· FOI/EIR · partially withheld
Contractors and suppliers involved with Forth Bridges Unit: EIR release
Information requested
'Under the Freedom of Information act 2000, please could I request a full list of Main Contractors, Consultants/Civil Engineers, Sub-contractors and suppliers involved with your new build and roads maintenance works from your Forth Bridges Unit, South East Unit, A74(M) DBFO, North East Unit, South West Unit, North West Unit, M77 DBFO and the M80 DBFO (indicated on your Asset Management Map https://www.transport.gov.scot/media/35770/oc-map.jpg )
I have been advised that these detail can be found in the health & safety documents (which is required by law).
If sub-contractor/supplier details are not held by yourself in house, can you please request them from principal contractors as these as still covered under Freedom of Information as the principle contractor working on your behalf and is therefore deemed that the information they hold in relation to your works is held on your behalf.
This request has been made under advise from one of your colleagues.'
Response
As the information you have requested is 'environmental information' for the purposes of the Environmental Information (Scotland) Regulations 2004 (EIRs), we are required to deal with your request under those Regulations. We are applying the exemption at section 39(2) of the Freedom of Information (Scotland) Act 2002 (FOISA), so that we do not also have to deal with your request under FOISA.
This exemption is subject to the 'public interest test'. Therefore, taking account of all the circumstances of this case, we have considered if the public interest in disclosing the information outweighs the public interest in applying the exemption. We have found that, on balance, the public interest lies in favour of upholding the exemption, because there is no public interest in dealing with the same request under two different regimes. This is essentially a technical point and has no material effect on the outcome of your request.
In response to your request, please see find information below;
Forth Bridges Unit
Main Contractors - Amey, American Bridge International and C Spencer Limited.
For subcontractor information, please refer to Annex A of this request.
South East Unit
Main Contractor – Amey
For subcontractor information, please refer to Annex B of this request.
A74 (M) DBFO
The M6 DBFO Concession is held by Autolink Concessionaires (M6) plc a special purpose company formed by joint venture of Innisfree, Sir Robert McAlpine, and John Laing Infrastructure.The nominated design consultant for the project is WSP (formerly Mouchel), employed by Autolink.
In the last twelve months Autolink appointed two Principal Contractors:
Operation & Maintenance was undertaken by Sir Robert McAlpineMajor re-surfacing was undertaken by Hanson Contracting
Sir Robert McAlpine employed a number of subcontractors and suppliers including:
Vigilant SecurityPeak EcologyCleveland PotashHoddamAmey ConsultingUSL BridgecarePeacock SaltAllan StobartVarley & GulliverHill SmithGreenhamStory ContractingMallatiteCusackR H IrvingStirling-LloydTarmac
Hanson also engaged a number of subcontractors and suppliers including:
2 Works Traffic ManagementTim Doody RoadmarkingsDP Cold PlaningAggregate IndustriesGiles Engineering North East Unit
Main Contractor - Bear Scotland.
For subcontractor information, please refer to Annex C of this request.
South West Unit
Main Contractor – Scotland Transerv.
For subcontractor information, please refer to Annex D of this request.
North West Unit
Main Contractor – Bear Scotland.
For subcontractor information, please refer to Annex E of this request.
Detected exemption language
We are applying the exemption at section 39(2) of the Freedom of Information (Scotland) Act 2002 (FOISA), so that we do not also have to deal with your request under FOISA. This exemption is subject to the 'public interest test'. Therefore, taking account of all the circumstances of this case, we have considered if the public interest in disclosing the information outweighs the public interest in applying the exemption. We have found that, on balance, the public interest lies in favour of upholding the exemption, because there is no public interest in dealing with the same request under two different regimes.