Individual / Organisation name: Victorian Automobile Chamber of Commerce (VACC) and Tasmanian Automobile Chamber of Commerce (TACC)

What state/territory are you from? Victoria and Tasmania

Public Discussion Paper:
Review of Design and Engineering Controls for Improving Quad Bike Safety

Public Comment Response Form

Complete and submit this form by 5:00pm AEST 28 SEPTEMBER 2012 to

IntroDUCTIOn

The Victorian Automobile Chamber of Commerce (VACC) is an employer organisation representing the interests of more than 5500 members in Victoria and Tasmania in the retail motor industry. The various divisions in the retail motor industry are mechanical repair, body repair (including spray painting), automotive dealers, used car traders, auto electrical, engine re-conditioners, tyre dealers, radiator services, farm machinery, motorcycle dealers, service station and convenience stores and towing operators.

VACC provides comprehensive advice and assistance to help members run their businesses more effectively. VACC, on behalf of its members, tenders this submission in response to the Discussion Paper on the Review of Design and Engineering Controls for Improving Quad Bike Safety that is due Friday 28 September 2012.

The views expressed in this submission have been developed through a number of avenues:

·  VACC’s OHS and Industrial Relations Department which have extensive experience in the practical application of OHS legislation, and its interaction with industrial instruments and other legislative provisions regulating the employment relationship in the retail motor industry;

·  Views of members expressed through day-to-day contact who use VACC’s advice, training and consultation services;

·  VACC as a member of Australian Chamber of Commerce and Industry (ACCI) has consulted through the ACCI Occupational Health and Safety Working Party; and

·  Discussions with other key stakeholders.

