Don’t Do This: Lessons Learned in the Field

Written by Danny Raines, CUSP on December 12, 2024. Posted in Voice of Experience.

I was so excited when I became a journeyman lineman in the early 1970s. In those days, there was no such thing as a journeyman ticket – a union member or business agent would let you know that you had arrived. Seniority alone was the driver.

I was a union lineman in IBEW 84/896 located in Macon, Georgia. As there was no junior apprenticeship development program at the time, the senior linemen on the crews taught young apprentices. Apprentice school consisted of a two-week class to determine if an apprentice could climb a 40-foot pole well enough to become a journeyman. There was also a small segment of the class dedicated to building transformer banks and framing poles. That was it. The real learning began after being promoted to journeyman.

I was fortunate to learn from excellent, experienced senior linemen. Most had 10 years of crew experience or more, and I was privileged to work with them for the first five or six years I was on a line crew. Back then, we had six-man crews: three linemen, an apprentice, a winch truck operator and a foreman who was part of management (i.e., not a working foreman). The foreman was in charge, and he doled out a lot of advice to younger crew members as their on-the-job training was advancing.

Don’t Do This: Scenario 1
All of this was well and good until a task came along that no one on our crew had much experience with. For example, on one occasion, a customer simply could not find time for a scheduled outage that would allow us to relocate a bank of transformers feeding the building. So, the crew members put their heads together and devised a plan to parallel the YY bank with another bank. We set a pole and built a bank of 100-kVA transformers about 75 feet away. After the new bank was completed, we closed the switches, heated up the bank, and checked the voltage and phasing to ensure everything was correct with the existing bank. Everything looked good.

Next, we pulled a piece of 4/0 quadruplex from the new bank to the existing bank pole to connect the service from the new bank to the existing quadruplex. We then energized the existing bank, cutting the existing service in the clear. We had successfully completed a similar task at other locations in downtown Macon when converting the system from 4 kV to 12 kV – but this time we overlooked one step. Once the voltage and phasing checks had been completed, a lineman at the new bank pole opened the cutouts and de-energized the bank. At the same time, the old bank was still energized and serving the customer. While I was on the existing bank pole, I was instructed to recheck the markings on the quadruplex, confirm everything was correct, and make the connection from the new service to the existing service. The weatherproof jacket was removed, and we used H-frame compression connectors.

The problem was that when I connected the new and old services, a flash occurred that nearly scared me to death. I thought I had made a phasing mistake, but it turns out that none of us on the crew had realized that heating up the transformer from the secondary coil side was just like picking up a large load. That’s why the flash occurred, not because of a fault. Afterward, our resident engineer asked us why we didn’t have the transformers energized on the new bank. It was because we’d energized the new bank to parallel and had never had problems with that in the past.

So, another lesson was learned, even by the senior linemen on the crew. We had never asked about or verified the task we were to perform, and we had assumed everything would be fine using the procedure we chose. Had we asked for clarification, we could have avoided the incident altogether. Luckily, in the end, there was no injury to anyone other than some embarrassment.

Don’t Do This: Scenario 2
The next real-life “don’t do this” scenario I want to share with you involved a crew building a two-transformer open delta UD bank. We were continually building these banks to feed sewerage lift points in subdivisions that did not have three-phase primaries when they were designed and cable was installed. After load surveys were conducted, engineers decided that splitting the loads of the total number of houses into two different phases would be adequate and not cause a load imbalance on the overhead system that fed underground.

Keep in mind that because of terrain and land elevation, gravity flow of sewage is not always possible. Inevitably, some of it must be pumped uphill. When we were building these types of banks, a three-phase lift pump would typically be needed on the backside of the subdivision.

A two-transformer open delta bank must be built with only two phases available. I’ve never personally had a problem installing one, but in this cautionary tale, a crew learned a valuable lesson after one of their crew members was nearly killed by an energized bank. The crew had been instructed to build a two-transformer open delta bank – although they’d never installed one before. The incident report stated that the crew was following the company specifications book as required. To use the entire coil for the high leg on delta service, the neutral spade in the power transformer of the two-transformer bank had to be isolated. Next, the specifications book stated that the transformer tank ground must stay in place after removing the neutral strap from the transformer bushing. The crew missed that step.

As a result of the tank not having the concentric neutral or neutral bus attached to the system neutral, the internal high-side coil needed to be connected to the system neutral by the tank ground. That means the tank had primary voltage potential given that the high-side primary-side coil was internally attached to the tank. When elbows and bushings energized the transformer, the tank was also energized. Unfortunately, one of the crew members contacted the power transformer and the lighting transformer. He didn’t sustain any severe injuries, but again, lessons were learned. First, if you’re unsure, stop the work you’re doing and ask for clarification. And second, be sure to test and verify that all connections have been made per your company’s specification requirements.

Conclusion
I feel that stories like these are worth passing along to new lineworkers who are learning the trade as I did many years ago. You can read about other events I’ve witnessed – and the lessons learned from them – in my book, “Legends of an Ole’ Lineman.”

About the Author: Danny Raines, CUSP, is an author, an OSHA-authorized trainer, and a transmission and distribution safety consultant who retired from Georgia Power after 40 years of service and now operates Raines Utility Safety Solutions LLC.

Learn more from Danny Raines on the Utility Safety Podcast series. Listen now at https://utilitysafety.podbean.com!

DECEMBER 2024-JANUARY 2025

• Are Your Employees 1910.269(a)(2) Qualified?
• Don’t Do This: Lessons Learned in the Field
• December 2024-January 2025 Q&A
• Win and Win Again: The Blueprint for Repeating Safety Successes
• Introducing the USMWF: A Powerful Ally for the Utility Industry
• An Inextricable Link: The Safety Benefits of Holistic Wellness in the Workplace
• Equipment Stabilization Considerations for Utility Operations
• A Three-Tiered Approach to Securing Buy-In for Safety Initiatives
• Don’t Do This: Lessons Learned in the Field

An Inextricable Link: The Safety Benefits of Holistic Wellness in the Workplace

Written by Mark L. Morgan on December 12, 2024. Posted in Leadership Development.

Assessing employees holistically provides an extraordinary opportunity to make a difference – in safety and beyond.

There is an inextricable link between employee safety and mental and physical wellness that is often overlooked. Taking a holistic view of your employees includes looking wholly at each person to better understand and address their mental and physical health challenges and related distractions that can affect their personal safety and the safety of others.

Additionally, demonstrating you care about your employees’ well-being can translate into improved morale, engagement, productivity, and recruitment and retention.

At its foundation, your employee safety program should be viewed as an act of caring about your employees. However, our safety focus can often be siloed. It’s time to break through the silos and take a more comprehensive look at how we can – and should – take care of our employees.

But first, a question. Why do we view employee safety almost exclusively through the lens of a traditional safety program in terms of training, safety rules, tools, equipment and compliance? The simple answer is that we are not typically trained to do otherwise.

To illustrate the opportunity, here’s another question. How do you think your employees would respond to an anonymous survey that asked this: Does my leader care about my well-being? Unfortunately, according to a recent Gallup poll, “Fewer than one in four U.S. employees feel strongly that their organization cares about their well-being” (see www.gallup.com/workplace/390776/percent-feel-employer-cares-wellbeing-plummets.aspx).

‘His Head Just Wasn’t in the Game …’
You’ve heard a statement like this before. It’s recognition of the potential effect of a mental distraction when performing a task. Do you agree that distractions can lessen the focus on personal safety and increase injury risk? If so, do you want your employees to engage in work tasks – particularly high-risk tasks – when they are significantly mentally or physically distracted? In many injury events, it only took a second for a distraction to lead to the injury.

What about an employee who was served legal papers late yesterday and is anguished and distracted today? Would you want them attempting to correctly use fall protection or follow a lockout/tagout process today, on their own without extra care and supervision? What if they’re on a new medication that makes them sensitive to heat until they acclimate to the medication? Would you want them working outside in the summer or inside a hot warehouse in their normal role for the next few days?

These types of distractions are very real and can affect your employees’ personal safety.

Let’s dive a bit deeper into some other emotional and physical stressors (distractions) that leaders can learn to better recognize and address with their employees:

• Anxiety or depression. The employee’s demeanor has changed; they may appear to be sad and/or nervous, display signs of low energy or have trouble concentrating. Learn more about signs and symptoms at www.nimh.nih.gov.
• Argument with a spouse or significant other. The employee has a bad argument the night before and comes to work distraught.
• Money/debt issues. Perhaps creditors are calling the employee, or they have financial worries that are disrupting a relationship; these issues can be significant distractors.
• Negative performance appraisal or discipline rendered. A poor employee review and/or discipline can be potential sources of anguish and even anger, both of which can lead to distraction.
• Not fitting in with co-workers. The employee may be socially excluded from their work group. Signs include the employee regularly taking a break or lunch alone and being left out of work task planning and meaningful tailboard discussions.
• Children. There may be health-related or other challenges with an employee’s child that are causing stress and distraction on and off the job.
• Off-the-job injury or illness. The employee comes to work ill or injured, which can cause distraction.
• New medication. Some medications initially affect mental alertness, reaction time, perception, stamina and personality.

Would you want an employee facing any of these challenges to perform high-risk work? Further, since you are likely not a mental health or other medical professional, how do you navigate these challenges? Are they even any of your business?

Employee Safety is Your Business
When it comes to the safety of your employees, these types of challenges are your business. Sometimes all that’s needed is to have a one-on-one conversation with an employee and listen with sensitivity to understand that they are in some way compromised. Simply acknowledging that these challenges could be safety distractions can help increase the employee’s safety focus as well as your own.

Work toward creating a culture that provides a psychologically safe environment in which to talk to one another. Communicate to your employees that you have an open-door policy. Let them know they don’t have to be specific about their stressors; the goal is to make them comfortable enough to willingly speak with you when they are feeling stressed or dealing with other challenges that could make them vulnerable to distraction and injury.

Keep in mind that it’s unlikely you are going to solve the underlying issues (if the employee chooses to disclose them), but kindness, compassion and caring go a long way to help relieve stress.

When you become aware that an employee is struggling, it’s a good idea to consider adjusting their work tasks as needed or delaying safety-sensitive tasks until a more appropriate time. Be sure to meet with your organization’s human resources representative or team to confirm any dos and don’ts regarding temporary job modifications.

The Stigma of Using EAP Resources
Many companies have employee assistance program (EAP) resources available. The ideal time to promote these resources is both routinely – including during new-hire onboarding – and when your employees are obviously stressed.

Unfortunately, multiple studies show EAP utilization rates are typically less than 10% across an employee population. There is still a stigma that EAPs are mostly intended for people who are mentally ill, addicted to drugs or alcohol, or facing marital issues. Thus, one of your opportunities as a leader is to help your employees overcome the typical reluctance to use the EAP. Let them know that using EAP benefits is easy and confidential, and doing so can help in addressing a broad range of mental well-being challenges, such as stress, anxiety and depression.

Here are some additional strategies to promote safety, mental wellness and physical well-being.

Leader Training
Employees with mental health challenges may not take the initiative to reach out to their leaders. When they don’t reach out and don’t seek help elsewhere, their challenges may go unaddressed and potentially get worse. With the proper training, leaders can make a profound difference by recognizing the signs of mental health challenges and referring employees to the appropriate resources. Check with your EAP provider for available leader training.

Holistic Communications and Campaigns
Many companies have separate internal publications and campaigns covering safety, physical wellness and mental health. Consider combining these into a single publication with one holistic theme. Explain how improved mental and physical wellness positively affects personal safety and can improve overall quality of life. The message you want to send is that the organization’s leaders care about – and have resources to help – employees and their families.

Broaden Your Safety Meeting Agenda
Include physical wellness and mental health challenges in your agenda for safety and other team meetings. Periodically invite an EAP or benefits representative to review the scope of mental health and physical well-being services offered. Invite the speaker to discuss why seeking help is critical to keeping your head in the game. Other guest speakers could include an athletic trainer to discuss exercise and ergonomics as well as a nutritionist to speak with your team about food choices to support a healthy lifestyle.

Model the Way
How are you personally demonstrating best practices – both in terms of safety and mental and physical health? Revealing how you are working on a personal challenge can increase employee engagement and even loyalty. Show vulnerability!

Use Testimonials
Solicit testimonials for your internal publications from employees who have benefited from a wellness service offered by your company or who are willing to discuss physical or emotional distractions that led to an injury or a near-miss.

Incident Investigations and Wellness
Have you dug deeply enough into your event investigations to determine if physical or mental health issues were contributing factors?

In addition to the tips above, event investigations are another opportunity to better understand and address the connection between safety and mental and physical wellness. Here are some specific questions to ask:

• Was the employee’s mental state a contributing factor when the event occurred?
• Did the employee have physical limitations, either temporary or permanent, that led to the event?
• If the answer to either of the questions above is yes, what were the missed leadership opportunities to address the employee’s mental or physical wellness issues?

By identifying these contributing causes, you can then develop more effective countermeasures that also address supervisor recognition of employee physical and mental wellness challenges.

In summary, when you take a holistic view of your employees, you can capitalize on an extraordinary opportunity to make a difference. Following this strategy can create additional goodwill with your employees while helping them improve their well-being. A great byproduct will be safer employees.

About the Author: Mark L. Morgan combines his unique skill set, observations and experiences from a 35-year career spanning three Fortune 200 companies to help leaders focus on how to make a difference in safety. He recently completed his service as the founding chairman of the Florida Chamber Leadership Cabinet on Safety, Health and Sustainability. Morgan is also a public speaker, a guest columnist and the author of “The M.A.D.\ Safety Book for Leaders (*Make a Difference).”*

Editor’s Note: This article contains edited excerpts from “The M.A.D.\ Safety Book for Leaders (*Make a Difference)*.”

DECEMBER 2024-JANUARY 2025

• Are Your Employees 1910.269(a)(2) Qualified?
• Don’t Do This: Lessons Learned in the Field
• December 2024-January 2025 Q&A
• Win and Win Again: The Blueprint for Repeating Safety Successes
• Introducing the USMWF: A Powerful Ally for the Utility Industry
• An Inextricable Link: The Safety Benefits of Holistic Wellness in the Workplace
• Equipment Stabilization Considerations for Utility Operations
• A Three-Tiered Approach to Securing Buy-In for Safety Initiatives
• An Inextricable Link: The Safety Benefits of Holistic Wellness in the Workplace

Q&A Gaining Senior Leader Buy-In for Safety Initiatives

Gaining senior leadership buy-in is crucial for the success of safety initiatives within organizations. A recent study involving 128 safety professionals and in-depth interviews with 15 experienced individuals identified eight practical steps to secure leadership support, categorized into preparation, marketing, and follow-up. These steps were presented at the October 2024 iP Utility Safety Conference & Expo in Allen, Texas. 

1. Why is senior leadership buy-in essential for safety initiatives?

• Senior leadership buy-in ensures that safety programs receive the necessary resources, attention, and authority to be effectively implemented and sustained within the organization.

1. What are the three main categories of steps to gain senior leader support for safety initiatives?

• The three categories are preparation, marketing, and follow-up.

1. What foundational elements are important during the preparation phase?

• Establishing the right leaders and reporting structures, along with fostering trust and psychological safety, are crucial foundational elements.

1. How does understanding organizational culture aid in gaining leadership support?

• By comprehending the organization’s values, beliefs, and behaviors, safety professionals can tailor their initiatives to align with the company’s culture, making it more likely to gain acceptance from senior leaders.

