Building Safer Highway Work Zones:

Measures to Prevent Worker Injuries

 From Vehicles and Equipment

Stephanie G. Pratt

David E. Fosbroke

Suzanne M. Marsh

DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES

Centers for Disease Control and Prevention

National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health

April 2001
ii

DISCLAIMER

Mention of any company or product does not constitute endorsement by the

National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health

This document is in the public domain and may be freely copied or reprinted.

Copies of this and other NIOSH documents are available from:

Publications Dissemination, EID

National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health

4676 Columbia Parkway

Cincinnati, OH 45226-1998

Fax number: (513) 533-8573

Telephone number: 1-800-35-NIOSH (1-800-356-4674)

E-mail: pubstaft@cdc.gov

For further information about occupational safety and health

topics, call 1-800-35-NIOSH (1-800-356-4674), or

visit the NIOSH Web site at www.cdc.gov/niosh.

DHHS (NIOSH) PUBLICATION No. 2001-128
Foreword

Highway and street construction workers are at risk of fatal and serious nonfatal injury when working in

the vicinity of passing motorists, construction vehicles, and equipment. Each year, more than 100 workers

are killed and over 20,000 are injured in the highway and street construction industry. Vehicles and

equipment operating in and around the work zone are involved in over half of the worker fatalities in this

industry.

Historically, efforts to reduce vehicle-related worker injuries in this industry have focused on improving

traffic control devices and work zone configurations to minimize confusion of motorists passing through the

work zone and to limit collisions involving motorists. The premise has been that by minimizing traffic

collisions in work zones, worker injuries are minimized. However, fatality data indicate that workers being

struck by a motorist passing through the work zone account for only half the vehicle-related fatalities among

highway workers.

To better understand these injury risks, NIOSH reviewed the current literature on highway safety, analyzed

data on worker fatalities in the highway and street construction industry, and held a workshop with

individuals from government, labor, industry, academia, and state departments of transportation. During

the workshop, participants were asked to discuss measures that could be taken by employers, manufacturers, and government and research agencies that would reduce or eliminate these hazards. This document

draws on the collective knowledge, experience, and expertise of numerous individuals and organizations

who are intimately involved with highway construction. By bringing together partners from all parts of the

industry to discuss prevention of these injuries, NIOSH hoped to improve our understanding of the hazards

faced by highway workers, raise the industrys awareness of these hazards, and initiate discussion among

all concerned about measures that can reduce these hazards. The material presented in this document does

not constitute an all-inclusive checklist. Rather, it is a listing of interventions from which contractors,

contracting agencies, and other entities may choose those most appropriate to their situations and needs.

More than 50 individuals participated in the workshop, and more than 30 individuals and organizations

reviewed prior drafts of this document. Each of their contributions is sincerely appreciated.

Lawrence J. Fine, M.D., Dr.P.H.

Acting Director, National Institute for

 Occupational Safety and Health

iii
v

Contents

Foreword ............................................................................................................................................iii

Acknowledgments ..............................................................................................................................vii

Public Health Summary ....................................................................................................................... ix

Introduction ........................................................................................................................................... 1

Worker Fatalities and Injuries in Highway Work Zones ....................................................................... 5

Injury Prevention Measures ................................................................................................................... 7

Work zone layout ............................................................................................................................ 7

Use of temporary traffic control devices ......................................................................................... 8

Motorist education and speed enforcement ..................................................................................... 9

Flaggers......................................................................................................................................... 12

High-visibility apparel .................................................................................................................... 12

Illumination of the work zone ........................................................................................................ 15

Developing internal traffic control plans ........................................................................................ 16

Implementing internal traffic control plans ..................................................................................... 19

Accountability and coordination at the work site .......................................................................... 20

Equipment operation and maintenance .......................................................................................... 20

Safe equipment operation around workers on foot ....................................................................... 22

Training and certification ............................................................................................................... 22

Changes in the contracting process ............................................................................................... 24

Laboratory and field research needs ............................................................................................. 25

Data and record keeping ............................................................................................................... 26

List of Acronyms ................................................................................................................................. 27

Glossary .............................................................................................................................................. 29

References ........................................................................................................................................... 33

Additional Readings ............................................................................................................................ 35

On-line Resources ............................................................................................................................... 37

Appendix ............................................................................................................................................. 39

Case Examples of Highway Construction Fatalities ...................................................................... 39

Sources for Case Examples .......................................................................................................... 39

Case Descriptions ......................................................................................................................... 43
Acknowledgments

The authors thank the following NIOSH personnel for their review and comments during the development

of this document: Dawn Castillo; Lynn Jenkins; Tim Pizatella; Nancy Stout, Ed.D; and David Votaw.

Editorial review and production assistance were provided by Herb Linn, Paul Keane, and Joyce Spiker of the

Division of Safety Research, NIOSH. Rosemary Cianfrocco of the Division of Safety Research, NIOSH,

provided additional administrative and technical support.

The persons listed below assisted in the development of this document by participating in the NIOSH workshop

Preventing Vehicle and Equipment-Related Occupational Injuries in Highway and Street Construction Work

Zones and by reviewing earlier drafts. The authors gratefully acknowledge their contributions.

Ron Backer, Spokane Research Laboratory, NIOSH

Wayne Barnes, Ohio Department of Transportation

Douglas Bernard, Energy Absorption Systems, Inc.

George Bockosh, Pittsburgh Research Laboratory, NIOSH

Jim Boom, Occupational Safety and Health Administration

Janice Comer Bradley, International Safety Equipment Association (ISEA)

Jim Britell, National Highway Traffic Safety Administration

Ken Brown, 3M Company

Michael M. X. Buchet, National Safety Council

James Byrnes, Mine Safety Appliance

Leo Carey, National Safety Council

John Chisholm, American Road and Transportation Builders Association

Donna Clark, American Traffic Safety Services Association

Bill Davenport, Deere & Company

Brian Deery, Associated General Contractors of America

Larry Edginton, International Union of Operating Engineers

Thomas Flaherty, Reflexite North America

Mark Fullen, West Virginia University Safety and Health Extension

Robert Gosnell, Liberty Mutual Insurance

Gordon Harner, Barrett Paving Materials, Inc.

Ken Hoffner, Laborers Health and Safety Fund of North America

Carl Heinlein, Associated General Contractors of America

Ernest D. L. Huckaby, Federal Highway Administration

Lynn Jenkins, Division of Safety Research, NIOSH

Brook Jerzyk, Reflexite North America

Ken Kobetsky, American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials

Thomas J. Lentz, Education and Information Division, NIOSH

Larry Liberatore, National Safety Council

Denny Lockard, Maryland State Highway Administration

Robert McArver, Jefferson Government Relations

Dave Malter, Malter Associates, Inc.

William Marquardt, American Federation of State, County, and Municipal Employees

vii
Azita Mashayekhi, International Brotherhood of Teamsters

James Migletz, Graham-Migletz Enterprises, Inc.

Satish Mohan, State University of New York at Buffalo

Douglas Prince, Occupational Safety and Health Administration

Robert Randolph, Pittsburgh Research Laboratory, NIOSH

Louis Ricca, Jr., Occupational Safety and Health Administration

Michael Robinson, Federal Highway Administration

Louis Rowe, Occupational Safety and Health Administration

David Rush, Virginia Department of Transportation

Randal Schumacher, Jefferson Government Relations

Charlie Sears, Federal Highway Administration

Joseph Sease, South Carolina Department of Transportation

Nancy Stout, Division of Safety Research, NIOSH

Marie Haring Sweeney, Education and Information Division, NIOSH

Harold Thompson, National Safety Council

Ralph Topete, National Safety Council

J. Dan Turner, Federal Highway Administration

Camille Villanova, Occupational Safety and Health Administration

Thomas Werner, North Carolina Department of Transportation

Kenneth White, 3M Company

Anker Winther, New Jersey Department of Transportation

Daniel Zarletti, Kenny Construction Company

The persons and organizations listed below also provided valuable contributions to this document through

their review and comments on draft versions.

James R. Andrews, Southern Illinois Builders Association

John A. (Jack) Baliker, Katy, Texas

Brian Deery, Associated General Contractors of America

Phillip Ditzler, Federal Highway Administration

R. Gary Fore, National Asphalt Pavement Association

Susan Gaynor, Houston, Texas

Linda M. Goldenhar, Division of Applied Research and Technology, NIOSH

Craig Hughes, Cedar Valley Corp.

Bill Kojola, American Federation of Labor and Congress of Industrial Organizations (AFL-CIO)

Jack Kolberg, Northern Improvement Company

Leroy Mickelsen, Division of Applied Research and Technology, NIOSH

Richard C. Moore, Jr., Lehman-Roberts Company

James T. Patterson, Hilb, Rogal and Hamilton Company of Denver

Curt Peterson, Associated General Contractors of North Dakota

Earl S. Pollack, The Center to Protect Workers Rights

Bradley M. Sant, American Road and Transportation Builders Association

Michael J. Shelly, Hypower, Inc.

Gary S. Sorock, Research Center for Safety & Health, Liberty Mutual Group

Russell B. Swanson, Occupational Safety and Health Administration

David A. Toy, Equipment Manufacturers Institute

Gregory G. Zigulis, University of Tennessee

viii
Public Health Summary

What are the hazards?

Workers in highway work zones are exposed to risk of injury from the movement of construction vehicles and

equipment within the work zones, as well as from passing motor vehicle traffic. Data from the Census of Fatal

Occupational Injuries (CFOI) indicate that of the 841 work-related fatalities in the U.S. highway construction

industry between 1992 and 1998, 465 (55%) were vehicle- or equipment-related incidents that occurred in a

work zone.

How are workers exposed or put at risk?

Highway workers routinely work in proximity to construction vehicles and motor vehicle traffic. Flaggers

and other workers on foot are exposed to the risk of being struck by traffic vehicles or construction

equipment if they are not visible to motorists or equipment operators. Workers who operate construction

vehicles or equipment risk injury due to overturn, collision, or being caught in running equipment. Highway

workers, regardless of their assigned task, work in conditions of low lighting, low visibility, and inclement

weather, and may work in congested areas with exposure to high traffic volume and speeds.

What recommendations has the federal government made to protect workers safety?

The Federal Highway Administration has developed and maintained the Manual on Uniform Traffic Control

Devices (MUTCD), which provides for uniform design and setup of highway work zones. The primary focus

of Part 6 of the MUTCD is the interaction between the road user and the work zone. The MUTCD contains

exhaustive specifications for signage, pavement and curb markings, traffic signals, and marking of school zones,

bicycle facilities, and highway-rail crossings. It also prescribes temporary traffic control measures for numerous

scenarios involving lane closures, lane shifts, detours, shoulder work, median crossovers, mobile operations, and

blasting. The MUTCD addresses topics such as training, personal protective equipment, speed reduction,

barriers, and lighting, as they apply to highway construction.

OSHA construction industry regulations (29 CFR* 1926, Subpart O) address operation of vehicles and

equipment within an off-highway job site not open to public traffic. However, Subpart O is not exhaustive in

its coverage of machinery types or safety equipment, nor does it address work practices, traffic control plans,

or shift work. Flagging and signaling practices are discussed in general terms in Subpart G, which covers signs,

signals, and barricades. Subpart G defers to the 1971 MUTCD on matters relating to hand signals, barricades,

and traffic control devices.

Where can more information be found?

The references, additional readings, and on-line resources cited at the end of this document identify sources that

provide more information on highway work zone safety. Additional information from NIOSH may be obtained

through:

1-800-35-NIOSH

(800-356-4674)

http://www.cdc.gov/niosh/homepage.html

*Code of Federal Regulations. See CFR in references.

ix
Building Safer Highway Work Zones 1

Building Safer Highway Work Zones:

Measures to Prevent Worker Injuries

 From Vehicles and Equipment

Introduction

Construction contractors, contracting agencies, and others responsible for work zone safety face the

challenge of providing a safe workplace while ensuring the safe movement of the public through the work

zone. Highway and street construction presents a complex work situation in which workers face multiple

injury risks under conditions that may change without warning.

Highway workers are at risk of injury from passing traffic vehicles:

An 18-year-old flagger, outfitted in full reflective vest, pants, and hard hat, was

directing traffic at one end of a bridge approach during a night milling operation. The

work zone was correctly marked with cones and signs, and the entire bridge was

illuminated with street lights. The flagger was standing under portable flood lights

in the opposing traffic lane close to the center line, facing oncoming traffic. A pickup

truck traveling in the wrong lane at an estimated 55 to 60 miles per hour struck the

flagger head on and carried him approximately 200 feet. He died at the scene of

multiple traumatic injuries [Minnesota Department of Health 1992].

Highway workers are at risk of injury from construction equipment

operating inside the work zone and in ancillary areas that support the work

zone (e.g., temporary batch plants):

A 33-year-old construction laborer was working at a gravel-unloading operation

at a highway construction site. His usual work assignment was to operate the

generator for the conveyor system that moved gravel unloaded from belly dump

trailers. A dump truck driver on the site was having difficulty opening the gates of

his belly dump trailer. Attempting to assist the driver, the laborer went under the

trailer to manually open the gates. The driver, not realizing the laborer was under

the trailer, pulled away from the unloading platform and ran over him with the rear

dual tires of the trailer. The laborer was pronounced dead at the scene [Minnesota

Department of Health 1997].
2 Building Safer Highway Work Zones

Highway workers are at risk of injury from construction vehicles operating

inside work zones, as well as construction vehicles entering and leaving the

work zone:

An 11-person construction crew was paving the northbound side of a 6-lane

interstate highway. The far left and middle lanes of the highway were closed to

traffic, with two pavers operating simultaneously in staggered positions. Hot asphalt

was delivered to the site in tractor-trailers which queued on the left shoulder while

waiting to back up to the pavers. A 34-year-old construction laborer was

positioned adjacent to the far left lane, approximately 12 feet behind the pavers

work area, shoveling old asphalt from around a catch basin. A tractor-trailer pulled

away from the paver in the middle lane and began backing. The driver stopped

when he heard other workers yelling. Exiting the vehicle, he found the laborer run

over by the four left rear wheels. The laborer was pronounced dead at the scene

[Massachusetts Department of Public Health 1996].

The Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices (MUTCD) provides for uniform design and setup of highway

work zones, and includes guidance for the development of temporary traffic control plans (TCPs) that determine

the flow of traffic through work zones [FHWA 2000]. The Millennium Edition of the MUTCD, which went into

effect on January 17, 2001, includes new signs and pavement markings, changes in both standards and guidance,

new sections, and changes in Part 6, which covers work zones. The last full-scale revision of the MUTCD was

in 1978; however, frequent updates have been made to specific sections of the MUTCD since that time. States

have until January 17, 2003 to reach substantial conformance with the Millennium Edition of the MUTCD;

therefore, both the Millennium Edition and the previous edition [FHWA 1998a] are listed in the reference

section.

OSHA construction industry regulations (29 CFR* 1926, Subpart O) address operation of vehicles and

equipment within an off-highway job site not open to public traffic. However, Subpart O is not exhaustive in

its coverage of machinery types or safety equipment, nor does it address work practices, traffic control plans,

or shift work. Flagging and signaling practices are discussed in general terms in Subpart G, which covers signs,

signals, and barricades. Subpart G defers to the 1971 MUTCD on matters relating to hand signals, barricades,

and traffic control devices.

Compliance with the MUTCD and OSHA regulations is a necessary first step in providing a safe work

environment. However, these sources, taken together, do not provide comprehensive guidance to ensure

worker safety in highway work zones. To identify gaps in standards and regulations and to compile additional

prevention measures to enhance worker safety, NIOSH undertook a comprehensive review of scientific

literature, fatality and injury data, and current safety research. NIOSH also convened a workshop attended by

a broad range of stakeholders in work zone safety. The NIOSH workshop, Preventing Vehicle- and

Equipment-Related Occupational Injuries in Highway and Street Construction Work Zones, held in

Washington, D.C., December 2 through December 4, 1998, investigated the following areas of concern:

*Code of Federal Regulations. See CFR in references.
Building Safer Highway Work Zones 3

Safety of all workers on foot around traffic vehicles

Safe operation of construction vehicles and equipment in highway work zones

Planning for safe operations within work zones

Special safety issues associated with night work in highway construction.

The workshop was attended by over 50 individuals from government, labor, industry, academia, and state

departments of transportation. In breakout sessions addressing the four topic areas, participants were presented

with questions to stimulate discussion about preventing occupational injuries in highway work zones. Their

shared information, experiences, research results, resources, opinions, and recommendations were the starting

point for this document.

Through synthesis of current research on highway work zone safety with input provided by participants in the

December, 1998 workshop, this document offers additional measures that contractors, contracting agencies,

policy makers, manufacturers, law enforcement, and the research community can take to reduce occupational

injuries in highway work zones. This document also includes an Appendix with descriptions of highway

construction fatalities investigated through the NIOSH Fatality Assessment and Control Evaluation (FACE)

program. Each fatality description includes case-specific prevention recommendations.

The measures described in this document reflect ideas for reducing highway work zone injuries generated

by a broad cross-section of key stakeholders. Some prevention measures are ready to be used; others

deserve additional consideration and research. The material presented here does not constitute an allinclusive checklist. Rather, the document provides a listing of interventions from which contractors,

contracting agencies, and other entities may choose those most appropriate to their situations and needs.

Readers should not view these prevention measures as official NIOSH recommendations.
4 Building Safer Highway Work Zones
Building Safer Highway Work Zones 5

Worker Fatalities and Injuries in Highway Work Zones

Between 1992 and 1998, the Census of Fatal Occupational Injuries (CFOI) reported 841 worker fatalities in

SIC 1611 (Highway and Street Construction) [Bureau of Labor Statistics, unpublished data]. As Table 1 shows,

the majority of fatalities in this industry occurred in work zones, with vehicle and equipment-related incidents

similar to those described above the predominant type of fatal event.

