Silica dust control plan in Australia: when it is needed and what to put in it

A silica dust control plan records the actual crystalline-silica task, the high-risk determination, the controls selected and how the business will check that those controls work. Under the Australian model WHS framework, additional requirements apply when a person conducting a business or undertaking (PCBU) processes a crystalline silica substance (CSS) and determines that the processing is high risk. Safe Work Australia provides an optional silica risk control plan template for that situation. The document must reflect the material, process and workplace; copying a generic plan does not control airborne dust.

This guide explains the decision and supplies a practical framework. It is not a substitute for the enacted law in your state or territory, a competent exposure assessment, a construction SWMS where required, or a respirable crystalline silica monitoring programme. Victoria has a distinct OHS framework. Check the relevant regulator before deciding which duty or document format applies.

First, distinguish the material and the task

Crystalline silica occurs in many construction and industrial materials. Cutting, grinding, drilling, crushing, polishing, sweeping or otherwise disturbing a material can create respirable dust. A CSS under the model provisions is a material with at least 1% crystalline silica by weight; the question is what processing takes place and whether that processing is high risk. Safe Work Australia's working-with-CSS guide explains the assessment and the associated records.

Do not confuse permitted work with the separate engineered-stone prohibition. The national ban overview covers manufacture, supply, processing and installation of engineered stone benchtops, panels and slabs, with jurisdiction-specific transitional and legacy-work rules. A control plan does not authorise an otherwise prohibited job. Identify the exact product, proposed work, place and local exemption/notification position before any legacy work is scheduled. The ban and the broader CSS rules have different scopes.

Decision sequence before drafting

1. Identify the material. Record supplier/product information and credible silica-content evidence. If the material is unknown, stop and obtain reliable information instead of assuming a low-silica product.
2. Describe the processing. Name the tool, power, duration, frequency, number of people, enclosure, ventilation and nearby trades. Dry cutting in a room is not equivalent to a controlled task outdoors.
3. Check the engineered-stone ban. If the job involves an engineered stone benchtop, panel or slab, determine whether it is prohibited or a specifically permitted legacy task under the applicable law.
4. Determine whether CSS processing is high risk. Use the relevant state or territory rules and a competent assessment. Safe Work Australia has an optional high-risk determination worksheet. Record the evidence and who made the decision. A low-risk determination does not mean “no controls”.
5. Prepare the plan if required. Use the official optional plan template, or a locally compliant equivalent, for high-risk processing. Check whether a sufficiently detailed SWMS can satisfy the silica-plan requirement for the relevant construction work under the local law; do not presume every SWMS does so.
6. Approve the controls before starting. The supervisor and competent exposure specialist should confirm that extraction, water delivery, isolation, maintenance and respiratory protection, where selected, can be implemented on this particular job.

Safe Work Australia's model Code on respirable crystalline silica is the main source for the model approach. Model texts are not automatically the identical enacted provisions in every jurisdiction.

Copyable silica plan framework

Use these fields as a preparation worksheet. They are prompts, not an exposure result or pre-approved control design.

Attach the relevant manufacturer instructions, design or extraction specification, equipment maintenance evidence, task-specific assessment and any competent monitoring report. Identify where supporting records are stored and who can retrieve them. The plan should be intelligible to the workers doing the task and to another trade exposed nearby.

Choose controls that address the source

Start with eliminating or substituting the dusty operation where reasonably practicable. Pre-cutting off site, changing a design or selecting a lower-risk material may remove the need to make the dust on site. If processing remains necessary, specify engineered capture or suppression appropriate to the tool and material. The model silica Code is a better control reference than a generic phrase such as “use dust extraction”. The plan should name the actual extraction unit, connection, filter and inspection arrangements, or the actual water-delivery method and its limitations. Have a competent person determine whether the configuration works for the exposure.

Then identify the work-area boundary, who may enter, how nearby work is protected and how waste is contained. Housekeeping must not re-aerosolise accumulated dust. Workers need instructions on safe set-up, use, fault response, cleaning and maintenance. Respiratory protective equipment may be necessary in addition to other controls; the choice, fit, training and upkeep need a competent, task-specific decision. A disposable mask listed in a template is not proof that exposure is controlled.

A sample control record: A contractor proposes to drill multiple penetrations through silica-containing concrete in an occupied building. The site team first checks whether the work can be avoided or prefabricated. For the remaining holes it specifies a suitable on-tool capture system, verifies the shroud and extraction unit before work, isolates the area and checks people on the other side of the wall. The plan identifies who checks dust capture during the shift, what happens if the hose disconnects, and who can release work after the fault is corrected. A different material, tool or room layout triggers review. This is an illustration of the record structure, not approval of a particular drill/extractor pairing or exposure conclusion.

Monitoring, training and review

Document how the business decided whether air monitoring is required to determine exposure or check controls, and whether health monitoring is required for workers under the applicable law. A competent occupational hygienist and occupational-health professional may be needed. Do not substitute a visual “no visible dust” observation for exposure evidence or set a universal monitoring interval in a template. Australian workplace exposure standards and terminology are also changing; Safe Work Australia's airborne-contaminant duties page is a publication-day source for the applicable transition, with local law still to check.

Train workers and supervisors on the specific material, process, controls, restricted area, RPE if used, symptoms and the stop-work process. Consult the affected workers when selecting controls. Record the instruction and verify that workers can set up the equipment correctly. If another contractor shares the space, coordinate their timing and boundaries; their exposure cannot be ignored because they are not operating the tool.

Review the determination and plan when the material, process, tool, ventilation, location or duration changes; when a control fails; after an incident or concerning monitoring result; or when the enacted rules change. Record the change, revised controls, who was briefed and the release decision. A yearly date alone does not cover a tool change tomorrow.

Stop-work and release card

How this page fits Complys

This page owns the Australian silica-plan decision and preparation task. The Complys AU WHS software page is the observed commercial owner for general WHS records; AU risk assessment software is the broader assessment owner. The official Safe Work Australia plan template is the source for a blank regulator-aligned starting point. No new Complys silica-specific generator, automatic high-risk determination, air-monitoring function or legal approval is claimed here. After implementation review, a safe CTA is: Ask Complys to show how your current plan, SWMS, training and review records could be organised for the job. Check the actual product and plan before publishing that link.

Source, claim, owner, link, product and writer-side QA register — 5 October 2026

Terminal writer-side disposition: READY. Nothing was published or changed in the Complys repository.