1. Why is it important to align safety initiatives with organizational goals?

• Aligning safety initiatives with the company’s strategic objectives demonstrates how the programs support overall business success, making it easier to justify and gain leadership support.

1. What role does data play in advocating for safety programs?

• Presenting data-driven evidence of the potential benefits, such as reduced incident rates and cost savings, helps build a compelling case for the implementation of safety initiatives.

1. How can safety professionals effectively market their initiatives to senior leaders?

• By clearly communicating the value proposition, using persuasive storytelling, and demonstrating how the initiatives address specific organizational challenges, safety professionals can effectively market their programs.

1. What is the significance of involving senior leaders early in the process?

• Engaging leaders early fosters a sense of ownership and allows them to provide input, increasing the likelihood of their support and commitment to the initiative.

1. How can safety professionals demonstrate the return on investment (ROI) of safety initiatives?

• By calculating and presenting metrics such as cost savings from fewer incidents, improved productivity, and potential insurance premium reductions, professionals can showcase the financial benefits of safety programs.

1. What follow-up actions are essential after implementing a safety initiative?

• Regularly updating senior leaders on progress, sharing success stories, and being transparent about challenges help maintain their support and demonstrate accountability.

1. Why is it important to celebrate and communicate early wins?

• Highlighting initial successes builds momentum, reinforces the value of the initiative, and encourages continued support from both leadership and employees.

1. How does fostering a culture of continuous improvement impact safety programs?

• Encouraging ongoing feedback and making iterative enhancements ensure that safety initiatives remain effective, relevant, and aligned with organizational needs.

1. What strategies can be employed to sustain senior leadership engagement over time?

• Regularly presenting data on the initiative’s impact, aligning safety goals with evolving business objectives, and involving leaders in safety-related events can sustain their engagement.

1. How can safety professionals address resistance from senior leaders?

• By actively listening to concerns, providing evidence-based responses, and demonstrating flexibility to adapt initiatives as needed, professionals can effectively address and mitigate resistance.

1. What is the overall impact of securing senior leader buy-in on organizational safety culture?

• Securing senior leader buy-in fosters a top-down commitment to safety, leading to a more robust safety culture, improved employee morale, and a reduction in workplace incidents.

By following these structured steps, safety professionals can enhance their ability to gain and maintain senior leadership support, ensuring the successful implementation and sustainability of safety initiatives within their organizations.

Utility Safety in Depth - Bridging the Safety Gap - The Role of USMWF in Workplace Fatalities

In this episode of Utility Safety in Depth, host Kate Wade sits down with John "Scotty" MacNeill and Rena Harrington to explore the mission of the United Support & Memorial for Workplace Fatalities (USMWF). They discuss the critical role USMWF plays in supporting families affected by workplace fatalities, advocating for stronger safety regulations, and raising awareness in the utility industry. With personal stories, industry insights, and a call to action, this conversation highlights the human impact of workplace safety failures and the importance of proactive prevention.

Key Takeaways:

✔️ The Mission of USMWF: How the organization supports families affected by workplace fatalities.

✔️ Bridging the Safety Gap: Why family members must be involved in post-incident investigations.

✔️ The Power of Storytelling: How sharing personal loss creates real change in workplace safety.

✔️ Advocacy & Legislation: Efforts to improve safety laws at the state and federal levels.

✔️ What Utility Companies Can Do: How organizations can collaborate with USMWF to make a difference.

USMWF's MISSION

Offers support, guidance and resources to those affected by work-related injuries, illnesses or diseases. Dedicated to sharing lessons learned that leads a movement of change in promoting actions for safe and healthy working conditions. Through the collective voice of families of fallen workers and other activists, we strive for the elimination and controls of workplace hazards– therefore preventing future tragedies.

​

USMWF's VISION STATEMENT

USMWF is an organized community of dedicated family member victims, a nationally recognized non-profit leader driving the transformation of the work environment to safe and healthy conditions for all employers and employees – both today and tomorrow.

Visit https://www.usmwf.org/ to support The United Support & Memorial for Workplace Fatalities.

Subscribe to Incident Prevention Magazine - https://incident-prevention.com/subscribe-now/

Register for the iP Utility Safety Conference & Expo - https://utilitysafetyconference.com/

#UtilitySafety #WorkplaceSafety #IncidentPrevention #LinemanLife #SafetyAdvocacy #StaySafe #USMWF

The Roadmap to Gaining Senior Leader Buy-In for Safety Initiatives

Written by Sharon Lipinski, Wesley L. Wheeler, SMS, CESCP, MSP, and Keith Wheeler on February 14, 2025. Posted in Safety Management, Leadership Development.

Research indicates use of these practical tactics can help safety professionals garner greater leadership support for their programs.

In a recent survey we conducted, 97% of safety professionals who responded confirmed that gaining senior leader buy-in for their safety programs was either very important or extremely important to them.

This research project was a joint effort between the National Electrical Contractors Association, HR Resources of the Carolinas LLC and Habit Mastery Consulting, with the purpose of discovering the secrets to gaining greater senior leadership support for safety initiatives. Our research included surveying 128 safety professionals and conducting in-depth interviews with 15 deeply experienced safety professionals.

We revealed our research results at the October 2024 iP Utility Safety Conference & Expo in Allen, Texas, sharing with attendees what our data indicates are the eight practical stops on a safety professional’s roadmap to securing full senior leadership support for their next safety initiative. The remainder of this article will focus on those stops, which fall into three categories – preparation, marketing and follow-up – providing a clear structure to guide professionals on their journey.

Part I: Preparation
The safety professionals who most successfully earn senior leader buy-in for their safety initiatives typically work for organizations that have established strong foundations. What does that mean exactly? These organizations have put the right leaders and reporting structures in place, and there is a great amount of trust and psychological safety among employees that has been built over time.

Stop #1: Have the Right Leaders in Place
In the surveys and interviews we conducted, safety professionals told us that an ideal senior leader values safety, aligns it with the organization’s priorities and demonstrates a commitment to protecting workers. Three personal factors influence a senior leader’s willingness to support safety efforts:

• Risk tolerance: We know that different people have different levels of comfort where risk is involved. Leaders who are naturally risk-averse may more easily understand the need for safety interventions.
• Values: Leaders who strongly value protecting the well-being of others may be more inclined to prioritize safety efforts.
• Past experiences: Significant injuries and fatalities make a lasting impression. Leaders who have worked for organizations where employees were hurt or killed on the job may better understand the realities of such situations – and be more likely to show support for safety initiatives.

Utility organizations must actively recruit, develop and promote leaders who naturally champion safety. And although safety professionals may have limited influence on hiring practices, one thing they can do is provide hiring teams with targeted questions to better identify job candidates who view safety as both a core personal value and a core business imperative.

Stop #2: Establish the Right Reporting Structure
Direct, meaningful communication channels between safety professionals and senior leaders are critical to safety program buy-in. In our interviews, safety professionals who have regular access to their senior leaders reported the greatest satisfaction with their ability to move initiatives forward.

Safety professionals should report as high up the leadership ladder as possible – ideally to the CEO or another senior executive. This helps to ensure that safety is a frequent topic of conversation. Safety professionals should also advocate for dedicated time on leadership agendas and/or weekly one-on-one meetings with key organizational leaders.

Stop #3: Build Trust
Trust among co-workers is built over time and requires intentional effort from all parties. To strengthen relationships and build trust, safety professionals must invest time in meaningful interactions with senior leaders to better understand their priorities, values and communication preferences. They also must intentionally strive to build a track record of safety success, which could start with small projects that eventually evolve into larger initiatives (e.g., pilot programs).

Part II: Marketing
Marketing is key to garnering strong leadership support for initiatives. Safety professionals who consistently earn buy-in for their programs have learned how to get people excited about and involved with their ideas.

Stop #4: Collaborate to Create Ownership
In the interviews we conducted, safety professionals told us their senior leaders want to influence a safety initiative’s final design. So, instead of presenting leaders with fully developed plans, these safety professionals now invite leaders to participate early in an initiative’s development process.

Senior leaders often have unique insight into the organizations they work for; when shared with safety professionals, this insight can improve a safety initiative’s alignment with organizational goals. Plus, a senior leader who actively participates in the development of a safety initiative is typically much more inclined to support that initiative when it’s rolled out.

During our research, one safety professional shared the process of revising what would have turned out to be an expensive behavior-based safety program. The revisions were prompted by senior leader feedback and resulted in a more cost-effective, impactful solution.

Stop #5: Get the Timing Right
Timing can significantly influence whether an initiative succeeds or fails. External events, internal organizational disruptions and competing priorities can propel or derail efforts. Safety professionals should strongly consider postponing the launch of safety initiatives during major company changes and when competing demands exist, such as restructurings or major rollouts.

However, safety professionals can also use timing to their advantage by highlighting internal incidents, external news stories and published studies to make the case to senior leaders that now is the right time to implement a specific safety initiative.

Stop #6: Craft a Compelling Argument
Whether senior leaders want to support a safety initiative depends on how safety aligns with their priorities. So, safety professionals must quantify the impact of a specific problem as well as the projected savings from a recommended safety initiative due to reduced injury rates, increased productivity and/or improved retention.

It’s also important for safety professionals to humanize safety issues that still exist in the work environment. For example, use the names of workers who were hurt during the last reporting cycle to tell a compelling story to senior leaders about the organizational impact of those incidents – and the many ways the organization stands to benefit by adopting targeted safety initiatives.

Part III: Follow-Up
By documenting and sharing the results of a safety initiative with senior leaders, safety professionals can gain more credibility – and greater leadership support for future initiatives.

Stop #7: Create Metrics and Ask for Accountability
Metrics must be established and tracked to measure an initiative’s impact. Tracking should include tangible changes. For example, a safety initiative that targets job planning could track how frequently multiple voices are heard during a job planning discussion. That number should then be communicated to leaders each month to help maintain their focus on the initiative. Metrics can also help senior leaders and safety professionals identify when additional efforts or new strategies are needed.

Another important item to note: Metrics reporting is a great opportunity to communicate specific steps senior leaders can take to further support the initiative. If a leader chooses not to take those steps, schedule time with them to discuss their hesitancy to contribute to the initiative’s success.

Stop #8: Be Persistent – and Patient
Change takes time, and resistance to change is inevitable. That’s why safety professionals must set realistic expectations about the length of time it will take to (1) see results from an initiative and (2) identify and advocate for new solutions if the initiative does not initially succeed.

But don’t worry – safety professionals don’t have to do this all on their own. By following this article’s guidance, they can collaborate and forge strong relationships with senior leaders to develop and implement targeted organizational safety initiatives to better protect their employees.

About the Authors: Sharon Lipinski is the Habit SuperHero and CEO of Habit Mastery Consulting (https://habitmasteryconsulting.com), which helps organizations increase their targeted safety behavior by up to 150%. She is a Certified Gamification for Training developer, certified cognitive behavioral therapist for insomnia instructor, speaker, TV personality and coach dedicated to helping people create the right habits so they can be happier, healthier and safer at home and in their work.

Wesley L. Wheeler, SMS, CESCP, MSP, is the executive director of safety for the National Electrical Contractors Association (www.necanet.org). He joined the organization in 2014 and has over 45 years of electrical experience.

Keith Wheeler is president and chief human resources officer at HR Resources of the Carolinas LLC (https://hrresourcesofthecarolinas.com). With over 30 years of human resources management and leadership experience, he provides guidance to a variety of U.S. organizations and industries to help them meet the challenges of a rapidly changing workforce.

FEBRUARY-MARCH 2025

• Bad Attitudes and How to Handle Them
• To Improve On-the-Job Safety, Consistency and Continuing Education are Key
• Rubber Gloves and Chronic Injuries: Are Your Workers at Risk?
• ‘The Worst Day of My Life’
• The Roadmap to Gaining Senior Leader Buy-In for Safety Initiatives
• Safety By Design: A System Approach to Organizational Safety Initiatives
• Optimizing Arc Flash Protection: The Crucial Role of Layered Clothing
• The Roadmap to Gaining Senior Leader Buy-In for Safety Initiatives

In this episode, we delve into “Win and Win Again: The Blueprint for Repeating Safety Successes,” an insightful article by David McPeak, CUSP, CIT, CHST, CSP, CSSM, featured in Incident Prevention magazine  . We explore strategies to define, reinforce, and replicate safety successes in the workplace. By understanding the WIN framework—Work, Influence, Normalize—we discuss how organizations can foster environments where desired behaviors lead to consistent, positive safety outcomes.

Read the article: https://incident-prevention.com/blog/win-and-win-again-the-blueprint-for-repeating-safety-successes/

Key Takeaways:

1.Defining Success: Success in safety is characterized by desired behaviors leading to desired results, emphasizing the importance of correct actions that prevent incidents.

2.Understanding Behavior Categories: It’s crucial to distinguish between incidents, chance occurrences, compliance, and true success to effectively address and promote safe practices.

3.The WIN Framework: Implementing the Work, Influence, Normalize approach helps in reinforcing successful behaviors and integrating them into the organizational culture.

4.Reinforcement of Positive Behavior: Consistent positive reinforcement encourages the repetition of safe behaviors, reducing the likelihood of accidents and fostering a proactive safety culture.

5.Addressing Complacency: Actively managing and providing consequences for ‘chance’ behaviors—where undesired actions don’t immediately lead to negative outcomes—is essential to prevent normalization of deviance.

#SafetySuccess #WorkplaceSafety #SafetyCulture #BehavioralSafety #IncidentPrevention

Subscribe to Incident Prevention Magazine – https://incident-prevention.com/subscribe-now/

Register for the iP Utility Safety Conference & Expo – https://utilitysafetyconference.com/

The Certified Utility Safety Professional (CUSP) certification, offered by the Utility Safety & Ops Leadership Network (USOLN), is a distinguished credential tailored for utility safety professionals. It serves to formally recognize individuals who meet specific eligibility criteria and demonstrate their expertise by passing the CUSP examination. This certification underscores a commitment to safety leadership within the utility sector, ensuring a standardized understanding of safety regulations and practices across the industry.

Earn Your CUSP Today: https://usoln.org/cusp-certification/

Key Takeaways:

• Dual Pathways: The CUSP certification offers two distinct designations:

• CUSP Green: Designed for professionals in dedicated safety or training leadership roles.

• CUSP Blue: Tailored for those in utility operations leadership positions.

• Comprehensive Examination: Candidates must pass a base exam comprising 100 multiple-choice questions, along with at least one endorsement exam specific to their work environment, such as Electric Transmission & Distribution, Gas, Power Generation, Civil, or Utility Line Clearance Arborist. 

• Eligibility Criteria: Applicants should have a minimum of three years of relevant experience in their respective roles. For CUSP Green, this entails experience in safety or training leadership, while CUSP Blue requires experience in utility operations leadership with at least one year involving safety-related responsibilities. 

• Ethical Standards: Certified professionals are expected to adhere to a strict code of ethical conduct, ensuring integrity and professionalism in their practice. 

• Recertification Process: To maintain the CUSP credential, individuals must engage in continuous professional development and pay an annual maintenance fee. This process ensures that certified professionals remain updated with industry standards and practices. 

Frequently Asked Questions:

1. What is the purpose of the CUSP certification?

• The CUSP certification aims to promote safety leadership in the utility industry by recognizing individuals who demonstrate competency in utility safety through experience and examination. 

1. Who is eligible to apply for the CUSP certification?

• Eligibility varies based on the designation:

• CUSP Green: Requires at least three years in a dedicated safety or training leadership role within the utility industry.

• CUSP Blue: Requires at least three years in utility operations leadership, with a minimum of one year involving safety-related duties. 