Table 1. Fatalities in the highway and street construction industry (SIC 1611), CFOI, 1992-1998

Among the 492 work zone fatalities, the leading occupations were construction laborer (42%), truck driver

(9%), construction trades supervisor (8%), and operating engineer (8%). The most common primary sources

of injury were trucks (45%), road grading and surfacing machinery (15%), and cars (15%). Seventy-four

percent of the work zone fatality victims were employed privately, the remainder by state or local governments

(13% each).

In 318 of the 465 vehicle and equipment-related fatalities within work zones, a worker on foot was struck by

a vehicle. Victims of these events 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 among the 154

worker-on-foot fatalities that occurred within the confines of the work zone (51%).

The primary injury sources for fatalities of workers on foot struck by a construction vehicle within the work zone

were trucks (61%) and construction machines (30%). For fatalities involving a traffic vehicle, the major injury

sources were more evenly divided among cars (43%) and trucks (47%). In all but 13 of the incidents involving

a traffic vehicle, the motorist left the traffic space and intruded into the work space, striking the worker. For 108 (71%)

of these intrusion fatalities, the CFOI narrative denoted the workers activity at the time of the incident. The most

prominent work tasks were repairing the road (41), flagging (27), and setting or moving traffic control devices (24).

In 110 fatalities, the victim was operating a vehicle or mobile construction equipment. For vehicle and equipment

operators, the primary injury sources were construction machines (53%) and trucks (26%). Thirty-eight of the

110 workers operating equipment at the time of injury (35%) were not classified in equipment operating

professions. An additional 26 victims were passengers, and location could not be determined for 11 workers

[Bureau of Labor Statistics, unpublished data].

In addition to vehicle- and equipment-related hazards, CFOI and other sources report that highway workers

are at risk of injury or death from contact with overhead power lines, falls from machinery or structures, gas line

explosions, or being struck by falling objects or materials [Blacklow and Hoffner 1996; Bryden and Andrew

1999; Ore and Fosbroke 1997; Pigman and Agent 1990; Bureau of Labor Statistics, unpublished data].

Number Percent

Occurred in a highway or street construction work zone: 492 58.5

 Vehicle or equipment-related 465 55.3

 Other event 27 3.2

Occurred outside a work zone: 349 41.5

 Vehicle or equipment-related 198 23.5

 Other event 151 18

Total 841 100
6 Building Safer Highway Work Zones

Data collection systems for nonfatal occupational injuries do not provide sufficient detail to estimate the number

of workers injured in work zones nationally. Data from the Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS) Survey of

Occupational Injuries and Illnesses are reported for all of SIC 1611, with no separate tabulations for work zone

incidents provided. Further, these data cover private construction firms only (public entities engaged in highway

construction and maintenance are excluded). BLS Survey data for 1997 indicate that there were an estimated

22,200 injuries to employees of private highway and street construction contractors; 8,767 of these resulted in

days away from work. Injuries to workers in SIC 1611 resulted in a median 7 days away from work, compared

with 8 days for all construction industry injuries. In SIC 1611, 23.5% of the days-away-from-work injuries

resulted in 31 or more days away from work [Bureau of Labor Statistics 1999].

An analysis of 240 incidents involving serious injuries to workers on highway and bridge construction projects

in New York State confirms that highway workers are at risk of severe nonfatal injuries from being struck by

or run over by traffic vehicles or by construction vehicles and equipment [Bryden and Andrew 1999]. This

analysis, which covered incidents occurring between 1993 and 1997, revealed that although traffic accounted

for 22% of worker injuries and 43% of worker deaths in New York, the remaining cases resulted from

construction incidents not involving traffic. The most frequently occurring type of serious injury incident involved

workers struck by construction vehicles or large equipment, which included 44 hospitalized injuries and 3

fatalities.

Fatal and nonfatal injury data suggest a need to focus work zone safety efforts beyond issues of motorist safety.

Clearly, safety efforts must address eliminating vehicle crashes of the motoring public traveling through work

zones while ensuring the safety of workers who work adjacent to traffic. However, safety efforts must also protect

construction workers within work zones who are working on foot around moving vehicles and equipment, as

well as those who are operating dump trucks, rollers, pavers, and other pieces of construction equipment.

The Transportation Equity Act for the 21st Century (TEA-21) authorized approximately $80 billion for highway

and bridge construction between FY 1998 and FY 2003, the majority of which provides for rehabilitation of

existing highways [Federal Highway Administration 1999]. Because of increased spending under TEA-21, the

number of workers employed in highway and street construction is likely to increase. Further, the emphasis on

rehabilitation rather than construction of new highways means that more highway workers will continue to

confront the dual injury risks posed by passing traffic vehicles and by construction equipment moving within the

work zone [National Transportation Safety Board 1992].
Building Safer Highway Work Zones 7

Injury Prevention Measures

Work zone layout

Road builders and maintainers can:

Assign a traffic control supervisor who is knowledgable in traffic control principles overall responsibility for

the safety of the work zone setup.

Carefully review the TCP and, during contract negotiations, negotiate with the contracting agency as to

revisions to the TCP that are needed to ensure worker safety.

Ensure that the work zone is set up in accordance with the Millennium Edition of the MUTCD.

Evaluate the effectiveness of the temporary traffic control setup by having the project supervisor walk

or ride the job looking for evidence of near misses (e.g., skid marks, damaged barricades).

Include employees in the walk- or drive-through as a training tool, and to emphasize that safety is a

continuous priority.

Authorize the traffic control supervisor to temporarily halt work until unsafe conditions related to

temporary traffic control have been eliminated.

Document work zone setup and changes throughout the course of the project. Retain these records in a

job file as a reference for future jobs.

Where provided for in contract documents, increase the size of the lateral buffer zone to reduce worker

exposure to passing motorists.

To the extent practical, keep the length of the work zone appropriate to the work in progress so that

motorists do not increase speed after passing through a long stretch with no sign of work activity.

Contracting agencies can:

Establish a streamlined process for reviewing and approving changes in the work zone setup that are

necessitated by safety concerns.

Close the road completely and reroute traffic where feasible.

Provide alternative transportation modes and alternative routes for road users.

On interstate and similar roadway systems, minimize worker exposure to traffic hazards by forcing traffic

moving in both directions onto one side of the road and completely closing off the work space.

Specify the use of temporary pavement markings to laterally move the traffic lane away from the work space

on projects lasting less than 2 weeks.

For night work, specify:

Increased taper length

Installation of low-level transitional lighting in advance warning areas and termination areas to ease

motorists adjustment to changing lighting conditions.
8 Building Safer Highway Work Zones

Road builders and maintainers and contracting agencies can:

Cooperate to design and implement TCPs in accordance with safety management principles that call for a

hierarchical approach to prevention of worker injuries:

Reduce worker exposure to injury to the extent possible. For highway construction, possible

strategies to reduce exposure to injury from traffic vehicles include rerouting all traffic to one side of

a multi-lane highway, or complete road closure.

Where worker exposure to traffic cannot be completely eliminated, use positive protective barriers

to shield workers from intrusions by traffic vehicles. Examples applicable to highway work zones are

truck-mounted attenuators (TMAs) and temporary traffic barriers.

Where installation of temporary traffic barriers is impractical or creates a greater hazard, install

channelizing devices such as traffic cones and barrels to delineate the work zone. Keep in mind that

channelizing devices supplement the use of temporary traffic barriers, but are a less effective physical

barrier to prevent vehicles intruding into the work zone.

Consider additional measures such as sensors, handheld radios, and intrusion alarms, but do not rely

on them as a primary protection against injury.

Policy makers (Federal, state, and local) can:

Revise OSHA regulations for the construction industry (29 CFR 1926, Subpart G  Signs, Signals, and

Barricades) to require adherence to the Millennium Edition of the MUTCD in place of the 1971 version that is

currently specified [FHWA 2000; CFR]. This change would make OSHA regulations consistent with Federal

Department of Transportation policy, which will require state departments of transportation to adhere to the more

protective version of the MUTCD by January 17, 2003.

Where Federal agencies have overlapping responsibilities for work zone safety, collaborate to ensure that

regulations are consistent and comprehensive enough to ensure worker safety.

Collaborate with contractors, labor, and the research community to develop tables of recommended widths

for lateral buffer spaces under varying traffic speeds and volumes.

Use of temporary traffic control devices

Road builders and maintainers can:

Use temporary traffic control devices, such as signage, warning devices, paddles, and concrete barriers,

in a consistent manner throughout the work zone.

Set up temporary traffic control within a reasonable time prior to construction so that motorists do not

become complacent and ignore warning signs and devices when work begins.
Building Safer Highway Work Zones 9

Provide flaggers with devices that increase their visibility to passing motorists and construction vehicles. One

example that has been field-tested and shown to be effective is the flashing slow/stop paddle, which consists

of a standard paddle with a strobe light mounted on its face [Stout et al. 1993].

Keep channelizing devices clean and properly maintained to preserve their reflective intensity and visibility.

Ensure that all traffic control devices are operating properly and in place at all times. Missing traffic control

devices create the potential for motorists to inadvertently enter the work space or exit the highway in the

wrong place.

For night work:

Reduce spacing between channelizing devices to compensate for reduced driver visibility.

Ensure arrow panels are set at nighttime levels; daytime settings used at night produce blinding light.

Increase the size of traffic control devices, reflective material, and lettering to improve driver recognition.

Contracting agencies can:

To better delineate highway exits in work zones, consider specifying a different color for channelizing devices

and signs intended to guide motorists off the exit ramp.

Create positive separation between the traveling public and workers by specifying:

Use of temporary traffic barriers whenever possible. Paint barriers a color that contrasts with the

background. Reflectors, lights, or light tubes can be installed on barriers to further enhance

delineation.

Use of truck-mounted attenuators (TMAs) for a wider range of work zone safety applications. TMAs

can be placed on the upstream, lateral, or downstream sides of traffic flow to physically isolate the

work space. They may be particularly useful in moving work zones, where they can move forward

as work progresses to protect workers from being struck from behind by traffic vehicles.

Policy makers (Federal, state, and local) can:

In cooperation with contractors, labor, and manufacturers, develop a consensus standard for the use of

temporary traffic barriers and TMAs as positive separators.

Require consistency in traffic control devices within a single work zone area. Move toward uniformity in

the type and placement of traffic control devices within local jurisdictions, at the state level, and nationally.

Motorist education and speed enforcement

Road builders and maintainers and contracting agencies can:

Give motorists plenty of advance warning of upcoming work zones.

Ensure that motorists have real-time information in signage and in travelers advisory radio broadcasts.
10 Building Safer Highway Work Zones

Install warning signs that provide estimated time of delay and other road closure information so that drivers

have sufficient opportunity to exit and take a different route.

Use a combination of traffic queue detection equipment and dynamic message signs to vary messages as

traffic conditions change.

Keep warning sign messages simple and brief.

Cover or take down warning signs when workers are not present.

Remove channelizing devices when they are no longer needed.

Contracting agencies can:

Follow the MUTCD recommendation that reduced speed zoning should be avoided as much as practical.

However, in highly vulnerable situations which threaten worker safety, consider reducing speed through

regulatory speed zoning, use of police, funneling, lane reduction, flashing lights, or flaggers. Speed

reductions should be applied incrementally to maintain uniform traffic flow. Normal speed limits should be

restored when work is no longer in progress, when workers are no longer at the job site, or when hazards

have been removed or protected.

Use an advance media campaign to advise the public of upcoming road work.

Policy makers (Federal, state, and local) can:

Educate the public about work zone safety issues (e.g., standard signage, apparel colors, and importance

of obeying reduced postings) through public service announcements, driver education courses, and driver

training manuals.

Educate the public about human factors related to safe navigation of work zones (e.g., decision sight

distance, reaction time, and stopping distance) through public service announcements, driver education

courses, and driver training manuals.

Policy makers (Federal, state, and local), law enforcement, and others can work together to:

Implement and evaluate alternative speed control measures in the work zone:

Videotape speeding motorists to provide an incentive to slow down through the work zone.

Use radar-gun technology to advise motorists when they are exceeding work zone speed limits.

Explore the extension of this technology to automatic issuance of speeding tickets.

Increase fines for motorists exceeding work zone speed limits, and increase penalties for motorists

convicted of driving through the work zone under the influence of drugs or alcohol.

Use pace vehicles to pull into lanes and slow traffic.

Increase presence of law enforcement at the beginning of the work zone.
Building Safer Highway Work Zones 11

Use a variety of speed control methods throughout the course of a project so that motorists do not

learn how to anticipate and avoid speed controls.

Follow through on speed control measures through ticketing and fining violators.

Use a law enforcement officer who is trained in work zone traffic control as a flagger in work zones where

speed control is needed.

Ensure that officers are trained in work-zone traffic control procedures and know the MUTCD.

Ensure that officers working temporary traffic control are adequately protected from work zone hazards.

A New Jersey cooperative program enlists law enforcement personnel to

improve worker safety:

Parsippany, New Jersey is a model of collaborative efforts to improve highway

work zone safety. This program has not only reduced work-site accidents and

injuries, but has also reduced motorist collisions and fatalities in work zones. Police

officers receive three to four days of OSHA training on the job risks associated with

roadway construction, and are then authorized to warn employers of safety hazards

on the job site. If hazards are not corrected after the second warning, police notify

OSHA. Cooperators in this effort are the New Jersey State Police, international

and local Laborers Union, the Utilities and Transportation Contractors

Association, Rutgers University, local and county police, and the New Jersey

Department of Labor.

A Wisconsin program places law enforcement personnel among highway

workers as a speed control measure:

Beginning in the spring of 1999, a new program in Racine County, Wisconsin,

placed deputy sheriffs in plainclothes among highway construction workers in an

effort to control speeding through work zones. Deputies, wearing orange work

vests and equipped with handheld laser speed detectors and portable radios,

identify speeding or erratic vehicles and notify law enforcement personnel

positioned after the work zone if a stop or arrest is warranted. Racine County

Sheriff Bill McReynolds stated that while the presence of law enforcement vehicles

is a partial deterrent, the possible presence of officers among construction workers

might cause motorists to exercise greater caution driving through the work zone

[National Public Radio 1999].
12 Building Safer Highway Work Zones

Flaggers

Road builders and maintainers can:

Train all flaggers consistent with their level of responsibility and work zone conditions. Flaggers should know

the traffic flow, the work zone setup, and proper placement of channelizing devices.

Assign each flagger responsibility for monitoring operations in his or her immediate work area. Authorize

flaggers to recommend to the traffic control supervisor that operations be temporarily halted and the hazard

corrected when they see a hazard threatening the safe movement of traffic through the work zone. Authorize

flaggers to halt operations in the event a hazard arises and the traffic control supervisor is not in the immediate

area.

Train flaggers to maintain sufficient distance from other highway workers, so that they can be identified by

passing motorists.

In the event multiple flaggers are required, ensure they have the appropriate sight distance or two-way radios

to communicate effectively.

Avoid using flaggers whenever possible. Use alternative traffic management systems such as lane shifts,

portable traffic signals, or remote signaling devices operated by workers away from the flow of traffic.

Use alternatives to flaggers when traffic control is required under hazardous conditions such as high

traffic speeds, inclement weather, night work, and other conditions which limit visibility.

Policy makers can:

Develop flagger training program(s) that provide core competencies and are flexible enough to address

varying work situations. The current OSHA 500 course in construction can serve as a model. Flaggers

who successfully complete the program(s) could be issued documentation that could be carried from

employer to employer and state to state.

Add requirements for protection of flaggers to the OSHA construction standard.

High-visibility apparel

Road builders and maintainers can:

Require all workers on foot to wear high-visibility safety apparel.

Inspect high-visibility clothing regularly to ensure that color has not faded and that retroreflective properties

have not been lost.

So that workers do not blend into the background, consider seasonal variations in landscape and foliage

when choosing colors for worker apparel.
Building Safer Highway Work Zones 13

Consider using fluorescent garments with retroreflective material when working under poor lighting

conditions.

Consider increasing visibility by using high-visibility arm bands and hats, and vests with strobes.

Contracting agencies can:

Require fluorescent and retroreflective materials on head gear and on flaggers gloves.

Policy makers (Federal, state, and local) can:

Change the MUTCD to require that all workers wear high-visibility safety apparel.

Periodically evaluate visibility requirements in the MUTCD and OSHA regulations in light of changes in

technology and consensus standards.

Because visibility will be affected by background colors and available light, develop guidelines and mandates

that specify retroreflective or fluorescent material, rather than prescribe a specific color. {Note: research

suggests that the most effective choices for fluorescent colors are red-orange, fluorescent yellow-green, or

a combination of these [Turner et al. 1997].}

Incorporate criteria for selection and use of high-visibility clothing into 29 CFR 1926 Subpart E Personal

Protective and Life Saving Equipment, or incorporate them into the MUTCD for reference in Subpart E.

Manufacturers can:

Design high-visibility apparel that is effective 24 hours a day and during any weather condition.

Create high-visibility apparel with one design on the front and a different design on the back. If a workers

back is to the driver, the driver knows that the worker cannot see him.

Manufacture apparel to ensure visibility of the wearer from 360 degrees.
14 Building Safer Highway Work Zones

A new consensus standard provides guidance on high-visibility safety

apparel:

A new voluntary consensus standard, ANSI/ISEA 107-1999, American National

Standard for High-Visibility Safety Apparel, provides guidance for use of highvisibility safety apparel to protect workers exposed to hazards of low visibility,

including highway construction workers. The standard specifies minimum amounts

of retroreflective materials, colors, and placement of materials for high-visibility

worker apparel. It also defines three garment classes based on the surface area of

background and retroreflective material used to make the garment. Specifications

in the standard are intended to make the wearer of the apparel conspicuous under

any light conditions by day, and under illumination of vehicle headlights in the dark.

