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

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
Torres  
#1 Posted : 23 January 2020 08:06:24(UTC)
Rank: Forum user
Torres

Hi All,

Quick question on PTW, who in yopur place of work would normally give out the permits on a daily basis? I am in a upper tier seveso site and a lot of the permits are given out by the production manager with only very basic sdagety training, same as the operators would get. What do ye think - my thoughts would be the production guy worries about one thing - production and the speed the job can get done!!

Thanks all. T

NBBeacock  
#2 Posted : 23 January 2020 08:39:36(UTC)
Rank: Forum user
NBBeacock

Hi, We have maintenance engineer supervisors who are responsible for permit authorisation in house and for contractors. They have completed a permit issuer training course and will generally oversee any works that they have issued a permit for. We looked at the maintenance department manager but thought that he didn't have the required working knowledge even though he runs the department very well the supervisors have more hands on knowledge of what is required and we think that the permit issuer course just made them aware of their responsibilities a bit more so "Hopefully" the need to get a machine back working or lost production time thoughts don't come into it.

Torres  
#3 Posted : 23 January 2020 08:46:17(UTC)
Rank: Forum user
Torres

Originally Posted by: NBBeacock Go to Quoted Post

Hi, We have maintenance engineer supervisors who are responsible for permit authorisation in house and for contractors. They have completed a permit issuer training course and will generally oversee any works that they have issued a permit for. We looked at the maintenance department manager but thought that he didn't have the required working knowledge even though he runs the department very well the supervisors have more hands on knowledge of what is required and we think that the permit issuer course just made them aware of their responsibilities a bit more so "Hopefully" the need to get a machine back working or lost production time thoughts don't come into it.

Thanks for that, i just always feel its the guy who thinks about "how someone could get hurt doing this job" should be issuing permits i.e. safety guy. Say a line break permit recently, box ticked that the line is flushed but it is not so the guy doing the job must wear chem suit, full face mask etc etc.. this is because production guy knows it will add a little time to flush it and do it right!! Should i take it on..

Roundtuit  
#4 Posted : 23 January 2020 10:40:40(UTC)
Rank: Super forum user
Roundtuit

Beware drawing the safety guy in to signing every permit - in most companies I have worked at either as employee or visiting contractor there have been a range of issuers from Engineering Manager through Production Management/Supervision to Plant Operatives (not every permit is required during convenient office hours in a 24/7 facility).

It is rather unfair to state production personnel are only interested in production - many with the right training really do grasp the importance of doing the job safely so that everyone goes home in one piece and no one gets hauled up in court.

Regarding a line flush and still wearing significant amounst of PPE - unless there is a capability to push a lot of dilutant through a line and safely dispose of it sometimes there will be residues e.g. a process where water may not be a suitable dilutant, the pipe being worked on may have an uphill through to vertical incline, the effluent treatment plant cannot accept a large volume of high/low pH etc.

Permits are typically used for the unplanned and unexpected - normally breakdown situations so if a pump has failed and requires changing how do you flush through?

Roundtuit  
#5 Posted : 23 January 2020 10:40:40(UTC)
Rank: Super forum user
Roundtuit

Beware drawing the safety guy in to signing every permit - in most companies I have worked at either as employee or visiting contractor there have been a range of issuers from Engineering Manager through Production Management/Supervision to Plant Operatives (not every permit is required during convenient office hours in a 24/7 facility).

It is rather unfair to state production personnel are only interested in production - many with the right training really do grasp the importance of doing the job safely so that everyone goes home in one piece and no one gets hauled up in court.

Regarding a line flush and still wearing significant amounst of PPE - unless there is a capability to push a lot of dilutant through a line and safely dispose of it sometimes there will be residues e.g. a process where water may not be a suitable dilutant, the pipe being worked on may have an uphill through to vertical incline, the effluent treatment plant cannot accept a large volume of high/low pH etc.

Permits are typically used for the unplanned and unexpected - normally breakdown situations so if a pump has failed and requires changing how do you flush through?

Elfin Davy 09  
#6 Posted : 23 January 2020 11:00:23(UTC)
Rank: Super forum user
Elfin Davy 09

I agree with Roundtuit - not normally down to the safety guy.

In my personal experience, it's more often than not down to the person who's authorising the work to organise and sign off the PtW, so the Maintenance Manager is often the person best placed to do so.

Obviously however this is subject to change depending upon the size of the company, and the roles individuals have within it.

Holliday42333  
#7 Posted : 24 January 2020 09:04:19(UTC)
Rank: Super forum user
Holliday42333

Have a look at Paragraph 37 of HSG250 which gives a comprehensive description of the type of person who should undertake the duties of 'Issuing Authority' and what those duties are.

Obviously this is an idealised description based on comprehensive process, however I think you will agree once you have reviewed it that it is unlikely that "the safety guy" would actually have the knowledge and/or authority to perform this role.

A Kurdziel  
#8 Posted : 24 January 2020 09:50:37(UTC)
Rank: Super forum user
A Kurdziel

Agree with Roundtuit-H&S should not be lumbered with running the H&S system: their job should be making sure that the system actually works. Your issue is that “the production manager with only very basic sdagety training”. He needs to understand the sort of things that can go wrong and the consequences, to himself, to fellow employees and the company of something going wrong.

The managers need to up their training and understanding.  

SteveL  
#9 Posted : 24 January 2020 11:16:16(UTC)
Rank: Super forum user
SteveL

Torres

As others have said HSG 250, Have a look at the Piper Alpha enquiry regarding PTW.

May not be in the same league but lessons available, Safety persons should not issue permits  

peter gotch  
#10 Posted : 26 January 2020 15:27:34(UTC)
Rank: Super forum user
peter gotch

Torres

I'm with other respondents.

In truth, you probably don't know as well as those planning the job how to do it safely.

They are the ones who have coped with Safety setting out conditions (whether on Permits, procedures, whatever) that don't work and they are the ones who have probably found ways round the impracticality behind Safety's back.

....and they are the ones who are often in charge of doing work done under Permits when production is down anyway - e.g. nightshifts and weekends. That's also when Safety is probably not on site.

Encourage line management ownership of health and safety!

Kate  
#11 Posted : 26 January 2020 16:40:56(UTC)
Rank: Super forum user
Kate

I agree with the gist of the responses above.

When I was working at a COMAH site, permits were given by the supervisor.  That was the person who knew the status of each plant and what was going in both production and maintenance, as well as having an excellent technical and practical understanding of the site and of its safety issues.  Hot work and confined space permits also needed authorisation from the technician who tested the atmosphere.

My involvement, quite rightly, was limited to checking that the permit system was working and making improvements to it where needed. 

Kim Hedges  
#12 Posted : 26 January 2020 22:18:53(UTC)
Rank: Super forum user
Kim Hedges

I worked in a few places that needed the P.T.W. in place.  Best I've come across had the permit form spell out what the work was in detail, A4 sized pad.  The padlocks were then issued to Lock Out the job, so the production could not be started until it was safe to commence, i.e. all the workers were present with the PTW Clerk.  This way, the PTW Clerk - who tends to have some clue as to what is going to happen, can keep control.  

Incidentally, nothing worse, than a cheapo PTW form being too small and provide B4 plastic covers or clear B4 plastic wallets for the permits to stay dry and oil free, preferably with a clip board, as it's rare for a desk near a work zone. 

thanks 1 user thanked Kim Hedges for this useful post.
A Kurdziel on 27/01/2020(UTC)
Users browsing this topic
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.