Posted By STEVE HI WHICH COMES FIRST: 1=SIGN ON PERMIT TO WORK 2=GO DO RISK ASSESMENT FOR TASK ----------------- 1= GO DO RISK ASSESMENT FOR TASK 2= THEN GET PERMIT TO WORK IS THERE A LEGAL WAY TO GO ABOUT THIS AS DIFFERENT INDUSTRIAL SITES HAVE BOTH OF THESE METHODS. IS IT UP TO THE SITE HOW IT RUNS ITS P/T/W.? Q= WHERE WOULD YOU STAND IN A CLAIM IF WHILST NOT ON A PERMIT TO WORK YOU WHERE INJURED DOING A RISK ASSESMENT,WHERE A PARTICULAR SITE DOES NOT ISSUE P/T/W UNLESS YOU HAVE A RISK ASSESMENT AND METHOD STATEMENT. IS THE SITE WRONG IN DEMANDING THE RISK ASSESMENT BEFORE ISSUEING THE PERMIT? AWAITING YOUR VIEWS AND EXPERIENCE STEVE

Posted By Stuart Nagle Steve. 1) Ordinarilly, the sequence is; (a) Risk assessment (b) safety method statement (c) permit to work (a) a risk assessment is required to establish the hazards present, and detail how you intend to either remove that hazard or if you cannot do so, identify what control measures you intend to put in place to reduce the risks arising from the hazard(s) to a minimum 'acceptable' risk (b) the safety method statement is to indicate how the task is to be undertaken and the what is to be done to carry out the work (safely I hope) It should also indicate what is required in respect of the works, e,g, personnel, tools/plant/equipment etc and may also stipulate what must NOT be done !! It should also detail the procedure to be folowed in an emergency and identify, by name, who is responsible for doing what. (c) the permit to work is the final stage in a safe system of work, which provides for checking the above (a) and (b) and seeing all conditions, personnel, tools/plant/equipment etc is checked, in place, understood by all and that the conditions are safe for work to proceed. It may also indicate details of other permits required e.g. hot work, pressure systems etc, identify all persons by name who are authorised to work on the system(s) involved, details of safety equipment and other equipment, start and finnish times, emergecy procedures etc... There are exceptions to the rule. for instance, part of a risk assessment process may require that a 'competent' person enters a place of work for which a pemit to work is required (i.e. a confined space) in order to carry out part of the risk assessment in relation to the works entry or indeed the works to be performed. Obviously in such cases pre entry procedures themselves would require the above steps to be taken to perform this task, which incidentially, should oly ever be done by a competent and highly experienced person(s). Hope this helps.... Stuart Nagle

Posted By John Webster Steve Are you perhaps confusing pre-work site inspection/survey with risk assessment? Risk assessment is done by people such as, say, the fire brigades, who have to enter premises with completely unknown and unpredictable hazards. They work on the basis of what COULD go wrong, and train and equip accordingly. It sounds as if you are working in derelict (or overseas) industrial sites. It should be possible to assess the possible and probable risks take the appropriate precautions, and issue a permit for suitably trained and equipped personnel to enter the site for the purpose of conducting a detailed survey of the proposed worksite - assuming that a permit system is a required outcome of the risk assessment! As Stuart pointed out, the purpose and legal requirement of risk assessment is to reduce risk to as low a level as reasonably practicable - ie not to remove all risk. Hope this helps John

Posted By STEVE THANKS TO EVERY ONE , THAT HAS ANSWERED MY ENQUIRY,I HAVE SAT BACK AND READ OVER YOUR ANSWERS OVER AND OVER AGAIN. I CAN SEE KNOW WHAT YOU WHERE GETTING AT PHIL, AND TOTALLY AGREE WITH YOUR VIEW. JUST SHOWS THAT THIS IS WHY WE NEED THIS TYPE OF FORUM TO GIVE ADVICE AND EXPERIENCED VIEWS. STRANGE THAT IVE BEEN ON 3H&S COURSES AND THIS VIEW HAS NOT BEEN BROUGHT FORWARD. THANK YOU AGAIN AND JUST SHOWS THAT DIFFERENT VIEWS CAN MAKE YOU HAVE A CHANGE OF THOUGHT IF YOUR PREPARED TO EXCEPT THEM. STEVE