Just as Retread posted I finished this, posting anyhow)

On 12/12/2023 at 10:24 AM, bodenlok said:

EM_385-1-1 para 01.A.17a - The SSHO Shall:  (1) Be a full-time responsibility.

However, our experience is that on certain construction contracts the Superintendent can serve as SSHO.  Other contracts have allowed for the QC Manager to also fulfill this role. It is only when the specifications state "SSHO shall have no other duties" do we have a sole individual fulfill the duties of SSHO.  

Question is, if EM_385 states "full-time responsibility" do the specifications take precedence?  I haven't found a FAR that really addresses EM_385 or the like.  Would EM_385 be considered an attachment?

@bodenlokWhat edition of the US Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) Engineer Manual:  EM 385-1-1 “Safety and Health Requirements” are you supposedly (partially) quoting? The November 2014 version reads: 

(01.A.17)

“a. The SSHO [Site Safety and Health Officer] shall:

(1) Be a full-time responsibility. The SSHO shall be present at the project site, located so they have full mobility and reasonable access to all major work operations during the shift.

(2) Be an employee other than the supervisor, unless specified differently in the contract and coordinated with the local SOH [Safety and Occupational Health] Office, and

(3) Report to a senior project (or corporate) official.”

 Note: underlining in the 2014 edition denotes edits from the previous, 2008 edition.

EDIT: Therefore, EM 385-1-1 doesn't conflict with specifications allowing collateral duties. "Full-time responsibility" means that the contractor has full-time, not part-time responsibility for the site safety function. The SSHO or approved designated alternate must be on-site during each shift of construction operations. If the contract allows collateral SSHO duties for a person in another position, the person must perform the specified SSHO duties in addition to their other duties.

Retreaded and Carl are correct.

The FAR directly addresses Engineer Manual 385-1-1.

The EM 385-1-1 is a specific contract requirement when contract clause 52.236-13 Accident Prevention is in the contract. The clause directly addresses the EM.

The Accident Prevention clause is required for ALL DoD agency and component fixed price construction contracts,  certain service contracts and certain other contracts, as prescribed in FAR 36.513.

@bodenlok should be familiar with his/her contract requirements, including the contract clauses and what they require. 

EDIT:

A GOOGLE Search for "FAR EM 385-1-1 includes this reference to FAR 52.236-13, including EM 385-1-1:

"52.236-13 Accident Prevention.

Acquisition.GOV (.gov)

https://www.acquisition.gov › far

... EM 385-1-1, in effect on the date of the solicitation. (d) Whenever the Contracting Officer becomes aware of any noncompliance with these requirements or ..."

Thanks for changing the title of the topic, Bob. I clarified my references to various acronyms.