SRAT SAP Audit checklist Overhead Lines 1

Information

Audit Number
Auditor
Location
Conducted on

SAP Details

SAP Name.
SAP Payroll No.
SAP EUSR No.

AP Details

AP Name
AP Payroll No.
AP EUSR No.

CP Details

CP Name
CP Payroll No.
CP EUSR No.

Work Audited

Work Description
Safety Document Type/No.

SRAT Point of Work Risk Assessment

Are there any hazards from HV Electricity that require additional control measures?
Is the area clear of hazards from Slips, Trips or Falls on the same level?
Is the area clear of hazards from Falls from Height?
Is the area free from hazards from Chemicals/Harmful Substances?
Is the area clear from hazards from Falling/Flying objects?
Is the area free from hazards from Heat/Fire/Explosion?
Is the area free from hazards from Asphyxiation/Drowning?
Is the area free from hazards from contact with moving parts?
Is the area free from hazards from Objects overturning/collapsing?
Is the area free from hazards from Manual Handling?
Is the area free from hazards from vehicles?
Is the area free from hazards from the work of others?
Is the area free from hazards from entry into confined spaces?
Is the area free from hazards from Dust?
Is the area free from hazards from Fumes?
Is the area free from hazards from Noise?
Is the area free from hazards from Vibration?
Is the area free from hazards from Electricity?
Is the area free from hazards from Radiation?
Is the area free from hazards from poor Lighting?
Is the area free from hazards from Temperature (high or low)?
Are there any hazards from Lone Working?
Are there any hazards from adverse weather?

Audit Notes/Previous Findings etc.

Use this space to record previous audit findings or just as a jotter to make notes during the audit.

Section 1 - Isolation

Category 1 - POIs

NSI 1 4.4 & SR P 3.2. Have all POIs and safety precautions listed on the safety document(s) been locked in to key safes (except items returned under ROMP)
SR 3.2c Check HV POIs are locked and cautioned.
NSI 3, 5.1 c. Metal Clad Switchgear - Shutters of spouts which are live or may become live must be locked shut.
NSI 33 4.5 1 Construction - Is the SAP managing HV Connection to the System. Prior to initial connections plant declared as Equipment and part of System requires a System Connection form should be issued.
SR, P 3.1. 1 Construction - Are arrangements in place to ensure in the above cases physical separation from equipment that is not part of the system to the system is maintained throughout the work (min Safety Distance).
SR Guidance Have Towers being used as Points Of Isolation been correctly identified and locked correctly.
If aircraft lighting installation presents danger has it been isolated and a SSOW in place to maintain isolations during work.

