Welcome Guest! The IOSH forums are a free resource to both members and non-members. Login or register to use them

IOSH Forums are closing 

The IOSH Forums will close on 5 January 2026 as part of a move to a new, more secure online community platform.

All IOSH members will be invited to join the new platform following the launch of a new member database in the New Year. You can continue to access this website until the closure date. 

For more information, please visit the IOSH website.

Postings made by forum users are personal opinions. IOSH is not responsible for the content or accuracy of any of the information contained in forum postings. Please carefully consider any advice you receive.

Notification

Icon
Error

Options
Go to last post Go to first unread
Admin  
#1 Posted : 01 November 2007 11:09:00(UTC)
Rank: Guest
Admin

Posted By Stephen Sherratt
On one of our sites the Principal Contractor wants us to issue permits to work once we put power on to the equipment.

I feel confident that we should not be required to issue permits to work as just one of the many works contractors; however we should be a signatory to the Principal Contractors permits but certainly we should Not be the Issuer. Comments please
Admin  
#2 Posted : 01 November 2007 18:47:00(UTC)
Rank: Guest
Admin

Posted By CFT
There is no reason why you can't and no reason to assume you would work to the PC's PTW system although it does tend to make life easier all round with one central point to work from.

I can't categorically say if the PTW is right and proper for you with the limited description provided; at the end of the day it really does not make a hapeth of difference what I think, if the PC wants it under PTW then so be it; as a yard stick, up to the supply I don't permit, beyond it I do.

All the best

CFT
Admin  
#3 Posted : 01 November 2007 18:51:00(UTC)
Rank: Guest
Admin

Posted By Robert K Lewis
You can however make sure your permit does not permit the PC unfettered access if you control the permit.

Bob
Admin  
#4 Posted : 02 November 2007 07:29:00(UTC)
Rank: Guest
Admin

Posted By Adrian
If this is a CDM site and the principle contractor has identified in his construction phase plan that he is going to use PTWs then he has the right to do so the only problem that I see with more than one issuer is that there could be a conflict in PTWs and therefore make the situation more hazardous.

Adrian
Admin  
#5 Posted : 02 November 2007 11:13:00(UTC)
Rank: Guest
Admin

Posted By Stephen Sherratt
Many thanks, you have all confirmed my first instinct and indeed it is madness for all works contactors to be issuing their own permits. PTW must be centrally managed and coordinated. The base cause of Piper Alpha was duplicate and uncontrolled PTW

Thanks again Steve
Admin  
#6 Posted : 02 November 2007 11:35:00(UTC)
Rank: Guest
Admin

Posted By Robert K Lewis
Stephen

Don't forget however that some specialist works need contractors who understand it to run the permits. Radiography, live substation work and live power work come to mind immediately so all is not clear cut.

Bob
Admin  
#7 Posted : 02 November 2007 12:51:00(UTC)
Rank: Guest
Admin

Posted By Stephen Sherratt
Bob,
Thanks for that and you are absolutely right about specialist work however my Electrical Work Risk Assessments are all clear that on no account will we expect or require work coming into contact with live parts and all components are shrouded to IP20 we expressly forbid “live Working” and concentrate on a safe system of isolation, Lock out and Tag out.
Thanks again Stephen
Users browsing this topic
Guest
You cannot post new topics in this forum.
You cannot reply to topics in this forum.
You cannot delete your posts in this forum.
You cannot edit your posts in this forum.
You cannot create polls in this forum.
You cannot vote in polls in this forum.