First, describe the work and worksite
A trained equipment crew will break and remove a released outdoor nonstructural slab on grade in a closed building yard. An excavator-mounted breaker fractures the marked slab; after the equipment is made safe under its instructions, a compatible bucket handles debris. The operation does not include digging below the released slab limit. This fictional learning example describes planned controls; it records no actual inspection or work authorization.
- The written demolition survey and utility/material review establish slab function, exact removal limits, connected elements and any required isolation before machine disturbance.
- The actual excavator, approved attachments, ground support, movement routes and exclusion boundary are selected for the yard and surrounding structures.
- This is partial coverage of concrete demolition and removal. Suspended slabs, live utilities, excavation, crushing plants, whole-structure demolition and handheld breaker work are excluded.
Questions before work
- What evidence establishes that this slab can be removed without affecting foundations, adjacent supports or embedded services?
- How will workers remain clear of the equipment, fragment throw and debris-handling route during each operating phase?
- Which silica-control method applies to the actual excavator task and any employees outside its cab?
Build the analysis one step at a time
What will the worker do? How could someone be harmed? What prevents or reduces that exposure? Who checks the control, and when?
1. Confirm the slab removal release
Hazard: An assumed nonstructural slab or concealed service can become a collapse or utility-strike event.
Control: Demolition lead obtains the written engineering survey and current utility/material review for the marked slab. Resolve connections to foundations and adjacent structures, define the depth/removal boundary and establish required isolation before mobilizing the breaker.
Verification: Lead checks the marked limit against survey and utility-release records.
Why this belongs in the analysis: The machine’s ability to break concrete does not prove the concrete is safe to remove.
2. Prepare machine access and separation
Hazard: An unstable operating surface or pedestrian entry can cause overturning or crushing.
Control: Equipment lead selects the actual machine and approved breaker/bucket arrangement and checks support and travel conditions. Mark the operating, fragment and debris-transfer boundaries; establish a protected spotter position and a positive stop/contact method. Separate haul traffic and other trades.
Verification: Operator and lead check the work route, boundaries and spotter communication.
Why this belongs in the analysis: Separation must cover the whole machine and fragment envelope, not only the tracks.
3. Verify attachment and exposure controls
Hazard: A damaged attachment can fail; an unsuitable cab or dust method can expose the crew to silica.
Control: Operator completes the manufacturer’s pre-use and attachment checks and rejects defects. Silica competent person verifies the Table1 heavy-equipment fracture/demolition method or the employer’s alternative assessment route; confirm cab requirements and any outside-worker dust suppression. Provide noise protection and planned slurry handling.
Verification: Operator records defects; silica competent person checks the actual cab and exposure-control setup.
Why this belongs in the analysis: Excavator breaking has different Table1 conditions from handheld jackhammer work.
4. Break the marked slab in controlled sections
Hazard: Unplanned fragmentation can throw debris, undermine support or expose an unknown connected element.
Control: Operator follows the released breaker method and removal progression, keeping people outside the operating boundary. The competent person reviews changing ground, loosened material and adjacent supports as work advances. Stop for unexpected reinforcement, voids, services or slab movement rather than probing farther with the breaker.
Verification: Demolition lead records changing conditions and confirms the next section remains within the release.
Why this belongs in the analysis: A changed condition requires a new decision before the next machine impact.
5. Change attachment and remove debris
Hazard: Stored hydraulic energy, falling attachments or unstable debris can crush workers during the phase change.
Control: Use the actual manufacturer’s parking, isolation and attachment-change method with the attachment supported and workers protected. Verify the compatible bucket’s secure connection before use. Load debris within the machine and container limits on the controlled haul route; keep workers clear of suspended or shifting pieces.
Verification: Authorized operator verifies the attachment connection and lead checks debris-transfer separation.
Why this belongs in the analysis: Changing from breaking to lifting changes both equipment state and the line of fire.
6. Leave a protected removal area
Hazard: Exposed edges, loose fragments or dusty cleanup can injure the next crew.