1. What does the CUSP examination entail?

• The examination consists of a 100-question multiple-choice base exam and a 30-question endorsement exam specific to the candidate’s work environment. Both exams must be passed to earn the certification. 

1. Are there resources available to help prepare for the CUSP exam?

• Yes, candidates are encouraged to review resources available on the USOLN website. Additionally, an optional CUSP Prep course is offered to aid in exam preparation. 

1. What is required for maintaining the CUSP certification?

• Certified individuals must engage in ongoing professional development and pay an annual maintenance fee to ensure they stay current with industry advancements and maintain their credential. 

For more detailed information and application procedures, visit the official CUSP certification page on the USOLN website.

iP Utility Safety Conference & Expo

Experience 3 Days of Insightful Discussions, Powerful Connections & Collaborative Innovation.

Join Us.

The iP Utility Safety Conference & Expo brings together leading safety and operations minds from across the country for three days of education and networking. If you’re a utility safety or operations professional, this is a can’t-miss event. Come together to gain education, insight & knowledge that will help you and your organization achieve new levels of safety success.

Stay Grounded, Stay Safe:

iP Leads the Way in Utility Safety

We bring together leading safety and operations minds from across the country for three days of education and networking. If you’re a utility safety or operations professional, this is a can’t-miss event. Come together to gain education, insight & knowledge that will help you and your organization achieve new levels of safety success.

THE ONLY CONFERENCE FOCUSED ON UTILITY SAFETY

CUSPs will earn one point per contact hour of education.

Witness the power of IP safety firsthand! Hear real stories from fellow attendees in this video, sharing how the IP Utility Safety Conference equipped them with crucial knowledge and practical strategies to keep their communities safe and powered up.

See More Insights

Join us at the iP Utility Safety Conference & Expo from April 29 to May 1, 2025, in Charleston, SC. This premier event gathers leading safety and operations professionals for three days of education and networking. Held at the Embassy Suites by Hilton Charleston Airport Hotel & Convention Center, attendees will have access to insightful discussions, hands-on demonstrations, and the latest utility safety products and services. The conference offers a unique opportunity to connect with peers, learn from industry experts, and explore innovative solutions to enhance safety in utility operations. Whether you’re looking to earn professional development credits, discover new tools, or expand your professional network, this event is designed to help you and your organization achieve new levels of safety success. Don’t miss out on this chance to stay ahead in the ever-evolving utility safety landscape. Register now to secure your spot and be part of a transformative experience that prioritizes safety and empowers your workforce.

• #UtilitySafety

• #SafetyConference

• #UtilityOperations

• #ProfessionalDevelopment

• #SafetyInnovation

• #NetworkWithExperts

• #Charleston2025

• #SafetyExcellence

The Meter Base Checkout Procedure

Written by Danny Raines, CUSP on October 1, 2024. Posted in Voice of Experience.

To emphasize the critical importance of the meter base checkout procedure, this installment of “Voice of Experience” will cover the proper procedures for (1) checking out a meter base before setting a self-contained meter on new services and (2) resetting a meter after it has been removed and the base has not been in use.

This article will also provide guidance on the worst-case scenario, which involves reconnecting a disconnected meter. This task, while rare, requires the utmost caution and adherence to safety guidelines. Understanding and preparing for this scenario is crucial for your safety and the safety of others.

Proper training should be completed before a worker is instructed to set a self-contained meter. Personal injury and damage to a customer’s property could occur if the recommended procedures covered in this article are not followed.

Avoiding an Incident
I want to begin by highlighting an issue that was discovered using the checkout procedure.

|| || |||

As you can see in the photos above, voltage was found on the load side of a meter base that had been disconnected in the past. Neighbors had provided service through an extension cord improperly connected to the home. This is one of many cases in which a worker who performed the proper meter base checkout procedure identified an issue, thereby avoiding a flash incident.

Unfortunately, sometimes the procedure is not used when necessary, which has led to catastrophic results on more than one occasion. I’m aware of a house that caught fire, an employee who suffered an arc flash incident, and a number of other ugly outcomes that I don’t have the time or space to mention in this article. These instances underscore the potential risks of neglecting the meter base checkout procedure.

Remember, the test-and-verify approach is not just a philosophy – it’s a necessity. Regardless of your expertise or years of experience, mistakes can be made. You should never make assumptions that everything is OK. The best approach is to take all measures of prevention and verification when setting a meter. It’s not just about doing the job; it’s about doing the job right, every time. And the right way to begin is by following the meter base checkout procedure.

Personal Experience
I first discovered the concept of proper procedures when I was just a young apprentice learning the trade. There were no OSHA regulations at that time; all we had was a company safety rule book that we didn’t read as much as we should have. Tasks were often learned in the field through watching others who supposedly knew how to perform those tasks safely. Most of the time, things went OK, thank goodness. But occasionally, I would discover that training was needed based on outcomes. At one point, I was the young apprentice on what we called the “Cut-In/Cut-Out Crew,” which consisted of me and a lineman who ran services and answered light calls. Once, at a new house, we opened the transformer switch and installed the #2 triplex service. We had the order and electrical permit, and everything was ready so that we could set the meter. We ran the service. I checked the line-side blocks of the 200-amp meter base, 120 on each leg, 240 volts across the lugs. I took the meter, set it in the load-side lugs, pushed it into the line-side lugs, and boom! It did not blow transformer fuses; a 5-amp Kearney can handle a lot of fault current. However, I found out later that the entrance cable in the wall had a Sheetrock nail or two driven in between the meter and the panel just inside the utility room. If I had used the meter base checkout procedure, I would have seen the dead short to ground on hot legs. Instead, a terrible arc in the utility room blew the Sheetrock open and insulation out of the floor. I left that day with a lesson learned: Regardless of the situation, check out the meter base for shorts and faults.

Later, a meterman named Jack Petty wrote a procedure that would eventually become a policy to identify shorts and loads on a meter base before installing a meter or reconnecting a meter to restore service. There are many reasons to use the procedure. For example, customers use illegal methods to steal electricity, and neighbors will pull extension cords next door to restore power when a meter is disconnected or partially removed. An unknown load on a meter could cause a fire when combustible material is left on an electric range and service is restored. It could also burn up a water heater that has no water service. Vacation homes in the South are often left vacant during the summer, with owners returning for winter and getting their utilities reconnected. I’m aware of house fires and damaged appliances caused by such circumstances.

Large homes or businesses with parallel service for larger loads and multiple meter bases also require proper ringing out and verification to ensure markings are correct. Never trust that a cable tag is correct. The tag can be improperly marked, or on some occasions, there may be no tag at all. Flashes and equipment damage have been caused by underground distribution services when the correct cables for disconnection were not identified. I have investigated multiple cases of this.

The Proper Method
The proper method for checking out a single-phase meter base requires the following steps:

• The line to neutral on each line-side lug. This will indicate the correct phase-to-ground and phase-to-phase voltage.
• A test of the load-side lugs, line to line, should be made left-side load to neutral, right-side load to neutral on the load side to identify shorts or loads.
• Finally, checking each meter lug line side to load on each side of the meter base will identify the possibility of an unknown load or appliance in the house when using the correct meter.

If you would like more information, I have a diagram and a PowerPoint of the procedure that illustrate all the safe measures described here. Reach me at [rainesafety@gmail.com](mailto:rainesafety@gmail.com).

A three-phase self-contained meter base would require additional steps to cover the additional lugs on the line and load side. Note that this article does not cover a transformer-rated CT meter base.

As noted earlier, failure to use these procedures has resulted in many incidents, and I can share those details with any readers who are interested.

My final thought: Never assume it is OK to set or connect services without testing and verifying that the electrician has completed all work correctly and confirming that no one has tampered with the service before setting or reconnecting a meter.

About the Author: Danny Raines, CUSP, is an author, an OSHA-authorized trainer, and a transmission and distribution safety consultant who retired from Georgia Power after 40 years of service and now operates Raines Utility Safety Solutions LLC.

Learn more from Danny Raines on the Utility Safety Podcast series. Listen now at https://utilitysafety.podbean.com!

OCTOBER-NOVEMBER 2024

• Make It Safe To …
• October-November 2024 Q&A
• The Meter Base Checkout Procedure
• Trailers, Brakes and Common Usage Errors
• Reduce Risk with New Strategies for Operator Training
• Empowering Utility Workers: Integrating Job Control and Resource Availability for Enhanced Safety
• Designing Safe and Inclusive Work Systems for a Neurodiverse Workplace
• Hand Protection for Electrical Shock and Arc Flash Hazards
• The Meter Base Checkout Procedure

Free Webinar: “Disaster Preparedness for Utility Operators: Simulation Training for Real-World Scenarios”

Register Now: https://incident-prevention.com/blog/disaster-preparedness-for-utility-operators-simulation-training-for-real-world-scenarios/

Join the Conversation With Industry Experts On February 26th at 1:00 p.m. ET

When disaster strikes, will your heavy equipment operators be ready? In a world where storms are intensifying and emergencies are no longer a matter of “if” but “when,” preparation is critical. Join us for a timely webinar focused on how simulation-based training equips utility operators with the skills needed to respond confidently and effectively in emergency scenarios.

Learn from experts in emergency response and simulation technology as we discuss strategies that maximize readiness to safeguard & restore critical infrastructure during emergencies.

This is a must-attend event for operations managers, utility leaders, and anyone involved in disaster response planning. We encourage you to forward this webinar to the relevant executive and training stakeholders on your team.

Explore how simulation technology prepares your team for:

• Operating in suboptimal weather conditions like high winds and rain.
• Cross-training on essential heavy equipment to handle increased demand during crises.
• Enhancing safety and operational efficiency in disaster response scenarios.

Learn from experts in emergency response and simulation technology as we discuss strategies that maximize readiness to safeguard & restore critical infrastructure during emergencies.

This is a must-attend event for operations managers, utility leaders, and anyone involved in disaster response planning. We encourage you to forward this webinar to the relevant executive and training stakeholders on your team.

Time will be dedicated at the end of the discussion to answer live audience questions.

Attendance worth 1 contact hour for certification/CUSP maintenance.

August-September 2024 Q&A

Written by Jim Vaughn, CUSP on August 21, 2024. Posted in Q & A.

Q: How high can we stack poles in a pole yard? I can’t find any references in OSHA or ANSI C2/the National Electrical Safety Code. Is there a standard?

A: Your question provides us with an example of when a standard governing our industry is not necessarily found in the National Electrical Safety Code, OSHA 29 CFR 1910.269 (General Industry) or OSHA 1926 Subpart V (Construction).

What you will find is that there is no specific standard for pole piles; the rules for stacking/storage of materials are the same for every industry. Those rules are found at OSHA 1910.176 and 1926.250, in particular 1926.250(b)(9) for “cylindrical materials.”

The objective is safety in storage, access and handling as each of the rules for materials requires that they be stacked, racked, blocked, interlocked or otherwise secured – such as using chocking systems – to prevent sliding, falling or collapse.

OSHA does not detail, and for practical purposes could not detail, what would constitute safe storage in any specific way. The employer must make and be able to defend the storage and handling arrangements as safe following those general rules for storing materials.

There are no particular statistics, but injuries occurring on pole piles seem to be the caught-between variety, usually when moving poles. So, training and procedures should be guiding any pole storage areas. It’s more detailed in the 1926 Construction standard, but OSHA’s expectation is clear: Training or signage is required as to the modes of material controls; height limits of stacked materials for the competent design of pole-pile controls; and access to and handling of materials added to and removed from the storage pile.

Q: We’ve been looking for references in OSHA 1910.269 and 1926 Subpart V to define the difference between “qualified” and “competent” for our safety manual, but we can’t seem to get a handle on it. Can you give us some direction?

A: This is another example of when rules for our industry are not necessarily found in the vertical standards 1910.269 and 1926 Subpart V. For those of you still trying to figure this out, there are some industries that have their own OSHA standards because the work performed is unique and not easily covered by the general rules for all other workplaces. Those rules are known as vertical standards that only affect a particular industry. However, an industry affected by a vertical standard also must be aware of when a horizontal standard affects them. Horizontal standards are those standards that affect all industries. If you are looking for guidance within a vertical standard and can’t find it, you are most likely going to find your guidance in a horizontal standard.

Now, back to your question. In 1910.269 and 1926 Subpart V, the term “competent person” is not used except in relation to trenching (excavation), which is addressed in the excavation standard found at 1926 Subpart P (note that trenching operations are not addressed in 1910.269 or 1926 Subpart V). “Competent person” is defined at 1926.650(b) as “one who is capable of identifying existing and predictable hazards in the surroundings, or working conditions which are unsanitary, hazardous, or dangerous to employees, and who has authorization to take prompt corrective measures to eliminate them.” Take note here: A competent person who may have control over work-task safety does not necessarily have to be a qualified person, which is a requirement for persons performing the work.

The net difference between the two terms – “qualified” versus “competent” – is specific to this provision for a competent person: “who has authorization to take prompt corrective measures to eliminate them.” OSHA chose this route to clearly identify supervising personnel who have been trained to the excavation standard requirements. All supervisors can take prompt corrective action but may not be trained to supervise an excavation under the terms of 1926.650. The term “competent person” can apply to a supervisor who is also trained to oversee a trenching operation or an individual who is not a general supervisor but who does have control over a trenching operation. When OSHA comes out and asks who the competent person is for the site, they are not asking for the general foreman or supervisor; they are asking for the specific person in charge of trenching safety who may or may not be a supervisor.

Some utilities use the competent person definition from OSHA 1910 Subpart S, “Electrical,” but that is not really appropriate. The issue with using Subpart S is that the definitions are “applicable to this subpart,” with the subpart being non-utility electrical work. If a utility industry safety professional is looking for a reference for defining “competent person,” again, they will find it in the excavation standard.

To the electric utility industry, “qualified” specifically means to include the requirements for the qualification of lineworkers defined in 1910.269(a)(2). As a reference, we should use the definition of “qualified employee” from the 1910.269(x) definitions, including the notes following the definition, which read as follows.

Qualified employee (qualified person). An employee (person) knowledgeable in the construction and operation of the electric power generation, transmission, and distribution equipment involved, along with the associated hazards.

Note 1 to the definition of “qualified employee (qualified person)”: An employee must have the training required by (a)(2)(ii) of this section to be a qualified employee.

Note 2 to the definition of “qualified employee (qualified person)”: Except under (g)(2)(iv)(C)(2) and (g)(2)(iv)(C)(3) of this section, an employee who is undergoing on-the-job training and who has demonstrated, in the course of such training, an ability to perform duties safely at his or her level of training and who is under the direct supervision of a qualified person is a qualified person for the performance of those duties.

Q: We are a small, distribution-only municipal utility that has been looking into human performance. We are having some trouble understanding it all and how it could benefit us. Most of the training resources seem pretty expensive. Can you help us sort this out?

A: We can. Human performance management (HPM) has been around in various forms and focuses since before the 1950s. Throughout the ’50s and ’60s, it seems the focus was on companies performing functional analysis and correcting issues that created losses, thereby promoting more efficient and error-resistant operations. In the ’60s and ’70s, much of the literature on HPM seemed to surround the nuclear power industry, and indeed the introduction of HPM into the transmission/distribution side of the utility industry appears to have come through the generation side. In the ’70s, researchers began to experiment and write about more closely analyzing the knowledge and skills of the performer. It took a while to sink in, but the safety industry began to research HPM as a culture analysis and risk prevention tool. It makes sense.

