A returned RAMS is not necessarily a long one or a short one. It is usually a document that leaves a practical question unanswered. Use these five checks before sending an updated version. For all the checks and how they affect the score, see the PlanOps RAMS Review Standard.
1. It could describe another site
Check the location, work package, access, neighbouring activities, ground and services. The risk assessment needs to address the risks of the actual work. Regulation 3 of the Management of Health and Safety at Work Regulations 1999 requires a suitable and sufficient assessment. If the site-specific hazards have not been considered, ask for a revised assessment rather than a new cover page.
2. The controls do not follow the hazards
If the risk assessment identifies a risk of falling, the method statement needs to explain how falls will be prevented. A harness also calls for workable rescue arrangements, not merely a note to call emergency services. HSE's work at height guidance addresses emergency and rescue planning. Ask the author to show how each significant hazard will be controlled, and how those controls will be checked and maintained.
3. The method has tasks but no order
A list of activities does not explain how people will be protected before the work starts, who checks that the next step can begin or how the area is handed back. Ask for the order of work, how it fits with other trades and how the area will be left safe between stages. HSE's construction planning guidance explains the need for planning and coordination.
4. Nobody owns the critical decisions
The RAMS should say who supervises the work, what skills and training are needed, who handles permits and inspections, and who acts in an emergency. Ask who authorises a change, who stops the work and who checks the next step can start. HSE's CDM 2015 contractor guidance describes contractors' duties to plan, manage and monitor their work.
5. The versions disagree
A revised cover with an old method, inconsistent dates or an unsigned approval makes it unclear which version has been accepted. Ask for one revision, one approval and evidence that the crew will be briefed on it. Then compare the changed document against the previous one rather than treating it as a new document with no history.
A free document-only review can flag gaps visible in the file. The project team still needs to compare it with the planned work, permits and site information before accepting it.