Though not considered a part of ANSI/ISEA 107-1999, Appendix B provides the

following conspicuity criteria for selection of apparel:

Class 1  For use in situations which permit the workers full attention to

approaching traffic, with ample separation of workers and vehicles, and traffic

speeds not exceeding 25 mph.

Specifies a minimum of 0.14 m2

 fluorescent background material and 0.10 m2

retroreflective material.

Class 2  For use in inclement weather conditions, for work on or near roadways

with higher traffic levels, or for traffic speeds above 25 mph. Class 2 apparel is

appropriate for use in situations where worker attention is diverted from

approaching traffic, or where separation of workers and traffic is less than ample.

Specifies a minimum of 0.50 m2 fluorescent background material and 0.13 m2

retroreflective material.

Class 3  For use in settings where workers and vehicle operators have high task

loads, where workers are exposed to traffic speeds above 50 mph, and where

workers are exposed to a wide range of weather conditions. Class 3 apparel is

recommended for all highway construction personnel.

Specifies a minimum of 0.8 m2 fluorescent background material and 0.2 m2

retroreflective material.

Note: Performance of Class 3 apparel, suggested for use by all highway

construction personnel, exceeds the 1,000-foot distance visibility recommendation

in the MUTCD. The new ANSI/ISEA standard states that the worker should be

conspicuous through the full range of body motions and be identifiable as a person.

Appendix B further suggests that workers needing Class 3 apparel should be

conspicuous from a minimum distance of 1,280 feet [ANSI/ISEA 1999].
Building Safer Highway Work Zones 15

Illumination of the work zone

Road builders and maintainers can:

When installing lighting within a work zone, ensure proper illumination for the work space, while controlling

glare so as not to blind workers and passing motorists:

Lower the height of lighting equipment to reduce glare for motorists.

Consider using glare-free light balloons and glare screens.

Policy makers (Federal, state and local) can:

Develop a comprehensive consensus standard for illumination of work zones. The standard could include:

Minimum lighting levels needed for each work task

Types of light sources recommended for both portable lighting and equipment-mounted lighting

Minimum area to be illuminated around each type of equipment

Recommendations for placement of both portable lighting and equipment-mounted lighting.

Manufacturers can:

Work with policy makers, contracting agencies, contractors, and labor to develop standards for illuminating

highway work zones.
16 Building Safer Highway Work Zones

Research into work zone illumination needs:

Illumination guidelines for nighttime highway work are now being developed by

researchers at the University of Florida. Preliminary recommendations from this

research defined three categories of highway construction and specified lighting

levels needed for each:

Category I: General illumination requirement for the work space (5 footcandles)

Recommended for large-scale visual tasks with comparatively low

need for accuracy

Category II: Provides for general illumination of tasks and around equipment (10

foot-candles)

Recommended for work done on and around construction

equipment such as paving and milling which require somewhat

greater accuracy and where workers are located near machinery

Category III: Specified for small scale visual tasks requiring high accuracy, such as

repairing cracks or pot holes (20 foot-candles)

Also recommended for situations requiring extreme caution and

attention, such as flagging and signaling

The preliminary illumination recommendations also cover light sources, lighting

system configurations (temporary, portable, and equipment-mounted), steps for

designing a lighting system, and the importance of maintenance and backup of the

system. The final product of the research will be illumination guidelines for nighttime

highway work that specify design requirements for work zone lighting, taking into

account visibility requirements of motorists passing through the work zone. The

research is funded through the National Cooperative Highway Research Program

[Transportation Research Board 1996].

Developing internal traffic control plans

A temporary traffic control plan (TCP) describes how a specific work zone is to be set up to ensure the safety

of the motoring public traveling through the work zone; however, construction equipment and vehicles within the

work space are not addressed by TCPs [Graham and Migletz 1994] . In contrast to a TCP, an internal traffic

control plan (ITCP) is a tool that project managers can use to coordinate the flow of construction vehicles,

equipment, and workers operating in close proximity within the activity area, so that the safety of workers can

be ensured.
Building Safer Highway Work Zones 17

Road builders and maintainers can:

Develop an internal traffic control plan (ITCP) once the temporary traffic control plan has been established.

As the ITCP is developed, consider how the work space fits within the overall work zone and make sure

that the ITCP is placed in the context of a temporary traffic control plan.

Develop internal traffic control plans for all medium, large, and multi-contractor jobs. For small recurrent

operations such as filling potholes, routine maintenance, and mowing, a checklist could be used in place of

a complete ITCP.

Develop schematic diagrams depicting the movement of construction workers and vehicles within the work

space. Sample diagrams have been developed for paving, trenching, and dirt-spread operations [Graham

and Migletz 1997]. These diagrams provide an idea of how a typical ITCP diagram might look, but must

be modified to assure compatibility with the overall TCP and to address site-specific conditions.

Management elements that may be addressed in an ITCP:

Chain of command

On-site equipment and personnel

Contact information, including company personnel, other on-site contractors,

the contracting agency, and emergency response services

The location, time table, and scope of the project

An operations communication plan that includes the following:

A plan for orienting independent truck drivers and subcontractors to the

work space and the ITCP

Methods of communication regarding changes in the ITCP

A means for workers on foot to talk with equipment operators, truck

drivers, and the people in charge of controlling or coordinating the flow

of vehicles and equipment entering and leaving the work space and the

movement of heavy equipment within the work space

A means for grader operators, dozer operators, truck drivers and

scraper operators to communicate with each other and with the prime

and sub-contractors
18 Building Safer Highway Work Zones

Safety elements that may be addressed in an ITCP:

Identification of ITCP coordinator assigned to the project

A description of the role and authority of the ITCP coordinator

A description of the role employees have in implementing the ITCP, and in

recognizing, reporting and eliminating safety hazards

A continuous process for reviewing incidents, close calls, and potential hazards

involving workers and equipment within the work space and for elimination of

reported hazards

A description of how the ITCP fits within the temporary traffic control plan

Hazard assessment and control elements that may be addressed in an ITCP:

Schematic diagrams depicting the movement of construction workers and

vehicles within the work space (see ITCP diagram elements)

A checklist of site-specific hazards with a description of how these hazards will

be minimized: what procedures, safety equipment, and control strategies will

be used?

A reporting system for all close-calls and incidents related to the internal traffic

control plan (to encourage reporting, consider using an anonymous reporting

system)

A plan for safely handling intermittent traffic stoppages; e.g., for equipment

turn-around

Anticipated traffic volume and speed, as well as speed limit for operation within

the work space

Specifications for lighting in the work space
Building Safer Highway Work Zones 19

Elements of an ITCP diagram:

Standard symbols for pieces of equipment and project personnel that will be

on site

Overview of how the activity area fits within the temporary traffic control plan

Location of proximate traffic control devices

Delineated areas around specific pieces of equipment and operations where

workers on foot are prohibited (e.g., swing radius of an excavator, blind areas

of a dump truck)

Locations for storing and servicing materials and equipment

Location of parking for visitors and workers

Size and location of lateral buffer zones

Description of internal signage and all internal traffic control devices

Contracting agencies can:

Assist contractors in the development of ITCPs and in reviewing compatibility of ITCPs with the project

TCP.

Policy makers (Federal, state, and local) can:

Establish guidelines for developing ITCPs.

Develop sample ITCPs for selected road construction operations.

Implementing internal traffic control plans

Road builders and maintainers can:

Train workers in the implementation of the ITCP for each project.

Place a trained ITCP coordinator at each job site. By being at the job site, the coordinator is able to respond

immediately to hazardous situations. The employer should authorize the coordinator to make adaptive

changes and/or halt operations as needed to ensure worker safety.

Evaluate the effectiveness of the ITCP throughout the project, noting changes required as the project

evolves. Retain schematic drawings and other documents in the job file for use in developing future ITCPs.

At entrances to the activity area, distribute site-specific safety materials, including a copy of the ITCP and

safety guidelines for workers on foot, to all drivers and visitors coming into the activity area. Other means

of communicating this information include toolbox safety meetings, faxing the ITCP to other employers who

will be on site, and distributing the ITCP to truck drivers at the loading facility.
20 Building Safer Highway Work Zones

Contracting agencies can:

Ensure agency staff understand the ITCP for each project so that they can comply with the ITCP when they

travel to a work site during inspections.

Accountability and coordination at the work site

Road builders and maintainers can:

Avoid assigning collateral duties that distract safety personnel from focusing on their safety responsibilities.

Make supervisors accountable for daily documentation of hazards and how hazards were mitigated.

Maintain lines of communication between the individuals responsible for different aspects of work zone

safety.

Contracting agencies can:

Require contractors and subcontractors to prepare site-specific hazard assessments that include

identification of hazards and description of how hazards will be eliminated or controlled.

For each project, use hazard assessments to guide identification of immediate worker training needs.

Adopt a project-wide communication program in which each contractor informs all other contractors of

hazards related to their work. This allows each contractor the opportunity to ensure that employees are

aware of hazards resulting from work being done by others at the site.

Require an on-site senior project supervisor with final authority and overall responsibility for safety on the

project.

Conduct a pre-construction meeting among contractors to coordinate project activities, discuss potential

hazards and how hazards will be eliminated, or minimized.

Equipment operation and maintenance

Road builders and maintainers can:

Make sure that each equipment and vehicle operator has a valid drivers license.

Allow equipment to be operated or repaired only by persons who have been trained and authorized to work

with that piece of equipment. Assign responsibility for each piece of equipment to an individual worker.

Designate a supervisor to be responsible for daily pre-shift equipment checks and for verifying that any

problems are corrected. Although equipment may be inspected by various people, the supervisor must be

responsible for ensuring that inspections are performed daily, that necessary repairs are made, that

scheduled maintenance is performed, and that records of all inspections and repairs are maintained.
Building Safer Highway Work Zones 21

Ensure that workers are paid for the time they spend performing equipment safety checks.

When repairs are made on site, require that the operators controls are made inoperable so that the

equipment cannot be moved by another worker while repairs are being made.

Require equipment operators to set parking brakes when leaving equipment unattended. When equipment

is parked on an incline, chock wheels in addition to setting parking brakes. Chocks should be of sufficient

size and configuration to immobilize the equipment.

Require employees to report equipment problems to the designated competent person and give employees

the authority to shut down unsafe equipment without repercussion.

Develop pictorial checklists to make equipment inspections easier.

Keep operator manuals in the equipment cab.

Ensure ready access to repair manuals by maintenance personnel at all work locations.

Contact the equipment manufacturer to obtain operator and repair manuals when purchasing used

equipment.

For night work, install light strips on trucks to better delineate vehicles and equipment. Drivers must turn

off this additional lighting before leaving the work area.

Use equipment with rollover protective structures (ROPS). Purchase and have installed retrofit ROPS and

seat belts for older equipment.

Train equipment operators in safe work practices to prevent equipment rollovers:

Maintain proper tire pressure

Know material density and surface stability

Use spotters with two-way radio communication

Train operators to use seat belts and to remain belted in the event of a rollover

Use edge guards on trailers to prevent rollovers

Use spotters during loading and unloading of equipment from transport trailers

Install full-width loading ramps on transport trailers.

Contracting agencies can:

Specify use of high conspicuity tape to delineate height and width of construction vehicles and equipment.

Existing Federal standards that apply to tractor-trailers provide a model for placement, pattern, color, and

reflectivity of tape at the sides and rear of the trailer [49 CFR 393.13].

For night work, specify installation of low-level lighting on trucks and equipment so that operators can see

workers on foot in the vicinity.

Policy makers (Federal, state, and local) can:

Require the highway construction industry to comply with a standard similar in purpose to the general

industry lockout/tagout standard (29 CFR 1910.147).
22 Building Safer Highway Work Zones

Manufacturers can:

Make operator and repair manuals for equipment available on manufacturers Websites or through an online clearinghouse.

Safe equipment operation around workers on foot

Road builders and maintainers can:

Separate workers on foot from equipment as much as possible:

Schedule work tasks to keep workers on foot out of areas where heavy equipment is in use.

Channelize dump trucks leaving the work space and keep workers on foot out of that channel. Use

flexible, colored poles (as used for snowplow markers) or temporary pavement marking inside the

work space to mark pedestrian-free areas or flow-of-traffic lines. These delineators should be

installed so that the public will not notice or respond to them, but the workers will recognize them as

guideposts.

Train subcontractors, crews, operators, and truck drivers to understand any symbols, markers, and

colors used to separate workers on foot from equipment within the work space.

Design the work space to eliminate or decrease backing and blind spots; when feasible pull trucks

in and let the operation catch up to them.

Train workers on foot and equipment operators in appropriate communication methods (e.g., using hand

signals and maintaining visual contact) to be used when workers on foot are required to be in the same area

as equipment.

Train equipment operators never to move equipment without making positive visual contact with any

workers on foot near the equipment.

Training and certification

Road builders and maintainers can:

Implement performance-based training that evaluates trainees core and specialized knowledge and

demonstrated ability to perform the tasks for which they were trained.

Create an industry-wide campaign to promote training and to publicize available training programs.

Since all workers, including equipment operators and supervisors, are likely to be on foot around operating

vehicles and equipment, train all workers to recognize and avoid the hazards of working on foot around

equipment.

Train all workers in hazards and adaptations for work at night and in other low-visibility conditions.
Building Safer Highway Work Zones 23

Hold daily toolbox meetings at the job site to discuss and report hazards and close-calls, and to discuss

safety considerations for performing the days tasks.

Train workers on the specifics of the ITCP for each new construction project. Review ITCP with workers

whenever it is modified.

Policy makers (Federal, state, and local) can:

Promulgate an OSHA regulation mandating training of all construction workers whose actions affect work

zone safety. The current MUTCD recommends but does not require that all such persons, from upper level

management through field personnel, receive training appropriate for the job decisions each is required to

make.

Develop training programs that provide workers with an understanding of safety hazards and methods of

hazard reduction in highway and street construction.

Begin to develop a national certification process for equipment operators.

Preparation for certification could involve a 2- to 4-year qualification period that includes classroom

and on-the-job training and experience.

Certification would be a function of the operators qualifications, demonstrated knowledge, and

proficiency.

The certification process should provide for maintaining and renewing certification on a periodic basis.

A national third-party crane certification program:

The National Commission for the Certification of Crane Operators (NCCCO) is a

nonprofit corporation that was founded in 1995 to develop effective performance

standards for safe crane operation to assist all segments of general industry and

construction. The NCCCO is strictly a credentialing organizationthe Commission

does not offer training programs, since that would compromise its objective

measurement of a candidates knowledge and skills. What the NCCCO does provide

is a comprehensive and independent means of assessing crane operator knowledge

and skills through administration of a core and several specialty written

examinations. On February 26, 1999, the OSHA and the NCCCO signed an

agreement officially recognizing the NCCCO national crane operator certification

program as meeting OSHA requirements for crane operator proficiency. As a

result, when compliance safety and health officers perform inspections or make

accident investigations, they will recognize NCCCO certification as verification that

crane operators have met the training requirements of the OSHA standards.
24 Building Safer Highway Work Zones

An OSHA standard with specifications for performance-based training:

The OSHA standard for powered industrial truck training provides a model for

performance-based training. The standard stipulates that training shall consist of a

combination of formal instruction, demonstrations by the trainer, practical exercises

performed by the trainee, and evaluation of the operators performance in the

workplace. Also specified in the standard are situations in which refresher training

must be conducted, including the following: unsafe operation has been observed;

the operator has been involved in an accident or near-miss incident; the operator

is being assigned to drive a different type of truck; or workplace conditions have

changed such that the safe operation of the vehicle may be affected. At a minimum,

the standard requires that operator competence be re-evaluated at least once every

3 years. In contrast with the crane operator certification program discussed above,

the OSHA standard requires the operator to be certified by the employer;

certification through a third party is not allowed [29 CFR 1910.178(l)]. Note: The

requirements applicable to construction work under 29 CFR 1926.602(d)

reference those set forth in 29 CFR 1910.178(l).

Changes in the contracting process

Contracting agencies can:

Level the playing field among all potential contractors by requiring a written safety program in bid

specifications. Contractors may risk losing jobs when they bid higher to account for costs of training,

maintenance, and other safety program elements.

Level the playing field among all potential contractors by specifying appropriate protective technologies

(e.g., TMA, concrete barricades) as individual bid line items when preparing bid specifications, instead of

using generic contract language that simply specifies contractors must comply with Federal and state safety

regulations.

In bid specifications, stipulate that all workers on foot be equipped with high-visibility safety apparel.

In planning new construction and rehabilitation, specify durable surfacing materials that will need to be

replaced less frequently.

Pre-qualify all contractors and subcontractors to ensure that they have good safety records. Periodically

re-evaluate the pre-qualified list of contractors.

Through contract language, specify that the traffic control supervisor must have overall responsibility for

temporary traffic control.

In bid specifications, include provisions for the contractor to set up an adequate work space for safe

operations (e.g., sufficient lateral buffer space and room for equipment to maneuver).
Building Safer Highway Work Zones 25

Require demonstrated understanding and ability to implement the TCP as an acceptance criterion for

awarding contracts. Do not award contracts based solely on a low bid criterion.

Use the quality and completeness of the TCP and the ITCP as acceptance criteria for awarding contracts.

Policy makers (Federal, state, and local) can:

Develop model safety specifications for contracting agencies to use when developing contract documents.

