'Authority to work'

[Archie]

Has anybody got any 'authority to work' questions for me to have a go at, and get my brain tuned back in as I have got to do one next week.

Many thanks

[PJW]

Has anybody got any 'authority to work' questions for me to have a go at, and get my brain tuned back in as I have got to do one next week.

Many thanks

I am afraid that I am not really sure what you are asking.
Presumably you are to be reassessed for an ATW to undertake installation activities on certain items of equipment...?
Not sure what questions would be asked but I guess they might concentrate on:
1. Establishiing a safe system of Work
2. Relevant Installation standards and techniques- procedures such as test crimps etc
3. Use of diagrams, correct version control, marking up progress
4. What to do if things go wrong, such as a wire is dislodged within a working installation

[nicklawford]

Has anybody got any 'authority to work' questions

I am afraid that I am not really sure what you are asking.
Presumably you are to be reassessed for an ATW to undertake installation activities on certain items of equipment...?

When I saw the header I thought something different.

In LU CMO i.e. ''maintenance'' we use something call an AWC (Authority to Work Certificate). There are 2 types Safety and Non Safety but philosophy and use are the same; in simplified terms essentially an AWC is issued by one IRSE licence holder to another holding the same licence, it gives a final check on who is actually undertaking the work, precisely defines the work, by default limits work to that definition, but then requires reporting not only that the defined work is complete but any other necessary activity to complete the main job is recorded. There is a complex audit trail. I can't competently state where Safety AWC are required as I do not work in that area, but Non Safety AWC are required for maintenance activities that involve making or breaking network connections to signals control systems, starting up or shutting down passenger information servers, or making a configuration changes; and cover faults, failure investigation and planned maintenance. We would not go down to the level of which wire to disconnect or reconnect, but it would be at component level if the component is known, or at least sub-system level. For example, the reason I was not at last weeks IRSE London paper was working on an extensive passenger information system fault. The AWC defined the processor we needed to shut down and work on. At this point we were working on one side of a dual redundant sub-system. The repair turned out to be exchange PSU - suspected but not known beforehand. Even if a PSU fault were known in advance, while ''PSU on processor X'' might be defined, wires to X or its PSU would not. Bacl to our job, on repair completion and start up, it was found necessary to re-boot both sides of a different sub-system of the same overall system. It is within limits of authority to do that latter step, and record it along with PSU details on the AWC before closing it. Now some of you signals engineers are wondering why all this is necessary for passenger information systems. On this particular line we run 30 TPH in peaks with 8car trains with an official crush load capacity of 1202 passengers, and we've got 79 of those trains out in the peaks across 49 stations. Accurate PIS is essential to keep passengers moving else you very very quickly build up to over crowded stations and so on. The ''stand back train approaching'' message is a safety message, and so on. A Non Safety AWC may not be dealing with interlockings and other devices that prevent trains from coming together, but it does cover items like that, accurate information to maybe 50,000 or more people on the move.

Not sure now how much of that is of any help ?

--
Nick