WorkCover NSW recently issued a Position Paper on Protective Structures For Earthmoving Equipment that clarifies the position in the OH&S Regulation 2001 on fitting of protective structures to earthmoving equipment (as defined under the Regulation). This paper was prepared after extensive consultation with industry, including CIMA and AAPA.
An important move forward is that it also applies to earthmoving equipment that is used for other purposes (something that is quite common with the versatility of attachments for a number of classes of equipment). Examples include excavators used in forestry, scrap metal, vegetation management and demolition, where there can be a significant risk of the machine turning over or being struck by falling objects.
All earthmoving equipment (other than the exclusions listed below) with a mass of 700 - 100,000 kg must be fitted with a structure that conforms to AS 2294 Earthmoving Machinery - Protective Structures, and protects the operator from the risks associated with a machine overturning or objects falling on them.
Excluded from these provisions are:
Rollers or compactors with a mass of 2,700 kg or less.
Power shovels
Draglines
Paving machines
Earthmoving equipment designed to be operated from a standing position e.g. profilers, stabilisers, materials transfer vehicles, stand-on loaders
Hydraulic excavators.
This exclusion only applies where:
the risks of the earthmoving equipment overturning or of objects falling on their operators have been assessed, and other means are used to control them. (A written risk assessment, including those controls, should form part of a documented safe work method statement.)
a risk assessment indicates that the operator of a hydraulic excavator (including a stand-on machine) is at risk from falling objects and/or objects that that approach from the front of the excavator, and it is fitted with a protective structure conforming with AS 4988:2002 Earth-moving machinery – Hydraulic excavators – Laboratory tests and performance requirements for operator protective guards.
a risk assessment indicates that compact excavators (1,000 - 6,000 kg mass) are at risk of tipping over, and they are fitted with a structure conforming to AS 4987:2002 Earth-moving equipment – Tip-over protection structures for compact excavators – Laboratory tests and performance requirements.
a risk assessment indicates that an excluded machine should be fitted with an operator protective structures other than one within the scope of AS 4987 and AS 4988, and the structure is designed by a suitably qualified engineer who has regard for the relevant performance requirements of AS 2294:1997. (This structure would not require deformation testing if the engineer was satisfied that calculations are sufficient to prove its performance.)
The issue of protective structures on excavators has been a vexing one for some time, and the change over time of the excavator from a digging tool that replaced cable excavators to a hydraulic power pack that spawned a range of attachments and took excavators into environments and applications that a traditional cable machine would not be seen in, has caused problems in wording regulations to cover their safe use.
The latest position paper from WorkCover NSW clarifies this by placing the onus on the owner to assess the risk of rollover or falling objects in classes of equipment where exclusions are given (such as excavators) and extending the definition of earthmoving equipment (including excavators) to include earthmoving equipment performing non-earthmoving functions, removing the anomaly where an excavator was excluded because its attachment performed a non-earthmoving task.
Owners will need to carefully assess the work that an excavator is likely to do: their sheer versatility makes it likely that many machines, during their working life, could come into a situation where a protective structure is called for. This leaves them with a choice of changing work practices to remove or manage the risk, using a different class of machine that already has a protective structure, or fitting a protective structure to an excavator.
These structures have not traditionally been an option offered by manufacturers, and excavators pose a difficult engineering challenge in finding suitable mounting points for a protective structure, but Brisbane firm QMW has been making such structures, with their own subframe, for a number of years, so they are available.
The clarifications in the NSW position paper will no doubt be considered closely when the Australian standard is revised. ISO is also believed to be working in developments that could see protective structures on excavators up to 50t.