During the bidding process, contractors would then be able to assign costs for implementing better safety

practices.

Create forums for dialogue among all entities involved in highway construction.

Laboratory and field research needs

Policy makers (Federal, state, and local), contracting agencies, road builders and maintainers, labor,

and the research community can work together to:

Develop prototype internal traffic control plans for a broad range of highway construction tasks and evaluate

their effectiveness through field studies.

Determine the optimum dimensions and spacing for channelizing devices.

Determine the optimum lateral buffer zone distance and re-calculate the maximum travel speed outside the

work space based on this distance.

Determine optimum spacing between the truck-mounted attenuator (TMA) and the vehicle in front of it;

develop interventions to deter motorists from driving in front of the TMA in order to get around it.

Evaluate driver recognition and comprehension of different channelizing devices under various lighting and

weather conditions.

Evaluate the reliability of intrusion alarms for alerting workers of traffic vehicles that have penetrated the

work space.

Evaluate the effectiveness of law enforcement officers or vehicles stationed in the advance warning area as

a means of reducing crashes and worker injuries. Evaluate risk to law enforcement personnel who are used

in work zone advance warning areas.

Evaluate effectiveness and applicability of phosphorescent, fluorescent and retroreflective materials,

including the patterns used when they are applied to a garment.

Evaluate the effectiveness and applicability to work zones of:

Sensing devices that sound an alarm when an object is near the vehicle

Parabolic mirrors on construction equipmentsimilar mirrors are now in use on school buses

Individual vibrating alarms that can be triggered from any place on the site, giving a worker 8-10

seconds notice of approaching vehicles
26 Building Safer Highway Work Zones

Transmitters worn by workers which will send a signal/alarm to approaching construction equipment

[Hoffner 1997]

Tapes that sound an alarm when a person or vehicle crosses them

Closed-circuit television cameras, mirrors, and devices that stop a vehicle nearing a collision.

Evaluate ways of reducing glare caused by work zone illumination:

Evaluate polarized windshield glass or polarized material over windows as a means of limiting glare.

Assess warning lights and strobe lights used on emergency vehicles and traffic control devices to

determine need for glare reduction.

Conduct research to better understand physiological and psychosocial effects of night work, extended shifts,

rotating shifts, and irregular work schedules on worker safety.

Conduct research to determine the most effective means of delivering training to highway construction

workers.

Measure light levels and test the effectiveness of mirrors and video cameras under nighttime construction

conditions.

Conduct hazard surveillance research to determine levels of worker exposure to specific types of machinery

in highway construction zones.

Data and record keeping

Policy makers (Federal, state, and local) can:

Modify existing injury and fatality data systems to allow more detailed analysis of exposure to injury risk for

highway construction workers in work zones:

In highway crash data systems, distinguish between injuries to workers and injuries to motorists.

Continually analyze work zone crash data so that high-risk work zones can be quickly identified and

hazards eliminated.

Accurately identify work zones where crashes are occurring by recording a unique identifier (e.g.,

DOT project code) on documents such as police crash reports.

Consider adding time of injury and type of equipment information to the OSHA 200 logs or other data

collection forms.

Collect information on type of road construction: new, rehabilitation, or maintenance, as well as

information on type of work schedule (i.e., regular or compressed work schedules, overtime work,

or night work).

To produce better state-level data on highway work zone injuries and better estimates of worker

exposure, coordinate data collection and analysis between state departments of health and

transportation. Consider developing injury rates per mile of highway built or maintained.

Assess work zone-related worker injuries and fatalities on an annual basis and report results through

Web and print media.
Building Safer Highway Work Zones 27

List of Acronyms

ANSI American National Standards Institute

BLS Bureau of Labor Statistics

CFOI Census of Fatal Occupational Injuries

CFR Code of Federal Regulations

FACE Fatality Assessment and Control Evaluation

FHWA Federal Highway Administration

ISEA International Safety Equipment Association

ITCP Internal traffic control plan

LHSFNA Laborers Health and Safety Fund of North America

MUTCD Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices

NIOSH National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health

OSHA Occupational Safety and Health Administration

ROPS Rollover protective structure

SIC Standard Industrial Classification

TCP Traffic control plan

TEA-21 Transportation Equity Act for the 21st Century

TMA Truck-mounted attenuator
28 Building Safer Highway Work Zones
Building Safer Highway Work Zones 29

Glossary

Activity area The portion of the highway where the work takes place. It is comprised of

the work space and the traffic space, and the buffer space [FHWA 2000

(MUTCD, Section 6C.06)].

Advance warning area The area in advance of the work zone where drivers are informed of what to

expect. The advance warning may vary from a single sign or rotating/strobe

lights on a vehicle to a series of signs in advance of the temporary traffic control

zone activity area [FHWA 2000 (MUTCD, Section 6C.04)].

Certification A process which assesses an individuals knowledge and skills to determine if

the individual meets a minimum standard of qualification.

Channelizing devices The function of channelizing devices is to warn road users of conditions created

by work activities in or near the roadway and to guide road users. . . . They are

also used to separate motor vehicle traffic from the work space, pavement

drop-offs, pedestrian or bicycle paths, or opposing directions of motor vehicle

traffic. . . . Channelizing devices include cones, tubular markers, vertical panels,

drums, barricades, and temporary raised islands [FHWA 2000 (MUTCD,

Section 6F.55)].

Chock A wedge or block for blocking the movement of a wheel.

Competent person One who is capable of identifying existing and predictable hazards in the

surroundings or working environments which are unsanitary, hazardous, or

dangerous to employees, and who has authorization to take prompt corrective

measures to eliminate them (29 CFR 1926 Subpart C).

Consensus standard Any occupational safety and health standard, or modification thereof, which

has been adopted and promulgated by a nationally recognized standardsproducing organization under procedures whereby it can be determined by the

Secretary [of Labor] that persons interested and affected by the scope or

provisions of the standard have reached substantial agreement on its adoption

[and] was formulated in a manner which afforded opportunity for diverse views

to be considered . . . (OSH Act, Sec-3).

Foot-candle One lumen per square foot.

High conspicuity tape Retroreflective marking material, usually white or an alternating red-white

pattern, that is applied to the rear and sides of vehicles to create visual contrast

and clearly delineate vehicle size.

High-visibility vest/apparel Personal protective safety clothing intended to provide conspicuity during

both daytime and nighttime usage [ANSI/ISEA 1999].
30 Building Safer Highway Work Zones

Internal traffic control plan A traffic control plan developed to control the flow of construction workers,

vehicles, and equipment within the work space.

Internal traffic control A person designated by the contractor as a competent person who has the

plan coordinator ability to recognize hazards associated with the movement of construction

vehicles, equipment, and personnel within the work space and has the authority

to modify conditions to eliminate those hazards.

Lateral buffer space A lateral buffer space may be used to separate the traffic space from the work

space . . . [or a hazardous area], such as excavations or pavement drop-offs.

A lateral buffer space also may be used between two travel lanes, especially

[those carrying traffic in opposite directions]. The width of the lateral buffer

space should be determined by engineering judgement [FHWA 2000

(MUTCD, Section 6C.06)].

Light balloon A self-inflating elliptical lighting fixture designed to produce uniform non-glare

illumination.

Milling Process in which a rotating drum, equipped with special working tools, cuts the

pavement to a predetermined depth and reduces the cuttings to a minimum size

in the process. Also called cold planing [Webster 1995, p. 125].

Pedestrian A person traveling on foot, who may be a construction worker or a member of

the public.

Pre-construction meeting A meeting between the owners representatives and representatives for the

contractor(s) to discuss their respective safety requirements and

implementation of health and safety provisions pertinent to the work under

contract [Hinze 1997, p. 102].

Pre-qualification A process by which only selected contractors that meet predetermined

performance criteria are entitled to bid on a construction project. The

contractors safety performance is often one of the qualifying criteria

[MacCollum 1995, p. 53-54].

Project supervisor Manages the activities at the construction site, schedules work crews and

materials, and is responsible for keeping project on schedule and on

budget.

Retroreflective material Retroreflective material reflects light back towards the source. For example,

retroreflective material reflects vehicle headlights so that signs, safety clothing,

and other safety devices appear more visible to drivers at night.

Senior project supervisor The senior project supervisor has final authority and responsibility for safety and

health on the project, ensuring correction or abatement of hazards, monitoring

for potentially hazardous conditions, determining that competent persons are
Building Safer Highway Work Zones 31

designated by contractors, notifying responsible contractor of conditions that

may cause injury or illness, and maintaining project safety and health records

[ANSI A10.33-1992 (R1998)].

Site-specific hazard Review of plans and specifications to identify the location and nature of

assessment potential hazards... [MacCollum 1995, p. 60].

Skilled construction trades A grouping of occupations that includes the traditional building trades, such as

carpenters, painters, electricians, and cement finishers.

Taper Tapers may be used in both the transition and termination areas. . . . Tapers

are created using a series of channelizing devices and/or pavement

markings to move traffic out of or into the normal path [FHWA 2000

(MUTCD, Section 6C.08)].

Temporary pavement Markings used until the earliest date when it is practical and possible to install

markings pavement markings that meet [the full MUTCD standards] for pavement

markings. Normally, it should not be necessary to leave temporary markings

in place for more than 2 weeks [FHWA 2000 (MUTCD, Section 6F.66)].

Temporary traffic control A temporary traffic control plan (TCP) describes temporary traffic control

plan measures to be used for facilitating road users through a work zone. . . . [The

plan] may range in scope from being very detailed, to simply referencing typical

drawings contained in [the MUTCD], standard approved highway drawings

and manuals, or specific drawings contained in contract documents [FHWA

2000 (MUTCD, Section 6C.01)].

Termination area The termination area is used to return road users to their normal path. The

termination area extends from the downstream end of the work area to the

END ROAD WORK signs, if posted [FHWA 2000 (MUTCD, Section

6C.07)].

Toolbox meeting Toolbox meetings are typically short (10 to 30 minutes), and are held on a

regular basis (weekly, or daily) to discuss safety rules, procedures,

hazards, corrective actions, mishaps, and injury and illness prevention

[Hinze 1997, p. 106].

Traffic control device A traffic control device is a sign, signal, marking or other device placed on,

over, or adjacent to a street or highway, pedestrian facility, or bike way (by

authority of a public agency having jurisdiction) to regulate, warn, or guide

traffic [FHWA 2000 (MUTCD, p. I-1)].

Traffic control supervisor A person designated by the contractor to assume overall responsibility for the

safety of the work zone setup and conformance of the temporary traffic control

devices with the TCP.
32 Building Safer Highway Work Zones

Traffic space The traffic space is the portion of the highway in which road users are routed

through the activity area [FHWA 2000 (MUTCD, Section 6C.06)].

Transition area The transition area is that section of highway where road users are redirected

out of their normal path [FHWA 2000 (MUTCD, Section 6C.05)].

Truck-mounted attenuator A safety appliance mounted on the rear of a truck that dissipates the energy of

(TMA) a rear-end collision.

Worker on foot A worker on foot is any worker, regardless of task assignment, who is on the

ground (standing, walking, or sitting) rather than inside a vehicle or piece of

equipment.

Work space The work space is that portion of the highway closed to road users and set

aside for workers, equipment, material, and a shadow vehicle if one is used

upstream. Work spaces are usually delineated for road users by channelizing

devices, or to exclude vehicles and pedestrians, by temporary barriers. The

work space may be stationary or move as the work progresses [FHWA 2000

(MUTCD, Section 6C.06)].

Work zone The area between the first warning sign and the last traffic control device, as well

as non-roadway areas (e.g., shoulders and drainages), and ancillary areas that

serve as staging areas, or support areas for the work zone (e.g., temporary

batch plants). This definition is broader than the work zone described in the

MUTCD, which does not include ancillary areas that serve as staging areas, or

support areas (e.g., temporary batch plants) for the work zone.
Building Safer Highway Work Zones 33

References

ANSI/ISEA [1999]. American National Standard for high-visibility safety apparel. New York, NY: American

National Standards Institute, ANSI/ISEA 107-1999.

ANSI/NSC [1992 (R1998)]. American National Standard for construction and demolition operations safety

and health program requirements for multi-employer projects. New York, NY: American National Standards

Institute, ANSI/NSC A10.33 (1992 (R1998)).

Blacklow B, Hoffner K [1996]. Fatalities and serious injuries among highway construction workers. Laborers

Health and Safety Fund of North America, unpublished report for FHWA Grant DTFH-93-X-00024.

Bryden JE, Andrew LB [1999]. Serious and fatal injuries to workers on highway construction projects. Paper

presented at the Annual Meeting of the Transportation Research Board, Washington, DC, January 10-14, 1999.

Bureau of Labor Statistics [1992-1998]. Census of Fatal Occupational Injuries (CFOI). Unpublished data

(analysis by the NIOSH Division of Safety Research).

Bureau of Labor Statistics [1999]. Occupational injuries and illnesses: counts, rates, and characteristics, 1997

(U.S. Department of Labor Bulletin 2518). Washington, DC: U.S. Government Printing Office.

CFR. Code of federal regulations. Safety and health regulations for construction (29 CFR 1926), Safety and

health regulations for general industry (29 CFR 1910), and Parts and accessories necessary for safe operation

(49 CFR 393). Washington, DC: U.S. Government Printing Office, Office of the Federal Register.

FHWA [2000]. Manual on uniform traffic control devices millennium edition. U.S. Department of

Transportation, Federal Highway Administration (FHWA).

FHWA [1998a]. Part VI of the manual on uniform traffic control devices  1988 edition of MUTCD, Revision

3  September 3, 1993, Includes Revision No. 4A Issued February 19, 1998. U.S. Department of

Transportation, Federal Highway Administration (FHWA).

FHWA [1999]. TEA-21: Moving Americans into the 21st Century (web site). http://www.fhwa.dot.gov/tea21/

index.htm. Last accessed November 29, 1999.

Graham JL, Migletz J [1994]. Development and implementation of traffic control plans for highway work zones.

Transportation Research Board, NCHRP Synthesis of Highway Practice 208.

Graham J, Migletz J [1997]. Internal traffic control plans. Laborers Health and Safety Fund of North America,

unpublished report for FHWA Grant DTFH-93-X-00024.

Hinze JW [1997]. Construction safety. Columbus, OH: Prentice Hall, pp. 102, 106.

Hoffner K [1997]. A training program for the spotter to operator alarm system  the spot alarm. Laborers

Health and Safety Fund of North America, unpublished report for FHWA Grant DTFH-93-X-00024.
34 Building Safer Highway Work Zones

MacCollum DV [1995]. Construction safety planning. New York: Van Nostrand Reinhold, pp.53-54, 60.

Massachusetts Department of Public Health [1996]. Construction laborer crushed by asphalt truck while paving

interstate highway. Boston, MA: Fatality Assessment and Control Evaluation (FACE) Report No. 95-MA039-01.

Minnesota Department of Health [1992]. Highway construction flagman dies after being struck by a pickup

truck. Minneapolis, MN: Fatality Assessment and Control Evaluation (FACE) Report No. MN9214.

Minnesota Department of Health [1997]. Conveyor operator dies after being run over by belly dump trailer.

Minneapolis, MN: Fatality Assessment and Control Evaluation (FACE) Report No. MN 96-92.

National Public Radio [1999]. All Things Considered [transcript], February 24, 1999.

National Transportation Safety Board [1992]. Safety study: highway work zone safety (PB92-917005 NTSB/

SS-92/02). Washington, DC: National Transportation Safety Board.

Ore T, Fosbroke DE [1997]. Motor vehicle fatalities in the United States construction industry. Accid Anal Prev

29(5):613-626.

Pigman JG, Agent KR [1990]. Highway accidents in construction and maintenance work zones. Transportation

Research Record 1270:12-21.

Stout D, Graham J, Bryant-Fields B, Migletz J, Fish J [1993]. Maintenance work zone safety devices

development and evaluation (final report). Strategic Highway Research Program, Report SHRP-H-371.

Transportation Research Board [1996]. Illumination guidelines for nighttime highway work. NCHRP Research

Results Digest 216.

Turner JD, Simmons CJ, Graham JR [1997]. High-visibility clothing for daytime use in work zones.

Transportation Research Record 1585:1-8.

Webster LF [1995]. The contractors dictionary of equipment, tools, and techniques. New York: John Wiley

& Sons, Inc., p. 125.
Building Safer Highway Work Zones 35

Additional Readings

Agent K, Hibbs JO [1996]. Evaluation of SHRP work zone safety devices. Kentucky Transportation Center,

Report KTC-96-80.

American Road and Transportation Builders Association [1996]. Construction safety management manual.

Washington DC: ARTBA.

Anderson RW [1990]. Part I: worker safety in street and highway work zones. TransSafety Reporter 8(5):4-7.

Andrew LB, Bryden JE [1997]. Managing construction safety and health: experience of New York State

Department of Transportation. Transportation Research Record 1585:9-18.

Booker SC, Ullman GL, Levine SZ [1987]. Supplemental devices to enhance flagger safety.

Transportation Research Record 1148:34-37.

California Department of Transportation [1988]. Highway maintenance activities during low volume traffic

hours. Report to the Legislature, March 1988.

Chappell DW [1992]. Backing accident prevention. Professional Safety 37 (May):40-41.

Construction Safety Association of Ontario [1991]. Backing up. Construction Safety (Mar/Apr): 4-9.

Dalere EF, ed. [1993]. The traffic safety toolbox: a primer on traffic safety. Institute of Transportation Engineers,

ITE Publication No. LP-279.

Daly JB [1997]. Working on safety. ENR 238 (Feb. 24):3.