Response to questions identified in the Discussion Paper
1.  What design solutions and/or engineering controls could improve quad bike stability and safety?
Comment
From the outset, VACC have concerns with the discussion paper and questions placing an outright focus on engineering controls and not considering the full extent of the hierarchy of controls. The discussion paper and questions need to consider all of the heirachy of controls for duty holders under law. Any health and safety issue or legislation addressed through public comment in the past has considered the full extent and combination of the hierarchy of controls, as it is the standard risk management approach. VACC believe that the focus on improving quad bike safety should have a wider approach. With regards to quad bikes, an elimination or substitution control applies when selecting or changing over vehicles, for example, change a quad bike for a side by side vehicle which has a manufacturer certified Roll Over Protective Structures (ROPS) and seatbelts. As for administrative controls, quad bike training is highly recommended and there should be legislation to restrict children from using adult sized quad bikes. In regards to Personal Protective Equipment (PPE), helmets and protective clothing must be worn.
The design solutions and/or engineering controls, listed in the discussion paper, could improve quad bike stability, however, it will not prevent a fatality or serious injury. To date, there has been no evidence based research on quad bikes that proves that engineering controls fitted to quad bikes will deliver a substantial safety benefit. However, there is scientific research supporting that the installation of certain engineering controls to quadbikes increases injuries in the event of a rollover. VACC refers to the research undertaken by Dr John Zellner of Dynamic Research Institute, Torrence, California, USA.
Another issue with implementing design and/or engineering controls is that such measures will compromise the utility of the vehicle and dramatically increase the cost, resulting in the vehicle being no longer suited to the tasks for which it was designed.
2.  What engineering controls could improve operator protection in the event of a roll over?
Comment
There is no tested and certified engineering control that could improve operator protection in the event of a roll over. Roll Over Protective Structures (ROPS) combined with the operator wearing a seat belt have been proven to be effective for vehicles such as side by side vehicles, tractors and forklifts which are a larger unit, have a body that provides for structural intergrity and have a conventional seat. Based on quad bike designer/manufacturer feedback and research (as noted in the response to question 1), a quad bike cannot be fitted with ‘certified’ ROPS due to the flex and minimal body structure of the quad bike. Furthermore, the rider dynamics of a quad bike don’t allow a seat belt to be fitted as the rider needs to move back, forward and stand from the saddle seat. Also, seat belts don’t have proper function on saddle seats with no back rest and no certified mounting points.
VACC has reviewed the current retro fitted ROPS on the market and have major concerns with these devices. The current ROPS which are being sold for retro fitting onto new/used quad bikes have not been certified or tested to an appropriate standard. Furthermore, ROPS are only as good as a seat belt in protecting the operator. VACC has advised our members not to fit rollover frame devices that are unauthorised by the manufacturer of the quadbike. VACC have also reminded members that they have significant obligations under the Victorian OHS legislation, particularly with plant supplier and plant installer obligations. If a retailer installs a rollover frame to a quad bike, it is also likely that any product liability insurance policy they carry would not cover a claim.
VACC would also like to draw the attention of the Government and Safe Work Australia to the current Victorian OHS Plant Regulations and model Work Health and Safety Regulations, which enforce tractors to have ROPS and seat belts, but, the regulations do not apply to tractors under 560 kg from having ROPS, yet, quad bikes weigh less than 560 kg.
Another contradiction we have identified is that the WorkSafe Authorities are very quick to enforce that tractor ROPS and seat belts must be certified, tested and stamped to a particular Australian Standard. The WorkSafe Authorities cannot allow uncertified and untested ROPS to be fitted to a quad bikes non-load bearing points, or points that are not certified to take forces of a rollover, for example, QB Industries Quadbar is attached to the tow hitch and the Trax Equipment LifeGuard is fitted to an accessory mounting frame (cargo rack).
3.  What engineering options could minimise the capacity of children to start and/or operate quad bikes?
Comment
Based off the discussion papers engineering control ideas, it is possible to intergrate a start-up system engineering control to make it harder for children to start/operate a quad bike, however, such engineering controls will not minimise the risk. In rural culture where quad bikes are operated, the parents are well aware that their children operate quad bikes, tractors, vehicles and other dangerous farm machinery. Even if engineering controls were implemented, parents might allow the children to still operate a quad bike.
Quad bike manufacturers and suppliers (who are VACC members) of quad bikes, provide warnings in writing and verbally to the purchaser regarding child operators, especially for adult sized quad bikes. Based on reported injuries and fatalities that have occurred with children, a good number of the parents have been aware of their childrens activities, but there are no legal ramifications for a parent as losing a child or dealing with the serious injury is traumatic enough. In a workplace setting, OHS Regulators would prosecute an employer if an employee is injured or killed, in turn a precedence is usually set for other employers, and the authority follow up with a prevention campaign in most circumstances. It is understandable that laws are hard to enforce in a persons backyard, but VACC strongly recommends that government should legislate, promote a campaign and ensure enforcement is implemented to stop children from operating any type of adult vehicles, not just quad bikes. Laws should ensure the minimum operator age is 16 years for all adult sized quad bikes. Similar laws were implemented in New Zealand in the last 12 months. The New Zealand quad bike injuries and fatalities have decreased since the introduction of this legislation. If the laws are not implemented and enforced by an authority, regardless of what engineering controls are implemented, there will still be serious injuries and fatalities.
Another aspect that is often forgotten in public and workplaces, is that existing laws are present which focus on keys remaining in plant (OHS law) and vehicles (road safety law). Although these don’t have affect on private property which is not in a workplace, such laws should be extended as there are situations where these private property vehicles could venture into a nearby workplace or onto a public road, affecting workers or the public. VACC urges the government to enforce and extend these laws to take affect on private property/operators.
4.  What engineering controls could minimise the capacity of a quad bike to carry passengers.
Comment
Most quad bikes are not designed or manufactured to carry two people. Long saddle seats are designed on quad bikes and two wheel motocycles for the operator to shift weight backwards and fowards dependent on the slope of the terrain. If the seats were shortened it would limit the operator dynamics of the quad bike. The rider needs to move back and foward to distribute their weight and maintain stability.
Quad bike manufacturers place warnings in quad bike sales brochures and operator manuals regarding the carrying of passengers. VACC advise that a higher level of control such as a substitution control should be considered before an engineering control. If purchasers want to carry a passenger, it is recommended that a side by side vehicle or four-wheel drive vehicle should be chosen, as it is better suited to the need.

Please note legal requirements, such as those imposed by the Freedom of Information Act 1982, may affect the confidentiality of your submission.

Page 3 of 3