Contractor Safety Forum Workshop May 15, 2018 Lion’s Hall Chalk River UNRESTRICTED / ILLIMITÉE UNRESTRICTED / ILLIMITÉ

Reminder of findings from Stantec Direct Causes • Using equipment improperly - Operating the mini-excavator outside the safe operation limits listed in the manufacturer’s operations manual, while having the boom and bucket in an elevated position, created an unstable and unsafe condition. • Procedure and practice not followed/Improper position for task - Entering into the workzone of mobile equipment without following the controls established by the team, and noted in Stantec’s Safe Work Practice 216 – Working Near Mobile Equipment. Root Causes • Planning the work – The worksite was not initially prepared or kept in a state to keep the slope within the safe operating limits of the mini-excavator. There was no evidence of a formal worksite arrangement or layout. This could include exclusion zones, break/rest areas, and retreat areas. This meant that some personal belongings and job materials were left in the path of travel when the mini-excavator operator began backfilling. • Situational awareness – Machine stability was not recognized as a hazard by the mini-excavator operator, or by anyone on site. Personnel did not recognize the potential of the machine to tip given the site conditions. • Communication – The communication plan, which included approaching from the left side and making eye-contact with the operator, was not followed when entering the workzone. You should leave this slide up on the screen so that the group can refer to it. UNRESTRICTED / ILLIMITÉE

Some Questions About Incident: I wasn’t sure who was coming to this meeting and didn’t want to insult any company that knows what a HIRAC plan is about. You might want to remind folks: Hazard Identification (HI) – list the hazards Risk Assessment (RA) – how often, how serious etc. Control (C) – apply controls Question #1 - Although the print out we received doesn’t mention the role of a HIRAC, I wanted to make sure that folks understand an HIRAC is the start. Questions #2 & #3 – I wanted to get the folks to reflect/share who is involved in the HIRAC (is it just OSH folks, engineers). It should include the people that are doing the work and a number of SME’s. Also that there needs to be someone that is accountable to review and sign off. Question #4 – A HIRAC is only as good as it is practically used to create work plans. Probe the group in how they take HIRAC info. and create work plans. Question #5 – reflect on the Statec incident and ask if their work plans get practical with work lay outs that give direction and expectations on how the worksite should look and be maintained What is the role of a Hazard Identification, Risk Assessment and Control (HIRAC) this incident or similar incidents? Who creates/contributes to your HIRAC plans? Who reviews your HIRAC plans? In your business, how do you use information from a HIRAC plan, to plan your work? In your work plans, do you include work site lay outs that include: exclusion zones, break/rest areas, and retreat areas UNRESTRICTED / ILLIMITÉE

Translating Written Plans to Field Practice This questions is added to probe in the area of how you get practical in the field. Perhaps you can bring out some principles of compliance based vs. risk based field practice. If you get no responses you can suggest things like: Plan of the week Plan of the day Supervisor training that includes their own competence to be able to manage employees performing the work Hazard recognition training/”over training” employees to recognize hazards Focus on competence of employees not just training Continual and planned field checks of high risk work: Confined space Working at Heights Heavy Equipment Digging, trenching, coring and cutting Equipment stability in excavation Hot work Can you share your best practices to make sure that the HIRAC and work plans are followed in the field: UNRESTRICTED / ILLIMITÉE