Gary Campbell

The crane and rigging industry has made national headlines too many times over the last few years. A recent internet search returned articles about crane accidents in Texas, Florida, Kansas, Colorado, Louisiana, North Carolina, Maryland, Hawaii, Wisconsin, and Oklahoma. That’s not to mention the major tower crane accidents in cities like New York, Miami, and Seattle.

One troubling aspect of many of these accidents is that the general public is often affected. In Bellevue, Wash., a man was killed in his condominium when a crane collapsed and struck several buildings, including the one where the man lived. This was his safe haven from the world outside, until the jib of the tower crane crashed through the roof of his building. In Oklahoma City, Okla., an elderly man was killed while sitting in his car watching a crane lift a church steeple. The crane overturned, crushing his car while he sat there with his wife where they thought they were safe.

In West Palm Beach, Fla., a crane was being used to construct a bridge along busy I-95. As the crane prepared to drive concrete test piles, a pile broke and fell across the highway crushing a man in his car. In Tampa, a crane collapsed while removing a bridge structure, hitting a passing dump truck; then a car slammed into the boom as it lay in the road.

In other instances, the public may not have been injured, but the potential for tragedy certainly existed. In Orlando, Fla., a large concrete form broke loose from a crane and fell on the perimeter fence of a project on a busy street corner near a hospital, where it narrowly missed landing on the sidewalk. In Charlotte, N.C., a crane lost its load of steel beams because of improper rigging techniques. The load fell 51 stories, shattering glass, which rained down from the building, with at least one metal piece hitting a school bus. In New York City a contractor at the World Trade Center site was erecting a tower crane, and a 40,000-pound load was being lifted over the street. The city Buildings Department and Transportation Department halted the project and issued citations to the general contractor.

An attitude of caution

How do we prevent these accidents and near misses from occurring? Measures being taken by government partially address the issue. OSHA’s proposed cranes and derricks (C-DAC) standard contains a new emphasis on the “controlling entity,” defined as “the prime contractor, general contractor, construction manager or any other legal entity which has the overall responsibility for the construction of the project – its planning, quality and completion.” The document also proposes that “hoisting routes” be used. These routes should always be within the perimeter of the project and clearly marked so they can be easily discerned by the crane operator. When the route has to pass over an area accessible to the general public, the area absolutely needs to be restricted. While legislation like this provides a framework for protecting the public, crane and rigging professionals bear a greater responsibility to expand the scope of lift planning on a daily basis.

The first step is to treat all lifts with greater caution. Most people in the industry are familiar with “critical lifts,” yet there is some confusion on what this entails. Typically, two or more cranes lifting a single load requires a critical lift plan. In addition, any lift that exceeds 75 percent of the crane’s capacity is a critical lift. However, the 75 percent value must be applied at all times, in all configurations. For example, a 40-ton Grove truck crane with full boom extension of 95 feet has a rated capacity of 4,210 pounds at a radius of 75 feet. A critical lift in this case would be just over 3,000 pounds. Lifts where the operator takes the load to the longest radius possible are made frequently, yet seldom is this considered a critical lift.

Next, it’s common knowledge that loads should not be lifted over people. To expand on this concept, no part of the crane or load should be able to reach an area where the general public is walking, driving, living, or working. But if it does, then a critical lift plan should be developed. That means even when there is no reason to swing outside the perimeter of the job, a critical lift plan needs to be implemented if it is possible for the crane to reach those areas.

For instance, if a crane has a 150-foot long boom then a radius of 150 feet should be considered a danger zone. By approaching jobsite setup in this way, more emphasis would be placed on planning lifts, planning rigging requirements, and getting more people involved in making sure the cranes are making safe lifts. In addition, there should be specific training for operators, riggers, and signal persons about where the crane is allowed to be positioned.

While these suggestions would lead to improved safety, they aren’t easy to implement. It requires management’s support from the top down. It will also take participation from municipalities involved when requests are made to restrict public access to hazardous areas.

Finally, when members of the public gather near a construction site to watch the progress, crane and rigging personnel need to be aware of their presence. Respect their curiosity by politely asking them to move to a safer location if a hazard exists in that area. Posting a signal person or other traffic control person in the area of public access, even if for a temporary situation, is vital to the protection of the public. Government entities with jurisdiction of the area around the project should be cooperative if they understand the reason for the request. Have a plan. Present them with a description of the hazards and a request for public access restrictions. Then work with them to come up with a safe solution.

In highly congested areas, like high-rise construction within an urban area, some of these measures won’t be practical. If you can’t close a street or easily keep a load within the perimeter of the project, then critical lift plans must be established for virtually all lifts. It isn’t “business as usual” when a mistake can cost someone his life. Our workers are generally aware of the hazards, wear personal protective equipment, and have training to work around the hazards of crane operations. The general public doesn’t, so it is up to us to implement measures to protect them.

In the case of the Oklahoma City accident where the crane fell on the car, the victim was not in the “hoisting route.” But because the car was parked within the distance of the boom length, extra measures could have been taken to keep the car away from the work in progress. Following this step as part of a critical lift would have saved someone’s life. Not all of these suggestions will be right for every project. Evaluate the hazards that exist on the site, and implement whatever measures are necessary to protect the general public as well as your workers.