Get the Earthmover & Civil Contractor Magazine free!

 
You are here: Home → News → 2010 → Newswire Archives → July → July 1st → Road barrier standard change set to multiply industry costs

Road barrier standard change set to multiply industry costs

Recently proposed changes to the standards governing construction of polyethylene road barriers, could make about 100,000 existing barriers worth about $40m, redundant.

  

Over the past several months AS3845, the relevant standard, has been under review by an Australian Standards committee, headed by Dr Rod Troutbeck. If its review is implemented, current Level 0 barriers would be eliminated from the standard. Since most have been tested to only this level, stocks held by various organisations working on roads, would be made useless for their current purpose.
The Association of Rotational Moulders Australasia (ARMA) represents polyethylene barrier makers in Australia, New Zealand and South East Asia. Its chief executive Leisa Donlan says, “Our industry believes due consideration was not given to the financial implications of such a change. It does not appear that there has been industry contact with the standards committee, nor has the industry been given the opportunity to perform a risk assessment on employee safety and the financial implications of this proposed change.”


Poly barrier revolution
TL0 polyethylene barriers introduced in the late 1990s, revolutionised the way road maintenance was performed and they have significant advantages in appropriate situations. Also, they are easier to move and are more visible than TL1 concrete or steel barriers. Since most barriers have a 10 year life cycle, many made under the imprimatur of the 1999 standard, are nowhere near the end of their life, Donlan said.
TL0s are habitually used by authorities in areas where traffic flow is reduced to 40km/h, not in areas which would require a higher level of barrier, such as TL3 for traffic travelling at 100km/h. Since there has been no loss of life or injury related to TL0 barriers, there are clearly no safety issues which need to be addressed. “So ARMA does not acknowledge any valid reason for eliminating them as an acceptable option. ARMA agrees the industry must continue to strive to protect people’s safety but we do not concede TL0 barriers put them at risk when used properly,” Donlan said.
 


Weekly Top Stories

Document Actions