 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
|
 |
|
|||||
 |
|
||||||
|
Both traffic and construction vehicles are killing our workers. By Dan Brown
|
||||||
|
An 18-year-old flagger, dressed in a full reflective vest, pants, and a hardhat, was directing traffic at one end of a bridge approach during a nighttime construction operation in Minnesota. The work zone was correctly marked with cones and signs, and the entire bridge was illuminated with streetlights. The flagger was standing under portable floodlights in the opposing traffic lane close to the centerline, facing oncoming traffic. A pickup truck traveling in the wrong lane at an estimated 55-60 mph struck the flagger head on and carried him about 200 ft. He died of multiple traumatic injuries. Such accidents - and others involving only construction vehicles in work zones - are becoming all too common. In 2001, work-zone fatalities in motor vehicle traffic crashes reached a staggering 1,079, according to the National Work Zone Safety Information Clearinghouse. That figure is up dramatically from 1998, when 772 fatalities were reported. Those numbers include work zones for construction, maintenance, and utility, as well as other unspecified areas; the vast majority occurs in construction work zones. It's Not Just Traffic
Many people are quick to place blame for work-zone accidents on speeding traffic. And it's true; traffic speeding through work zones, despite posted speed limits, frequently causes accidents. But there are other killers lurking in our work zones: construction trucks and machines themselves. Between 1992 and 1998, the Census of Fatal Occupational Injuries reported 841 worker fatalities in highway and street construction. Of those fatalities, 492 occurred in work zones. Of those 492, 465 involved a vehicle or a piece of equipment. And in 318 of the 465 vehicle- and equipment-related fatalities within work zones, a worker on foot was struck by a vehicle. The bottom line: Victims of those accidents were as likely to be struck by a construction vehicle (154 fatalities) as by a passing traffic vehicle (152 fatalities). Incidents involving backing vehicles were prominent, at 51% of the 154 worker-on-foot fatalities in the work zones, according to a report, Building Safer Highway Work Zones, published in 2001 by the National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health (NIOSH). Among fatalities of workers on foot struck by a construction vehicle in a work zone, trucks were involved 61% of the time, the NIOSH report says, and construction machines were the culprits in 30% of the fatalities. For fatalities involving a traffic vehicle, the major injury sources were fairly evenly divided between cars, at 43%, and trucks, at 47%. The Bible: MUTCD Nearly all work-zone safety regulations use, or emanate from, the Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices (MUTCD). The document is administered, and periodically revised, by the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA). The current version is the Millennium Edition, published in 2000. In fact, in October 2002 the Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) was in the process of requiring that traffic control signs, signals, barricades, and worker protective devices conform either to Part VI of the Millennium Edition of MUTCD or to what's called Revision 3, which is the 1988 edition of MUTCD as revised in 1993. OSHA's final rule was slated to take effect on December 11, 2002 (see www.osha.gov). Copies of MUTCD are available through the American Traffic Safety Services Association (ATSSA, www.atssa.com). Both Revision 3 and the Millennium Edition recommend but don't require a traffic control plan (TCP). In most states, it's standard practice for the contracting agency to develop the TCP, which describes traffic controls used to move vehicle and pedestrian traffic through the work-zone area. General contractors in some cases, however, believe they can create a TCP that is safer for their employees than the plan written by the agency, says Brian Deery, senior director of the Associated General Contractors of America (AGC) Highway Division. "In some cases contractors want to develop a plan that is not only safer but a plan that better fits the way they plan to take on the construction," notes Deery. "A lot of times the contractor would like more flexibility in the TCP. Sometimes the contractor can negotiate changes, and in some states contractors just do it the way they're told because of the liability associated with it. "The issue of liability is always looming," he continues. "Once [a contractor] gets involved in developing the plan, you get into the issue of liability should there be an accident. In some states contractors can work with the agencies to change the TCP, but that usually does increase the general contractor's liability." Some contractors, such as Clarkson Construction Company in Kansas City, MO, usually hire a subcontractor to handle traffic control. That helps control a general contractor's liability, states Jeff Gamble, loss control director for Total Risk Management, a Clarkson subsidiary. Total Risk handles safety, security, and insurance claims for Clarkson. Although Clarkson, as the general contractor, maintains ultimate responsibility for implementation of traffic control, "We feel it's better to hire an expert in work-zone safety because they're up to date on traffic control regulations," says Gamble. "Plaintiffs' attorneys know everything in MUTCD," he remarks. "If you don't have everything done according to MUTCD, it can sting you really badly." If a lawsuit occurs, chances are that both the subcontractor and the general contractor will be sued, Deery notes. "I think you can make the argument that hiring a subcontractor will help control liability." "You have to document your traffic control in work zones," says Gamble. "It's one thing to do it properly, but you're going to have to prove you did it two years down the road if you get sued. We're one of the better contractors at documenting our traffic control. We videotape our own projects using a video camera mounted on the windshield of a company vehicle. The operator turns it on and drives through the project. It videotapes every sign and traffic control device on the project." When the traffic control measures change, Clarkson videotapes the job again, Gamble explains. In addition, Clarkson supervisors keep project diaries that include traffic control changes, and they correct any problems - such as a blown-down sign or malfunctioning light - immediately. Liability is a significant reason, but not the primary one, for a general contractor to hire a traffic control subcontractor, says Mark Metzger, assistant branch manager at the Minneapolis office of Highway Technologies Inc., an affiliate of United Rentals. "Many contractors have found it more efficient and more cost-effective and more timely to have a service provider like ourselves do the traffic control. We provide the service more quickly and efficiently. Nothing drives these contractors batty like having their workers and machinery sit idle while waiting for traffic to be switched to another lane." Costs Are an Issue
In many cases contractors want to install temporary Jersey barriers, made of concrete, which would be used to prevent access to prohibited areas. "But it costs more for Jersey barriers, so the safer contractor doesn't always get the job," Deery points out. "We at AGC are working with FHWA to work out guidelines on the use of positive barriers so that states would have more clear-cut parameters as to when they should use [them]," says Deery. "Some states won't use a barrier because it costs too much, and contractors are saying that should not be an issue in making those decisions. If there were clear-cut guidelines, we would have more of a level playing field in terms of project bidding." On major interstate highway projects, with at least 50-mph traffic zipping past the work zone, in most cases there's no question that Jersey barriers should be used, Deery says. For work zones on secondary and lesser highways, though, the issue is not as well defined. Those are areas that AGC is discussing with FHWA.
