29.01.2014
Harness takes a life
A man died in Waco, Texas after a boom lift slipped off a barge into the Brazos River, on Tuesday, taking him and his co-worker under.
Both men were wearing harnesses and lanyards, even though they were working over water, the co-worker managed to unclip his harness and escape, while Jose Dario Suarez, 55, perished.
The two men were working from the lift, understood to be a 40ft straight boom, using acetylene torches on a bridge being built to serve the new Baylor University Stadium, which is currently under construction.
The jack up barge has been in place alongside the bridge for some time, and been used by crawler cranes, as well as the lifts and other equipment.
Please register to see all images
The lift remains completely submerged in around six metres of water, although divers were able to find and recover the body later in the day. The survivor suffered no injuries, but was being treated for hypothermia.
Vertikal Comment
Although the recommendation about not using a harness when working over water has been around for many years, cases like this are very rare. But sadly it is likely that both men would have survived if the advice had been followed. Although the water was extremely cold and the man who was rescued had to be treated for symptoms of hypothermia.
Dear Sir,
The purpose of this letter is to remember a young man’s tragic death some 4 years ago today.
I will say in the interest of full disclosure that I never knew Steven Lillicrap, or any other member of his family. I only learned of this young man’s death through the daily news section dated February 4th 2009 of Vertikal.net that your site provides free of charge, to a Worldwide group of readers.
[[link:http://www.vertikal.net/en/news/story/10544/]] See Mother makes plea for crane safety[[link]]
As the popularity of your site continues to grow it is important for a reader to know that an incident on their job will most likely be reported upon. You can look at the material facts of his death as determined by OSHA steven%20lillicrap%20osha%20findings.pdf
Fact: When Steven Lillicrap died, the crane industry was working under the OSHA 1926.550 which had been written some nearly 40 years earlier. Diane Lillicrap Discusses the Importance of Crane Safety
Fact: TODAY, we as an industry working with cranes are required to comply and follow the specific directions of OSHA 1926.1400. Please see OSHA Letter of Interpretation 03/13/2012 - Certification and qualification requirements for mechanics, inspectors, and testers under the Cranes and Derricks in Construction standards.
Fact: Contractors are required by OSHA to train their employees, and there is a difference between someone telling them something and “properly documented training”.
Fact: From OSHA’s Letter of Interpretation you can see if your company, because it involves crane work will fall under the requirements of The Regulations Crane and Derricks in Construction 1926.1400.
Fact: The laws and regulations of The General Industry or Steel Erection Subpart R will not apply to a Crane assembly/Disassembly process or activity. These activities are subject to 1926.1400.
Fact: OSHA 1926.1423 contains specific and noted exceptions to the widely enforced 100 % tie off rule of many companies. The unique risks of crane assembly/disassembly and operation around the draw works and moving parts along with pinch points and other peculiar hazards have special accommodations which are contained within this standard. Fall protection. - 1926.1423
From this tragic and fatal incident described in this story, we can see how perhaps a worker can be in compliance with a standard, and then possibly by the rotation of some component become hopelessly entangled or ensnared without the hope of releasing themselves.
Properly selected fall protection equipment along with aerial access equipment, continue to be necessary components to safe and proper crane assembly/disassembly operations.
I will not argue that properly selected and used, fall protection prevents injuries and fatalities daily around the world. My first exposure to wearing a body harness was while assembling a Manitowoc 4100 Ringer inside of a refinery southwest of Chicago.
This refinery had safety people that oversaw your every move, much like they do today. Again this activity was done under 1926.550 the old crane standard. While our given task at the time was rewrapping the hoist drums we were required to be Tied Off 100% by our host facility. We were exposed to this imminent danger 23 years ago by this requirement. Have we learned anything 23 years later?
I did not agree, however I was required to comply. The nice thing was the crane operator was right alongside on the other side of the window and he could see you and stop immediately. That was years ago and the cranes and complexities of them have only continued to grow.
The old crane standard went away in 2010.
In the crane industry all we seem to hear about is “Certified” or “Qualified”. Whenever I bring up the fall protection accommodations for our very special industry, I continue to be met with a dismissive attitude by superintendents and safety people. Talking about safety has been my ongoing commitment. In May of 2012, I presented a session on “Complete Crane Communication,” to draw attention to the connection between clear communication on the job site and safety.
A few months ago the general contractor had a vendor come in and do a presentation on fall protection. He really did a good presentation and passed on a lot of good information about today’s available equipment for tie off options. I listened to his presentation and then asked him a few direct questions. I explained to him that I was a certified crane operator and ask him if he knew about the special provisions about being tied off while working with cranes that is contained in OSHA 1926.1423? He answered no.
I asked him if he knew who Steven Lilicrap was? Again, he did not.
I explained how Steven was killed and asked him if he could personally learn more about 1926.1423. His drop test of the dummy was very impressive, as well as the stickers that he passed out that said “I defy Gravity”. As we can see from the referenced sources above, a cranes presence on the job will hold your company accountable to OSHA 1926.1400
We cannot continue to allow the misinformation regarding 100% tie off rules to possibly maim or kill another person. Do your safety people have the correct information? It is 1926.1423 in Our Crane Industry. It is not General Industry.
Have all of your people been trained and provided with the proper fall protection gear? I am talking about having a good and well informed trainer come in to personally spend some quality and unrushed time with your crane and rigging professionals. Document this training and provide your employees with their proof of this training as well our industry should settle for nothing less.
In closing we cannot afford to stand by and watch as others are sacrificed on the altars of some misinformed superintendents and their safety people. A crane user does not subrogate their rights or responsibilities to a general contractor or host facility. Don’t think that you are on their coattails of accountability, in fact according to OSHA’s Multi employer doctrine you are all in this together. See Summit OSHA's Multi-Employer Worksite Liability Doctrine Upheld Yet Again - General Contractors Continue To Be Held Liable Even If Their Own Employees Are Not Exposed To Hazard - Employment and HR - United States [[link:http://www.mondaq.com/unitedstates/x/162060/Health+Safety/OSHAs+MultiEmployer+Worksite+Liability+Doctrine+Upheld+Yet+Again+General+Contractors+Continue+To+Be+Held+Liable+Even+If+Their+Own+Employees+Are+Not+Exposed+To+Hazard]]See Summit OSHA's Multi-Employer Worksite Liability Doctrine Upheld Yet Again - General Contractors Continue To Be Held Liable Even If Their Own Employees Are Not Exposed To Hazard - Employment and HR - United States[[link]]
Let’s all help each other to go home safely today.
Sincerely John Egnatz