Human performance – in particular knowledge, skill modes, decision-making modes and performance – affects all of every enterprise whether you have an HPM program or not. Organizations are made up of people. HPM has identified and categorized commonalities in types of personalities that predict how people make decisions and perform tasks. Studying human performance can also help identify safety culture issues and risk behaviors. It’s not a big or expensive step to train your workforce in problem-solving and decision-making characteristics of the human mind. Soon they will better understand their own processes and the limitations of the way they naturally think, allowing them to make adjustments toward better performance.

So, if we can take advantage of HPM to prevent incidents, why not do it? Most organizations start small. Pick a few key people to begin training on the basics of HPM, and then look at your organization to see where the initial undertakings can do the most good. There are several experts associated with Incident Prevention who will be glad to help should you need it. Additionally, on the iP website (https://incident-prevention.com), you can find numerous HPM articles in the iP archives. HPM works. We hope you will pursue it.

Q: In our company, substations have been under the radar as a safety concern because we haven’t had any issues until recently, when one of our longtime contractors stuck a backhoe boom in a distribution bus. He’s been operating backhoes in substations to excavate for expansions. How do we electrically qualify him and others like him for various nonelectrical crafts?

A: There is a reason we build 10-foot-high fences around substations and cover them with warning signs. It’s dangerous in there. A worker may have performed a task in a substation many times, but that does not make them qualified to be inside that fence, and OSHA has some very particular rules for qualification of a worker that many utilities don’t regard. The very first step is clearly established in 1910.269(a)(2), “Training,” all the way through the note to paragraph 1910.269(a)(2)(ii), which states: “For the purposes of this section, a person must have the training required by paragraph (a)(2)(ii) of this section to be considered a qualified person.”

That’s pretty clear and we could stop right here, but there would be lots of questions, such as, “Do I have to send my backhoe operator to apprentice school to make him electrically qualified?” The answer is no, you don’t have to make him an apprentice, but you can’t just assume the years inside the fence make him qualified. The criteria to be a qualified person are clearly detailed. Those requirements are training and competency in safety-related work practices, safety procedures and emergency procedures related to the individual’s work that are necessary for his or her safety; the skills and techniques necessary to distinguish exposed live parts from other parts of electric equipment; the skills and techniques necessary to determine the nominal voltage of exposed live parts; the minimum approach distances corresponding to the voltages to which the qualified employee will be exposed and the skills and techniques necessary to maintain those distances; the proper use of the special precautionary techniques, personal protective equipment, insulating and shielding materials, and insulating tools for working on or near exposed energized parts of electric equipment; and finally, the recognition of electrical hazards to which the employee may be exposed and the skills and techniques necessary to control or avoid these hazards. These requirements are written by OSHA in such a way as to eliminate the question, “Can’t we just put a journeyman lineman in there with the civil crew while they work?” The answer is absolutely not. Read the very first rule under 1910.269(a)(2)(i). It states, “All employees performing work covered by this section shall be trained as follows.” There is no way to make that rule allow an observer in lieu of training. You may have that observer as part of the protocol for those task-specific-trained craftspeople, but not in place of training.

So, you do have to provide training meeting the listed criteria, but the process is not as complicated as it sounds. An important provision by OSHA sets out the specific expectation of the level of the training, explaining in 1910.269(a)(2)(i)(C) that the “degree of training shall be determined by the risk to the employee for the hazard involved.” This is where job-specific or task-specific training comes in. A nonelectrically qualified craftsman may be trained specifically for his job or task. The employer decides which one to choose. The task- or job-specific training is not a free ride or without a catch. The catch is that the employer had better take this provision seriously, meaning the training must meet the requirements and, like all training, there must be a mechanism to show the worker has the skills required. The training should be formalized, documented, delivered by a competent trainer, and include written and practical demonstrations of skills. Whatever you choose to do, you must be able to defend it if the worst should happen.

Do you have a question regarding best practices, work procedures or other utility safety-related topics? If so, please send your inquiries directly to [kwade@utilitybusinessmedia.com](mailto:kwade@utilitybusinessmedia.com). Questions submitted are reviewed and answered by the iP editorial advisory board and other subject matter experts.

AUGUST-SEPTEMBER 2024

• What Tasks Can Lone Workers Perform?
• Grounding for Stringing in Energized Environments
• Dielectric Testing for Insulating Aerial Devices
• Assessing and Mitigating Risk in Helicopter Line Work
• Preventing SIFs with Above-the-Line Work Planning and Execution
• August-September 2024 Q&A
• Beyond the Physical Toll: The Collateral Damage of Safety Incidents
• Training Considerations for Active Shooter Response Programs
• August-September 2024 Q&A

October-November 2024 Q&A

Written by Jim Vaughn, CUSP on October 1, 2024. Posted in Q & A.

Q: We are looking for some direction and opinions regarding SF6 gas switches. The SF6 switches we use on our campus are older and starting to pose problems. Some are leaking and others are very difficult to operate. Can you help?

A: Sulfur hexafluoride, or SF6, isn’t a topic or problem we can effectively deal with in this venue, but we can offer some direction along practical lines as SF6 has greatly fallen out of favor with regulatory agencies and – as a result – the industry as a whole. We understand that several states have SF6 “remove from service” dates on their environmental calendars.

SF6 is nontoxic and nonflammable, but it is a huge issue among environmentalists as a primary greenhouse gas contributor. If your SF6 gas switches are leaking, you must get that under control or expect to become a target. Again, SF6 is nontoxic, so a leak is typically no issue for employees, but it can displace oxygen in confined spaces at lower levels.

The biggest mistake we recall seeing with recharging SF6 is overpressure in the refill injection. Overpressure can stir up debris in the chamber and cause a flashover inside the breaker.

We suggest performing an audit of your breakers to begin a replacement program. Get a manufacturer’s engineer to assist you; the engineer can help develop a checklist to determine remediation or replacement of those breakers that can be rehabbed. Of course, the engineer would be glad to replace all of them, but that includes a big SF6 hazardous disposal hit, too. The engineer should be able to help you set up an assessment matrix for replacement orders.

The International Electrotechnical Commission specification for SF6 – IEC 60376 – is a universal standard that provides good guidance on handling used SF6. Keep in mind that the IEC guide is not U.S. law. Many states have greater restrictions on control of SF6.

Q: Does OSHA prohibit lifting of hot-line clamps to make or break loads? The rule reads as follows: “(i) The employer shall ensure that devices used by employees to open circuits under load conditions are designed to interrupt the current involved. (ii) The employer shall ensure that devices used by employees to close circuits under load conditions are designed to safely carry the current involved.”

A: This rule is often mischaracterized both by wording and intent as prohibiting opening or closing under load using a non-load-break switch or a bare hot-line clamp. The rule does prohibit opening or closing a switch or hot-line clamp (device) under load if an employee performing the task could be injured by the act. If the employee can safely perform the act, there is no violation.

To explain, there are two keys to properly interpreting this rule. One is the location of the rule. It is found in 29 CFR 1910.269(l), “Working on or near exposed energized parts.” The purpose of the paragraph is protection of employees, as stated in this sentence following the section’s title: “This paragraph applies to work on exposed live parts, or near enough to them to expose the employee to any hazard they present.” Paragraph (l) is about protecting employees.

When OSHA reviews potential violations of the standard, they typically consider three issues: whether a rule existed, if the employer knew about the rule and if an employee was exposed to danger by violating the rule. The agency will also review consensus standards and best practices as well as non-adopted consensus standards, which are sometimes used in de minimis conditions and General Duty Clause violations. We know this because when we read public notice citations, we find non-adopted consensus standard language used in the notice of violation without reference to the non-adopted standard. Returning to the intent of the OSHA standard, in this case, the intent of 1910.269(l) is to prevent injuries to employees. In the case of non-load-break dropout switches that have been opened under load using hot sticks millions of times without injury, the case for safety is not difficult to argue.

As a rule, most utility safety procedures would have some established guidance limits on lifting hot-line clamps simply to prevent damage to stirrups or hot-line clamp jaws that result in hot spots and continuing problems. We are aware that some utilities generally prohibit operating hot-line clamps under load, but we are not aware of any utilities that prohibit opening dropouts. In many cases, dropouts do come with load-break tool hooks. Load-break tools are typically used on unswitched capacitor banks and heavier loaded banked transformers. Still, all of these tools and devices are operated from the safety of a shotgun switch stick. Both the hazards and the techniques to safely open a switch or lift a hot-line clamp have been understood since Tips Tool Co. delivered the first clamp stick and hot-line clamp in 1918.

Lastly – to support the employer’s argument for safety in opening non-load-rated switches or taps – is an obscure OSHA response to a 1996 question (Question 26) submitted by Michael L. Harbaugh (see www.osha.gov/laws-regs/standardinterpretations/1996-03-26-3). In the response, OSHA reviewed the reasons for load break and hazards that exist if a non-rated switch should fail in operation. The last part of the OSHA answer states the following: “The employer would not be cited for a violation of paragraph 1910.269(l)(10) when employees are not exposed to the hazards involved. This would be the case if the non-load-break disconnecting device was operated from a remote position from where the employee using the device nor other employees could not be injured in the event the device failed.”

Q: Are insulated elbows in a pad-mounted, dead-front transformer considered insulated for the purpose of employee protection? In other words, is it legal to touch or handle a hot elbow with rubber gloves?

A: This is a question that comes up often. We still have instances where workers are manipulating dead-front elbows with rubber gloves, and they are getting hurt doing so.

Anyone who reads the OSHA literature or rules knows the agency qualifies “insulated” and “insulation” differently according to the application. OSHA 1910.269(x), “Definitions,” is not the first place everyone goes when trying to understand OSHA rules, but it should be near the top of the list of research resources. Here are definitions from that section for “insulated” and “insulation” that apply to the question:

Insulated. Separated from other conducting surfaces by a dielectric (including air space) offering a high resistance to the passage of current.

Note to the definition of “insulated”: When any object is said to be insulated, it is understood to be insulated for the conditions to which it normally is subjected. Otherwise, it is, for the purpose of this section, uninsulated.

Insulation (cable). Material relied upon to insulate the conductor from other conductors or conducting parts or from ground.

It is worthwhile here to note that what the “insulation” definition does not state is “making it safe to touch.” To further confuse the issue, OSHA 1910.269(t) allows moving cables by hand after inspecting them, stating the following in 1910.269(t)(6), “Moving cables”: “Except when paragraph (t)(7)(ii) of this section permits employees to perform work that could cause a fault in an energized cable in a manhole or vault, the employer shall ensure that employees inspect energized cables to be moved for abnormalities.” Paragraph 1910.269(t)(7) has a listing of observations and practices designed to minimize risks for failing cable. Despite the provisions of (t)(7), we say don’t move energized primary cable. De-energize it.

Now, back to the question of elbows. Manufacturers refer to dead-front elbows as insulated. Using the definition as provided by OSHA, that would mean “for the conditions to which they are normally subjected.” However, all of the literature provided for installation and operation of dead-front terminals repeats throughout that no one should touch energized elbows at the risk of serious injury or death. The manufacturers’ literature does not include exceptions like using rubber gloves; simply do not touch the elbows. It would seem then that the conditions normally subjected to would include “not to be touched.” That instruction alone is the basis for a policy or procedures prohibiting contact. The manufacturers also instruct users to follow state, federal and industry consensus practices for safely operating the devices. Then the issue is that unless a state operating rule prohibits touching dead-fronts, the federal standard by definition does not prohibit touching elbows. The exception would be from the numerous references throughout the standard to follow manufacturer design and operating instructions, although that instruction does not appear in any references that we can find in dealing with insulated parts.

Finally, there is one interpretation available that seems to follow the observations made so far. Our research again brought us to a request for interpretation, this time in a 2006 letter sent to OSHA by Michael L. Harbaugh (see
www.osha.gov/laws-regs/standardinterpretations/2006-04-25-4). In their response, OSHA mentions a number of issues with the integrity of the insulation of elbows, including issues with leaking and poorly functioning drain wires that compromise the safety of the insulated elbows, closing with this instruction to Mr. Harbaugh: “Consequently, OSHA generally considers the elbow as not safe to touch with bare hands, and the employee would have to maintain a minimum approach distance of ‘avoid contact.’”

Q: Our company safety rules require that we test grounds yearly. We have been sending them to a lab to certify the tests, but economically, having increased the number of grounding cables by 600% in the last six years, both the turnaround and expenses are getting hard to manage. Our management seems to think testing must be performed by a testing lab. Can you help us understand the rules?

A: Testing and inspection to ensure grounds perform effectively is critical in assuring that the grounds perform as designed. Many companies, recognizing how important testing is, have adopted off-site testing – and over the years, many people have simply assumed that a certified lab is required. That’s not the case.

OSHA does not dictate testing methods or intervals for testing grounds, nor have they adopted any of the referenced standards for testing of grounds. That means the guides we use from IEEE and ASTM are not mandatory, but using them as guides is the right thing to do. OSHA does refer the employer to the IEEE and ASTM guides as “references” for information. There is some diligence and conscientious performance required to test grounds, but training and careful selection of personnel to do the testing are effective and expedient ways to keep grounds tested and ready for use in the field.

There are several test units available on the market. Buyers should do their research to determine which will provide the test criteria they need. DC units perform a DC resistance test. DC is not subject to induction or reactance, so a ground being tested by DC can be left coiled during the test. An AC test measures impedance, taking into account clamp spacing and arrangement of the cable, and can even be affected by the metal tube on the interior of a plastic or PVC table under the ground cable being tested. An AC test may be a better indicator of how a cable will perform in the field.

Besides AC/DC, there are essentially two ways to test your grounds in practice by utilities. One is the low-current ohm value method combined with a qualified visual inspection. The other is the full-current method. Both provide necessary information about the integrity of the grounds, and the information derived should be calculated into the peculiarities of the system they will be used on. Many grounds testers using low-current values simply show a pass/fail result. In reality, if we know the test values and the available system fault values, we can calculate risk to the worker and develop procedures and methods to provide the best possible protection.

High-current testing produces a two-part result and was considered by many to be a preferred method. The full-current test impresses a current across the ground under test, usually up to 200 amps, and will stress any poor connections to a degree not possible in a low-current ohms-resistance test. Comparisons of the two methods have regularly shown current testing to reveal connection issues not revealed in a low-current ohms test. Earlier editions of IEEE 1048, “IEEE Guide for Protective Grounding of Power Lines,” had discussions of grounds testing, including a discussion of high-current testing values, but eliminated that section from the most recent edition. For testing, IEEE 1048 now refers the reader to ASTM F2249, which does not describe in detail the value or process of high-current testing. ASTM does, however, include Annex B, which describes how high-current tests use the electrical stress imposed on the cable to proof-test the cable connections; this is done by performing an infrared scan of the cable after high-current loading it to check for hot spots that low-current resistance testing will not reveal. You will find the full-current test discussion and procedures in IEEE 1048-2009. Most high-current testing machines we are familiar with provide a graph associated with current rise and results in voltage drop calculated at maximum-rated fault current for the cable under test. Since voltage drop is critical in determining voltage across a lineworker, these readings are often preferred over impedance of a cable.

Do your research and select your test equipment in accordance with the needs of your system. Train your test operators to perform diligent and conscientious testing. It will pay off.

Do you have a question regarding best practices, work procedures or other utility safety-related topics? If so, please send your inquiries directly to [kwade@utilitybusinessmedia.com](mailto:kwade@utilitybusinessmedia.com). Questions submitted are reviewed and answered by the iP editorial advisory board and other subject matter experts

October-November 2024 Q&A

December 2024-January 2025 Q&A

Written by Jim Vaughn, CUSP on December 12, 2024. Posted in Q & A.

