Question 1

Partway through an overside hull inspection under a valid permit, the duty officer asks the team to also quickly check a sea chest grating 10 metres further aft while they're already rigged, without raising a new permit.

Is this acceptable?

Accepted Answer

No - this is a scope change; the permit controller must be notified and the permit reassessed/reissued for the new location before work continues A permit to work is specific to location and task. Extending scope to a new area introduces different anchor points, exclusion zones, and hazards (e.g. different fendering, different suction zones) that were not assessed in the original permit.

Question 2

Cargo operations are ongoing and the second officer wants to simultaneously send a crew member aloft on the foremast to fix a navigation light, reasoning that the mast is "well clear" of the active hatch.

What should happen?

Accepted Answer

Treat this as a combined-hazard situation: work aloft near cargo operations should only proceed if absolutely essential, with barriers and warning notices for anyone moving below, and ideally be deferred until cargo work pauses "Well clear" is a judgement call that can be wrong - dropped tools, swinging gear, and moving personnel below the mast during active cargo work compound risk. COSWP treats this combination as something to avoid unless essential.

Question 3

A crew member is briefed to go aloft to carry out maintenance near an active radar scanner and the ship's whistle, both mounted on the same mast structure.

What must be confirmed before work starts?

Accepted Answer

Both the radar (electrical/radiation hazard) and the whistle must be isolated, with warning notices posted on the bridge and in machinery spaces, in addition to standard aloft precautions Mast-mounted hazards stack: an energised radar scanner and an unexpectedly sounded whistle are both independently hazardous to someone working at close range, and COSWP requires isolation and signage for each before work begins.