Tower Collapse During Upgrades: The Structural Hold Point Every Crew Needs

Tower Safety Bulletin | November 12, 2026

Fall protection is essential, but it cannot protect a climber when the structure itself fails. A documented fatal tower-collapse investigation shows why structural sequencing, engineered temporary supports, and field verification must be treated as critical controls—not paperwork.

Documented incident: two climbers killed during a tower upgrade

On February 1, 2014, a 340-foot Rohn 80-series cellular tower collapsed during upgrading/construction activities. Four workers were removing diagonal tower supports; temporary supports had not been installed. Two climbers died and two others were injured. These are findings reported in the NIOSH FACE investigation (published 2019), not a new 2026 incident. The report provides a stronger verified lesson than an unconfirmed recent report.

What should have been a hold point?

Before a load-bearing member is removed, the crew should verify that the approved engineered sequence and required temporary bracing are in place. A tower that is stable in its completed configuration may not remain stable during alteration. No crew-level improvisation should substitute for engineering authorization when the structural load path changes.

Seven pre-climb and mid-task checks

• Structural state: Confirm current drawings, tower condition, approved modification/construction plan, sequence of member removal, temporary supports, and engineer-defined hold points. Stop for corrosion, missing members, unexpected deformation, or undocumented changes.
• Fall protection and rescue: Verify compatible continuous fall protection, anchors, transfer methods, pre-use inspections, trained rescuers, usable rescue equipment, communications, and a site-specific suspended-worker recovery plan. A rescue plan must work with the people and equipment actually on site.
• Rigging and hoisting: Confirm load weights, rigging configuration, rated equipment, attachment-point capacity, competent/qualified personnel, exclusion zones, and the approved lift classification. Do not position workers beneath suspended loads.
• RF and electrical: Coordinate with all relevant transmitters/carriers, document antenna operating status and RF controls, assess exposure along the entire work path, and verify power isolation or other protective measures where necessary. Check electrical approach distances and applicable lockout procedures.
• Weather and fatigue: Establish wind, lightning, precipitation, heat and cold stop-work triggers appropriate to the tower, lifting plan and equipment. Reassess when conditions change; climbing fatigue affects judgment and rescue capability.
• Dropped objects: Tether tools where appropriate, secure materials, control ground access and prevent simultaneous work in the fall zone.
• Contractor coordination: Identify the tower owner, carrier, prime contractor, subcontractors, engineer, competent person, RF contact, rescue lead, and who can authorize changes or stop work. A contract chain must not become an accountability gap.

What is enforceable—and what is guidance?

OSHA requirements: Applicable federal construction or general-industry provisions depend on the actual activity. Fall protection, training, electrical safety, hoisting, and other relevant requirements must be determined for the specific task; it is incorrect to assume that one universal tower fall-protection height applies to every operation. OSHA’s communication tower guidance and tower construction directive explain important distinctions. OSHA also identifies hazards involving hoisting, weather, dropped objects and structural collapse.

Voluntary consensus standards: ANSI/ASSP A10.48-2023 addresses communication-structure safe work practices and training; ANSI/TIA-322-2023 addresses engineering criteria for construction loads, structural stability and lifting devices. These are not automatically federal regulations, although contracts, adopted codes, or recognized-hazard analysis can make them highly consequential.

RF rules: OSHA notes that its general RF exposure provision does not establish an enforceable federal OSHA exposure limit; FCC RF requirements for authorized facilities are distinct and must be evaluated where applicable. RF warning signs alone are not a substitute for coordinated exposure controls.

The field decision that matters

At the tailboard meeting, ask: What will temporarily carry the load after we remove this member—and who verified that condition? If the answer cannot be shown in the approved plan and confirmed in the field, do not proceed. Reassess the JHA whenever the structural state, lifting configuration, weather, RF environment, or crew changes. Capture the change, obtain the necessary authorization, and rebrief everyone before resuming.

Primary sources and standards

• NIOSH FACE: Two Tower Climbers Fatally Injured When a Cellular Tower Collapsed While Performing Tower Upgrades (2019)
• OSHA: Communication Tower Incident Investigations
• OSHA: Communication Towers
• ASSP: A10.48 planning, structural loads and safe work discussion
• OSHA: RF and Microwave Radiation Standards

Read more tower safety insights at https://ursafetypro.com.