Section 2 - Earthing

Category 2 - Earthing

Where reasonably practicable Primary Earths should not be within the work area. If primary earths are in the work area are the precautions established adequate to ensure their integrity is maintained throughout the work
For the work being audited on the Safety Documents(s) is primary earths correct against the operational drawing for the work being undertaken
Has 9 metre or 30 metre rule been applied correctly. where not RP to apply between POI and work area primary earths may be placed so as to have a similar electrical effect e.g. permanent tee point or beyond point of work
Have all Fixed Earths listed on the safety document(s) associated with the work being audited been locked in to key safes(Except those returned under a SFW)?
Check earthing is correct against VT LV POI's. PE between POW & VT, PE remain solidly connected to the HV side of the VT or PE solidly connected to a teed section between the POW & VT throughout the course of work If disconnected LV POI & drain earths to be used or 2 POIs on LV side.
If Restricted Earthing Device used, has it been managed to ensure it does not make/break currents the Earth is not rated for.
Are Primary Earths positioned inside the zone established by POIs. Where reasonably practical Earths should be positioned between POI and work.
Was the 1st earth applied a fixed earth. If not reasonably practicable was first PPE applied to a short bar where POIs are visible or indirect earthing via CB or disconnector
Have Portable Primary Earths applied more than 6 months been replaced in agreement with Control Person Safety and quarantined?
Have Portable Primary Earths been labelled to identify them as Primary Earths?
Are Portable Primary Earths correctly attached: • Not attached to co-ordinating gaps or corona rings etc.
For the work being audited on the Safety Documents(s) is primary earthing correct against the operational drawing for the work being undertaken
Have the correct number of Portable Primary Earths been applied and are they applied to all phases except on phase segregated Equipment.
Has Earth Tape been cleaned prior to attachment of Portable Earths.
Is IV adequately controlled by the provisions on Earthing Schedule
Are issued drain earths and earthing pole etc safely managed by Competent Person? If not applied/being applied are they locked away so that only CP can gain access to them.
If Earthing Schedule is issued is it correct i.e. clear, legible and with a clear sequence for application and removal of drain earths
Is the scaffold earthed with Field equipment earths (orange) at 5m intervals or as instructed by the SAP. Have the scaffolders been instructed not to touch clear sheathed earths
Does the MEWP have an adeuate electrical bond between the acess platform & vehicle chassis? Are field equipment earths issued and applied correctly to Cranes & MEWPs etc
Earth systems - SAP should RA before working on earth systems or approaching disturbed earth tape, rating of temporary conductors should be considered. Written RA required where earth tape removed from a structure or tower, buried earth tape disturbed, main earth system not intact
Earth Systems - Has SAP specified number of Type A Bonds on Earthing Schedule or Method Statement? Have Earth bonds been correctly applied / removed. Is the break bridged by a fully rated type 2 bond not a type 1 blue bond
Construction - Is the SAP managing Earthing. Prior to initial connection to the System a System Connection form should be issued
Has Complex Circuit been converted to Simple Circuit for section to be worked on.?
If work within 5 towers of terminal tower, has integrity of earth to substation been verified?
Are Drain Earths applied by use of correct earthing pole.?
Have Short Drain Earths or Short Bridging Earths been used for Earthwire work. If a drain earth longer than 1.5m is used, has a RA been completed?
If Primary Earths are portable are they of adequate cross section and withstand substation fault levels.
Are Drain Earths being managed via a Master Safety Document and recorded correctly in section 2 of the Permit.?
Are double DrESS earthing schemes being controlled via a Safety Document Card safe? Is the DrESS document locked in a card safe? Has a card safe key been issued with the subsequent safety documents.?
Safety Document information should match that on any Drain Earth Schedule issued e.g. the number should be listed correctly and requirement in line on each document and the number of earths correct etc.
If drain earths applied on terminal tower or sealing end, has a minimum of Single DrESS been used?
Additional work, if additional drain earths are issued is this completed correctly with drain earth schedule
Have the circuits been identified as simple or complex and correct Dress Earthing schemes applied - Need to check circuit diagrams and positioning of Dress Earthing schemes
Does the Competent Person know how many drain earths he is responsible for and does he know where they are at the time of the audit, if not being used are earths being controlled correctly. This includes the use of the DEC forms.
If drain earths already applied by Earthing Team. Has the Competent Person checked that the drain earths are in accordance with the earthing schedule.
Is work at height carried out with no persons directly below?
Are earths being inspected before use and do they have in date inspection labels
If multiple Safety Documents issued, is Drain Earthing controlled by MPA and a copy of the earthing schedule supplied to other PICs.
Have Primary Earths been applied to the line side of Substation POIs prior to issue of OHL PFW