Ellis RD, Herbsman ZJ, Chheda PN, Epstein WC, Kumar A [1993]. Developing procedures for night

operations. University of Florida Transportation Research Center, Report No. UTC-UF-326-93-1.

Submitted to the University of North Carolina Institute for Transportation Research and Education, Raleigh, NC.

Elrahman OA, Perry RJ [1994]. Night-time construction operations. New York State Department of

Transportation, Engineering Research & Development Report No. FHWA/NY/SR-94/116.

FHWA [1992]. Proceedings of the Symposium on Work Zone Traffic Control, 1991, Orlando, FL. U.S.

Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Office of Research and Development.

Publication No. FHWA-TS-91-003.

FHWA [1995]. Innovative devices for safer work zones. U.S. Department of Transportation, Federal Highway

Administration, Office of Technology Applications, Report No. FHWA-SA-95-029.

FHWA [1998b]. Meeting the customers needs for mobility and safety during construction and maintenance

operations (Pub. No. FHWA-PR-98-01-A). U.S. Department of Transportation, Federal Highway

Administration, Office of Program Quality Coordination.
36 Building Safer Highway Work Zones

FHWA [1998c]. Meeting the customers needs for mobility and safety during construction and maintenance

operations: Model Work Zone Traffic Management Program and Self Evaluation Guide (Pub. No. FHWA-PR98-01-C). U.S. Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Office of Program Quality

Coordination.

Graham JL, Paulson RJ, Glennon JC [1977]. Accidents and speed studies in construction zones. Report

FHWA-RD-77-80. Kansas City, MO: Midwest Research Institute.

Harris-Stewart C [1987]. Work zone safety arouses concern. Engineering News Record 218:30-31.

Hinze J, Carlisle DL [1990]. Variables affected by nighttime construction projects. Transportation Research

Record 1282: 95-103.

Hoffner K [1997]. A training program for the ribbon switch/radio control truck stopping system: the truck stop.

Laborers Health and Safety Fund of North America, unpublished report for FHWA Grant DTFH-93-X-00024.

Keeping motorists and workers safe in the work zone: North Carolinas training program [1993]. Road Work

Safety Report 3(3):3-6.

LHSFNA (Laborers Health and Safety Fund of North America) [1996]. Heavy equipment expert task team

teleconference notes, unpublished report for FHWA Grant DTFH-93-X-00024.

LHSFNA [1997]. Highway work zone safety. Unpublished training course manual for FHWA Grant DTFH93-X-00024.

Melia MK [1994]. How to improve work-zone safety. Traffic Safety 94(3):6-9.

Melia MK [1995]. Warning: work still ahead on work-zone safety. Traffic Safety 95(2):16-19.

National Association of County Engineers [1995]. Traffic operations. 1995 ed. NACE Action Guide Volume III-2.

Pietrucha MT [1995]. Human factors issues related to work zone safety. Transportation Builder (May):40-42.

Pratt SG, Kisner SM, Moore PH [1997]. Machinery-related fatalities in the construction industry. Am J Ind

Med 32:42-50.

Safety after MUTCD: is it enough? [1997]. Better Roads 67(2):17-20.

Sorock GS, Rainey TA, Lehto MR [1996]. Motor vehicle crashes in roadway construction workzones: an

analysis using narrative text from insurance claims. Accid Anal Prev 28(1):131-138.

Trout ND, Ullman GL [1997]. Devices and technology to improve flagger/worker safety. Texas Department

of Transportation, Office of Research and Technology Transfer, Report TX-97/2963-1F.

Washington State Department of Transportation [1996]. Safety in the work zone (videocassette).

Work zone safety: dangers and some solutions [1988]. Highway and Heavy Construction 131 (Nov):94-97.
Building Safer Highway Work Zones 37

On-line Resources

NOTE: The addresses below were correct as of January, 2001. Since Internet addresses for Websites

change frequently, readers are cautioned that slight changes may have taken place since that time.

American Association of State Highway Transportation Officials

http://www.aashto.org/

American Concrete Pavement Association

http://www.pavement.com

American Road and Transportation Builders Association

http://www.artba.org

American Traffic Safety Services Association

http://www.atssa.com

Associated General Contractors of America

http://www.agc.org

Federal Highway Administration home page

http://www.fhwa.dot.gov

Federal Highway Administration

Safety

http://safety.fhwa.dot.gov/

Federal Highway Administration

Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices

http://mutcd.fhwa.dot.gov/

Federal Highway Administration

Turner-Fairbank Highway Research Center

http://tfhrc.gov

International Safety Equipment Association (ISEA)

http://www.safetyequipment.org/

National Asphalt Pavement Association

http://www.hotmix.org/

National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health

http://www.cdc.gov/niosh/

National Highway Traffic Safety Administration

http://www.nhtsa.dot.gov/
38 Building Safer Highway Work Zones

National Safety Council

Highway Traffic Safety Division

http://www.nsc.org/mem/htsd.htm

National Transportation Safety Board

http://www.ntsb.gov/

National Work Zone Safety Information Clearinghouse

http://wzsafety.tamu.edu/

Occupational Safety and Health Administration

http://www.osha.gov/

Transportation Research Board

http://www.national-academies.org/trb
Building Safer Highway Work Zones 39

Appendix

Case Examples of Highway Construction Fatalities

Since 1982, NIOSH has conducted site investigations of workplace fatalities through the Fatality Assessment

and Control Evaluation (FACE) program, a research program for the identification and investigation of fatal

occupational injuries. The goal of the FACE program is to collect information on factors that may have

contributed to occupational fatalities, using an epidemiologic approach, and to develop and disseminate

recommendations for prevention of similar incidents in the future. The FACE program has conducted

investigations of machinery-related fatalities since 1994, and in the fall of 1999, began to target highway work

zone fatalities. FACE investigations are conducted by staff from the NIOSH Division of Safety Research, and

by FACE programs housed in state departments of health or departments of labor, with technical assistance

provided by NIOSH.

The product of each FACE investigation is a narrative report describing the incident and providing

recommendations for prevention. FACE investigators draw upon multiple sources to gather information needed

to develop a report: employer and witness interviews; coroner, medical examiner, police, or OSHA reports;

death certificates; equipment operators manuals; and manufacturers representatives. The role of FACE is not

to place blame for the fatality or to assess compliance with safety and health regulations. Rather, as a research

program, it seeks to provide concrete, practical recommendations that can be applied to prevent similar types

of fatalities.

The following case examples underscore the fatality risks faced by those who work near vehicles and machinery

in work zones and in ancillary areas that serve as staging, or support areas for the work zone (e.g., temporary

batch plants). Although most of the examples involve highway construction, a few cases that occurred in

maintenance and utility work zones are also included. Each case example consists of a summary of the incident

and the prevention recommendations put forth by the investigator. The full text of the narrative reports on which

these case examples are based may be found at http://www.cdc.gov/niosh/face/faceweb.html. It is hoped that

these examples will be of use to construction contractors, contracting agencies, and safety professionals in

assessing hazards in their own workplaces and communicating those hazards to workers.

Sources for Case Examples

Case #1. Minnesota Department of Health [1992]. Highway paving crew member dies after being run over

by a rear end dump truck. Minneapolis, MN: Fatality Assessment and Control Evaluation (FACE) Report No.

MN9207.

Case #2. Minnesota Department of Health [1992]. Highway construction flagman dies after being struck by

a pickup truck. Minneapolis, MN: Fatality Assessment and Control Evaluation (FACE) Report No. MN9214.

Case #3. Minnesota Department of Health [1993]. Worker dies after being run over by a dump truck.

Minneapolis, MN: Fatality Assessment and Control Evaluation (FACE) Report No. MN9219.

Case #4. Minnesota Department of Health [1993]. Road paving crew member dies after being run over by

a digger derrick truck. Minneapolis, MN: Fatality Assessment and Control Evaluation (FACE) Report No.

MN9300801.
40 Building Safer Highway Work Zones

Case #5. New Jersey Department of Health [1994]. Road construction laborer dies after falling underneath

the wheel of a front end loader. Trenton, NJ: Fatality Assessment and Control Evaluation (FACE) Report No.

93-NJ-090-01.

Case #6. Maryland Division of Labor & Industry [1994]. Construction foreman crushed by excavator

Maryland. Baltimore, MD: Fatality Assessment and Control Evaluation (FACE) Report No. 94MD063.

Case #7. Minnesota Department of Health [1995]. Highway construction worker dies after being struck while

crossing roadway. Minneapolis, MN: Fatality Assessment and Control Evaluation (FACE) Report No.

94MN03101.

Case #8. Nebraska Department of Labor [1995]. Asphalt roller crushes flagman. Omaha, NE: Fatality

Assessment and Control Evaluation (FACE) Report No. 94NE059.

Case #9. NIOSH [1994]. Tree trimmer foreman dies after being struck by a pickup truckSouth Carolina.

Morgantown, WV: U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Centers for Disease Control and

Prevention, National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health, Division of Safety Research. Fatality

Assessment and Control Evaluation (FACE) Report No. 94-07.

Case #10. NIOSH [1994]. Asphalt milling superintendent crushed under asphalt milling machineVirginia.

Morgantown, WV: U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Centers for Disease Control and

Prevention, National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health, Division of Safety Research. Fatality

Assessment and Control Evaluation (FACE) Report No. 94-18.

Case #11. Minnesota Department of Health [1997]. Conveyor operator dies after being run over by belly dump

trailer. Minneapolis, MN: Fatality Assessment and Control Evaluation (FACE) Report No. MN 96-92.

Case #12. NIOSH [1994]. Laborer dies after being struck by overturning craneVirginia. Morgantown,

WV: U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, National

Institute for Occupational Safety and Health, Division of Safety Research. Fatality Assessment and Control

Evaluation (FACE) Report No. 94-19.

Case #13. Massachusetts Department of Public Health [1996]. Construction laborer crushed by asphalt truck

while paving interstate highway. Boston, MA: Fatality Assessment and Control Evaluation (FACE) Report No.

95-MA-039-01.

Case #14. California Department of Health Services [1996]. Crane operator falls 30 feet while working from

a freeway overpass in California. Los Angeles, CA: Fatality Assessment and Control Evaluation (FACE) Report

No. 95CA01101.

Case #15. NIOSH [1998]. Construction laborer dies after being run over by asphalt roller at highway

construction siteVirginia. Morgantown, WV: U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Centers for

Disease Control and Prevention, National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health, Division of Safety

Research. Fatality Assessment and Control Evaluation (FACE) Report No. 98-06.
Building Safer Highway Work Zones 41

Case #16. Minnesota Department of Health [1995]. Construction worker dies after 9-wheel pneumatic roller

rolls over on her. Minneapolis, MN: Fatality Assessment and Control Evaluation (FACE) Report No.

95MN04701.

Case #17. Missouri Department of Health [1995]. County highway department worker crushed when dump

truck and trailer tipped over. Springfield, MO: Fatality Assessment and Control Evaluation (FACE) Report

No. 95MO057.

Case #18. University of Iowa [1996]. Asphalt machine runs over and kills workerIowa. Iowa City, IA:

Fatality Assessment and Control Evaluation (FACE) Report No. 96IA55.

Case #19. Missouri Department of Health [1996]. Highway department supervisor struck by reversing dump

truck. Springfield, MO: Fatality Assessment and Control Evaluation (FACE) Report No. 96MO012.

Case #20. NIOSH [1996]. Equipment operator dies after scraper overturnsVirginia. Morgantown, WV:

U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, National Institute

for Occupational Safety and Health, Division of Safety Research. Fatality Assessment and Control Evaluation

(FACE) Report No. 96-16.

Case #21. Missouri Department of Health [1997]. Asphalt roller operator dies following rollover incident.

Springfield, MO: Fatality Assessment and Control Evaluation (FACE) Report No. 97MO037.

Case #22. NIOSH [1997]. Construction laborer dies after being struck by a front end loader at a construction

site  Pennsylvania. Morgantown, WV: U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Centers for Disease

Control and Prevention, National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health, Division of Safety Research.

Fatality Assessment and Control Evaluation (FACE) Report No. 97-11.

Case #23. Minnesota Department of Health [1998]. Worker dies after being run over by a front end loader.

Minneapolis, MN: Fatality Assessment and Control Evaluation (FACE) Report No. 98MN030.

Case #24. Minnesota Department of Health [2000]. Laborer run over by dump truck while paving parking

lot. Minneapolis, MN: Fatality Assessment and Control Evaluation (FACE) Report No. 99MN03201.

Case #25. Minnesota Department of Health [1999]. Electrician dies after falling from cherry picker basket.

Minneapolis, MN: Fatality Assessment and Control Evaluation (FACE) Report No. 99MN01801.

Case #26. Wisconsin Division of Public Health [1999]. Heavy equipment operator pinned after bulldozer slides

off flatbed trailer. Madison, WI: Fatality Assessment and Control Evaluation (FACE) Report No. 99WI04101.

Case #27. Nebraska Department of Labor [1999]. Member of road crew struck by semi. Omaha, NE: Fatality

Assessment and Control Evaluation (FACE) Report No. 99NE021.

Case #28. NIOSH [2000]. Female construction worker dies in a compactor tip over at a highway construction

siteSouth Carolina. Morgantown, WV: U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Centers for Disease

Control and Prevention, National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health, Division of Safety Research.

Fatality Assessment and Control Evaluation (FACE) Report No. 99-03.
42 Building Safer Highway Work Zones

Case #29. NIOSH [1998]. Laborer run over by dump truck at roadway resurfacing operationVirginia.

Morgantown, WV: U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Centers for Disease Control and

Prevention, National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health, Division of Safety Research. Fatality

Assessment and Control Evaluation (FACE) Report No. 98-19.
Building Safer Highway Work Zones 43

Case #1: Highway Paving Crew Member Dies After Being Run Over

by a Rear End Dump Truck

A 45-year-old member of a highway paving crew died as a result of being run over by a rear end dump truck

that was backing up on a section of highway under construction. The incident occurred on a blacktop mat which

was the underlayment for concrete paving the crew was laying that day. The victim and two helpers were setting

reinforcing rods on the mat, over which concrete would be spread.

The victim had completed his work and was watching the paving operation. He was asked to instruct the drivers

of a line of seven or eight batch trucks waiting to drive towards the paver to back up approximately 1000 feet.

The paver had advanced to a position where using the blacktopped area in the median as a turnaround was not

possible, and this maneuver was necessary in order to use another section of the highway.

The victim walked to the rear truck (Truck 1) and gave the driver instructions to back up. At the same time,

another truck (Truck 2) was coming forward towards the rear of the truck line. As the victim was signaling Truck

2 to stop, he positioned himself in the path of Truck 1 which was backing up, in that drivers blind spot. Truck

1s driver was backing and turning into the opposite lane, the lane used to drive away from the paver, to make

right-of-way for Truck 2. Despite Truck 1s having an operational back-up alarm and attempts by Truck 2s

driver to warn him of the danger, the victim was hit by the right rear dual wheels of Truck 1 and pushed

approximately 14 feet on the blacktop. He stated to rescue personnel before transport that he thought (he) could

make it. He died later in surgery from loss of blood.

To prevent similar fatalities, investigators recommended the following measures:

Workers should direct only traffic moving in one direction at busy, noisy construction sites.

Include in employee safety training information about human inaccuracy in estimating the arrival time of a

moving vehicle.

Equip trucks used on construction sites with rearview sonar which alarms drivers of close proximity to

objects behind them.
44 Building Safer Highway Work Zones

Case #2: Highway Construction Flagman Dies After Being Struck by a Pickup Truck

An 18-year-old highway construction flagger died as a result of traumatic injuries received after he was struck

by a pickup truck. A highway crew was milling the surface of a bridge approach in preparation for resurfacing.

This job was being performed at night during minimum traffic hours; the incident occurred at approximately 3:00

a.m. The milling machine had advanced from the north towards the bridge approach and the job was near

completion. The posted speed limit for the stretch of highway involved was 55 mph.

The flagger was positioned just at the north end of the bridge, approximately 75 feet in front of the milling machine.

He stood just west of the center line in the southbound lane with the milling machine at his back, facing oncoming

(northbound) traffic. He was responsible for stopping and directing this northbound traffic. A portable generator

with 7-foot-tall floodlights was positioned 15 to 20 feet from the flagger, and the bridge was well lit by street

lights. Traffic signs, cones, and beacon lights were appropriately in place throughout the construction zone. The

victim was outfitted with a full reflective vest, reflective pants, and hard hat. It was a clear night and visibility was

good.

A pickup truck traveling north at approximately 55 to 60 mph approached the bridge. It advanced across the

bridge in the wrong (southbound) lane, directly towards the flagger, who was standing in that lane. The truck

struck the flagger, then moved into the correct (northbound) lane before striking the milling machine and other

workers, and carried the victim approximately 200 feet before coming to rest in the road at the north end of the

bridge. There was no indication of the truck slowing or stopping before impact. The flagger was pronounced

dead at the scene of multiple severe traumatic injuries.

To prevent similar fatalities, investigators recommended the following measures:

Reduce the posted traffic speed limit through highway construction and work zones.

Post law enforcement vehicles and/or personnel near and before highway construction zones to capture

drivers attention and ensure that traffic slows before entering the work area.
Building Safer Highway Work Zones 45

Case #3: Road Paving Crew Member Dies After Being Run Over by a Dump Truck

A 27-year-old member of a road paving crew(victim) died of injuries he received as a result of being run over

by a dump truck. The fatality occurred as the crew was laying blacktop in two lanes of a four-lane residential

city roadway. Dump trucks were being used to haul blacktop to a paver, which was situated on a northsouthbound road. Trucks waiting to dump their load of blacktop were parked around the corner from the paver.

