Members Day 2017

By on February 7, 2018

CMPA Secretariat reports on the successful day recently held in the East of Melbourne for CMPA members.

Guarding Workshop

The Guarding Workshop was held on Thursday 16 November 2017 at the Stamford Hotel Rowville commencing at 9:00 am and was attended by approximately 40 people. Many thanks to our sponsor Kinder Australia.

The workshop was held to update the CMPA’s current Guarding Guideline 2014 and to include guarding of mobile crushers, screens and conveyors. The aim of the Workshop being to enable employees/employers to gain an understanding of how to improve guarding on their site and ensuring they are compliant with safety regulations:

  • To gain an understanding of what could be best practice guarding in the construction materials industry.
  • To gain an understanding of how to apply the CMPA Guarding Guideline in their workplaces.
  • To review the existing CMPA Guarding Guideline and to integrate guarding requirements for mobile crushing and screening equipment into this guideline
  • Aims to support members in meeting the requirements of the Victorian OHS Act 2004 and OHS Regulations 2017.
  • Demonstrates a process that can be used to establish and successfully implement plant and equipment Guarding specific to your site requirements.

The following presentations were made.

Insight into Guarding AS 4024.3610 and AS 4024.3611 – 2015 Maintenance and Ergonomics, Presented by Peter Laskey – Field Applications Specialist, Kinder Australia (the sponsor for the Guarding Workshop). The presentation covered:

  • What is a guard?
  • Correct Meshing
  • Guarding Ergonomics
  • Guarding Maintenance

Guarding Plant and Equipment in the Construction Material Industry Guideline, presented by David McKelvie of Safemix

Occupational, Health and Safety Regulation 2017 (Summary)

  • If access to the area of the plant is not necessary during operation, maintenance or cleaning of the plant, the guarding is a permanently fixed physical barrier;
  • If access to the area of the plant is necessary during operation, maintenance or cleaning of the plant, the guarding is an interlocked physical barrier;
  • If it is not reasonably practicable to use guarding as referred to above the guarding used is a physical barrier that can only be altered or removed by the use of tools; or
  • If it is not reasonably practicable to use guarding referred to above in paragraph a presence-sensing safeguarding system is used that eliminates any risk arising from the area of the plant requiring guarding while a person or any part of a person is in the area being guarded.

The employer or self-employed person shall ensure that the guarding:

Makes bypassing or disabling the guarding, whether deliberately or by accident, as difficult as is reasonably possible; and

Does not create a risk in itself.

The employer or self‑employed person must ensure that if the plant contains moving parts that may break or cause workpieces to be ejected from the plant the guarding will:

So far as is reasonably practicable, eliminate the risk; or

If it is not reasonably practicable to eliminate the risk, reduce the risk so far as is reasonably practicable.

Conveyor GuardingConveyor Guarding2

SITE PHOTOS: Conveyor Guarding

Typical Shortcomings with Guarding

  • Does not extend far enough from head/tail pulleys, e.g. can still reach nip point;
  • Small gaps are left around guards allowing potential entanglement;
  • Snubber, return rollers and belt scraper pinch points, not always suitably guarded;
  • Trough and return rollers not guarded due to height being above reach limits but can still dislodge and fall from brackets, therefore require guarding as fall protection;
  • Mesh aperture size not sufficient for distance to hazard;
  • Can restrict maintenance and lubrication;
  • Not properly secured;
  • Allows build up within it the guard causing blockage and potential belt damage;
  • Positioned, mounted and attached in a manner that exposes the person removing and storing the guard to undue risk, e.g. manual handling risk.

Further information was given on guard design, general principles; types of guarding; removing, refitting and securing of guards, conveyor lanyards; guard signage; establishing a guarding program; sustaining a guarding program.

