Washington State’s New Crane Bill - Less Safety Than Before OSHA
Example of a lifter still in use in Washington State
Washington State is updating it's Construction Crane Bill from 2010, or Part L of the code. Here's a link to find the update . There are going to be issues that are hopefully unintended. I'll try to be brief and move to answering any questions from people instead of being wordy. In the end, the advancement with regard to Below the Hook only holds Washington back and it advances dangerous behavior. I would hope this is all just bad timing and the complexity of writing rules.
I was on the committee that wrote the first crane bill for 2010. We adopted the 2010 ASME B30.20 for Below the Hook items. The intention was to have everything designed to the most current standard with the most current practices. We used the language of Structural Lifter in WAC 296-155-56200. None of us picked up on two minutia details that keep us unsafe in Washington to this day. Despite saying, "Structural Lifter" which sounds incredibly obvious, the 2010 code says "Supports" and nothing about "contains" the load. So a box is seen as a container. Awesome. On top of that, the language said, "Load-supporting lifers and include a positive connection..." So if it didn't hook in, it didn't need to meet ASME because it doesn't meet ASME. It's about as circular as an argument gets and lives are on the line. Can we fix it to meet our 2008 intentions? Not today.
In 2025 the code was updated to include "containers" and it changed the sentence on Structural Lifters from "and" to "or" so it was inclusive of items that didn't attach by hooks. Now, even if you sling it up, ASME still captures it. We're doing safety by lawyers here in Washington.
Structural and mechanical lifting devices directly support or contain the load, or include a positive connection to the load or other component
Washington State had to have known what was coming down the line in the new ASME. Yet they cited 2021 as the ASME for the new code. Again, that reading of structural lifter is exclusive. If you don't hook in, they don't count it. So let's look at what this means.
If you go out and buy bins, skips, or baskets, or boxes that are rated, they will have hook in points and you also get the pleasure of load testing it. If you are trying to buy something with a rating, engineering and safety, then you have more complexity for the safer item. If you job build a wood box with no rating, there is no requirement to load test it. It's that circular reasoning still at play. Will it be able to hold the load today? Probably. Wanna bet a coffee on it? If you exclude the positive attachment, you avoid the regulations. Washington contractors are incentivized to take the risk and nail boxes together. No ratings gets a thumbs up for another 15 years in Washington?
If you are in an OSHA state, this is no longer true. OSHA requires a manufacturer, tag, rating, then they state in multiple places that you need to inspect according to ASME B30.20. In a few appreciable ways, Washington is taking a path that leads to notably more dangerous practices than would be allowed on an OSHA site with knowledgeable oversight. All for pedantic lawyerly reading of code. If you take the vague writing of OSHA 1926.251 you'd be far safer than the four pages Washington writes on Structural Lifters. In the end, it's just fancy wording for anything without a positive attachment can be deadly and we won't find you at fault for it.