Section 3 - Control

Category 3 - Control

Are the correct Safety Rules and NSIs being applied for the work (Ref Site Responsibility Schedule if required)
Is the Operational Key Cabinet(s) locked correctly i.e. secured by AP lock
Is cross locking of key safes completed correctly & the SAP control lock correctly applied.
Are there safety key(s) identified on active safety document(s) not secured by the Key Safe Key, ROMP or SFW Procedure issued with the Safety Document?
Have Key safe content labels been updated by the SAP with relevant information.(cascaded keys location, PFW No. etc.)
Is the number of key safes available in the switching office reasonable for the size of site
Safety documents being audited are correctly identified on T card(s) and correctly located on status board with current recipient or location if in safe custody recorded on the rear.
POIs and Earthing T card(s), updated with reference to relevant Safety Documents on the rear
Complete overview check of status board, are there obvious errors on the board e.g. overcrowded/ incorrect or missing TLs or exclusion zone information or circuits etc.
15 drawer cabinet, check that the contents are the current safety rules guidance and procedures.
Is the Switching Office tidy and free of obvious hazards
Is there an adequate supply of pre-printed Safety Documents available on site for business continuity purposes (currently old type pads are adequate).
Is the Competent Person keeping safety documentation and associated items in safe custody & available at the point of work.
Is the documentation and other items available at point of work?
Temporary identification labels are correctly fixed to equipment clearly identifying the equipment and words are the same as on the safety documentation
The correct key safe key(s) issued and present
Has any additional work been correctly added to the safety document, work communicated to working party
In the opinion of the auditor has the Competent Person adequately been set to work by the Senior Authorised Person
In the opinion of the auditor at time of audit is Competent Person managing his responsibilities adequately
If reasonably Practicable, has the SAP walked the Safety Precautions and demonstrated them to the CP cross referencing them with the Safety Document & Operations diagram.
Has SAP communicated with other parties: The SAP must communicate with others e.g. OHL, construction, other SAPs, other Working Parties who may be affected by the issue of the Safety Document
Has the Senior Authorised Person had sufficient time to plan the work.
Does the Senior Authorised Person think there are enough people with the correct skills to complete the planned work.
Are Approved G3 procedures used for the work when Safety Rules cannot/ should not be applied, is this correct application of the G3 for strong commercial or technical reasons
If Scaffold is being used has the Senior Authorised Person managed the erecting, removal considering possible loss of control of poles
HV Cables - Buried or underground cables - HSG47 advice should be followed, records, planning, location, ground marking.
Construction - Has equipment been removed via HVSCC. Prior to physical disconnection (part A HVSCC issued)
Construction - Has a control boundary been correctly established are Isolation Request forms being used to enabling third parties to manage hazards presented by identified Equipment
Construction - Has the SAP ensured equipment removed from system has a physical separation greater than Safety Distance?
Does the quantity of P3 findings result in a repeat audit required and, therefore, a P2 as per AMBP 073 5.8
If the SAP was authorised less than 12 months ago, does he have a 12 month development plan established and agreed with his TL?
For work on downleads or downdroppers, has a separate PFW been issued?
If a Double DrESS is controlled by a Card Safe, is the Double DrESS PFW and Earthing Schedule locked in a Card Safe and a key issued with each subsequent PFW which is endorsed in Section 2 - Further Precautions "Double DrESS Earthing Scheme is applied to tower .... under Permit For Work ...." and section 4 endorsed with card safe details.
Check the location is correct as per Technical data sheet and the correct voltage.
Check towers are listed correctly and circuit I/D is listed (Equipment I/D should match that on the equipment itself)
Is the G3 for working on microwave aerials being applied. Are the appropriate safety documents being used, and staff hold correct authorisations?
Towers with Cellular installations should have access controlled on the safety document by: either omitting the tower from Section 1, or limiting access in Section 2, or detailing the requirements in the further precautions section?
If working above ground is a minimum of a Competent Person and a Person in team?
Has Competent Person ensured that equipment identification is correct prior to access to structure?
Has SAP assessed the requirement for DAR been switched out for re-stringing activities including lowering/raising of conductors.?
If adjacent circuit trips is the Competent Person contacted prior to re-energisation?
Is DAR nominated Competent Person aware of his duties?
Additional work is completed correctly on equipment consented to by the TNCC, not same POI and primary earthing requirements RAMS completed. If the additional work is complex should a new safety document of been issued.
Has the SAP ensured that the nominated Competent Person responsible for requesting the DAR is aware of their responsibilities to inform all other Working Parties affected by the DAR outage or its restoration and any associated lightening risk notification?
Are equipotential zones managed correctly if required. Correctly set up with access egress being managed?
Has the SAP ensured that the nominated Competent Person responsible for requesting Lightning Risk status is aware of his responsibilities to inform all other working parties that are affected along the route?
If a circuit has been subjected to a fault, have all earthing devices been inspected visually for any detached earths or for signs of excessive arcing?

