Australasian Mine Safety is the leading voice for all key decision makers within Mining company's and major contractors. Delivering the latest industry news as it breaks.
Issue link: http://ebook.aprs.com.au/i/29218
LSM TECHNOLOGIES Eliminating Your Blind Spots LSM Technologies is involved in assisting industry to mitigate fatalities, injuries and high potential incidents associated with vehicle- to-vehicle, vehicle-to-person and vehicle-to-infrastructure interactions. This is done utilising the Orlaco range of CCTV viewing solutions in accordance with the ISO 5006/16001 Standards for Operator Visibility, which became a “recommended” - and in some countries a mandatory standard - as of November 2008. The following article is written by LSM Technologies - Peter Woodford who endeavours to provide some “food for thought” when endeavouring to establish risk mitigation, evaluating / implementing available technologies and on-going management of systems utilised to mitigate V2P, V2V and V2I interactions in the mining industry. Compliance & Control Measures: ISO 5006/16001 The ISO 5006 Standard for Earthmoving Equipment: Operators Visibility has been in development for nearly 20 years. It became a full standard in 2006 and recommended (mandatory) in November 2008 after a two- year amnesty period. ISO 5006 (and 16001) is specified, endorsed and enforced internationally to mitigate Operator Visibility ( “blind spot”) incidents by many safety and health authorities and industries. “The purpose of this International Standard is to address an operator’s visibility in such a manner that the operator can see around the machine (360 degrees) to enable proper, effective and safe operation that can be quantified in objective engineering terms.” Like personal protective equipment, there is no legislation that requires the implementation of ISO 5006/16001. However, PPE is an accepted industry control measure which means that if an incident occurs in a workplace, then duty-of-care and regulative accountability ramifications will occur. ISO 5006/16001 for Operator Visibility is also an accepted and recommended industry control measure to eliminate fatalities, injuries and HPIs associated with V2V, V2P and V2I interactions. ISO 5006/16001 should be a company’s first line of defence to: • • mitigate 80%-90% of operator visibility incidents, and reduce the risk of litigation and legal ramifications of non-compliance to a recommended International Standard and accepted industry control measure. ISO 5006/16001 is already adopted in many specifications for equipment and vehicles in the mining and earthmoving, materials handling, construction, waste vehicles and transport industries. A few examples are: • • Mineral Resource Industry / DPI (NSW)- MDG15 specifications. British Standards- UK (BS ISO 5006). • S.A.E. J1091 (USA). • Safety in Mines Research Advisory Committee- COL 451 Specification- Report (South Africa). • NIOSH / MSHA / CDC (USA). Major Causes & Contributors Analysing historical incident data soon depicts that 80%- 90% of fatalities, injuries and HPIs involving V2V, V2P and V2I interactions are a result- or a contain a significant factor- of restricted operator visibility around vehicles and equipment. These “blind spots” occur predominantly: • • • at speeds of 0-10 kilometres/hour in situations of close proximity to another person, vehicle or structure restricted vehicle visibility- “blind spots”. First Step: Risk Assessment There can often be some trepidation as to where to start and what technology solutions to implement onsite to improve safety performance due to the differing requirements of underground and aboveground operations. 36 AUSTRALASIAN MINE SAFETY JOURNAL Your first step should be the completion of a detailed risk analysis and assessment to help target a solution that can meet ALARA and Zero Harm objectives. One of the most significant concerns “is mitigating one risk and potentially creating others” and this needs to be emphasised as a critical component of risk assessment process. Human factors such as concentration, complacency, learning skill, reaction times, etc also need to be considered. Consequently, a thoroughly risk assessment can not be understated. What technology should we implement? The selection process for choosing your safety technology is also not an easy task and requires thorough evaluation before implementation. There is a lot to consider in evaluating the technology to be implemented, such as operator distraction, interpretation of information, required operator intervention, human factors, cabin noise, false alarms, cabin clutter, and much more. What are the net effects on production, moving a safety control measure from one asset to another, site to site compatibility, technology to technology compatibility, differing systems across sites - this is especially discerning for contractors. Education, training of all stakeholders in the use of the technology is a significant key for successful implementation and on-going support for the safety control measures - aspire to entrain “ownership” of the control measures. And again ensuring that “mitigating one risk does not potentially creating others”. Considering technological and non- technological control measures the following provides a brief overview of the four defences that should be considered. Defence #1: Operator Visibility • Involves the use of visual aids such as mirrors and camera (CCTV) systems. • Can help to mitigate more than 90% of such incidents and is therefore considered primary defence technology. • They are often standalone systems, requiring little maintenance, little operator intervention and no separate infrastructure.