Deery reports that AGC is encouraging state departments of transportation (DOTs) and FHWA to consider closure of highways as a part of the project, rather than doing the job under traffic. "There's too much of a trend to avoid traffic disruption," says Deery. "More and more contracts are time-driven rather than safety-driven." Another problem is that some contractors, particularly small ones, simply don't make work-zone safety a top priority, observes Kathi Holst, ATSSA president and president of ACCI/NES Traffic Safety, a traffic control contractor based in Romeoville, IL. "It's usually thought of as some OSHA or DOT rule that is an afterthought and doesn't attain a high-enough priority in the mind of the contractor, and that's why people are getting killed. They don't adequately train their people, and often they're not using state-of-the-art equipment. "For example, there are new crash-worthy requirements for work-zone safety devices," continues Holst. "Standard NCHRP [National Cooperative Highway Research Program] 350 means that on impact, a traffic control device cannot penetrate a driver's windshield. If it's tested and doesn't penetrate the windshield, it can be used. FHWA requires that work-zone safety devices meet the crashworthy standard of NCHRP 350."
NCHRP 350 establishes various categories of crashworthy traffic control devices, ranging from cones to variable message signs and more. The categories of devices have had varying deadlines for usage. "Most of the deadlines have passed, but as I drive around I see many devices that would not pass the test," states Holst. Eastern Metal USA-Sign is an Elmira, NY–based manufacturer of work-zone signs, stands, and barricades that ships its products across the country, says Jan Miller, vice president of sales. Eastern Metal has developed and tested signage products that meet the crashworthy requirements of NCHRP 350. "The issue we face is that most contractors are using rigid signs - plywood or aluminum - so many of our products needed to be engineered to work with these requirements," relates Miller. "We needed to reengineer sign stands to accommodate the older rigid signs in most people's inventories. Contractors and agencies have thousands of signs that would not meet the standard unless we designed a stand that meets the standard. Our stands are accepted for use with signs of rigid plywood or aluminum."
Alternatively, Eastern Metal has designed all-new sign materials. "We migrated to softer signs, those made of roll-up reflective fabric or corrugated polycarbonate, a product called Endurance," says Miller. "Roll-up signs are now of better quality than they used to be." Another problem with work-zone safety is the use of improper worker garments, points out Holst. Flaggers do not always wear proper vests or proper reflective clothing for use at night. On that point, there is a recently established standard set by the American National Standards Institute and the International Safety Equipment Association for high-visibility safety apparel, says Tom Flaherty, industry manager for temporary road building at Reflexite Americas Inc. in New Britain, CT. "If contractors would follow this new standard, their people would have a higher level of conspicuity in the work zone," stresses Flaherty. Reflexite makes retroreflective materials for use in work-zone signing and on garments, drums, cones, and other equipment. Lack of flagger training is also a problem, as is the lack of enforcement in using certified flaggers, says Holst. In Illinois, for example, flaggers are required to be certified, and the state recognizes certifications from three organizations: ATSSA, the National Safety Council, and the Laborers Union Training Center. Some states do not require certified flaggers, she adds. Another issue raised is that of credibility of work-zone signage. A contractor might install a "Road Construction Ahead" sign and leave it in place even when not working the site. Motorists see no workers. The next day, some of the same motorists pass through the work zone at a high speed, assuming there are again no workers present. If workers are there, the speeding motorist presents a threat, Holst points out. Other common flaws in work zones include the following, according to Holst:
"A great many crashes are caused by speed violations and distractions to motorists," states Holst. Distractions might include the use of cell phones, the use of onboard navigation systems, or the general distraction of workers and construction equipment next to the roadway. So ATSSA encourages minimal use of cell phones and navigation systems while traveling through work zones. Work-zone accidents can be prevented and lives can be saved. The first step is compliance. Frequent contributor Dan Brown is the owner of TechniComm, a communications business based in Des Plaines, IL. GEC - January/February 2003
|
|||||||
|
|||||||
