Editorial: ROPS Are Not Homemade.

Safety professionals should speak up when secondary school teachers and FFA advisors consider fabricating and installing low-cost rollover protective structures (ROPS) as service learning projects for ag education students or as a service to the farm community. These projects are often motivated by the desire to address the continued occurrence of tractor rollovers, which are the most frequent cause of farm-related fatalities (NIOSH, 2018). These projects have also been made feasible by the availability of online plans for ROPS fabrication, including plans from the National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health (NIOSH) that are designed for specific makes and models of tractors. Because of the large number of older tractors that were not originally equipped with ROPS, and the cost and lack of easily accessible ROPS retrofits, fabricating a structure to provide operator protection in the event of an overturn can be attractive as a service learning project. In addition, several of the NIOSH Agricultural Injury Prevention Centers have promoted these projects as a means of reducing the frequency of rollover-related injuries. However, in light of the liability risk involved, such projects should be weighed carefully. Fabricating a ROPS is not the same as building a chicken house, fabricating a welding table, or welding together a hay feeder. ROPS are life-saving devices that must meet specific design and installation standards that exceed the expertise available in most secondary school ag education shops, and even most local machine shops. In fact, "ROPS" is a technical term defined by OSHA standards and the Society of Automotive Engineers (SAE). It does not apply-nor should it be applied-to untested, homemade structures that are installed on tractors with the intent of protecting the operator.

Development of methodology to document and code farm-related injuries and fatalities involving manure storage, handling and transport - with summary of 2017 incidents.

As part of ongoing surveillance of fatalities and injuries involving agricultural confined spaces by Purdue University's Agricultural Safety and Health Program, nearly 300 cases involving manure storage, handling, and transport equipment and facilities have been documented over the past 30 years. With the exception of a summary of 77 fatalities published by Beaver and Field1, these cases have not been previously analysed or published due to a lack of resources and the limitations of the Purdue Agricultural Confined Spaces Incident Database (PACSID) which was designed primarily for analysis of grain-related cases. These limitations included differences in terminology used to code case information in the PACSID and dissimilar causative and contributing factors. To develop a consistent and more useful approach to process and analyze data, 28 U.S. manure-related incidents involving 39 victims documented as having occurred in 2017 were examined for type of incident, victim characteristics, primary contributing factors, and nature of injuries. A review of literature was conducted to identify previously reported contributing factors, and a coding rubric was developed and reviewed by a panel of experts. It was determined that the rubric provided a consistent way to code and analyze descriptive information available on each case. A pilot analysis was completed of the 39 cases using the new tool, and results were summarized. The final methodology will be used to analyze all historically documented incidents, as well as future incidents. Findings presented include a review of relevant literature, discussion of the methods used in case documentation, classifications developed from sample data, and a summary of incidents in 2017. Anticipated outcomes include: 1) consistent strategy to document, code, and summarize manure-related incidents; 2) means of classification of key contributing factors; 3) identification of new or emerging trends; and 4) completion of previously documented incidents.