Control: Remove or stabilize remaining loose material using the planned method and inspect the yard’s actual condition. Protect the opened boundary and retain any isolation or access restriction. Collect dust/slurry and hand over the removal limits and findings; further excavation requires a separate release.
Verification: Competent person records final findings and lead confirms waste and access handover.
Why this belongs in the analysis: A cleared slab area is not automatically an approved excavation or traffic route.
What does a useful control look like?
| Needs improvement | More useful for this scenario |
|---|---|
| Break it out carefully and keep people back. | Demolition lead releases the exact removal limit and a marked machine/fragment boundary; operator stops when actual conditions differ from the survey. |
| Use water like a handheld breaker. | Silica competent person selects and verifies the actual heavy-equipment Table1 method or alternative exposure route, including cab and outside-worker conditions. |
Decisions that change the analysis
Does the existing concrete saw-cutting example cover breaking and removal?
No. It expressly ends with protected cuts and excludes slab breaking, lifting and excavation. This operation creates fragments with powered mobile equipment and then changes equipment state to handle debris; it needs a demolition release and machine separation controls.
What must the crew record for actual use?
Record the written survey and utility/material findings, marked slab and depth limits, machine/attachment identities, support and route checks, exposure-control basis, communication and exclusion arrangements, changing-condition findings, actual attachment-change verification and final access restrictions.
Agree when the crew will pause
- The slab reveals uncharted services, connected structural elements, reinforcement or a void beyond the survey assumptions.
- Ground, adjacent supports or debris conditions change, or someone enters the equipment/fragment boundary.
- An attachment defect, communication failure or loss of the selected silica controls prevents the released method.
After a pause, correct the condition, reassess the work, and obtain required authorization before restarting. Keep unresolved actions visible.
Download the worked example and free template
No account required. The worked example contains planned controls. The blank template is for your own work; neither includes fabricated inspection results, signatures or approval.
Your editable working copy
Build and download your draft
Start blank or load the learning example. Replace its assumptions with your actual conditions and involve the people doing the work. Your entries stay in this browser tab; download a copy before leaving or refreshing.
1. Describe your work and site
2. Work through each task
Describe an observable step, how someone could be harmed, and the control that acts on that hazard. Identify who checks it and what evidence is needed.
3. Record changes, checks, and open actions
Walk the work area, review with the crew, and resolve missing controls. Follow the required approval process. This tool does not judge completeness, verify signatures or authorize work.
Open the downloaded file in a browser, then use Print → Save as PDF for a printable copy.
Training needs to confirm
- Equipment and attachment-specific operator instruction, including permitted use, safe attachment changes, isolation and spotter communication for the actual machine.
- Supervisor and crew instruction in demolition-release boundaries, continuing hazard review, equipment/pedestrian separation and the applicable silica-control plan.
Confirm applicable qualifications, task instruction and actual training evidence for the people assigned. Related toolbox talks support toolbox talks; they do not establish competence.
Common questions
Can this example be used as a JSA?
Adapt its Task | Hazard | Control analysis to the employer’s JSA format and the actual work. Confirm the assigned checks and record real findings before relying on the plan.
What changes if the project requires an AHA?
Use the project’s governing AHA format, risk method, supporting records and acceptance process. The published formwork AHA illustrates that additional structure; this JHA does not establish an AHA risk rating or acceptance.
Are these resources part of a paid course?
This walkthrough, browser draft builder and downloads are free public resources, separate from Academy course enrollment.
References and source note
- OSHA 1926.850 Demolition preparatory operations
- OSHA 1926.859 Mechanical demolition and continuing inspections
- OSHA 1926.1153 Table1 Heavy-equipment fracture and demolition
Original instructional scenario with planned controls. Primary references support hazard planning. Use actual equipment and product instructions, project design and employer requirements to establish field criteria. This example supplies no inspection findings or work authorization. Use actual equipment instructions and site requirements alongside these references. Reference review: October 9, 2026.