How Design Changes Should Be Handled in the DfS Register
A design change that affects risk — including a substituted construction method, revised temporary works, or altered access arrangement — should trigger a follow-up DfS review, and the Register should be updated to reflect the new position, not left describing a superseded design.
Direct answer
Construction rarely proceeds exactly as detailed-designed. When a change affects a previously reviewed design risk, the DfS process is meant to catch up with it — not leave the Register describing a design that no longer matches what is being built.
What should trigger a review
- A substituted construction method or sequence that changes exposure to a previously identified risk
- A revised or newly introduced temporary works scheme
- A change to site access, egress or working-at-height arrangements
- A value-engineering or buildability change to a structural or façade element
- A change in scope that introduces a new foreseeable risk not previously considered
Updating the Register
Flag the change
Designer, Contractor or DfSP identifies that a change may affect a previously reviewed risk.
Follow-up review
DfSP convenes a follow-up review with the relevant parties for the affected scope.
Update the record
Design Risk Record and residual-risk entries updated to reflect the new design.
Re-communicate
Updated Register reissued so the Contractor and design team are working from current information.
See our main page on the DfS Register → and the full DfS process across project stages →.
Official references
- GuidanceWSH Council, Workplace Safety and Health Guidelines — Design for Safety — official source →