The victims dump truck was parked in the inner lane of this road, facing west. Tack, a sticky liquid spray used

between two layers of blacktop for better adhesion, had been sprayed in the outer lane of the work area. Trucks

were able to drive on the tacked area of the road if necessary, but the surface was too sticky for other equipment,

such as rollers.

While the victims truck remained idling, he left the cab, apparently to check something underneath it or to adjust

its brakes. A hammer and the wrench used for brake adjustment were found near him after the incident. He

was positioned between the cab and the rear tandem wheels of the truck on the passenger side. A roller

approaching from the west was unable to pass the truck because it could not proceed in the tacked lane. The

operator approached the idling truck on the drivers side, entered the cab, and released the parking brake. He

did not see the victim, who was located on the passenger side of the truck. He put the truck into gear and drove

it forward approximately 15 feet to make enough clearance in the inner lane for the roller to pass. The truck driver

was run over and killed in the process.

Another nearby truck driver, observing that the victim had been run over, immediately dialed 911 from his cellular

radio. First responders attempted to resuscitate the victim, but he died en route to the emergency room of multiple

traumatic injuries.

To prevent similar fatalities, investigators recommended the following measures:

Use of a lockout-tagout system should be required when vehicles are left unattended or undergoing repair/

adjustment.

Wheels of vehicles undergoing repair or adjustment should be chocked to help prevent unintentional

movement of the vehicle.
46 Building Safer Highway Work Zones

Case #4: Worker Dies After Being Run Over by a Digger Derrick Truck

A 23-year-old apprentice lineman died of injuries he received after being run over by the tandem dual rear tires

of a digger derrick truck. The construction company the victim worked for had been subcontracted to frame

and set new electrical poles along a 2-mile stretch of paved county road. The digger derrick truck with an

attached boom was used for hole digging and pole stabilization during the setting operation. The crew had been

on site for 3 days, and several poles had already been framed and set.

The crew had returned to work after the lunch break, forgetting to don their high-visibility vests. At this time,

two company vehicles were parked on the shoulder of the road about midway between two poles in the

northbound lane. The crew began work by setting and backfilling pole #1 with the digger derrick, then walked

south in the northbound lane to pole #2. They were about 30 feet in front of the digger derrick truck, which was

proceeding in reverse to the same pole at about 2 miles per hour. Approximately halfway between pole #1 and

pole #2, the victim knelt with his back to the truck to apparently inscribe a word or initials into some soft seal

coating. The truck driver, not seeing the victim in his blind spot, continued backing. The victim was hit and run

over by both sets of tandem dual rear tires on the passenger side of the truck before it could be stopped. The

victim was pulled from beneath the truck and CPR was immediately initiated by co-workers. First responders

arrived on the scene within 5 minutes, but the victim was pronounced dead at the scene of multiple traumatic

injuries.

To prevent similar fatalities, investigators recommended the following measures:

Consider equipping vehicles with additional mirrors to help eliminate the blind spot behind vehicles, or utilize

infrared or ultrasonic devices to detect the presence of objects behind the vehicle.

Consider equipping vehicles with audible back-up alarms.

Consider implementing a safety policy which assigns one person per site the responsibility for directing

vehicles, and specifies site locations for other pedestrian personnel.
Building Safer Highway Work Zones 47

Case #5: Road Construction Laborer Dies After Falling Underneath the Wheel

of a Front End Loader

A 39-year-old road construction laborer was killed after falling beneath the wheel of a moving front end loader.

The incident occurred during a paving operation in a large suburban housing development. The victim was in

one of three crews working in different parts of the development under the supervision of a roving foreman. He

had been assigned to work with a front-end-loader operator to chip and fill in the asphalt around manhole covers

in preparation for paving. At about 12:15 p.m., the crew completed work on a manhole near a T-intersection

of two roads. The driver then started moving the front end loader to the next manhole, located about 50 yards

away. Hitching a ride, the victim jumped onto the loaders battery box, which was part of a side step leading

up to the driver. The site foreman and a neighbor saw the loader move slowly up the road and turn onto the next

street. As the loader climbed a slight incline, the driver stated that the victim (who was apparently engaging in

horseplay) grabbed at the forward/reverse control lever on the loader. The driver told him to stop, but he again

grabbed at the lever and moved it. This caused the machine to go into reverse, jarring the victim off the loader.

He fell three feet to the ground, and the front wheel of the loader ran onto his chest. The driver immediately

stopped the machine and went for the supervisor. The neighbor called for an ambulance. The police and EMS

arrived and transported the victim to the local trauma center where he underwent emergency surgery. He died

of his injuries 7 hours after the incident. The medical examiner determined the cause of death to be hemorrhagic

shock due to multiple devastating injuries.

To prevent similar fatalities, investigators recommended the following measures:

Employers should develop, implement, and enforce a comprehensive safety program with the assistance of

a joint labor/management safety committee.

Employers should conduct periodic job safety meetings and refresher training.

Manufacturers of construction equipment should consider installing an interlock system that prevents heavy

equipment from suddenly reversing direction.
48 Building Safer Highway Work Zones

Case #6: Construction Foreman Crushed by Excavator

A 47-year-old construction foreman was crushed by the crawler treads of an excavator. The company had been

contracted to modify existing sewer lines for new home construction. The excavator was being used to dig a

trench across a two-lane road, with traffic to be routed around the work zone under flagger control. The victim

had given directions to the operator regarding placement of the excavator. After speaking with the operator,

he walked around to the opposite corner of the excavator. With his back to the excavator, he leaned over to

move an orange safety cone. The west track of the excavator caught the victims leg, and he fell to the ground

face first into the path of the excavator. A witness ran toward the operator shouting to him to stop the machine

and move backward off the victim. Another member of the crew radioed the company to notify 911. Paramedics

arrived within minutes of the call. The victim was flown by helicopter to a university trauma center where he died

approximately 45 minutes after the incident. The medical examiner attributed death to multiple injuries.

According to the witnesses, the excavator was equipped with an omni-directional alarm that was audible when

the incident occurred. The machine was new, having logged fewer than 100 hours of operation. All of the

controls were reportedly functional and the windows of the operators station were free of cracks or other

impediments to the operators vision. The upper structure was equipped with parabolic mirrors on the cab (right)

and the frame (left). The position and configuration of the upper structure and the position of the boom may have

obstructed the operators view of the track that struck the victim.

To prevent similar fatalities, investigators recommended the following measures:

Employers should ensure that employees are instructed to stand clear of heavy equipment that is maneuvering

in a work zone.

Employers should ensure that heavy equipment operators who must maneuver equipment with limited

visibility in the direction of travel utilize an employee to signal the operator from a safe distance.

Employers should ensure that heavy equipment operators make every effort to establish a clear view in the

direction of travel before maneuvering a piece of equipment.

Heavy equipment and other vehicles should be, when feasible, equipped with devices for visualizing or

sensing the presence of humans or obstacles that are in the path of travel.
Building Safer Highway Work Zones 49

Case #7: Highway Construction Worker Dies After Being Struck While Crossing Roadway

A 55-year-old construction worker died of injuries sustained after being struck by a vehicle on an interstate

highway near a major metropolitan area. The victim and a co-worker were assigned to drill holes for installation

of steel pipes beneath the highway, using a boring machine. The machine was located in the ditch on the east

side of the northbound lanes. Construction warning signs were set up 2,000 feet ahead of the work area. At

the time of the incident, the victims task was to cross the highway lanes to mark the exit location of the hole

currently being drilled, as his co-worker monitored the gauges on the boring machine. According to witnesses,

the victim was not wearing a high-visibility safety vest.

At about 8:30 a.m., when the victim crossed the highway and was near the middle of the left lane, two vehicles

traveling in that lane approached him. The driver of the second vehicle momentarily looked to the right, toward

the boring machine. When he looked forward again, the vehicle ahead of him had moved one lane to the right,

and he saw the victim standing directly in front of him. The driver of the second vehicle turned his vehicle to the

right and applied his brakes. The victim was struck by the skidding vehicle and thrown 40 feet, landing in the

ditch along the left shoulder of the highway. Emergency medical personnel arrived at the scene within a few

minutes. The victim was transported to a local hospital where he died approximately 2 hours later. Death was

attributed to multiple blunt force injuries.

The total skid distance of the vehicle that struck the victim was 193 feet. Based on the length of the skid and

the dry conditions of the road surface, the state patrol estimated the minimum speed of the vehicle as 61 miles

per hour at the time the driver started braking. According to the state patrol officers report, several drivers who

witnessed the incident said that the victim was not watching the traffic as he began to cross the highway.

To prevent similar fatalities, investigators recommended the following measures:

Employers should ensure that employees wear high visibility vests or garments while walking and working

on roadways.

Roadway construction work should be scheduled during non-peak traffic periods.
50 Building Safer Highway Work Zones

Case #8: Asphalt Roller Crushes Flagman

A 20-year-old road construction company flagger was crushed to death when he fell from and was run over by

an asphalt roller during a highway resurfacing operation. The victim had been employed by the company for 3

days. The roller operator was driving the roller up an approximate 10-degree incline, with the flagger riding on

the roller. He attempted to shift into a higher gear as he was moving forward, but the roller did not shift and

became stuck in neutral. The roller then began moving backwards down the incline. The operator was unable

to stop the roller with the foot brake; he did not attempt to apply the emergency brake. As the roller was going

downhill and gaining speed, the operator saw cars approaching on the road. To avoid a collision, he decided

to turn the roller into the ditch. He told the flagger to jump clear of the roller when he drove off the pavement.

As the roller left the pavement, it appeared the victim was thrown from it. The roller rolled backward into a culvert

at an opposite incline, then forward. At this time, the roller drum rolled over and came to rest on the victims

head. A witness immediately directed the roller operator to reverse the roller off the victim. His injuries were

too severe for any first aid to be rendered, and he died at the scene of massive head trauma.

Several risk factors may have contributed to the fatality. The flagger was riding on the roller in violation of written

company policy prohibiting nonoperators from riding on equipment. Secondly, the operator attempted to shift

gears while the roller was in motion, although a placard on the machine stated that doing so could result in loss

of control, leading to serious injury or death. The roller operator said this prohibition was not explained to him

during the 10 to 15 minutes of verbal training he had received. Finally, inspection of the roller after the incident

revealed an aerosol can of starting fluid in the area of the brake pedal. This can may have been lodged under

the brake pedal when the operator depressed the pedal, thus preventing the brakes from engaging. Subsequent

tests on the roller showed the foot brake to be operational.

To prevent similar fatalities, investigators recommended the following measures:

Establish a comprehensive training program for all personnel operating specialized machinery to include

hands-on training and documentation.

Establish a thorough vehicle maintenance and inspection program.

Develop, implement and enforce a comprehensive safety program that includes, but is not limited to, training

in all hazard recognition.
Building Safer Highway Work Zones 51

Case #9: Tree Trimmer Foreman Dies After Being Struck by a Pickup Truck

A 21-year-old tree trimmer foreman died after being struck by a pickup truck as he fed brush into a wood chipper

along a two-way, two-lane state highway. The victim and a co-worker (a climber) were cutting brush for a utility

company along a power line right-of-way. The wood chipper and truck used by the crew were located

approximately 4 feet from the edge of the highway. Orange safety cones were placed in front of the truck, at

the truck door, at the rear of the truck, and at the wheels of the chipper. Four cones were also set behind the

chipper at 15-foot intervals. A 48-inch-square Utility Work Ahead sign was placed on the same side of the

highway, behind the chipper. The posted speed limit was 55 mph. The workers were wearing green work

uniforms without orange vests. Company policy required them to wear safety vests in the woods during the

hunting season and at intersections; at other times vests were worn at the foremans discretion.

At 4:30 p.m. on the second day of work at the site, the two men were feeding brush into the wood chipper

attached to their truck. The victim emerged from the woods with an armload of brush as his co-worker entered

the woods to gather another load. The victim began to feed the brush into the chipper. The co-worker heard

a loud crash and turned to see that a small pickup truck had struck the victim, then the chipper. EMS personnel

who responded could not detect any vital signs. The victim was pronounced dead at the scene by the county

coroner, who listed the cause of death as closed head trauma and multiple fractures. The investigating officer

estimated the speed of the pickup truck at the time of impact was 50 to 55 mph. The pickup truck driver, who

was critically injured, told hospital personnel he had no memory of the incident.

To prevent similar fatalities, investigators recommended the following measures:

Employers should ensure that a flagger or lookout is present while work is being performed on the sides of

roadways normally open to the public.

Employers should ensure that employees wear high-visibility clothing while performing operations on the

sides of roadways normally open to the public.
52 Building Safer Highway Work Zones

Case #10: Asphalt Milling Superintendent Crushed Under Asphalt Milling Machine

A 40-year-old asphalt milling superintendent was crushed when the milling machine he was operating overturned

off a transporter trailer. The victim had arrived about 1:30 a.m. to complete a milling job after the regular machine

operator had quit and left the site. At about 2:45 a.m., the crew began loading the milling machine for transport

from the job site. Because of the length of the milling machine, the rear tracks are normally positioned over the

axles of the transporter for transport, while the discharge conveyor is over the cab of the transporters tractor.

Positioning the milling machine in this manner requires that ramps be used to enable the machine to negotiate the

transition from the transporters deck in front of its wheels to the deck over the transporter wheels. To

accomplish this, the crew placed two wedge-shaped wooden blocks (12- by 12- by 52-inch) in front of the deck

transition. The victim began to tram the machine in reverse onto the transporter with the assistance of his coworkers, one positioned on the ground between the transporter and the edge of the roadway and the other

positioned behind and to the culvert side of the trailer. As the victim trammed the machine up onto the transporter,

the wooden blocks used to elevate the rear end of the machine over the transporter wheels dislodged, and the

machine overturned off the transporter into a roadside culvert. The victim was trapped in the operators station

and crushed as the machine rolled on top of him. EMS responded within 15 minutes, followed by the medical

examiner. The victim was pronounced dead at the scene of crush injuries to the chest.

To prevent similar fatalities, investigators recommended the following measures:

Employers should ensure that equipment used for loading mobile machines on transporters is configured so

that precise alignment of the machine is not critical to the safety of the operation.

In addition, equipment designers, manufacturers, and employers should:

Consider providing control station layouts that use dissimilar-shaped control levers for differing functions,

or which include lockout devices to prevent hazards from inadvertent activation of controls.

Consider machine operator visibility when developing machine designs and operational procedures.
Building Safer Highway Work Zones 53

Case #11: Conveyor Operator Dies After Being Run Over by a Belly Dump Trailer

A 33-year-old conveyor operator died of injuries he sustained when a belly dump trailer that was preparing to

unload gravel ran over him. The victim was working at a job site where gravel for a highway construction project

was being dumped by belly dump truck trailers. The trucks drove up a ramp composed of sand and gravel to

an unloading platform, where the gates of the trailers were opened and the loads emptied into a grating system

on a conveyor belt. The victim had been assigned to operate the generator of the conveyor system. As the first

truck of the day approached, the driver informed the victim he was going to pour alcohol in the lines that operated

the gates of the belly dump trailer to prevent the lines from freezing. The driver then pulled onto the ramp and

made two unsuccessful attempts to open the gates from inside the truck cab. The victim, seeing that the gates

were not opening, ran up the side of the ramp, which was outside the truck drivers field of vision. He went to

an area under the trailer, where there was a lever that could be used to manually open the gates. The truck driver,

noticing that other trucks were queuing up behind him, began to drive down the ramp to clear the way for other

trucks to dump their loads and to make room for a mechanic to repair his trailer. The driver of the truck

immediately behind him, who had observed the victim go under the trailer, attempted to contact the truck driver

by radio. However, the truck was already in motion, and the victim was run over by the dual rear wheels on

the passenger side of the trailer. Emergency personnel were contacted, but the victim was pronounced dead

at the scene. The cause of death was transected thoracic aorta as a result of a pedestrian-dump truck accident.

To prevent similar fatalities, investigators recommended the following measures:

Employers should ensure that belly dump trailers are equipped with a manual gate- release lever located on

the side of the trailer rather than underneath the trailer.

Employers should ensure that employees only perform tasks which they have been trained to do.

Employers should develop and implement a comprehensive safety program.
54 Building Safer Highway Work Zones

Case #12: Laborer Dies After Being Struck by Overturning Crane

A 24-year-old construction laborer was fatally injured when a crane being used to lower a bucket of gravel from

the shoulder of an interstate highway into a drainage ditch tipped over. The six-person crew began work at 7

a.m. They positioned a 22-ton capacity, rough terrain, hydraulic crane along the highway shoulder to lower

buckets of gravel and concrete down to the ditch line, about 20 feet below the shoulders edge. The crane was

set up on fully extended outriggers, with the left side outrigger floats placed on stacked wooden blocks, which

provided additional bearing surface on the shoulders newly placed fill material. The blocks also tipped the crane

slightly toward the highway for additional resistance to the load. This procedure had been followed by the crew

in response to a tipping incident that had occurred 3 weeks earlier. A 1⁄2-cubic-yard capacity bucket attached

to the cranes load line was used to lower concrete or gravel into the ditch. The victims task was to trip the

buckets discharge mechanism and pour out the contents.

At about 10:30 a.m., after a break, the crew repositioned the crane along the shoulder to access the unfinished

area of the ditch. While part of the crew set forms in the ditch, the victim, one laborer, and the crane operator

began depositing and spreading gravel. At approximately 10:45 a.m., the crane operator was lowering a load

of gravel (approximately 1⁄4 cubic yard) to the victim when the ditch side outrigger floats slipped off the timbers,

allowing the crane to slide and tip over toward the ditch. As the crane tipped, the head sheave of the boom struck

the victim, fracturing his skull and amputating his right arm above the elbow. One of the crew immediately called

the emergency medical service (EMS), which responded within 10 minutes and pronounced the victim dead at

the scene. The medical examiner determined the cause of death to be skull fracture.

