Papers, please
30 October 2015This month, I've had a series of conversations about documentation. Written records are often a good way to show that correct safety checks have been carried out. A well-designed form can ensure that each check in and inspection is carried out. It can then be used to confirm the results of the inspection, to regulators or to anyone else with an interest.
The problem is that good safety practices require a lot of checks. This week, I've been talking to a crane owner in a well-regulated city, for an article coming up in a later issue. They explained to me that best practice here had worked along the lines of the operator perfroming a simple daily check, with more in-depth weekly, monthly and longer-term inspections. The record of the daily check would be confirmed in the weekly check, and then discarded. The weekly check would be confirmed in the monthly, the monthly in the longer term inspections.
The result was an easy-to-manage record of quarterly or longer interval checks, that confirmed the more regular checks had taken place, and highlighted any issues. Now though, the local regulator has raised the idea of keeping all of those inspection forms. The result of that would be crane owners needing to hold 365 daily check forms for every crane in their fleet. That's a lot of paper.
In Australia, CICA chief executive Brandon Hitch tells me in this issue, there's another reason to maintain extensive records. Regulations there now effectively require a ten-year strip down and magnetic particle check. The relevant standards offer an exemption to this requirement, by allowing a manufacturer or competent person to confirm that a crane is safe. However, the best way of proving this is to have a regular series of visual inspections. While the manufacturer or competent person may understand that records like those outlined above show those checks have been carried out and any maintenance performed, other stakeholders like site owners, financiers and insurers may not. So, while the regulations don't demand every crane is taken to pieces on its tenth birthday, the market will not accept a crane that hasn't been.
CICA's clever solution to this problem has been to develop web and smartphone support for its existing CraneSafe equipment certification scheme. Rather than ticking a box to say they have checked a weld or the condition of paintwork on a boom, the person performing a visual inspection can take a photo. The limitless storage capacities of the modern internet mean those photos can be kept forever. My understanding of the technology, which is still under development, is that an insurer or site owner, concerned by a failed visual check, could then compare the same part, before and after maintenance. By showing that a crane is structurally sound in this way, stakeholders beyond the immediate crane industry will see that an NDT test is not required.
At the same time, this sort of technology ensures all records are available, without forests of paperwork being left on crane owners' shelves.
