Role, responsibilities and Functions of a Site Technical Officer
by Karl Attard and Maurizio Schembri
The Law ‘LN 136’ was established in June 2019 to regulate the monitoring of construction works and to safeguard the third-party property owners of a construction site.
It is the Site Technical Officer (STO) who was made thus responsible under this Law.
The main responsibility of a STO is to ensure that the contractor/s are working as per method statement and at no point affecting third-party property in any of the phases of construction.
A professional engineering graduate, the STO is responsible for the implementation of the architect’s instructions (method statement) to the contractor/ builder in every phase of the construction project, including demolition, excavation, alterations and construction works. The STO is also responsible to ensure that any works in the stages mentioned will not affect the third-party properties.
Though as per current law (LN136 of 2019), any person with a degree in engineering can practice as an STO, the role must perforce be filled by a competent person, and thus whose obligatory degree in engineering would be preferably related to construction or architecture, and who would be already familiar with such works.
photo: stock image
This role is vital to every construction project, as everything that is instructed by writing in the form of a document called the “method statement” by the architect of the project or the architect ultimately responsible to the method statement, must be implemented onsite by the contractor. This needs to be ensured by the STO – with frequent inspections onsite. It is essential that the STO make regular site visits especially in the crucial stages of the project, so that if the STO notes that the contractor is not following the method statement, immediate action can be executed.
the role must perforce be filled by a competent person, and thus whose obligatory degree in engineering would be preferably related to construction or architecture, and who would be already familiar with such works
The STO has the right to stop the works if he or she reckons that the method statement is not being properly followed. When in doubt, the STO is to consult directly with the contractor to see why s/he is not following the method statement. And even if said contractor were to insist that works are being processed and implemented correctly, if not as per method statement, the STO must notify the Architect in writing,
who would then have to approve (or reject) officially and in writing whether or not works could proceed with the method proposed by the contractor. In major changes from the method statement, the Architect must revise it and submit to the BCA.
Should the Architect not so approve, the STO is duty bound to order the works to halt until the approval from the architect is issued. In other situations, the architect might refuse the method being proposed by the contractor. In this case, the STO must stop the works until the contractor accepts to work as per architect’s instructions reflected in the method statement.
any justified complaints … are to be addressed by the STO who is responsible to solve the issue
Apart from this and as previously mentioned, the STO is also responsible to the adjacent third-party property/ies. Therefore, if at any time during the demolition, excavation and/or construction phases, any justified complaints from these third parties are to be addressed by the STO who is responsible to solve the issue. This might be not part of the method statement, but the STO is responsible that the third-party owners are not affected with the ongoing works.
photo: stock image
The STO enforces regulations which protect neighbouring third parties in terms of working hours, noise, dust and other major issues that negate comfort or security of and on third-party property and proprietor. Though this role has been in force for more than 3 years, many are still unaware of this role and responsibilities of the STO.
As per current law, it is the contractor but with the approval of the architect, who is ultimately responsible in appointing the STO. Therefore, both can and must refuse their own client his or her choice of STO should they perceive the person in question to be either imprecisely qualified or insufficiently experienced. This is also an issue of cost as well as of responsibility, piece of mind and enforcement.
Whoever appoints the STO ought to always check the qualifications and also ask for the guidance of the contractor or the architect in regards to this engagement. This role is definitely not just another fee in one’s project, but more so, peace of mind that a veteran and qualified professional is monitoring the works in line with the architect’s instructions and also to eliminate any conflicts with the third-party property owners. Indeed, ultimately, the STO must conclude the monitoring of works by means of a report to prove that all works were carried out as per method statement.
Comment