How Qualified Is Your Crane Inspector?
Here’s a scary thought: In 48 states, just about anyone can say they are a crane inspector.
Sure, there are plenty of veteran inspectors out there. But as more general contractors, regulators and others look to cut risk around these potentially dangerous machines, they want a solid way to measure competency for inspectors. At the moment, few methods exist.
This soon may change, though, as two construction-industry groups have formed an alliance to develop a nationally accredited exam for this trade called by many names: crane inspectors, crane certifiers, crane surveyors and the like.
If governments or private businesses adopt it, the exam could become the new standard for people who certify that a crane is “good to go.”
Not required by the federal government (or under the Occupational Safety and Health Administration's proposed crane rule, due for publication next month), such a credential is only mandatory in California, and more recently, Washington. Those two states launched inspector tests after tower cranes collapsed there.
The National Commission for the Certification of Crane Operators, which helped Washington develop its test, and the Crane Certification Association of America, which administers a private exam to its members, announced last week at a Crane and Rigging Conference in Houston that they will co-develop a national exam that will be “fair, valid and legally defensible” for anyone who says they can inspect a crane.
Both organizations have something to gain. CCAA has a test for its members, but it is not accredited. NCCCO's programs are, and both organizations plan to submit the new test for ANSI review. Once candidates have completed the exam, NCCCO lacks a networking environment to nurture inspectors in their careers. CCAA can foster that networking and possibly boost its membership of about 120 inspectors.
Graham Brent, who leads NCCCO, told me that the exam, expected to be available in mid-2011, would fill an important link in the jobsite decision chain.
“When you look at the lifting environment, you’ve got various people involved in the execution of a certain lift,” he says. “The crane operator is critical—we all know that—that’s why we focused on the operator initially.”
Since the NCCCO program started in 1996, there are now 52,000 card-carrying operators in the U.S. (including me). NCCCO has since developed tests for other lifting personnel, with 1,000 riggers and 2,000 signalers now certified. ENR took the NCCCO tower-crane operator exam for a test drive in 2008 and concluded that while such credentials are no replacement for sound experience, they are a baseline of knowledge. Federal regulators agree.
The crane inspector test will likely be a written exam only. California and Washington do not administer a practical test, but they require five years of crane-related experience before you can sit for the written exam.
Brent says that it is ultimately up to the program’s task force to shape the test. Ed Shapiro, president of CCAA and a professional crane inspector in Connecticut, adds that practical exams for inspectors are not, well, practical.
“A practical exam for crane operators is quite a bit easier,” he says. Both Brent and Shapiro say that the new inspector test will likely not include an eligibility requirement for previous experience.
“That sort of falls into the way that the certification will be applied, which therefore is out of the remit of the task force,” Brent explains. “I think the test itself will police that,” Shapiro adds, meaning that if you fail the exam, you're not experienced enough to climb on a crane. In addition to mandating at least five years of experience, California recommends that inspectors carry general liability insurance and have a registered engineer on staff or on permanent retainer.
People taking the new exam likely will be in the hundreds, not thousands. California has 565 licensed. Since Washington’s inspector license became a requirement this year, 68 candidates have taken the main exam (there are five exams total). Of those people, only 46 are now licensed. The pass rate is 82% for the general exam, 79% for the mobile crane exam and 63% for the tower crane exam, according to NCCCO.
Cal/OSHA has a requirement that cranes (mobile & tower cranes) be inspected by individuals who are licensed by the State of California. Does this mean that the cranes inspected by the ...
Cal/OSHA does a poor job of monitoring their licensed crane inspectors. I am not a crane inspector but some of the deficiencies I have found when observing cranes on my clients' job sites include:
1. Improperly certified cranes, including lack of proper proof load testing.
2. Mobile cranes that do not have the operator's manual on the crane.
3. One crane was certified as a 165 ton crane but the load chart showed that the capacity of the crane was only 150 tons.
4. Crane inspectors have certified cranes with rolling outriggers (an after market attachment). The crane manufacturers did not certify or authorize the use of rolling outriggers. There was no engineering data to prove that the rolling outriggers were safe to use on cranes that have no Pick & Carry load charts.
5. A tower crane has the chords on the jib partially worn through due to the use of chains rubbing on the chords during transportation to the job site. Welding was performed on the chords without the manufacturer's input or authorization. The Cal/OSHA crane certifier signed off on the inspection without having any nondestructive testing performed on the welds.
6. One crane was certified by a crane inspector as being a 100 ton capacity crane when the load chart provided by the manufacturer showed that the maximum capacity was only 65 tons. And, one of the boom sheaves was split along the side wall.
7. Individuals certifying cranes have put on the Quadrennial certification that the crane was tested during a Pick & Carry operation. The problem was that the crane manufacturer does not allow any Pick & Carry operations with the crane. The load chart allows for On Outriggers and On Rubber (stationary).
8. In the mid-90's, a 300 ton crawler crane was assembled on a job site. The crane surveyor (certifier) and the master mechanic for the crane owner were on site during the assembly and initial testing of the crane. The surveyor issued a Cal/OSHA crane certification even though the brakes for the hoist drum were out of calibration and severely worn. The result of this improper certification was a 22 ton load pulling through the brakes and free falling even thought the controls were in Controlled Load Lowering mode. The 44,000 pound steel column hit an iron worker, instantly killing him. Based on the way the crane was set up, the load chart indicated that the crane could lift up to 110,000 pounds. When questioned in a deposition as to why the crane cerifier did not properly proof load test the crane, his response was "If I had taken the time to properly proof load test the crane, the crane owner would have run me off because it would take too much time".
For cranes to be properly inspected and certified, the individuals performing the service need to perform a thorough job and the crane owners have to allow sufficient time to have the cranes properly inspected.
I am in favor of certifying cranes by qualified independent organizations IF the certification process is done properly. Individuals who are licensed to certify cranes should be held accountable for their work. Owners should not allow or accept "quick & dirty" inspections.
Respectfully Submitted,
Bob Harrell
Safety Management Services
San Diego, CA
