Posted By Ian G Hutchings
JV

This can be a tricky issue. There are a few options here. One is that the H&S professional is used to advise on the technical H&S requirements and can research information if they need further guidance.

I think if the work is of significant risk potential you may need to appoint an independent advisor/engineer who is competent to assess and sign off that the method is adequate.

Can you give some examples of the type of work you are talking about?

Ian

Posted By CFT
Agree with the above. The method statement as part of an overall SSOW should be identifying exactly that without getting into heavy technical data.

An example would be for say hot works;

Arrive at site
Sign in
Who is responsible for supervision
Be inducted or if already done
Check all operatives are familiar with SSOW
Obtain keys and meet with company officer/Manager etc
Be issued with PTW
Commence protection, either bag up or section off heat/smoke detectors.
Have fire watchman present
Have own Fire fighting equipment
First Aid kit
Proceed with work
Complete work
Stand by for 60 minutes to ensure area is cool and not at risk of combustion
Clear up
Report to Officer for PTW signing off
Officer to check works
Sign out and leave.

That is a really basic list and does not go into detail but there is nothing in it that would cause a problem from a technical point of view; where it says 'proceed and complete' to a degree is fairly irrelevant; I don't always fully understand the complete technical make up of a project but I do know enough to be certain it is being carried out safely; that after all is why I wanted the MS and supporting documentation in the first place, the contractor who will have gone through an exacting assessment procedure will be the competent expert.

Say you had an air con breakdown and you had lost gas, then the MS would probably include pressure testing vacuum test, often on nitrogen, after say 24 hours re-gas and re commission. If you were uncertain with the procedure then you can as mentioned get the contractor to explain what will take place and if you are still unsure you can do your own independent research to be certain what you are being told is correct.

WAH would be similar in terms of procedure, it would be the equipment that you would be looking at (among others), fall arrest/restraint, right lanyard for right equipment, duration, lone working, competency, i.e. trained operatives that are aware of the RA contents (I know, not many are) licensed for MEWP use and correct licenses, boom/cherry/spider/scissor etc. Also your opportunity to offer detailing to the contractor of any known hazards, perhaps this is why the need for WAH.

Once you have gone through the detailing you are then much more aware (and more to the point, knowledgeable) for the next time.

Can you give an example of work that is of such a technical nature that no one in your company would understand it? You have after all worked out that something is wrong and identified which contractor you need.

If I had work that was required to be carried out on a nuclear reactor, I would need help to clarify points; this was mentioned earlier in a response to you and it is vital that you only go as far as your knowledge and experience allow, being aware of your own limitations is half the battle.

CFT