Section 4 - RAMS

Is Work at height effectively managed
Are all obvious hazards identified in RAMS, is the work area tidy and free of obvious hazards?
Are the risk assessment and method statement integrated to develop a safe system of work
In the opinion of the auditor at time of audit is a safe system of work in place for the work being undertaken
If applicable have contractors completed RA/MS and has the SAP developed RAMS for management of safety from the system, Client & Occupier Hazards consistent with contractors RA/MS
If the Safety Document covers both contractors and NG activities has the SAP ensured there is no confusion regarding the RAMS being for SFTS only for the contractor.
Has Sensible Monitoring been carried out as appropriate for the work being done and is this recorded on a Sensible Monitoring Checklist.
Risk Assessments and Method Statements (RAMS) provided for the work identifying safety from the system and general safety requirements.
Have tool box talks been carried out at the issue of the document and subsequently due to changes / additions to the working part or as a requirement in RAMS. Are there completed tool box talk / personal RA forms available for checking from the CP
For any additional work have RAMS been updated and content communicated to the working party
Has the CP had the RAMS content explained to him at the issue stage does he understand its content and agree with it
If section 1 of Safety Document includes equipment which the SAP is not authorised for, has he taken advice from a suitably authorised SAP and recorded this in his RAMS.
Have the hazards arising from all spans in the work been identified and controlled e.g. National Grid or DNO circuit crossings, motorways, railways, waterways COMA sites etc is the Competent Person aware or all the arrangements for these. This includes control of public access.
Transfer of Roles/Responsibilities - have transfers been minimised where possible; have transfers been carried out correctly ensuring the individual is aware of his responsibilities.
Are RAMS provided for the work identifying all obvious safety from the system and general safety hazards & controls? Is the work area tidy and free of obvious hazards?

Section 5 - Safety Documents

Are the HV safety precautions and Primary Earths identified on the safety document adequate for the work being undertaken
If a Safety Document Continuation Sheet has been used is it correctly referenced on the main safety document and is the safety document number referenced on the safety document continuation sheet
Safety Document(s) which are prepared, clearance or in transfer, stored in Card Safe or safe custody
Is a clearly marked "copy" of the issued document printed in white and completed with relevant issue details available in case the original document is lost. If no Safety Document Issued is a copy of the RAMS available.
Safety Document consent from paper/card copy not from computer screen
The Safety document(s) are legible and printed correctly
Safety Document - Are all relevant sections completed with N/A where necessary and no typos/incorrect references etc.
Check there are no crossing out in Section 1, other crossings out are completely obliterated and initialled by the SAP.
Are additional safety precautions such as Earthing Schedule, ROMP, SFW referenced in the "Further Precautons" of the Safety Document.
If the SD Has IGDD POI's and transfer(s) have taken place has this been recorded correctly including transfer of CP telephone details to CP(S) and recorded in Part 2 of the Status of Transfer Form.
Does equipment identification on safety document match that on the equipment
Working party register issued all relevant Sections completed correctly references to other documentation completed, Section 2 updated by document holder. If extra WPRs issued are all copies available with work pack.
Status of transfer form issued and completed correctly if applicable
Ensure if applicable that any precautions applied under a separate PFW such as D.DreSS are referenced in Section 2.
Are multiple safety documents being used, and is this appropriate for the work. Is Section 1 and Section 2 identical for all multiples with Further Precautions identifying MPA as document controlling Drain Earths.