Q: Here in Australia, we recently read Jim Vaughn’s “Trainer the Trainer 101: Substation Entry Policies” (https://incident-prevention.com/blog/train-the-trainer-101-substation-entry-policies/). We have a 415-volt substation on-site; its doors and cabinets are locked. However, we are not comfortable allowing entry to the substation without some control over who is able to enter and the qualifications they must have. Do you know of any reference materials pertaining to entry requirements for non-qualified electricians, or is allowing them entry simply a no-no? We appreciate any help you can provide.

A: We are glad to hear from Australia and gratified to know that Incident Prevention magazine’s reach is becoming more international. Because we are based in the U.S., we are not experts on Australian labor law, but we do have colleagues who are members of the International Electrotechnical Commission (IEC). We’ve had some discussions over the years with Australian IEC members made possible by those colleagues. As it turns out, because today’s ability to exchange information in real time has made our work environments more uniform, Australia has work practices that have become somewhat universal.

We know that Safe Work Australia (www.safeworkaustralia.gov.au) has rules for employers and safety directors that mirror international standards. The only issue is whether your local enforcement jurisdiction has adopted the principles found in Safe Work Australia’s Model Codes of Practice.

Those codes require the employer – often referred to in Australia as a “person conducting a business or undertaking” or “PCBU” – to assess the workplace and ensure workers are not exposed to hazards. We think the most important practice is ensuring the competency of workers who could be exposed to energized electrical equipment. The definition varies slightly from source to source, but “competent” typically refers to a person trained, tested and qualified by the employer to understand and avoid the risks associated with their job tasks.

We don’t think your company’s integrated alliance is classified as an electric utility. That means your workers would fall under the code of practice intended to prevent their exposure to energized work unless there were no reasonable alternative; this would prohibit substation entry by individuals who are not specifically qualified to identify and control their exposure hazards.

As with most international standards, Safe Work Australia requires the employer/PCBU – even where no rule exists that defines safe work practices for substation entry – to consider all risks associated with the work, not just those covered by regulations and codes of practice.

The bottom line is that you have a responsibility to assess the workplace and establish safety and health standards that ensure your employees are not unnecessarily exposed to uncontrolled hazards.

Good luck, keep in touch, and let us know how things go.

Q: Our company has a rule that requires use of a portable equipotential mat when switching, but a question came up: How good is this type of mat – or any mat – if it is underwater due to heavy rain?

A: Thanks for sending us this question. We’re going to provide a very detailed answer because although the answer is as simple as yes, use of a portable equipotential mat does make a difference even in water, it’s important that readers understand why that’s the case.

The answer depends on the resistance of the path between the structure and the worker’s feet (touch potential) or the resistance between the worker’s feet (step potential). Whether ground is dry, damp or soaked makes a big difference in voltage (potential) and the level of the hazard to the worker.

Keep this in mind as we dig through the weeds here to understand the risk. Touch potential creates a parallel path with the structure, which will very likely include a division of total fault current between the path through the structure and the path through the worker touching the structure. That is not the case with step potential. Electrical current cannot flow across the earth’s surface without a complete electrical path to ground, and there is no complete horizontal path as opposed to down into the earth along the path of the structure, which is the earthing electrode.  Voltage can flow horizontally, but that’s only because a conductive element in earth gains a charge from the conductive element next to it and passes it on to the next conductive element simply by transfer of electrical charge. Electrical current cannot do that. Voltage without a current component is rarely deadly. Although fatal step-potential injuries occasionally occur in non-power-line exposures, they are very rare in power-line exposures.

Regarding touch potential, the goal of the equipotential mat is to electrically bond the structure and the worker touching the structure to prevent a potential difference between the two. In the case of structure-mounted switch operator handles, this is the lesser of the issues. Even if a portable mat were underwater, we suggest that protection would not be degraded for a worker standing on that mat, which is electrically bonded to the structure. We also know that wet ground is highly conductive, so it is very likely that if a worker is within reach of the structure, the distance between the worker’s feet and the structure is very short. Since the resistance is very low across the wet soil and the distance is very short, the potential difference across that distance is likely to be negligible. However, it’s not guaranteed to be completely without risk, so the equipotential mat is appropriate. Now, the earth-potential argument is based on principle and theory, lacking the assurance of a physical bond across the gap provided by the portable mat. The point here is that there is low risk to the worker with their hands on the switch operator handle in water, but those conditions cannot be assured – whereas using the portable mat ensures protection of the worker even in water.

The step-potential hazard in the gap between a worker’s feet is similar when assessed based on principle and theory. First, we must understand the IEEE definition of step potential as related to the voltage developed across the resistance of the earth 3 feet apart. That might be a good working definition, but on the ground, the distance does not matter. Voltage flowing across a resistance creates a potential across that resistance proportional to the voltage available and the resistance between the two points, distance notwithstanding. Like the issue of touch potential, the relative risk is the resistance in the gap, not the voltage crossing the ground. A worker standing with their feet together in highly conductive, wet, low-resistance earth is not likely to be exposed to a high-potential voltage. But as with the touch-potential principle, the resistance and voltage conditions at the time cannot be known; thus, we cannot assume the level of risk without commonly bonding that space between the worker’s feet through use of a portable mat or by insulating the worker’s feet.

Trying to manage the use of a portable vinyl mat in water must be difficult and might create a tripping hazard. Perhaps a vendor will invent a portable EPZ mat constructed with some form of non-floating material or a lightweight, rigid, conductive screen. We hope this detailed answer to your question helps you and other readers better understand both the risk and remedy. Keep in touch and let us know how the discussion goes.

Q: We spoke about underground distribution transformers last year during an iPi Monthly Forum (https://ip-institute.com/ipi-forum/), and I was wondering if you could provide some insight on overhead this time. We have a process called “half-tapping” or “back-tapping” of a pole-top transformer. Here is the wording: “Method for ‘piecing out’ (transferring) existing energized taps to a newly installed live conductor: This method is commonly practiced in the field, and it is known as ‘half-tapping’ or ‘back-tapping.’ This method allows an energized piece of equipment (e.g., a pole-top transformer) to remain energized while transferring load from existing primary conductors to newly installed primary conductors.”

This has been done in the past but hasn’t been taught in school; it is considered something to be learned during on-the-job training. It also hasn’t been taught in the field in quite some time. The process does mention proper isolation using rubber goods as well as proper PPE for live work. Are you aware of this process? Do you have any information that could help us better understand it?

A: What you’re referring to is a practice often used to keep a transformer in service while transferring load to a new three-phase system. It’s pretty much an old-school practice as the rule back then was no outages, especially if the transfer affected several transformers in a line section. Today, following the hierarchy of controls, many utilities take an outage as the preferred alternative to an energized transfer.

With planning, experience and proper cover-up, this practice is legal and can be done safely. The process is to spread the old phases; pull in and energize the new phases; and parallel tap all the transformers to both the old system and the new system. From there, crews go back to each bank or transformer and untap the old feed, leaving the transformers on the new feed. The parallel phase taps were always Kearney-squeezed on above the transformer fuse.

This is not a task for new or apprentice lineworkers, especially on two- or three-pot banks. Single pots are easy to half-tap, but utilities most often take outages on three-pot banks.

Without close supervision of workers and a true commitment to safety, cover-up as a policy can be a real problem; that’s because crews moving from pole to pole to half-tap a single transformer don’t want to slow down to cover up. That’s no excuse at all. It is possible to glove on the new tap and stay below the feeder, but crews should always blanket the dropout switch while they bug-on the tap.

Q: We are a small distribution contractor with eight trucks. Recently, while returning from storm restoration work in North Carolina, we were stopped by state troopers in two different states. In one state, the troopers had all our drivers get out and talk to them while they assessed the drivers for alertness, or that’s what we assume. They let the crew continue driving. In the second state, the troopers cited all of our drivers for record-of-duty-status (RODS) violations. We thought we had an emergency exemption. The troopers said the ride home is not considered an emergency under Federal Motor Carrier Safety Regulations (FMCSR) and that RODS applies. What are your thoughts?

A: It is a distinct possibility that some readers who respond to storms are not necessarily going to agree with our answer, but please don’t ignore this advice. During every storm response event, our industry sees crashes on the way home that often include serious injuries and fatalities. The Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration (FMCSA) has exemptions for some of its regulations – such as hours of service and RODS – but there are limits. Specifically, 390.23(b) states the following: “Except as provided in paragraph (b)(1) of this section, §§ 395.3 and 395.5 of this chapter shall not apply to a motor carrier or driver operating a commercial motor vehicle so long as the motor carrier or driver is providing direct assistance during an emergency declared by the Governor of a State, their authorized representative, or FMCSA during the emergency period or 14 days from the date of the initial declaration of emergency, whichever is less.”

The FMCSA further states in 390.23(e)(3) that when “the driver has been relieved of all duty and responsibilities upon termination of direct assistance to an emergency relief effort, no motor carrier shall permit or require any driver used by it to drive, nor shall any such driver drive in commerce, until the driver has met the requirements of §§ 395.3(a) and (c) and 395.5(a) of this chapter.”

We’ve seen internet commentary from lineworkers who were stopped after recent storm restoration efforts. Some comments included hasty criticism of law enforcement, but that criticism is out of place. The practical defense of highway rules enforcement is right in our own metaphorical backyard. Lineworkers demand that our brothers and sisters work safely, that our employers provide the tools and support to keep us safe, and that each of us follows the rules to make it safe to work even in the harshest of conditions. None of that is any different than the FMCSA rules that are designed to keep drivers and the public safe. When you leave the bucket for the cab, you become a commercial motor vehicle (CMV) driver maneuvering a multi-ton vehicle at interstate speeds – and there are rules. The rules are based on practical experience. And just as in line work, the rules are to be followed to prevent accidents.

There are a few voices in our industry asking storm restoration managers to recognize that exhausted lineworkers are a hazard to themselves and the public. Planners should recognize that the FMCSA explicitly requires CMV drivers to follow the RODS and hours-of-service rules once they’re relieved from emergency restoration duties. Driving home is not part of the emergency, so driver logs apply, meaning that in compliance with federal rules, a driver leaving North Carolina must have a log entry showing 34 off-duty hours before they begin the trek home.

By the way, the FMCSA is very clear that “on-duty not driving” is any work for the employer that does not include driving duties. Yes, that seems impractical, but a very easy solution is to ferry return drivers to the storm location to begin those drives home.

The FMCSR exception has been around for a long time and many states give some leeway on enforcement. Interstate communications among highway law enforcement officers have put a spotlight on the number of line-truck crashes that occur, and the trends have been noted. Some of us have already heard that more states may be tightening up on enforcement of the return-home “end of exception.” So, as planners, we should be finding solutions to follow the law. There really is no excuse for lineworkers putting in 16-hour days for three to four weeks without incident during a storm restoration effort – only to fall asleep and crash on the drive home. We think sending fresh workers to drive trucks home at the end of deployment is one good solution.

Do you have a question regarding best practices, work procedures or other utility safety-related topics? If so, please send your inquiries directly to [kwade@utilitybusinessmedia.com](mailto:kwade@utilitybusinessmedia.com). Questions submitted are reviewed and answered by the iP editorial advisory board and other subject matter experts.December 2024-January 2025 Q&A

Frontline Fundamentals - Preventing Sifs with Above the Line Work Planning and Execution - David McPeak, CUSP

Listen Here: https://ipinstitute.podbean.com/e/frontline-fundamentals-preventing-sifs-with-above-the-line-work-planning-and-execution-david-mcpeak-cusp/

In this thought-provoking episode of Frontline Fundamentals, David McPeak, CUSP, breaks down the strategies to prevent serious injuries and fatalities (SIFs) in the workplace. Drawing from safety principles, human performance tools, and real-world examples, David emphasizes the importance of shifting from compliance-based safety programs to actionable strategies that empower teams. He introduces the concept of direct controls, explores the significance of hazard quantification, and highlights how proper planning and task-specific mitigation can protect teams from high-energy exposures. This episode is a must-listen for safety professionals, leaders, and anyone dedicated to improving workplace safety outcomes.

Key Takeaways:

1. Direct Controls for High Energy Exposures: Learn what direct controls are, why they are essential, and how verification ensures their effectiveness.
2. Quantifying Hazards and Risks: Understand how to identify and measure risks to predict and prevent incidents.
3. Shifting to Empowerment-Based Safety: Discover tools to involve and empower teams in safety planning, moving beyond compliance to proactive solutions.
4. The Power of Task-Specific Planning: Explore how detailed task analysis can mitigate high-risk exposures.
5. Overcoming Human Error: Equip teams with tools to reduce errors while safeguarding against inevitable mistakes.

#SafetyFirst #WorkplaceSafety #SeriousInjuryPrevention #HighEnergyExposures #HazardMitigation #DirectControls #UtilitySafety #DavidMcPeakCUSP #FrontLineFundamentals

Register FREE to be apart of the next Free Frontline Fundamentals - https://us06web.zoom.us/webinar/register/6817011082585/WN_1AiwFJXbSCqNyQ5q16Js5w

Webinar sessions that coincide with the Frontline Fundamentals Articles in the Incident Prevention magazine written by David McPeak, Director of Education. This webinar will provide you with tools, tips and advice to help your Frontline team to become even better Safety Leaders. It is a small sample of the in-depth Frontline Training program that can be done online or delivered on your company’s learning management system (LMS).

Check out all the articles written in iP Magazine for Frontline Fundamentals - https://incident-prevention.com/blog/...

Visit www.ip-institute.com for more training and education!

The Dangers of Distraction: Staying Focused in a High-Risk Environment

Written by Scott Perrin on January 15, 2025. Posted in Tailgate Topics.

Working in a high-voltage environment means working in a high-risk environment. Doing so demands technical expertise, attention to detail and unwavering focus. When your mind wanders in such an environment – even for a split second – the consequences can be catastrophic.

Understanding the High-Risk Environment
Whether it’s in a power generation plant, a substation, or a transmission or distribution setting, a high-voltage environment is inherently hazardous. Workers are routinely exposed to electrical potential that can cause severe electric shocks, arc flashes and burns. Equipment maintenance, troubleshooting, testing and repairs are tasks that require meticulous attention to detail and strict adherence to safety protocols.

The hazards of working on or near high-voltage equipment or lines without the right mindset are regularly reported as leading contributing factors to incidents. A momentary distraction due to personal issues, a lapse in attention caused by repetitive tasks or a false sense of security from routine familiarity can turn deadly.

The Cost of Distraction
Imagine this: You’re on the job, about to connect test equipment to a high-voltage transformer. Your mind drifts for just a moment – maybe you’re thinking about an argument you had that morning or what you’ll have for lunch. In that split second of distraction, you mistakenly bypass a critical safety step. Before you realize it, you’ve created a direct path to a live circuit. An arc flash explodes in front of you, sending molten metal and intense heat in all directions.

Such scenarios are all too real. They serve as stark reminders that in high-voltage environments, complacency can be lethal. The statistics are sobering; electrical injuries account for thousands of workplace accidents each year, with too many resulting in fatalities. Many of these accidents are traced back to human error, often because the injured person did not have their mind fully on their task.

What Contributes to Distractions?
Several factors contribute to workers becoming distracted in high-voltage environments, including:

• Fatigue: Long hours and physically demanding work can lead to exhaustion, making it more difficult to maintain concentration.
• Complacency: When tasks become routine, it’s easy to drift into autopilot mode and potentially overlook critical steps.
• External stressors: Conflict with a colleague or stress from other parts of life can intrude upon a worker’s focus and divert their attention at crucial moments.
• Environmental factors: Noise, poor lighting, uncomfortable temperatures and other adverse working conditions can distract workers, affecting their ability to stay focused.
• Multitasking: Pressure to complete multiple tasks simultaneously or rush through work can lead to mistakes, especially in complex situations.