To prevent similar fatalities, investigators recommended the following measures:

Employers should ensure that each time a crane is set up, it is level and the outrigger floats are supported

by firm stable footing.

Employers should ensure that equipment manufacturers recommended safe operating procedures for crane

set-up and lift configurations are followed.

Employers should ensure that all crane components are properly rigged while lifting operations are being

conducted.
Building Safer Highway Work Zones 55

Case #13: Construction Laborer Crushed by Asphalt Truck While Paving Interstate Highway

A 34-year-old construction laborer was fatally injured when he was crushed beneath an asphalt-carrying tractor

trailer while paving a six-lane interstate highway. The 11-person crew was paving the northbound side of the

highway. The high-speed lane and the middle lane had been closed to traffic. Tractor trailers delivering asphalt

paving material were queued on the shoulder and partially in the high-speed lane. Two pavers were operating

simultaneously in staggered positions in adjacent lanes. Paver #1 was in the far left (high-speed) lane. Paver

#2 was in the middle lane staggered some distance behind paver #1, allowing trucks leaving paver #1 to pull into

the middle lane to leave. Usually, trucks waited to be signaled to approach the paver, but sometimes drivers

backed up as soon as they saw the previous truck leave the paver.

At the time of the incident, the driver of the truck next in line for paver #1 had just re-entered the cab of his truck.

About a minute later, the victim went over to shovel old asphalt from around the catch basin located

approximately 12 feet behind the waiting tractor trailer filled with asphalt. The driver saw a truck pull away from

paver #1 into the adjacent middle lane, started backing up, and then heard people yelling and the truck driver

working at paver #2 blowing his air horn. He stopped and found that the four left rear wheels had completely

passed over the victim. The county medical examiner pronounced the victim dead at the scene. The cause of

death was crushing injuries of the head and torso.

To prevent similar fatalities, investigators recommended the following measures:

Construction employers should ensure that one person be designated as a spotter to direct trucks backing

up within highway construction sites.

Trucking company employers should design, develop and implement a comprehensive safety program that

includes, but is not limited to, training for truck drivers in hazard recognition on construction sites and

providing back-up alarms on trucks.

Highway paving contractors should design, develop and implement a comprehensive safety program that

includes, but is not limited to, training for highway workers in controlling traffic hazards on highway

construction sites.

Tractor-trailer manufacturers should consider providing back-up alarms and back-up lights as standard

equipment on new vehicles.
56 Building Safer Highway Work Zones

Case #14: Crane Operator Falls 30 Feet from a Crane While Working from a Freeway Overpass

A 60-year-old equipment operator died after falling 30 feet from the crane he was operating on an elevated

freeway. The freeway was approximately 25 feet wide from concrete guardrail to concrete guardrail. The crane

was being used to set 12-inch x 12-inch timber stringers on top of the falsework on the west side of the elevated

freeway. Witnesses stated that he had pulled in the outriggers on the east side to let a truck go by and had not

extended them afterward. Co-workers stated that it was common practice for the crane operator to pull in the

outriggers in order to allow trucks to go by. The victim continued to lift three more timbers and place them on

the falsework. He then climbed down from the crane for a brief discussion with the foreman. Returning to the

crane, he began to rotate the boom to the east side and over the rear of the crane. The boom was rotated at

approximately an 80 degree angle from the horizontal position and was extended approximately 60 feet. Coworkers stated that they heard the crane making creaking sounds at the time. One witness stated that the victim

came out of the cab and shouted get out of the way. The crane fell over quickly and the victim was thrown

to the east side, struck the boom several times, then fell approximately 30 feet to the ground. The end of the

boom landed on the freeway without incident. The victim was not wearing a seat belt or hard hat. When city

fire paramedics arrived 20 minutes later, they found the victim without a pulse or spontaneous respiration. The

coroner listed the cause of death as craniocerebral trauma.

To prevent similar fatalities, investigators recommended the following measures:

Employers should ensure that operators extend and set crane outriggers when the load handled exceeds the

rated load without the outriggers.

Employers should require that there be a qualified signal person or oiler working with the crane operator to

provide assistance to the operator.

Employers should establish, as part of their site planning, a specification which does not require crane

operators to retract outriggers for any type of vehicular traffic.

Employers should require that crane operators wear seat belts at all times during operation.

In addition, manufacturers and product designers should consider designing cranes with control systems that

prohibit or limit certain maneuvers for specific load, boom, and outrigger configurations.
Building Safer Highway Work Zones 57

Case #15: Construction Laborer Dies After Being Run Over by Asphalt Roller

at Highway Construction Site

A 37-year-old construction laborer died after being run over by an asphalt roller during a highway paving

operation. A seven-person crew was engaged in paving the westbound lanes of a four-lane U.S. highway. At

the time of the incident, the crew was paving the right lane and traffic was moving in the left lane. The victim was

assigned to walk back and forth along the highway, checking the traffic cones positioned along the dotted lines

at the center of the highway to ensure they were standing upright, and ensuring that the construction-zone warning

signs remained standing. As the foreman of the crew operated the paving machine, the asphalt roller followed

behind to smooth the newly laid asphalt. The roller operator was transporting another employee, who was

standing at the front of the machine, leaning against the roll bar and looking backward. The operator made a

forward pass with the roller, stopped the machine, then put it in reverse gear. The machine had traveled

approximately 10 feet when the operator sensed that something was wrong; at the same time, the rider alerted

the operator to stop the roller. The victim was discovered lying face down with his arms at his sides, his head

crushed by the roller. The foreman radioed emergency personnel. A local fire department responded within

15 minutes, followed by a rescue squad and the state police. The victim was pronounced dead at the scene. The

autopsy report indicated that the cause of death was a crushed skull.

A passing motorist who witnessed a portion of the incident told state police she saw the victims right shoe get

caught by the left side of the metal plate that ran across the back of the machine. She stated that he was on his

back, then raised himself to a sitting position. She last observed him pushing against the metal plate.

To prevent similar fatalities, investigators recommended the following measures:

Employers should ensure that equipment operators are trained to check work areas for the presence of

pedestrians in the machines path before changing the direction of travel.

Employers should ensure that passengers are not permitted to ride on rollers or similar mobile equipment.

Manufacturers should consider equipping machines that must change direction frequently (such as rollers)

with sensors to detect the presence of persons in the machines path.
58 Building Safer Highway Work Zones

Case #16: Construction Worker Dies After 9-Wheel Pneumatic Roller Rolls Over on Her

A 39-year-old construction worker died of injuries sustained when the 20,000-pound 9-wheel pneumatic roller

she was driving rolled over on her. She had worked for the employer for 3 months (2 days at the incident site)

and had previous operating experience. The rollers drive system consisted of a four-speed manual transmission

coupled with a variable-speed hydrostatic drive. This configuration required the operator to manually place the

transmission in one of four gears while the roller was stationary. The drive system enabled the operator to change

the direction of travel without shifting the manual transmission between gears. The normal operating speed of

the roller was 3 to 5 mph. When the roller was being driven from job to job, speeds of up to 15 mph were possible.

The roller was not equipped with a rollover protective structure.

Prior to the incident, the victim was operating the roller near the top of a one-half mile hill. After compacting the

asphalt near the crest of the hill, she drove the roller downhill around a curve in the road. She may have shifted

the roller into neutral while attempting to shift into a lower gear. However, once the machine was in neutral, it

was not possible to shift into a lower gear, and the roller began to accelerate down the hill. As the roller continued

downhill, the victim was able to steer it around a paver and three other paving company employees. She then

left the paved road and drove on the gravel portion of the road for another quarter of a mile. The roller, traveling

between 40 and 50 mph, entered a ditch and traveled approximately 100 feet before striking a rock

embankment. The roller traveled across the rock embankment another 41 feet before it rolled upside down.

The victim was pronounced dead at the scene. The cause of death listed on the death certificate was severe head

trauma.

To prevent similar fatalities, investigators recommended the following measures:

Pneumatic rollers should be equipped with a rollover protective structure and a seat belt; older pneumatic

rollers should be retrofitted with a properly designed, manufactured, and installed rollover protective

structure and seat belt.

Employers should design, develop, and implement a comprehensive safety program.
Building Safer Highway Work Zones 59

Case #17: County Highway Department Worker Crushed When Dump Trailer

and Truck Tipped Over

A 47-year-old county highway department worker was crushed when the dump trailer and truck he was directing

tipped over onto him. The victim was part of a five-person crew installing a culvert drain across a county road.

He began guiding a truck driver to the edge of the culvert. As the driver started to raise the dump bed, the victim

was standing on the right side toward the rear of the trailer. As the trailer began to dump the load of fill around

the culvert drain pipe, the fill dirt on the right side remained in the bed while the fill on the left side began sliding

out. The uneven weight distribution caused the trailer to tip. The victim began running parallel with the trailer

as it was beginning to tip. As the trailer tipped, it brought the truck along with it. The victim reached the area

around the passenger side door of the truck when the truck tipped over onto him. Emergency personnel were

called to the scene. Extrication was initiated by cutting off the top of the cab and lifting the truck with a track

hoe. The victim was conscious during the extrication process. When the weight of the truck was released, the

victim began hemorrhaging internally and died at the scene. The cause of death listed on the death certificate

was traumatic shock and massive hemorrhaging. The truck driver sustained minor injuries.

To prevent similar fatalities, investigators recommended the following measures:

Employers should establish and enforce standard procedures to immediately alert the operator when loaded

material in a dump trailer or truck becomes lodged within the dump bed during dumping operations. All

employees on site should be trained to follow these procedures, and to identify hazards associated with

instability of loaded materials.

Employers should develop, implement, and enforce a comprehensive safety and health plan that addresses

the hazards associated with heavy equipment and takes into consideration the manufacturers safety

recommendations for operation of the equipment.

Employees working with heavy equipment operators may use signaling devices such as a whistle or radio

contact in order to alert the operator when a problem arises. This allows the employee to notify the operator

immediately from a safe distance.

Employees should be trained to maintain safe working distances and work within the line of sight of the

operator.
60 Building Safer Highway Work Zones

Case #18: Asphalt Machine Runs Over and Kills Worker

A 35-year-old road construction worker died after being run over by a 40-ton asphalt road-widening machine.

The victim, who had been on the job only 4 days, was part of a nine-person crew that was widening a state

highway in preparation for resurfacing. The victim (the ground man) and the machine operator were working

alone, laying down a strip of asphalt on the right shoulder of the road. The crew normally laid two layers of asphalt:

the machine moved slowly forward applying the first layer, then backed up to lay the second layer. The victims

job was to walk to the side and rear of the road widener, adjusting the width and height of the asphalt strip

according to changing road conditions by adjusting the machines side-mounted spreader arm.

The machine operator was seated on the top right side of the machine and had just finished applying the first layer

of asphalt. He yelled to the victim, who was to the right and rear of the machine at a safe distance. The operator

then began to back up the machine, avoiding cones and other barriers on the road. Unknown to the operator,

the victim apparently jumped onto the machine as it was backing up, slipped off, and was run over by the right

front tire. Although the machine was traveling only a few miles per hour, by the time the operator heard the

victims shouts and stopped the machine, it had already run over the victim. The operator moved the machine

off the victim and rushed to his aid. The victims left leg was amputated below the knee. He was transported

to a county hospital, then transferred to a regional hospital, where he suffered multiple complications and died

9 days later. The medical examiners report listed the cause of death as complications of crush injury to left

hemipelvis and left leg.

The victim had frequently been observed walking inside the right arm of the machine, making adjustments using

an auxiliary control panel mounted on the side of the machine. Normally these adjustments were made by the

machine operator, taking verbal directions from the ground man. It is possible the victim was attempting to make

some adjustments while the machine was backing up. At the time of the incident, the machine had an operating

backup alarm. Crew members reported that the victim appeared fatigued that day and was perhaps not fit for

duty.

To prevent similar fatalities, investigators recommended the following measures:

Heavy equipment operators must always remain aware of the location of workers around their machines.

Employers should enforce policies which prohibit riders on industrial equipment or vehicles that are not

designed for passengers.

Workers who are not fit for duty due to illness or fatigue should not be assigned to hazardous tasks.

To eliminate injury risk from walking inside the wing trying to make adjustments while the machine is in

operation, modify the side-mounted auxiliary control panel with a remote control which can be safely

actuated by the ground man walking at a safe distance behind the machine.
Building Safer Highway Work Zones 61

Case #19: Highway Department Supervisor Struck by Reversing Dump Truck

A 55-year-old highway department supervisor died from injuries sustained after being struck by a reversing

dump truck at a multi-lane highway repair project. He had been employed by the company for 30 years, and

had worked at the incident site for the previous 2 weeks. The incident occurred on a heavily traveled metropolitan

six-lane highway with a center divider. Counting the highway entrance acceleration lane, the incident area was

four lanes wide. The crew was to patch potholes and lay down a new layer of asphalt. On the day of the incident,

they had set cones and closed down all three travel lanes and the acceleration lane to traffic.

The driver of the dump truck involved in the incident was directed to the start of the patch area. The spotter then

set the chains on the dump gate. The driver was then instructed to raise his bed and begin spreading the load

of asphalt. At the end of the patch, the driver was instructed to lower the bed and stop the mix. He then pulled

forward a short distance and parked next to the oil distributor truck. The victim, in his role as the job-site

superintendent, instructed the spotter, the dump truck driver, and the distributor truck driver to lay down another

patch beside the first one. He turned and walked along the shoulder. The dump truck driver and the distributor

truck driver decided that the dump truck, then the oil distributor truck, would back up to the starting point of

the patch. The dump truck then pulled into the rightmost traffic lane and started backing. At some point the

supervisor crossed from the shoulder into the lane used by the reversing truck. The truck driver did not see the

victim and backed over him. Witnesses tried to warn the victim and the driver, rushing to the site to halt the truck.

Local emergency medical services (EMS) responded within minutes; however, the victim was pronounced dead

at the scene. The autopsy report listed the cause of death as blunt head and chest trauma.

To prevent similar fatalities, investigators recommended the following measures:

Employers should ensure that mobile equipment is equipped with well-maintained audible backup alarms

to warn pedestrians of impending equipment movement.

Employers should ensure that work procedures minimize or eliminate pedestrians exposure to hazards from

moving vehicles and mobile equipment, and should enforce existing policies that establish pedestrian-free zones.

Employers should consider providing personal audible alarms to pedestrian workers who are exposed to

hazards of vehicle movement.
62 Building Safer Highway Work Zones

Case #20: Equipment Operator Dies After Scraper Overturns

A 47-year-old male equipment operator died when the scraper he was operating overturned while negotiating

a turn. The victim worked for a company that had been contracted to widen a stretch of road as part of a parkway

construction project. The crew consisted of two scraper operators, a bulldozer operator, a roller operator, and

a site foreman. The crew was removing material from a 40-foot-wide cut area along the east edge of the existing

two-lane road and transporting the material to a fill area located along the west edge of the road. The length of

haul varied from 200 to 300 yards as work progressed northward. The scrapers normally cut a 6-inch-deep

lift, aided by the bulldozer which pushed them through the cut area. Once the scraper was loaded, the bulldozer

returned to the mouth of the cut and waited to assist in loading the next scraper. The victim had been moving

earth from a cut area to a fill area. Since the lunch break, he had made four or five passes through the cut area.

He had been turning in approximately the same area for about 45 minutes. As he was completing a U-turn into

the cut area, the right side tire of the scrapers tractor ran up on an elevated berm, causing the machine to slowly

tip over to the left. As the machine tipped, the victim apparently abandoned the operators cab, jumping to the

ground where he slipped and fell. As he was attempting to get up and retreat to safety, he was crushed by the

top bar of the machines rollover protective structure (ROPS). A co-worker who had been operating a bulldozer

behind the scraper immediately notified the job foreman who called for emergency assistance. A local emergency

medical service (EMS) responded in 15 minutes; however, because of the extent of the victims injuries no first

aid was rendered, and the victim was pronounced dead at the scene. Autopsy revealed the cause of death to

be multiple crush injuries of the thorax, abdomen, and lower extremities.

To prevent similar fatalities, investigators recommended the following measures:

Employers should ensure that earthmoving equipment operators are aware of the hazards of attempting

escape from the equipment during overturns and emphasize that operators remain inside the protection of

the ROPS with seat belt fastened.

Employers should ensure that operators of earthmoving equipment are aware of the importance of

maintaining the lowest possible machine center of gravity at all times.

Employers should ensure that haul-road routes are free from overturn hazards of sharply contrasting

gradients and curves.
Building Safer Highway Work Zones 63

Case #21: Asphalt Roller Operator Dies Following Rollover Incident

A 24-year-old asphalt roller operator was fatally injured when a 10-ton asphalt roller rolled over her. The victim

was working with a small crew on a highway outer-road resurfacing project. She had a total of 30 hours

experience operating the roller on street repairs. This was her first resurfacing project. Her task was to compress

the overflow of freshly poured asphalt at an established driveway to create a smooth transition. The street had

an upward slope of 5 to 10 degrees and was 23 feet wide. The road curved slightly to the left with no banking.

The depth of fresh asphalt on the street was about 3 inches with overflow asphalt on the sides of the road about

10 inches. The entire project covered approximately one-half mile. There was a ditch on the left side of the roller

with an approximate 45-degree downward slope from the road surface, with no shoulder present.