Section 6 - Access & Demarcation

Demarcation access point provided & notices present clear and up to date.
Has SAP included Designated Vehicle Access Point(s) in a sketch to clearly identify the position to the CP.
Demarcation equipment & notices in good condition
Correct demarcation being used for the safety document type & activitity being carried out.
Danger notices placed in sufficient numbers and prominent on all adjacent equipment outsides work area
The work area demarcation is a reasonable size for the work being completed (i.e. as small as possible but as big as required for the work being undertaken)
The demarcated area is designed considering proximity of adjacent live circuits
Is the demarcation designed if possible to exclude structures supporting Live Equipment from the work area and access prohibition notices used where necessary
Any live HV or LV equipment or mechanical hazards within the work area correctly demarcated.
Are safety distances maintained for the work
Access through the HV compound or S/S to the work area is managed e.g. Full authorisation to NSI 8, Issue LAC or .Extend work area
Has the SAP completed a NSI6 risk assessment and included it within the RAMS for the work or was this done as a separate RA and integrated into the safe system of work
Is the actual demarcation set up as indicated in the NSI 6 drawing.
Check that a suitable and sufficient RA has been completed for use and movement of vehicles, MEWPs, cranes, objects etc.. as applicable and recorded in RAMS or separately and integrated into the safe system of work
Vehicle movement adequately controlled within work area with RA
Were the specific requirements of NSI 8 explained by the SAP to the CP at the setting to work stage, does the CP understand them and is he applying them correctly
Are there any obvious conflicts or between CDM and or NSI6 demarcation arrangements?
If more than one working party inside the demarcated work area, are suitable controls, communication and co-ordination in place.?
Wayleaves: Access to site provided and appropriate for the work being undertaken e.g. access for vehicles if required.
Property Plates in good condition, clear, not fading etc.
Tower number plate(s) correct and in good condition.
ACD's in good condition and adequate for the location.
"Danger of Death" plates fitted and in good condition.
Flag Brackets fitted and in correct numbers.
Colour Plates correct against Safety Document and in good condition.
Wristlets issued to everyone in the working party, correctly worn, correct against safety document.
Emergency rescue equipment / kits available at point of work (at tower base not in van) is the seal applied to the bag and in date.
Are members of the working party aware of the emergency rescue arrangements, is the exact grid reference / location available/known if the emergency services are required?
Are Red pennants applied as defined by the SAP Is a demarcated work area &/or drop zone set up and is it adequate for the site and work
Is any cellular equipment demarcated and made safe as per the G3?
If more than one working party inside the demarcated work area, as suitable controls, communication and co-ordination in place.

Section 7 - Switching

Line earth circuit colours are recorded, if applicable
Switching Log. Have recent switching instructions particularly those associated with the work being audited been recorded correctly in the switching log (e.g. AP name CP(O)(S) names clear instruction etc.)
Switching Instructions are legible, clear and indelible.
Are Switching Instruction Sheets completed and stored correctly with each completed operation ticked by AP as it was completed
Have separate key safes been used for Isolation and earthing
Has the AP checked and confirmed IGDD Gas alarms to Control Person prior to receiving switching instruction for isolation.
Has the AP recording Switching Instruction using Standard Terminology and Switching Abbreviations.
Has the A key or one key from the key safe been secured in the operational key cabinet.
Has the AP correctly completed the Key Safe Contents Cards & S/S SB T-Cards.

Section 8 - Authorisations

Has the SAP checked appropriate Personnel involved in the work are correctly authorised to do so.
Has SAP had annual NSI 30 review with his line manager
Are all EUSR NSI 30 Authorisations correct.
Has the SAP attended a SAP stand-down day within the last 12 months? f not has the SAP had the information presented and explained adequately?
Are the AP Authorisations correct for audited switching activities?

SRAT SAP Audit checklist Overhead Lines 1

Go digital today!

Convert your paper checklists into digital forms

SAP Details

AP Details

CP Details

Work Audited

Category 1 - POIs

Category 2 - Earthing

Category 3 - Control

Section 4 - RAMS

Section 5 - Safety Documents

Section 6 - Access & Demarcation

Section 7 - Switching

Section 8 - Authorisations

Related checklists

SRAT SAP Audit checklist Overhead Lines 1

Free SRAT SAP Audit checklist Overhead Lines 1 Checklist

Go digital today!

Convert your paper checklists into digital forms

SAP Details

AP Details

CP Details

Work Audited

Category 1 - POIs

Category 2 - Earthing

Category 3 - Control

Section 4 - RAMS

Section 5 - Safety Documents

Section 6 - Access & Demarcation

Section 7 - Switching

Section 8 - Authorisations

Related checklists