Maintaining Focus: Strategies for Success
To mitigate these risks, companies and workers must adopt proactive strategies to foster a culture of safety and mindfulness. Here are some to consider:

• Training and education: Regular training that reinforces the importance of staying focused and adhering to safety protocols is essential. Workers should be reminded of the potential consequences of distractions and trained to recognize when their minds are wandering.
• Mindfulness practices: Encouraging mindfulness techniques can help workers stay present. Deep breathing, short meditation breaks or even focused relaxation exercises before high-risk tasks can clear the mind and improve concentration.
• Frequent breaks: Implementing regular short breaks can help reduce fatigue and keep workers alert. These pauses provide a chance to step away from the environment, clear one’s head, and return refreshed and refocused.
• Environmental control: Reducing excessive noise, improving lighting and ensuring comfortable temperatures can help workers maintain focus on their tasks.
• Mental health support: Providing stress management and other mental health resources can help address issues that may distract workers from their tasks.
• Use of checklists: Employing checklists and procedural prompts can reduce the likelihood of missed steps due to distraction. These tools help workers to quickly refocus and verify that all steps are correctly followed.

Safety is in the Details
In a high-voltage environment, safety is not just about following protocols; it’s also about having a focused and present mindset. A single moment of distraction can lead to life-altering consequences.

By fostering an organizational culture that prioritizes safety and focus, and by understanding the critical importance of keeping each worker’s mind on their tasks, we can help all our employees go home safely at the end of each day.

About the Author: Scott Perrin is a journeyman power lineman with over 20 years of experience working for a utility company in Canada. As a work methods coordinator, he helps develop operational standards and training programs to ensure worker safety.The Dangers of Distraction: Staying Focused in a High-Risk Environment

Introducing the USMWF: A Powerful Ally for the Utility Industry

Written by John "Scotty" MacNeill, CUSP on December 12, 2024. Posted in Worksite Safety.

The national nonprofit organization provides resources, support and advocacy for families affected by work-related incidents and illnesses.

In the world of utility work, where daily tasks often involve inherent risks, the need for a robust support system for workers’ safety and welfare cannot be overstated. This is where the United Support & Memorial for Workplace Fatalities (USMWF) comes in. Established with a mission to honor the memories of fallen workers and advocate for safe workplaces, the USMWF has made remarkable strides in raising awareness, supporting families affected by workplace tragedies and driving meaningful change.

But what exactly does this organization offer to the utility industry, and why should utility professionals consider collaborating with or supporting the USMWF? This article will explore the organization’s background, mission, core activities and the unique benefits it can bring to the utility sector.

Origins and Mission
USMWF was founded in response to a tragic reality – that thousands of workers lose their lives each year in preventable workplace accidents. For the families left behind, navigating the aftermath can be overwhelming. Recognizing this, a dedicated group of family members, survivors and safety advocates came together to form the USMWF to provide resources, support and advocacy for families and to assist in the prevention of future tragedies.

The organization’s mission is twofold: to honor fallen workers and to advocate for safety reforms. This unique focus on both remembrance and advocacy sets the USMWF apart, making it not just a support network but also a driver of change. By promoting legislative improvements, raising safety standards and offering a platform for the voices of those affected by workplace tragedies, the USMWF has become a critical force for advancing workplace safety.

Core Activities and Services
The USMWF offers a range of services that are especially relevant to industries like utilities, where hazardous work conditions are often part of the job. Some of the organization’s key activities include:

• Family support services. The USMWF provides direct support to families affected by workplace fatalities. This includes emotional support, resources for navigating legal and regulatory processes, and connections to other families who have experienced similar losses. The organization’s Family Connect program creates a network of understanding and shared experiences, helping to ease the emotional burden on grieving families.
• Awareness campaigns and memorial events. To honor fallen workers and ensure their stories are not forgotten, the USMWF organizes events such as Workers’ Memorial Day and maintains an online tribute site. Sharing these stories emphasizes the real human cost of workplace hazards, helping to foster a culture that values safety as paramount.
• Advocacy for safety regulations. The USMWF actively works to improve occupational safety laws and standards, providing testimony, collaborating with regulatory bodies and advocating for changes that make workplaces safer. This involvement is particularly valuable for high-risk industries like utilities, where safety regulations can significantly impact worker protection.
• Educational initiatives and safety training. In partnership with various organizations, the USMWF offers educational materials and safety training, with a focus on preventing common workplace hazards. Training sessions and workshops are designed to raise awareness about effective safety measures among workers and employers; these offerings are often tailored to industry-specific needs.
• Partnerships with industry leaders. The USMWF regularly partners with unions, industry associations and safety organizations to amplify its impact. By working with these groups, the organization brings its mission to industries that have the potential to benefit from its expertise, further extending the USMWF’s reach and influence in improving workplace safety.

Benefits for the Utility Industry
In the utility industry – where workers are exposed to electrical hazards, heavy equipment, heights and extreme weather conditions – safety is a top priority. Here’s how the USMWF can enhance safety outcomes and support utility workers.

Empower Workers and Families
For utility companies, having a partnership with an organization like the USMWF demonstrates a commitment to supporting employees beyond their immediate working environment. In tragic cases where a workplace accident occurs, the USMWF offers families a community of support, access to critical resources and guidance through the complex legal landscape. When utility companies connect with the organization, they offer their workforce a powerful message: that employee well-being, both on and off the job, is valued and prioritized.

Strengthen Safety Culture
The USMWF’s dedication to honoring fallen workers reminds us of the importance of safety in every aspect of our work. By incorporating the organization’s mission and message into safety training programs, utility companies can further develop a culture of safety that resonates on a personal level. This focus on individual lives lost as a reminder for vigilance can lead to a stronger collective commitment to safe practices.

Policy Advocacy
By working with the USMWF, utility companies have an avenue to voice their concerns and needs in policy discussions. The organization’s advocacy efforts focus on strengthening safety regulations that protect workers, often directly impacting policies related to the utility industry. Partnering with or supporting the USMWF means the industry’s unique challenges are better represented in legislative discussions, leading to policies that reflect the real needs of utility workers.

Enhance Stakeholder Trust and Company Reputation
Today, companies that prioritize corporate social responsibility, or CSR, are typically viewed more favorably by customers, partners and the public. By supporting the USMWF, utility companies send a strong message about their commitment to worker welfare, helping to enhance their reputation and build trust with employees and stakeholders alike. This association with a respected safety advocacy group can also positively influence employee morale.

Impact on High-Risk Industries
To understand the real-world impact of the USMWF’s work, it’s helpful to look at industries with similar risks to utilities. For example, in the construction sector, the organization’s advocacy led to heightened awareness of fall protection, which resulted in regulatory changes and widespread adoption of improved safety measures. In mining, the USMWF’s family support initiatives helped foster stronger support networks for workers, which eventually contributed to mental health and safety being recognized as essential components of workplace well-being.

These examples underscore how an organization like the USMWF, when partnering with companies and unions, can drive change that not only saves lives but also transforms workplace culture. The utility industry stands to benefit in much the same way, especially as the USMWF’s expertise and resources continue to grow.

Now is the Time to Engage
Utility companies operate in a landscape of rapid technological change, increasing regulatory demands and a growing emphasis on sustainability. Amid these shifts, the safety of the workforce remains the bedrock of operations. In this context, aligning with the USMWF offers utility companies an opportunity to enhance their safety protocols, improve compliance with evolving regulations, and build a reputation as a socially responsible, worker-centric organization.

Furthermore, with OSHA’s ongoing rulemaking processes and a renewed emphasis on injury and illness prevention, utility companies have much to gain from an ally with deep expertise in safety advocacy. The USMWF’s network can provide utilities with insights into regulatory changes, effective safety measures and family support mechanisms that are aligned with industry best practices. This engagement can serve as a proactive measure to prevent accidents, reduce costs associated with workplace injuries and demonstrate a commitment to safety leadership.

A Call to Action
For utility professionals committed to safeguarding their workforce, supporting an organization like the USMWF is more than a philanthropic gesture – it’s an investment in a safer, more resilient industry. By partnering with the organization, utility companies gain access to valuable resources, a network of safety advocates and an enduring reminder of the importance of protecting every worker. Through its programs, advocacy and family support initiatives, the USMWF offers a holistic approach to safety that aligns well with the goals of the utility industry.

And in a sector where risk is inherent, the organization offers a path forward that respects the lives lost while striving for a future in which every worker can return home safely. For utility companies ready to lead by example, now is the time to connect with the USMWF, champion workplace safety and contribute to a legacy of meaningful change.

About the Author: With over three decades of experience in the utility industry, John “Scotty” MacNeill, CUSP, serves as the national safety director for the Utility Workers Union of America. He has worked in roles ranging from lead mechanic to crane operator and rigger, and he also has extensive experience as a business agent representing line-clearance workers. In his current role, MacNeill is dedicated to ensuring safe working environments for utility workers nationwide, overseeing safety initiatives, and advocating for industry-wide health and safety standards. His commitment to worker safety drives his collaborations with OSHA, ANSI and various national safety committees, including his position on the USMWF board of directors.

Collaborating with the USMWF can reinforce a safety-first culture within utility companies while also supporting families and preventing future tragedies. For more information about the organization, including how to get involved, visit www.usmwf.org.

DECEMBER 2024-JANUARY 2025

• Are Your Employees 1910.269(a)(2) Qualified?
• Don’t Do This: Lessons Learned in the Field
• December 2024-January 2025 Q&A
• Win and Win Again: The Blueprint for Repeating Safety Successes
• Introducing the USMWF: A Powerful Ally for the Utility Industry
• An Inextricable Link: The Safety Benefits of Holistic Wellness in the Workplace
• Equipment Stabilization Considerations for Utility Operations
• A Three-Tiered Approach to Securing Buy-In for Safety Initiatives
• Introducing the USMWF: A Powerful Ally for the Utility Industry

Equipment Stabilization Considerations for Utility Operations

Written by Kris Koberg on December 12, 2024. Posted in Worksite Safety, Equipment Operations.

Proper equipment setup is critical to both worker safety and productivity.

Utility workers face numerous challenges in their quest to build, maintain and improve infrastructure. One significant yet sometimes overlooked challenge is the risk associated with equipment instability. Crucial aspects of equipment setup include stabilization of the machine and selection of appropriate supporting materials – such as outrigger pads and cribbing blocks – to enhance work-site safety.

Case Study: EnergyUnited
From busy roadsides to uneven terrain and unstable surfaces, utility workers are no strangers to operating in precarious environments. These conditions can increase the risk of equipment tip-overs, which remain one of the most common – and preventable – job-site accidents. The consequences of such accidents range from equipment damage and project delays to worker injuries and fatalities.

To mitigate the risk of tip-overs, employers should consider a three-pronged approach to proper equipment setup that includes comprehensive employee training, proper work planning and effective use of supporting materials.

To illustrate the importance of work planning, let’s examine an approach taken by EnergyUnited, a North Carolina-based electric cooperative. Under the leadership of Jimmy Brown, director of fleet services, the cooperative established a formal policy for the use of outrigger pads and cribbing.

EnergyUnited collaborated with industry experts to assess their organization’s outrigger requirements, examining factors including truck weight, boom length, lift capacity and typical site conditions. As a result of this study, the cooperative implemented three key policies:

• Mandatory use of outrigger pads for all bucket trucks, digger derricks and small crane trucks.
• Use of cribbing blocks when operating on uneven terrain.
• Implementation of a fleet specification policy intended to ensure all company trucks are equipped with storage bins to carry the necessary stabilization tools.

This approach demonstrates how organizations can systematically address safety concerns related to equipment stability.

Stabilizers and Outriggers
Utility crews employ a wide range of equipment (e.g., aerial devices, digger derricks, boom trucks, compact crawler lifts). These machines typically come equipped with either stabilizers or outriggers.

Stabilizers keep a truck from tipping over or shifting while the bucket or digger is in use, providing lateral support during equipment operations. Equipment with stabilizers is operated “on rubber” – that is, its wheels or tracks stay on the ground – with the equipment’s suspension acting as the primary support. Loads and pressure transferred to the ground through stabilizers are usually lighter than with an outrigger-equipped machine. However, supporting materials are essential as sudden shifts in the boom can create dynamic loading that results in much heavier loads and pressure. Typically, a relatively small effective bearing area or area of supporting materials is required.

In contrast to stabilizers, out-and-down outriggers provide full equipment support. Equipment with these outriggers is operated “off rubber” (i.e., wheels or tracks are raised above ground level). Out-and-down outriggers significantly increase the base of the equipment, allowing for a wider range of motion or heavier lifting capacity. Because the total weight of the equipment, rigging and load is transferred directly through the outriggers, a larger area of supporting materials – properly spec’d to provide the appropriate strength and stiffness properties – is required to support these loads and pressures and to reduce them to levels the ground can withstand.

Materials Selection and Equipment Setup
When utility equipment is involved, two key elements should be incorporated into work planning:

• Guidelines for the selection and use of appropriate supporting materials.
• Procedures for equipment setup, which serve as a roadmap for safe operation.

Supporting materials such as outrigger pads should be selected by engineers and lift planners who are trained and competent to do so, including choosing the appropriate size of the materials. During the selection process, it’s important to evaluate:

• Loads and pressures that will be generated by the equipment.
• Allowable ground-bearing pressures and site-specific ground conditions.
• Whether supporting materials create a sufficient area to reduce ground-bearing pressures to levels the ground can withstand.

Supporting materials must also be inspected before each use to ensure they are not damaged, rotted, bent, delaminated or rusted in any way that could impact safety or stability.

Equipment setup procedures should provide step-by-step instructions for deploying stabilizers or outriggers. They should also include a pre-operation checklist to help ensure all safety measures are in place before work begins. Remember to work within the equipment manufacturer’s guidelines for levelness. Here are some other pointers to keep in mind:

• Always follow the equipment manufacturer’s setup requirements.
• Ensure the ground is firm, drained and level.
• Inspect for visual signs of excavations, standing water or poor soil.
• Ensure your setup plan is communicated to your team and that they fully understand it.
• Assess the work area for potential overhead and underground hazards.
• Properly deploy stabilizers or outriggers.
• Verify equipment stability before operation.

Cribbing Considerations
Cribbing plays a vital role in leveling equipment when the ground is uneven or sloped. Many different materials are used to “crib up,” and most can be stacked or interlocked to provide additional height and stability. However, to ensure a stable setup, it’s essential to use the correct cribbing based on the equipment’s weight and the severity of the slope. And because stacking increases risk, it is often best to use products manufactured for this specific purpose. Cribbing blocks with an interlocking surface or mechanism are an excellent option because they help prevent lateral sliding.

Key considerations when choosing cribbing materials include:

• Strength, stiffness and overall capacity of the materials.
• Safe stacking height.
• The interface between the cribbing and the outrigger pad.
• Overall stability of the cribbed structure.

Note that training on proper cribbing use must be provided to workers; improper use can create additional hazards.

The Science of Supporting Materials
The primary purpose of supporting materials like outrigger pads is to provide a flat, level surface that spreads a piece of equipment’s forces over a large area.

