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.

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?

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.

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.  

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!

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.