Contents for next Guarding Guideline

Guarding Definition and Overview

  • Definition of Guarding
  • Overview of Guarding
  • Typical Shortcomings with Guarding

Types of Guarding

  • Fixed Guards
  • Fixed Enclosure Guards
  • Fixed Distance Guards
  • Fence Guards (Perimeter Guards)

Establishing a Guarding Program

  • On site Consultative Team
  • Off-site Consultation
  • Equipment Requiring Guarding
  • Guard Design General Principles
  • Guard Specifications

Removing, Re-Fitting and Securing of Guards

Conveyor Lanyards

Guard Colours

Guard Signage

Ongoing Guarding Review

Guarding – Do Nots


  1. Plant and Equipment Identification Checklist for Guarding
  2. Plant and Equipment Component Checklist for Guarding
  3. Guarding Integrity Review Checklist

Quarry Hazard – Guarding: Presentation by WorkSafe, Tony Ferrazza

The purpose of WorkSafe’s presentation was to:

  • Explain Worksafe’s expectations of adequate plant guarding compliance in a quarry.
  • Present compliance requirements regarding quarry plant guarding issues.
  • Discuss activities with the potential to exposure workers to moving parts.
  • Present information on trends in improving the effectiveness of this control.

Safety Guarding, Lincom Group presented by Albert Toal on guarding of Lincom Group’s mobile plant (see detailed article on page 30-31).

Ant Bateup, General Manager of Mansfield Crushing provided a presentation on the development of the business as well as the mobile plant set up currently at Hanson, Lysterfield.

At the conclusion of the workshop attendees jumped on a bus to visit the site for themselves.



General Meeting

The General Meeting commenced at 5:00 pm and was attended by approximately 40 people. Many thanks to our sponsor To Think Engineering. It was advertised as an important meeting on 3 critical issues that will affect Members’ ability to continue to operate profitability into the future. An invitation was extended to Members and interested parties to attend.

Presentation were made on:

Review of VCAT Decisions for the Extractive Industry by Martin Oakley of Niskin Enterprises was made.

This is the final presentation for Part 1 of the above review. The CMPA is concerned that there have been a number of adverse decisions in relation to quarries in the Victorian Civil and Administrative Tribunal (VCAT). These include VCAT decisions which on initial reading, may generally be deemed to be in the quarry’s favour. However, on closer scrutiny, numerous are accompanied by conditions that render the project commercially unviable. It is evident from the review that in the last four years only 25% of quarries have proceeded through to operation/expansion.

The CMPA advocates the criticality of a proactive, ‘whole of government’ approach to ensuring an orderly, cost effective supply of construction materials into market. The CMPA believes this approach to be one of several fundamental precursors to future economic growth in Victoria.

Part 1 of the Project has now been completed. The report (along with the accompanying media release) for this project is available on or Sand & Stone issue 95.

Earth Resources Regulation (ERR) DEDJTR – Continuous Improvement Program (CIP) by Anna Cronin, Commissioner for Better Regulation. Minister Pallas originally commissioned Anna to undertake the CIP project at Minister Noonan’s request, so he is already familiar with the aims of the project. The final report is currently with Minister Pallas and is due to be released at the end of December 2017. Anna presented on the general nature of the recommendations from the review.

ERR-CIP Implementation by Peter Betson, Deputy Secretary Resources DEDJTR. Peter outlined the implementation program for the CIP.

Further information on this presentation can be found in this issue of Sand & Stone.

What have we learned from testing Vibrating Screens? By Darren Toth, To Think Engineering the sponsor for the General Meeting. Darren covered issues currently found in the industry with screens:

  • Most Vibrating Screens, in service, have poor motion
  • Screens are not clearly understood
  • Screens are not being commissioned adequately
  • Screens are not being checked periodically
  • Most sites aren’t aware of what throw and speed their screens run at

Darren proposed:

  • Make sure new screens are checked and commissioned thoroughly
  • Check screen motion and speed on a regular basis (recommended 6 monthly)
  • Measure spring heights and shim to make left and right sides equal
  • Ensure that engine revs are displayed on all mobile screeners
  • Don’t tolerate badly behaving screens

WorkSafe Compliance Program was presented by Kevin Hayes, Manager – Earth Resource Program

Hazardous Industries & Industry Practice, WorkSafe. Kevin outlined the WorkSafe’s Annual Tenement Risk Profiling Process Flow for determining site visits. A summary of which can be seen below:

WorkSafe Annual Tenement Risk Profiling Process Flow



Many thanks to all the speakers who generated much interest in their presentations from the audience.

About Gavin Moreira

Sponsored Ads