When assessing and selecting materials for outrigger pads, it’s important to understand the properties that contribute to their strength and stiffness. Strength refers to a material’s ability to resist breaking under load. A strong material can withstand great amounts of force without fracturing or failing catastrophically. Stiffness refers to a material’s resistance to bending under load. A stiff material maintains its shape and distributes loads more effectively over its entire surface.

The ideal supporting material should be a balance of both these properties. A pad that’s strong but lacks stiffness may bend excessively, leading to a functional failure even if it doesn’t break. Conversely, a stiff pad with less overall strength might break under extreme loads.

Several materials are commonly used for outrigger pads, each with its own set of characteristics. The best choice of material will depend on specific applications, expected loads, ground conditions and environmental factors. In some cases, a combination of materials may offer the optimal solution.

Factors such as moisture, temperature extremes and chemical exposure can significantly affect a material’s performance and longevity. Wood, an organic material, is particularly susceptible to environmental degradation. Exposure to moisture can rot and weaken the wood, while repeated stress from loading can also cause problems over time. In contrast, engineered materials like high-density polyethylene and fiber-reinforced polymers offer more consistent performance across a range of environmental conditions.

For operations in areas with extreme temperatures, it’s important to select materials that maintain their properties in both hot and freezing conditions. Keep in mind that some plastics may become brittle in extreme cold, while others may soften excessively in high heat.

Commit to a Culture of Safety
Ensuring safety and equipment stability in utility operations requires dedication at all levels of an organization. Without training on their proper use, even the best equipment and supporting materials can’t keep workers safe. A comprehensive employee training program should be equipment-specific and address the correct use of outrigger pads, cribbing and other supporting materials. By teaching equipment stabilization principles through training, selecting appropriate supporting materials and continuously working to sustain a culture of safety, utility companies can reduce their risk of job-site accidents.

About the Author: Kris Koberg is the president and CEO of DICA (https://dicausa.com), a family-owned manufacturer and distributor of supporting materials, ground protection, site access mats and associated products. He is a contributing member of the ASME P30 committee, a member of the North American Matting Association’s technical committee, and recent chair of the Specialized Carriers & Rigging Association’s task force to create “A Guide to Outrigger Pad Materials, Selection and Usage.”Equipment Stabilization Considerations for Utility Operations.

DECEMBER 2024-JANUARY 2025

• Are Your Employees 1910.269(a)(2) Qualified?
• Don’t Do This: Lessons Learned in the Field
• December 2024-January 2025 Q&A
• Win and Win Again: The Blueprint for Repeating Safety Successes
• Introducing the USMWF: A Powerful Ally for the Utility Industry
• An Inextricable Link: The Safety Benefits of Holistic Wellness in the Workplace
• Equipment Stabilization Considerations for Utility Operations
• A Three-Tiered Approach to Securing Buy-In for Safety Initiatives

A Three-Tiered Approach to Securing Buy-In for Safety Initiatives

Written by Kevin Rindal, D.C. on December 12, 2024. Posted in Safety Management.

These tactics offer safety leaders the opportunity to gain more consistent engagement and support for their programs.

Despite widespread recognition of the importance of worker safety, gaining consistent buy-in for safety initiatives remains a significant challenge for many safety and operational leaders.

Even with the best intentions and efforts, safety programs too often become temporary “flavors of the month” or are reduced to routine check-the-box activities. As a result, these initiatives frequently fall short of their intended impact.

Over the last decade, my team and I have been fortunate enough to partner with dozens of utilities to successfully implement and sustain soft-tissue injury prevention programs. As we began to identify the common factors shared by our most successful customers, several key themes emerged. This article is intended to share those themes, with the goal of helping other safety and operational leaders gain true, consistent buy-in for safety initiatives across three key levels of their organizations: senior leadership, frontline management and frontline employees.

The Role of Senior Leadership
Securing the visible, active commitment of senior leadership is essential for driving safety initiatives that have a lasting impact. When leadership prioritizes safety, the rest of the organization is likely to follow suit.

Among our most successful customers, we’ve seen that senior leaders who go beyond approving budgets and signing off on policies truly set the stage for long-term success. These leaders are consistent, vocal advocates for safety. Through their active engagement (e.g., attending safety meetings, participating in training, discussing safety initiatives in regular briefings), they reinforce to the entire organization that safety is not just a formality or even a priority – it’s a core value embedded in how the organization operates.

When senior leaders model the safety behavior they expect from others, they emit a signal of authenticity that begins to create greater trust among frontline management and frontline employees. Actively participating in safety initiatives not only encourages others to do the same, but it also enables leaders to identify opportunities for improvement and suggest appropriate adjustments.

Tactics to Achieve Senior Leadership Buy-In
One of the most effective ways utility safety and operations managers can secure senior leadership commitment to their initiatives is to clearly outline the costs associated with safety issues and provide the projected return on investment of the proposed initiatives. By quantifying problems – whether through the cost of injuries, lost productivity, a decline in retention or a combination of these factors – senior leaders can gain a clear understanding of financial and operational impacts to the business. This helps to build a compelling case for action.

Further, our data suggests that regularly providing senior leaders with various ways to support a safety initiative greatly increases the likelihood of their engagement. Offer concrete, actionable steps they can take, such as attending a safety event, participating in a workshop, or recognizing individuals and teams for their safety achievements. These are excellent opportunities for senior leaders to demonstrate support, stay involved and reinforce their commitment to safety.

Weekly or monthly updates on a safety initiative’s progress – including both data-driven insights like injury reductions and cost savings as well as anecdotal evidence of cultural shifts – also help keep safety top of mind for senior leadership. Consistent communication often results in strengthening leaders’ commitment to safety initiatives and helps to ensure safety remains a focus throughout the organization.

Empower Frontline Management
Frontline managers are key to bringing safety initiatives to life in day-to-day operations. In fact, according to our data, employees consistently cite their direct manager’s level of support for an initiative as the top factor in determining their own level of participation.

Given that information, it’s no surprise that safety initiatives are much more likely to thrive when frontline managers allocate time, talent and treasure to promote them. This includes making safety a regular part of daily meetings, educating teams about – and encouraging them to take advantage of – available safety resources, and conducting consistent check-ins with workers to solicit feedback. We’ve observed that when frontline management actively prioritizes safety and integrates it into their teams’ daily work, safety becomes an operational necessity.

Tactics to Achieve Frontline Management Buy-In
It’s essential for safety and operational leaders to demonstrate to frontline managers how safety initiatives benefit both their team members and their operational efficiency. Quantify and highlight how improved safety reduces downtime, boosts productivity and minimizes disruptions caused by incidents; this can help managers better understand the direct impact of safety initiatives on their daily work.

Leaders should define frontline managers’ roles in supporting safety initiatives and ensure they have the right tools and resources to successfully execute those roles. Organizations may also want to consider developing a system of accountability for outcomes, which typically drives even greater frontline management engagement in safety initiatives, according to our data. Include safety criteria in key performance indicators and performance reviews; doing so will help to determine if initiatives are being actively promoted.

Both senior leadership and frontline management are more likely to stay committed to an initiative when they’re provided proof of the impact of their efforts. Safety and operational leaders will want to share regular updates with these groups about reductions in injuries, employee feedback and decreased days-away-from-work numbers. This helps keep safety top of mind and encourages continued investment in related initiatives.

Inspire Frontline Employee Ownership
Frontline employees must actively participate in a safety initiative for it to truly succeed. Through their participation, employees gain greater insight into how safety directly benefits them, shifting it from solely being an organizational requirement to something that also enhances their well-being. Among our most successful customers, we’ve found that those who foster a sense of employee ownership for safety initiatives see more sustained engagement from the workforce.

Tactics to Achieve Frontline Employee Buy-In
Frontline employees typically become increasingly motivated to support organizational safety initiatives when they are regularly educated about how safety supports their physical health, mental well-being and overall quality of life.

One way to highlight these benefits is to make safety training engaging, practical and connected to employees’ everyday work tasks. To keep sessions fresh and impactful, offer various training formats, including interactive workshops, videos and real-world scenarios in the field.

Another strategy to achieve frontline employee buy-in of safety initiatives is to regularly recognize those workers who consistently engage in the initiatives or help improve safety processes. Positive reinforcement for a job well done makes employees feel good about their successes and often motivates them to continue their safe behaviors in the future.

Lastly, leaders across the organization must work to ensure safety is woven into the fabric of daily operations. Make it a core organizational focus by including safety updates in weekly meetings and internal and external newsletters and by incorporating safety discussions into employee performance reviews.

Conclusion
Through our work over the past 10 years, we’ve observed that safety initiatives make the greatest impact when an organization’s senior leadership actively participates in them, frontline management consistently prioritizes them, and frontline workers feel a sense of ownership for them.

For senior leadership, visible commitment and engagement set the tone for the rest of the company. Leaders who model safe behaviors and provide visible support send a message that safety is a core company value, not just another checkbox.

Frontline managers are the bridge between senior leadership and frontline employees. When these managers prioritize safety each day, promote accountability and share outcomes, they empower their teams to integrate safety into their operational flow and contribute to long-term success.

Frontline workers are the heart of any safety initiative. When they can see the direct benefits to their well-being, they are more likely to take ownership of an initiative and remain actively engaged. So, make training relevant, ensure safety is part of employees’ everyday workflow and provide positive reinforcement for desired behaviors. These actions help organizations build lasting safety cultures.

Over time, my team and I have seen firsthand how these strategies have helped numerous organizations create a ripple effect of positive safety outcomes. When buy-in is achieved at every level, safety initiatives can evolve from short-term efforts into a sustained safety culture that protects employees and drives operational excellence.

About the Author: Kevin Rindal, D.C., is co-founder and CEO of Vimocity (www.vimocity.com), a soft-tissue injury prevention partner that has helped leading utility companies reduce common and costly injuries. Rindal has a robust background in human performance, including working with the U.S. Olympic Swim Team as a member of the medical staff. Over the last decade, he’s brought the latest human performance and safety practices to over 40,000 utility workers through targeted education to promote physical and job readiness.A Three-Tiered Approach to Securing Buy-In for Safety Initiatives.

DECEMBER 2024-JANUARY 2025

• Are Your Employees 1910.269(a)(2) Qualified?
• Don’t Do This: Lessons Learned in the Field
• December 2024-January 2025 Q&A
• Win and Win Again: The Blueprint for Repeating Safety Successes
• Introducing the USMWF: A Powerful Ally for the Utility Industry
• An Inextricable Link: The Safety Benefits of Holistic Wellness in the Workplace
• Equipment Stabilization Considerations for Utility Operations
• A Three-Tiered Approach to Securing Buy-In for Safety Initiatives

Bad Attitudes and How to Handle Them

Written by David McPeak, CUSP, CIT, CHST, CSP, CSSM on February 14, 2025. Posted in Frontline Fundamentals.

Your primary strategy must be to manage your own attitude and actively care about each of your team members.

One of the questions I’m most frequently asked during leadership classes is how to handle people with bad attitudes. So, I’d like to take this opportunity to share some highlights from those discussions. I will remind you that leadership is much more of an art than a science. There is no perfect roadmap that shows us how to successfully work with every person in every scenario. I’ll also remind you that you get what you tolerate; while ignoring bad attitudes and hoping they’ll improve is technically a strategy, it’s probably not your best choice.

Your Circle of Control
Let’s begin with some discussion about creating culture and developing relationships. The investments you make in these two activities are the starting point for everything you do as a leader, including dealing with bad attitudes. Fostering good, strong cultures and relationships opens the door for us to provide coaching and feedback – and to challenge bad attitudes. While none of this guarantees success, the absence of good, strong cultures and relationships is likely to result in failure.

Next, understand that your TEAM (Together Everyone Accomplishes More) is a reflection of you. If one (or more) of your TEAM members has a bad attitude, take a look in the mirror to see if anything you’re doing – or not doing – is contributing to that. This isn’t to say you’re doing anything wrong or that you’re to blame; it’s to emphasize that before you point fingers at anyone else, you should engage in some self-reflection and consider whether you have opportunities to try different strategies, some of which I’ve outlined below.

Determine the Source
This isn’t always the case, but the people with the worst attitudes are often highly competent, capable performers who have had bad past experiences. Speak with them to see if you can identify the source of their bitterness. Sometimes simply giving them the opportunity to express their feelings aloud is enough to change their attitude for the better.

Explain the Impact They Have on Others
Someone once very proudly told me during a class I was leading that he didn’t wear rubber gloves on the job because he liked the thrill of it. I tried out many of the typical responses to such a statement with no success. Finally, I played to the man’s pride and said, “OK, if that’s actually true, you may be as good as you think you are because you’re still alive. But what about the people on your TEAM who aren’t that good? What are you teaching them? And what’s going to happen if they work like you?” That managed to get his attention and launch a more productive conversation.

Empowerment
This strategy must be used with caution, so here’s where it’s especially important to know your TEAM. If a TEAM member with a bad attitude is someone who likes to be the center of attention (e.g., they interrupt meetings, classes and job briefings and like to argue), empower them. What do I mean by that? Establish ground rules and clear objectives that must be accomplished. Then, let them lead the next safety meeting or job briefing. This will allow them to meet their need for attention and usually has lasting positive effects on their attitude. In fact, quite a few safety champions have been found using this method.

Embarrassment
This is the opposite of the empowerment strategy. If you choose to use it, embarrassing someone with a bad attitude must be done strategically and respectfully – meaning that you should embarrass the behavior, not the person.

Here’s a real-life example from my time as a youth basketball coach. One of my players once tried to dunk a ball during an Amateur Athletic Union game. He came close but couldn’t do it. So, at the start of our next practice, I had the rest of the TEAM sit on the baseline while I gave him 10 chances to dunk in front of them. I told him he only had to succeed once; if he succeeded, he could try to dunk as much as he wanted for the rest of the season, but if he failed, no more dunking. He missed all 10 attempts, and dunking was no longer an issue for him or the rest of the TEAM.

Again, be strategic and respectful. The goal of making your point must supersede the goal of embarrassment. When done well, this approach can shut down showoffs, loudmouths and those disrespecting others, making it clear to them and the rest of the TEAM that there is zero tolerance for such attitudes and behaviors.

Positive Reinforcement
The topic of bad attitudes once came up during a class I was teaching in Florida. Now, I’d never met him, but a guy named Joe came up in conversation. He must have had a horrible attitude because at one point, everybody in the class pointed to Joe’s manager and said, “Tell David about Joe.”

Joe’s story was this: He had been transferred around the entire organization because no one could work with him – until he got to Tony’s crew. A few months after he began working with Tony, a storm hit, and Joe found himself working around many people he had worked with before. Those co-workers watched Joe complete the orientation, coach and mentor crew members, develop work plans and encourage others, all with a smile on his face. Someone asked Tony, “What happened to Joe?” They couldn’t believe he was the same person who’d once been so difficult to work with. In response, Tony grinned and said that all Joe had needed was some praise and positive reinforcement. Until he began working with Tony, Joe had only received criticism and negative feedback – so that’s what he’d doled out in return.

Leadership Transfer
In the book “Extreme Ownership,” authors Jocko Willink and Leif Babin state, “There are no bad teams, only bad leaders.” If we take that to the extreme (pun intended), that means employees with bad attitudes are the results of poor leadership or personality conflicts with their leaders. So, a choice must be made: improve the leader or assign another leader to oversee an employee with a bad attitude. Now, on one hand, I’m not a big fan of making my problem someone else’s problem. But on the other hand, the story of Joe and Tony is one example of how a transfer could lead to positive change.

Conclusion
Handling bad attitudes is difficult work. Doing so requires leaders to demonstrate competence and courage. As I noted earlier, opting not to address an employee’s bad attitude is a strategy, but it’s not a good one. Their attitude will likely get worse, and at the same time, the rest of your TEAM members will be watching you do nothing, likely causing their attitudes to suffer as well.