At the time of the incident the victim, who was not wearing a seat belt, was driving forward and approaching

the edge of the driveway. She did not stop at the edge of the driveway but proceeded toward the road. At this

time, only a portion of the front steering roller was on the asphalt road bed. The roller began pushing up a small

mound of fresh asphalt instead of rolling over and compressing it. When the back drive roller left the established

driveway surface the back end slid toward the ditch. The operator attempted to pull the roller back onto the

asphalt by turning the front steering roller to the right and revving the engine. As the unit began to roll over the

operator slipped out of her seat, falling in the direction of the rollover and into the path of the rollover protective

structure (ROPS). Co-workers were able to pull the victim clear of the roller and called EMS. The cause of

death was determined to be traumatic asphyxia.

To prevent similar fatalities, investigators recommended the following measures:

Employers should ensure that all employees wear seatbelts during operation of any heavy equipment

equipped with ROPS.

Employers should provide workers training on how to react in the event of an equipment rollover.

Employers should implement a training program specifically tailored to operators and their assigned

equipment.

Employers should provide worker training for hazard recognition and avoidance, along with safe work

practices.
64 Building Safer Highway Work Zones

Case #22: Construction Laborer Dies After Being Struck by a Front End Loader

at a Construction Site

A 20-year-old construction worker was struck by a front end loader at a construction site and died 13 hours

later. The incident occurred at a concrete batch plant operated by a private contractor which accepted shipments

by truck of sand and stone used to produce concrete. The facility included separate sand and stone bays, and

a hopper to mix the raw materials and transport them via conveyor belt to a large mixing tank where concrete

was produced. The concrete was then transported by truck to an interstate highway construction site nearby.

The area of the facility used for incoming shipments consisted of a 100-foot by 110-foot sand bay and a 130-

foot by 130-foot stone bay, separated by a 25-foot-wide mixing hopper. The maneuvering area in front of the

hopper and raw material bays was approximately 240 feet wide by 130 feet deep. A front end loader was used

to move the raw material from the bays to the mixing hopper. A 40-foot-wide by 48-foot-deep earthen ramp

was constructed in front of the hopper for use by the front end loader. The remaining area in which incoming

trucks could maneuver was approximately 240 feet wide by 60 feet deep.

The victim had worked on site for approximately 15 days. On the day of the incident, he started work at

approximately 7:00 a.m. and was assigned to collect shipping manifests at the entrance to the facility and direct

incoming trucks to dump their loads in the sand and stone bays. He had performed these duties for 8 of the 15

days he had been at the site. He was wearing an orange reflective safety vest. At approximately 11:30 a.m.,

the victim directed a truck into the sand bay located to the left of the mixing hopper. The truck was dumping

its load of sand when the victim walked behind the toe (bottom) of the earthen ramp located in front of the mixing

hopper. A front end loader backing down the earthen ramp struck the victim approximately 24 feet from the

toe of the ramp with the left rear tire, backing over him. At the time of the incident, the backup alarm and front

horn on the front end loader were not operational. A state Department of Transportation official who witnessed

the incident alerted the loader operator to stop. Emergency personnel arrived within minutes and administered

first aid. The victim died 13 hours later at an area hospital. The autopsy report listed the cause of death as multiple

blunt force trauma.

To prevent similar fatalities, investigators recommended the following measures:

Employers should ensure that backup alarms, horns, and other safety equipment on construction machinery

are functional and tested daily. Equipment that has nonfunctioning backup alarms, horns, or other safety

equipment should be removed from service until it is repaired.

Employers should ensure that construction workers who are directing traffic flow are placed in a location

where they are visible to equipment and vehicle operators. The site layout should be designed for efficient

and orderly traffic flow and with personnel safety in mind. Site-specific traffic control procedures should

be designed and implemented to allow for construction-site traffic and safe personnel mobility.
Building Safer Highway Work Zones 65

Case #23: Worker Dies After Being Run Over by a Front End Loader

A 31-year-old worker died of injuries he sustained after being run over by a front end loader at a construction

site. On the day of the incident, the crew was working at a site where asphalt and concrete were pulverized by

a crusher into material to be used for new road bases. One of the workers was operating a large front end loader

equipped with a bucket to transport the asphalt and concrete to the crusher. His task was to pick up uncrushed

material, drive up an earthen ramp, and dump it into the crusher. He then backed down the ramp and went to

pick up additional material.

Shortly before the incident, the loader operator dumped material into the crusher and backed down the earthen

ramp. After reaching the bottom of the ramp he turned the loader and continued to back across the work site.

Although he knew that the victim was in the general work area, he was not aware the victim was walking in the

immediate vicinity of the loader. As the operator turned the loader and continued to back across the work site,

he felt the right front wheel of the loader strike something. He continued to back a short distance and then

observed the victim lying on the ground in front of the loader. A co-worker contacted emergency personnel,

who arrived shortly thereafter and pronounced the victim dead at the scene. The cause of death listed on the

death certificate was multiple blunt force injuries.

The loader was equipped with an enclosed cab. The distance from the roof of the cab to the ground was 13

feet, 7 inches. The operators view was obstructed only in the areas directly beyond the cabs corner support

columns. However, the size of the loader made it difficult for the operator to see workers or objects in close

proximity to the loader. The loader was equipped with an audible back-up alarm, but it was not working at the

time of the incident. The loader had three reverse gears that allowed speeds from 4.9 mph to 14.6 mph.

To prevent similar fatalities, investigators recommended the following measures:

Mobile equipment should be equipped with an audible back-up alarm as well as sensing units to detect

pedestrian workers in the blind spots of equipment operators.

Employers should ensure that equipment is always maintained in the proper working condition.

Employers should ensure that heavy equipment is driven in a forward direction as much as possible.

Employers should design, develop, and implement a comprehensive safety program.
66 Building Safer Highway Work Zones

Case #24: Laborer Run Over by Dump Truck While Paving Parking Lot

A 19-year-old laborer (victim) died after being run over by a dump truck filled with asphalt. The victim worked

for a paving company that was contracted to pave the parking lot of a small office complex. At the time of the

incident, the victim was leveling and smoothing freshly laid asphalt with a lute. He was in the danger zone area

between the dump truck and the paver, smoothing a section of asphalt near the edge of a previously laid strip

of asphalt. He had received training that specifically addressed the hazards associated with the fatality and he

had been warned twice about not entering the area between the front of the paver and a loaded dump truck

backing toward the paver. The dump truck driver did not see the victim as he backed toward the paver with

a load of asphalt. Although the trucks back-up alarm was sounding, the victim did not move as the truck

approached. The truck driver noticed a nearby skid-steer loader operator and the paver operator signaling him

to stop. He stopped the truck and then drove forward over the victim again with the trucks rear passengerside dual wheels. Co-workers immediately placed a call to emergency medical personnel who arrived at the

scene shortly after being called. The victim was transported to a local hospital where he was pronounced dead.

To prevent similar fatalities, investigators recommended the following measures:

Employers should designate a single on-site worker who has responsibility for authorizing and directing the

movement of certain vehicles, such as trucks traveling in reverse.

Mobile equipment should be equipped with sensing units to detect pedestrian workers in the blind spots of

the equipment operator.

Employers should design, develop, and implement a comprehensive safety program.
Building Safer Highway Work Zones 67

Case #25: Electrician Dies After Falling From Cherry Picker Basket

A 41-year-old male electrician (victim) died after he fell from the basket of an aerial lift truck. The victim and

two co-workers were installing electrical wiring for a changeable message sign on the side of a highway bridge.

The two leftmost traffic lanes were closed to traffic. The workers arrived at the scene with a pickup truck and

a truck equipped with a basket-type work platform attached to a hydraulic boom. After arriving at the site the

victim entered the basket, swung it beneath the bridge and raised it up between two of the bridge beams. The

victim determined the length of steel pipe needed for the electrical wires and verbally told his co-workers the

required length of pipe. At this time the basket was positioned above the closed traffic lanes. While the coworkers cut the pipe, the victim apparently moved the basket to a location above the nearest open traffic lane.

A semi-truck approached the site and observed warning cones and signs directing traffic to merge to the right.

The driver proceeded toward the work site in the open traffic lane nearest the closed lanes at approximately 60

mph. When the truck was about 50 feet from the workers vehicles, the truck driver noticed the basket over

the traffic lane in which he was driving. Before the driver could slow the truck or safely move to the next lane,

the semi-truck struck the cherry picker basket. The collision caused the victim to be thrown from the basket

to the surface of the roadway. Co-workers who heard the collision and saw the victim fall used a cell phone

to place a call to emergency personnel. Emergency personnel arrived shortly after being notified and pronounced

the victim dead at the scene.

To prevent similar fatalities, investigators recommended the following measure:

All workers and equipment should remain or be kept within the boundaries of established work zones.
68 Building Safer Highway Work Zones

Case # 26: Heavy Equipment Operator Pinned After Bulldozer Slides off Flatbed Trailer

A 45-year-old supervisor for an excavation construction company died when the bulldozer he was driving onto

a flatbed trailer overturned, pinning him underneath. The victim had returned to a residential construction site

accompanied by his wife, to load the bulldozer and transport it back to the company shop. He parked the truck

and trailer across the two-lane road from the driveway of the residence, with the left wheels on the road and the

right wheels on the shoulder. There was a slight downhill grade on the shoulder to the ditch. Light rain was falling

at the time of the incident, and the trailer was wet. The trailer was equipped with two metal and wood ramps

that led from the ground to a wooden beavertail platform. After one unsuccessful attempt to drive the bulldozer

onto the platform, the victim drove up the ramps and partway onto the platform. The tracks of the machine began

to slide sideways towards the ditch, and off the trailer. He tried to jump out of the cab, but was pinned beneath

the cab structure when it landed on top of him. The victims wife, who had witnessed the incident from the

passenger seat of the truck cab, flagged down a passing car to call for help. EMS responders elevated the

bulldozer with air bags and blocks to remove the victims body. They noted the unfastened seatbelt dangling

from the seat. The victim was pronounced dead at the scene by the medical examiner. The cause of death was

crushing chest injuries.

To prevent similar fatalities, investigators recommended the following measures:

Workers should always use an operator restraint system while operating equipment equipped with rollover

protective structures (ROPS).

Employers should implement work procedures requiring that work crews (including bulldozer operators)

evaluate the terrain prior to loading track equipment onto a trailer, and plan safe strategies for addressing

the hazards.

Employers should designate a qualified observer to provide verbal or signal directions when track equipment

is being loaded onto a trailer.
Building Safer Highway Work Zones 69

Case #27: Member of Road Crew Struck by Semi

A 56-year-old senior highway maintenance worker was killed when the vehicle he was operating was struck

from the rear by a semi on an interstate highway. The victim was driving the trail vehicle of a three-vehicle highway

striping crew. On the day of the incident the victim started his shift at 7:00 a.m. He worked in the maintenance

yard in the morning. The incident happened in the afternoon at approximately 3:30 p.m., only 6 or 7 minutes

after the striping operation had begun.

The striping operation consisted of three vehicles. The lead vehicle was the striping machine and it was followed

by a trailing vehicle with beacons and a WET PAINT sign. The incident vehicle was in the rear and was

equipped with beacons, a WET PAINT sign and a roof-mounted flashing arrow board with the arrow flashing

to the right. Separation distance between each of the vehicles was approximately 1⁄4 mile to allow for the paint

to dry. All three vehicles were in the left lane of the eastbound lanes of the interstate.

All three vehicles in the striping operation were moving east at approximately 18 miles per hour. A semi and trailer

was passing two other semis going east. Weather conditions were optimal and the semi driver had a clear,

unobstructed view of the road for approximately 15 seconds prior to the crash. The driver of the front semi that

was passed also stated the driver of the incident semi appeared to have sufficient room to pull back into the right

lane before impact. From the skid marks at the incident site it appears the driver of the incident semi applied

the brakes approximately 1.7 seconds prior to impact. His estimated speed prior to applying the brakes was

75 to 80 mph. He struck the rear vehicle, which was a 1989 Chevrolet Suburban, and it flipped over one time

and came to rest upright in the median, 195 feet from the point of impact. The driver of the vehicle that was struck

was not wearing a seat belt. The impact caused him to slide up and back and he struck his head, and broke his

neck. He was killed instantly.

To prevent similar fatalities, investigators recommended the following measures:

Employers should ensure that for mobile striping operations on a multilane road, the rear vehicle is equipped

with a truck-mounted attenuator (TMA) and that it travels on the shoulder if possible.

Employers should ensure that vehicle operators and occupants always use vehicle restraint systems.

Employers should consider using a combination of white, orange, or blue strobe lights mounted on all vehicles

in the striping operation.

Consideration should be given to using a more durable method of striping than painting, such as heat inlaid tape,

thermo-plastic striping, or tape laid in grooves in the pavement, that would decrease worker exposure to hazards.

Training for mobile operations should address the need to constantly scan rear-view mirrors for quickly

approaching traffic as well as procedures to avoid collision.
70 Building Safer Highway Work Zones

Case #28: Female Construction Worker Dies in a Compactor Tip Over

at a Highway Construction Site

A 38-year-old female equipment operator (the victim) died when she was partially thrown from the compactor

she was operating when it tipped over an embankment and pinned her beneath the ROPS. The employer had

been subcontracted to construct a highway off ramp that would eventually lead to an overpass bridge. The

employer had been involved for over 16 months with other construction activities on this particular highway

expansion project, but had only been on the exit ramp project for 3 days. On the first day of the exit ramp job,

the company had delivered to the site a new compactor equipped with an enclosed cab that incorporated the

rollover protective structure (ROPS). Although the new compactor had ROPS, no seatbelts were installed.

Unlike the old compactor, with front and rear rollers, which the victim had operated for over a year, the new

compactor had a single roller in the front and pneumatic tires in the rear. The victims job at this site was to

compact the dirt ramp in preparation for hard surfacing. The victim was operating the compactor, with the

enclosed cab door open, back and forth over a built-up road bed. At approximately 1:15 p.m., as she backed

the compactor to the road edge, the dirt underneath the rear tire gave way and the compactor tipped over on

its side and slid down the embankment. The embankment had an approximate 45-degree slope, and after the

compactor slid down the hill on its side it came to rest some 25 feet from the top. When the compactor tipped,

the unrestrained victim was partially thrown through the open door, and was pinned underneath the ROPS.

Emergency rescue personnel were immediately called and arrived at the site within 15 minutes. The victim was

pronounced dead at the site.

To prevent similar fatalities, investigators recommended the following measures:

Equipment manufacturers, equipment dealers, and employers should ensure that all ROPS-equipped

vehicles are also equipped with functioning seatbelts.

Employers should inspect newly delivered equipment to ensure that all safety devices are available and

working properly before accepting equipment and placing it in operation.

Employers should ensure that all operators receive training on the importance of wearing seatbelts when

operating machinery equipped with ROPS.

Employees should comply with company policies that require use of safety devices.

Employers should comply with state and federal rules and regulations pertaining to occupational safety and

health.
Building Safer Highway Work Zones 71

Case #29: Laborer Run Over by Dump Truck at Roadway Resurfacing Operation

A 35-year-old male laborer was run over by a dump truck during resurfacing operations on a two-lane municipal

road. The eight-person crew began resurfacing where the two-lane and four-lane road intersected. The crew

began by placing a new apron of asphalt across the mouth of the intersection. The apron was then rolled while

the paving machine proceeded to lay down new asphalt in the northbound lane of the two-lane road. The laborer

had been assigned to rake and finish the edge of the pavement where it abutted and joined with the existing

concrete curb. As paving operations proceeded northward, he finished the pavement edge up to the back of

the paver, which had stopped to await reloading of asphalt mix. The laborer went around the front of the paver

and continued walking south in the unpaved lane toward the intersection along the center-line edge of the new

mat. At about the same time, a tandem-axle dump truck, leaving the work zone at about 5 mph, was also traveling

south in the unpaved lane behind him. As the laborer walked along the center line, the truck passed the paver

and the driver glanced in the right-side rear-view mirror to make sure that he had cleared the paver. At this time,

the laborer was slightly ahead of and adjacent to the trucks right front bumper. The roller operator working

behind the paver near the intersection saw him walk in front of the truck. The truck struck and ran over him.

The roller operator and the superintendent shouted to the truck driver to stop; however, the driver did not hear

the warnings until the trucks right front wheel had passed over the laborer and the lead wheel of the trucks rear

tandem axles had started to run over his foot. The driver stopped the truck and reversed it a short distance to

free the laborers foot. Co-workers notified 911, and emergency medical personnel responded within 12

minutes. CPR and first aid procedures were started at the scene and continued while the laborer was transported

to a local hospital, about 4 miles from the site. He died at the hospital approximately 1⁄2 hour after the incident.

The medical examiner attributed death to multiple body injuries.

Investigators identified several factors that may have affected the truck drivers ability to see the laborer. The

laborer was wearing a white fishing hat which may have been difficult to distinguish from the white hood of the

truck. Additionally, the level of the rear-view mirrors was significantly higher than the right front edge of the hood,

requiring a person behind the wheel to consciously look down to see a pedestrian. Finally, several objects in

the front of the truck may have been visually distracting to the driver: the top of the air cleaner (white in color)

and the windshield/door post frame; a fan mounted on the dashboard; regulatory stickers affixed to the inside

of the windshield directly in line with the corner of the truck hood and the driver; and a red translucent bug shield

mounted across the front of the hood.

To prevent similar fatalities, investigators recommended the following measures:

Employers should ensure that workers remain clear of moving equipment and that only those workers

necessary to the job at hand be in the area.

Employers should consider the use of electronic signaling devices or sensors to warn equipment operators

of the presence of pedestrians in the blind spots of mobile equipment.

Employers should consider providing and requiring pedestrian workers to wear high-visibility headgear of

standardized color.

Employers, manufacturers, and regulators should carefully evaluate the placement of auxiliary equipment in

vehicle cabs.