Hi,
Are these always generally signed off by a manager / supervisor? I ask as we're faced with the issue of hot works thats needed to be carried out way from the office (which is quite frequently), where managers are not on site and it would mean the operative coming back to the office or the manager going to the area to sign off the work?

Also, regarding the time afterwards that is needed for checking. I notice CITB suggest hot works is not carried out less than an hour before leaving site and the area is monitored for 15 minutes after work has been completed to check for fire risks.

Is the general rule an hour or does anyone operate less than this?

Thanks

Buzz

It's a good question and good response by stevie40. However the answer depends on a number of different factors, the crix of the issue is whether the hot work permit is a meaningful document or not.

First, the one hour rule is the generally accepted minimum in industry. Second, who signs off the permit depends on practicalities and how serious the permit is taken. It could be a supervisor, manager or some other 'responsible person', but not normally the operative who is carrying out the hot work.

The purpose of the permit is to ensure an extra measure of control over a potentially high risk activity which is also monitored by a responsible person by issuing the permit, otherwise it just becomes a 'paper safety' exercise.

Hi all, thanks for your responses, they're helpful.

We conduct the hot work and own / manage the area it's carried out in. Basically the operatives carry out the work in people's homes, but quite often don't know there is a need for hot works until they're there (as the nature of the work is responsive, not planned).

Our insurers stipulate 1 hour and supervisory sign off, which i'm in agreeance with, and certainly don't agree that the person writing the permit should also sign it off; however management feel the need for someone to travel to site to sign it and then close it down is unrealistic and unmanageable.

I was interested to make sure I wasn't way off with the approach of industry best practice.

Issuing a hot Work Permit for domestic work seems to me to be a load of useless paperwork, particularly if the work involves one individual tradesperson eg plumber. The householder will be highly unlikely to have sufficient knowledge to make any judgement on whether appropriate controls are in place.

The 1 hour rule is certainly very sensible and should be enforced but I see no value whatsoever in having a paper permit system, when there is no supervisor present.

Does anyone have a copy of a hot works permit they would be willing to share?

Many thanks

Mrs Noodle, if you ask your insurer they will probably be able to supply one. If not then PM me with your email address and I will sort you one out.
Ian

No idea why that middle one won't work - google Allianz hot work permit to find it and supporting guidance.

Thank you Steve, very useful.

Ian - for all you know Mrs Noodles could be a potential client.

Costs nothing to provide a link with the requested info and helps someone out who may genuinely be stuck. How many of us before we started working in H&S knew what a Hot Work Permit was or what one looked like. I know I didn't.

Yes Google is a big help but sometimes you need to click a load of incorrect, out of date or inappropriate links to find what you are looking for, assuming you have phrased the search correctly in the first place.

OP - we've recently reviewed a situation similar to yours. We found some situations where the lack of a permit and associated supervision meant that we weren't confident Hot Works were always carried out as expected.

To emphasise - this is about supervision. The piece of paper (or whatever format the permit takes) is not the point - it's the fact that this system requires certain conversations to take place that matters.

We have independent maintenance teams (some are lone workers) who would not normally return to HQ and would not always know in advance whether hot work was required. The solution was twofold:

1. establish non-hot solutions (where possible) for each of the common tasks (eg push-fit plumbing components etc). This has reduced the majority of hot work.

2. If after the above, we still need hot work then agree to delay this, inform a Supervisor (who visits site and agrees safety measures, issues permit).

3. Supervisor attends site to close off permit, but this can be ANY supervisor (ie closest) - not necessarily the permit issuer. This supervisor just confirms site has been made safe.

Our maintenance teams work mostly for councils / housing associations, and there's plenty of anecdotal evidence from their staff of potentially risky situations. When I was a kid, the largest school in town burned down when a gas torch was used wrongly and no fire watch was in place... I'm not OTT about permits in general and have always thought lone worker / hot work / old buildings was one of the obvious situations where this makes good sense.

Hope that helps