Tower Crane Inspections for Safety, Frequent Cycles Actually Hinder Safety [SME Regulation Field⑩]

[Planning] Visiting the Regulatory Site of SMEs
Excessive Tower Crane Inspections... Most Accidents Caused by Installation and Dismantling
Frequent Inspections Threaten Construction Site Safety
Issues with Mandatory 'Pre-Entry Inspection' Created by Private Companies

Tower crane (Photo by Yonhap News)

[Asia Economy Reporter Kim Cheol-hyun] "Trying to align the tower crane schedule with inspection dates actually makes it more dangerous." This is the voice from the field handling tower cranes. The industry explains that frequent inspections cause tower crane installation and dismantling to be rushed, increasing the likelihood of accidents. Moreover, inspection companies openly demand costly ‘pre-delivery inspections’ in addition to the legally mandated regular inspections. If the high-cost inspection is not requested, they effectively refuse by delaying the regular inspection schedule. This irony, where inspections meant to ensure safety instead threaten it, is the reality the tower crane industry is currently facing.

According to the related industry on the 22nd, tower cranes undergo regular inspections every six months. Inspections are also conducted during relocation and installation. When considering lifecycle inspections, the number of inspections is excessively high, according to the industry. As tower crane inspections have been continuously added, a backlog of regular inspections has occurred. In the past, inspections took 15 days. Although the number of inspection companies increased from one to eleven, the inspection period has extended to up to two months. This can directly relate to the possibility of safety accidents, as installation and dismantling work for inspections is being carried out excessively. Han Sang-gil, director of the Korea Tower Crane Rental Cooperative, explained, "Since 1991, a detailed analysis of tower crane accidents shows that most accidents were caused by installation and dismantling."

The bigger problem is the ‘pre-delivery inspection.’ This is an inspection arbitrarily established by inspection companies designated by the Ministry of Land, Infrastructure and Transport. According to the industry, if only the legally mandated regular inspection is requested without applying for the pre-delivery inspection, the inspection companies do not respond. Director Han said, "If you apply for the pre-delivery inspection, they come for the inspection; if not, they don’t." Due to inspection companies forcing the pre-delivery inspection, regular inspections can be delayed by one or two months. The tower crane industry has even filed complaints against these inspection companies. Director Han said, "If inspections are delayed, it causes not only financial damage to tower crane companies but also harm to construction sites. About 150 workers operate per tower crane at construction sites, so if the tower crane stops, the lifeblood of the site stops as well."

Conducting the pre-delivery inspection does not necessarily improve safety. When dismantled, a general-purpose tower crane amounts to 14 loads on 18-ton cargo trucks, and the industry explains that proper inspection is difficult when the crane is not operational. Furthermore, once reinstalled, it must be inspected again, and then again after six months. Despite this reality, construction companies also demand pre-delivery inspections in the name of safety, forcing small-scale tower crane operators to reluctantly bear the cost of expensive inspections.

The tower crane industry is demanding that the regular inspection cycle be changed from six months to one year. They argue that the current system hampers safety and is unfair compared to other construction machinery inspected every two to three years. The burden on small-scale tower crane operators is increasing, causing serious management difficulties. They also call for improvements to prevent inspection companies from refusing regular inspection applications and to eliminate the practice of forcing pre-delivery inspections. Director Han pointed out, "With regulatory reform discussions underway, the legally mandated inspection deadlines are suddenly being observed. This means that until now, what could be done was not done. If interest wanes, compliance may lapse again. Temporary business suspensions and other sanctions against private inspection companies are mere slap-on-the-wrist measures."

This content was produced with the assistance of AI translation services.