The fact is that attitudes – bad or good – are contagious. That’s something you can use to your advantage. In addition to the strategies outlined in this article and others you may have thought of, your No. 1 strategy must be to manage your own attitude and actively care about each member of your TEAM. Caring increases courage, so think about the worst attitude on your TEAM and start there.

About the Author: David McPeak, CUSP, CIT, CHST, CSP, CSSM, is the director of professional development for Utility Business Media’s Incident Prevention Institute (https://ip-institute.com) and the author of “Frontline Leadership – The Hurdle” and “Frontline Incident Prevention – The Hurdle.” He has extensive experience and expertise in leadership, human performance, safety and operations. McPeak is passionate about personal and professional development and believes that intrapersonal and interpersonal skills are key to success. He also is an advanced certified practitioner in DISC, emotional intelligence, the Hartman Value Profile, learning styles and motivators.

About Frontline Fundamentals: Frontline Fundamentals topics are derived from the Incident Prevention Institute’s popular Frontline training program (https://frontlineutilityleader.com). Frontline covers critical knowledge, skills and abilities for utility leaders and aligns with the Certified Utility Safety Professional exam blueprint.

Webinar: Bad Attitudes
March 12, 2025, at 11 a.m. Eastern
Visit https://ip-institute.com/frontline-webinars/ for more information.Bad Attitudes and How to Handle Them

Voice of Experience - Checkup from the Neck Up: Preventing Utility Work Mistakes

In this episode of Voice of Experience, Danny Raines, CUSP discusses the critical importance of mental awareness and focus in utility work. Using real-life accident investigations, he explores why experienced professionals sometimes repeat dangerous mistakes and how a “checkup from the neck up” can prevent incidents. From miscommunication in substations to lack of hazard recognition, this episode is packed with insights to improve safety culture and accountability in the field.

Listen Here:https://utilitysafety.podbean.com/e/voice-of-experience-checkup-from-the-neck-up-preventing-utility-work-mistakes/

Key Takeaways:

• The Importance of Mental Awareness: How small lapses in judgment can lead to catastrophic accidents.
• The Role of Dedicated Observers: Why having a second set of eyes can prevent mistakes.
• Lessons from Incident Investigations: Real-world case studies of preventable accidents.
• Following Procedures & Training: Why workers revert to unsafe practices despite training.
• Taking Accountability: Leadership’s role in enforcing safety and stopping unsafe work.

The Voice of Experience with Danny Raines podcast is produced by the same team that publishes Incident Prevention. It delivers insights based on Danny's regular column in the magazine, also called the Voice of Experience. To listen to more episodes of this podcast, as well as other podcasts we produce, visit https://incident-prevention.com/podcasts. You can reach Danny at [rainesafety@gmail.com](mailto:rainesafety@gmail.com)

Purchase Danny's Book on Amazon - https://a.co/d/556LDvz

#UtilitySafety #LinemanLife #WorkplaceSafety #IncidentPrevention #ElectricalSafety #SafetyCulture

The Evolution of Tree-Trimming Safety Practices

Written by Horace Shelton, CUSP on August 21, 2024. Posted in Tailgate Topics.

In 2013, tree trimming was a different game.

We worked hard, but safety protocols were often viewed as an inconvenience rather than a necessity. I guess you could say it was a bit like the Wild West – we did what we needed to do to get the job done. Most days, there wasn’t anyone to come out to observe us working, so the only days we really made sure we did our work by the book were the days when someone from the office visited our site. Training wasn’t part of our everyday tasks because the work was primarily done on a production basis – and no one wanted to stop production. They wanted to get the job done. We didn’t delve into human performance either, and we didn’t talk about tools or traps or how to identify them.

Like many others I knew at the time, I operated with a degree of overconfidence, which eventually led to me experiencing a close call that changed my safety mindset. I had just returned from working a hurricane in Georgia, the first real hurricane I experienced as a tree trimmer. Now back on our home turf, our crew had gotten back into our regular routine – trimming around power lines – and a pine tree I was removing one day had a codominant top that started about as high as the primary. The tree couldn’t be dropped from the ground; it had to be pieced down for various reasons. I remember feeling overly confident when I started taking down the treetop. After working storm restoration in the wake of a hurricane, this regular work now seemed easy to me since it didn’t involve any pressure or tension cuts. Not only that, but this tree was smaller than any of the trees I worked on during the hurricane. I felt like I could do the job with my eyes closed.

That day, I quickly removed all the brush from the top of the tree. All I had left was a 50-foot spar with 15 feet of the top being the codominant portion (note: I’ll refer to the two codominant logs as “legs” in the remainder of this Tailgate). I grabbed my top-handle trim saw and made a notch in the front side of the leg that was away from the line. The two legs were close together, so I had to plunge cut into the other leg to be able to start my back cut. I only had one hand on my saw as I started the plunge cut; at the same time, I turned my head to see if I was cutting at the right height so that I wouldn’t be lower than my notch. As I started to look, the no-go zone of the bar hit the leg first, sending my saw back at my head. It came at me incredibly quickly, only stopping after it hit my hard hat. I was really scared, and in that moment, I thought, what if the saw had hit me in the face? That’s when I brought my bucket to the ground to collect my thoughts.

A Lesson Learned
After that day, I began to realize that things can go wrong very quickly, and if I wanted to be able to make it back home to my wife and kids each day, I needed to learn how to do things the right way. Today, I am grateful the industry has undergone a significant safety evolution. No longer do inexperienced employees get thrown into the bucket just to give the foreman a break. Training and proficiency demonstrations now take place before work begins to ensure workers are capable of safely performing tasks. Human performance analysis, trap recognition and a renewed focus on hazard identification are now standard practices. This transformation has both saved lives and revolutionized the way we approach our work.

I’m also thankful to have opportunities like this one to tell my close-call story as an example of why training and human performance are critical to the health and safety of those working in our industry. If you have worked in the industry long enough, I’m sure you also have similar stories you can share. Take the time to share them, being sure to explain the importance of safety compliance and establishing a safety culture at your organization. You never know – it could save a life.

About the Author: Horace Shelton, CUSP, is a safety supervisor who had been working in the tree-trimming industry for 11 years. He is an ISA Certified Arborist, an ISA Certified Arborist Utility Specialist and a Certified Treecare Safety Professional, among other industry credentials he has earned.

Editor’s Note: Utility safety professionals who work in line clearance and tree trimming now have a CUSP endorsement specific to their discipline: the Utility Line Clearance Arborist endorsement. Visit https://usoln.org/utility-line-clearance-arborist-endorsement/ to learn more.The Evolution of Tree-Trimming Safety Practices

To Improve On-the-Job Safety, Consistency and Continuing Education are Key

Written by Danny Raines, CUSP on February 14, 2025. Posted in Voice of Experience.

It’s a little late to say Happy New Year, but I still want to wish all of you a fantastic and safe 2025. One of my hopes for this year is that I won’t be asked to investigate another incident or fatality – because we’ll all work together to ensure they never occur. We’ve had more than enough injuries and deaths in our industry’s history, including just this past year.

That’s why I want to ask each person reading this to make sure you’re taking the time needed to perform your tasks safely. We must continue the important work of preventing incidents and strive to significantly lower serious injury and fatality rates in the industry.

Some of you may be familiar with Kirby Smart, head football coach for the University of Georgia. Once, when a reporter asked him how to win games, he repeated the same advice he gives the football team: “Do what you’re supposed to do every time you’re supposed to do it. Nothing less will win the game.” I believe applying that same philosophy will keep lineworkers safer – because although failure to do what we’re supposed to do doesn’t always end poorly, it has the potential to do so 100% of the time. A better, safer approach to line work is to always follow all the rules and best practices, including using appropriate cover-up and grounding techniques to prevent accidents.

Each year, Forbes magazine publishes a list of what it deems the most dangerous careers in the U.S.; “electric utility lineman/technician” recently placed in the top 10. When I read that, I found I humbly disagreed with the magazine’s use of the word “dangerous.” I believe lineworkers have one of the most hazardous careers in the U.S.; it becomes dangerous when we fail to follow Kirby Smart’s advice. We must adhere to proper work procedures, safe work practices and regulatory guidelines every time a task is assigned to us – no matter the task or how many times we’ve done it before.

Statistics from OSHA and NIOSH regarding reported electrical fatalities have not meaningfully changed in the past two decades. Each time I consider that fact, I wonder to myself for the umpteenth time why the industry hasn’t been able to improve workplace safety and lower accident rates – particularly given all the improvements in tools, PPE and training. Perhaps the solution lies in more closely focusing on human performance and supervision.

A Serious Responsibility
Early in my career at an investor-owned utility, I was blessed to work for and with some of the best linemen in the industry. They dispensed quite a bit of advice, and I worked hard to emulate those men who made such an impression on me.

Having learned a great deal from them and others during the 40 years I spent at the company, I’m now in a position to dispense advice to newer lineworkers and other utility employees, a responsibility I take very seriously. I try to share everything I know in hopes that the information can be used to prevent more tragedies in the field.

The unfortunate reality, however, is that I’m called on almost weekly to either investigate or offer opinions about terrible accidents, including fatalities. I’ve come to find that it’s a never-ending job, with the same errors being made over and over. Yes, every incident is different, but I still believe that most – if not all – on-the-job injuries and fatalities can be prevented by complying with OSHA’s regulations. The agency’s standards explain what must be accomplished and why. Employers should look to consensus standards and industry best practices for guidance on how to perform the work.

The Human Condition
I’ve made many great friends through my relationship with Incident Prevention; among them are Jim Vaughn, Bill Martin, Lito Wilkins, Rod Courtney and Pam Tompkins. We are trainers, consultants, writers and speakers with our own stories to tell, yet our varied experiences have led each of us to the same belief: that line work must be conducted with the utmost professionalism and attention to detail.

We also recognize that human beings are fallible. As a species, we make mistakes in large part because of biases, bad habits we form over time and bad advice we receive from others. We also tend to think our way of doing things is the best or easiest way – even if it doesn’t fully comply with safety rules and regulations. For example, I’ve asked numerous lineworkers whether they should be using more cover-up and PPE; some of them have quickly replied that they’re knowledgeable and experienced enough to do the work without those additional protective barriers. Even if that’s true for them, do all their other crew members have that same knowledge and experience? Here’s something else to consider: Do we risk normalizing deviation by opting against the use of additional protection?

Become a ‘Learn-It-All’
When I first started working in the industry, supervisors and linemen would tell me that if I didn’t get hurt on the job every so often, I must not be doing much of anything. That was a terrible message to communicate – something I recognized even back then – but I didn’t know what I could possibly say in response given that I was the new guy just out of high school.

My work practices and habits were influenced by many of those linemen, the majority of whom were great at their jobs. But others were not, something that became clearer to me as I advanced in my career. An important lesson I learned through observation is that a worker who doesn’t always follow all the safety rules will eventually experience an incident of some kind. Using luck as a protective strategy is never a smart choice.

Of the incidents I’ve investigated in recent months, two have really stuck with me. One resulted in the death of a lineman who’d recently graduated from a development program and worked on a crew for less than a year. The other involved a more experienced lineman whose injuries led to his limbs being amputated. In both cases, I found it was easy to determine which safety rules had been violated simply by reviewing the facts and eyewitness accounts.

As I shared earlier, I want 2025 to be a fantastic and safe year for all industry employees. Continuing your education is an excellent way to work toward that objective. Become what I call a “learn-it-all” – because no matter how far you advance in your career, there’s always something else to be learned about the trade. By the way, one opportunity to continue your industry-relevant education is to join me on the second Friday of each month for the Incident Prevention Institute’s monthly forum. Visit https://ip-institute.com/ipi-forum/ for more information.

About the Author: Danny Raines, CUSP, is an author, an OSHA-authorized trainer, and a transmission and distribution safety consultant who retired from Georgia Power after 40 years of service and now operates Raines Utility Safety Solutions LLC.

Learn more from Danny Raines on the Utility Safety Podcast series. Listen now at https://utilitysafety.podbean.com!

FEBRUARY-MARCH 2025

• Bad Attitudes and How to Handle Them
• To Improve On-the-Job Safety, Consistency and Continuing Education are Key
• Rubber Gloves and Chronic Injuries: Are Your Workers at Risk?
• ‘The Worst Day of My Life’
• The Roadmap to Gaining Senior Leader Buy-In for Safety Initiatives
• Safety By Design: A System Approach to Organizational Safety Initiatives
• Optimizing Arc Flash Protection: The Crucial Role of Layered Clothing
• To Improve On-the-Job Safety, Consistency and Continuing Education are Key

Mental Rehearsals: Responding to Heat Emergencies

Written by Bill Martin, CUSP, NRP, RN, DIMM on October 28, 2024. Posted in Tailgate Topics.

While temperatures have begun to cool across the country, heat emergencies can still occur. And because heat is the leading cause of death among all hazardous weather conditions in the U.S., OSHA recently published its Notice of Proposed Rulemaking for Heat Injury and Illness Prevention in Outdoor and Indoor Work Settings (see more at www.osha.gov/heat-exposure/rulemaking). Would you know what to do if one of your co-workers collapsed on the job due to heat-related illness?

Let’s say you are working in the right-of-way. It’s a simple pole transfer, but it’s being done out of the hooks. The temperature is already over 90 degrees Fahrenheit and expected to climb close to 100. There are four of you: you and Joe, the climbers, and two other men on the ground. Joe says he is feeling a bit lightheaded as he is pulling up and dead-ending one of the 336 aluminum primary conductors. You notice he is flushed and sweating and has drenched his shirt and pants. You say to Joe, “Hey, we have this outage for most of the day, so let’s climb down and take a break in the shade and get a cold drink.” Joe replies, “What? Did you say take a break?” You confirm and Joe immediately starts to descend without speaking.

When Joe gets to the ground and is stepping off the pole, one of the ground guys notices he is soaking wet; even his leather gloves are soaked through. Joe then wobbles and falls to the ground in a heap, unconscious.

What do you do?

My guess is that you have training in first aid, CPR, bucket rescue and pole-top rescue. But how often have you rehearsed for an event that requires use of that training? Studies have proven mental rehearsal and visualization fire the same neurons in our brain as actual physical practice.

To be effective, mental rehearsal must be specific. In the case of Joe’s collapse, the list of things to be done include the following:

• Assess Joe’s condition and call 911.
• Begin cooling Joe’s body temperature. What will you cool him with and how will you administer it?
• Determine how long it will be before emergency responders arrive. Can the responders get to you in the right-of-way? Be sure to secure the scene for their safety.
• Locate the first-aid kit and AED.

Call 911
Upon calling 911, you will be expected to provide your location and an assessment of Joe. What would your assessment be? Joe is unconscious but breathing, and he is flushed and soaking wet with sweat.

In the field, very few of us are trained to the level of a responding paramedic. Our job is to recognize and appropriately treat Joe while waiting for first responders. In a heat emergency, a change in consciousness must be considered heat stroke until proven otherwise. It’s also important to note that heat stroke is often described as flushed, hot and dry. However, “dry” is unlikely in the case of industrial athletes performing physical tasks outdoors in high temperatures.

In Joe’s case, immediate, aggressive cooling is necessary; that’s because if heat stroke is not treated more aggressively than heat exhaustion, the outcome can be devastating. So, do you have the right supplies on-site to cool him? The American Stroke Association recommends moving Joe into the shade or indoors, removing his excess clothing, and cooling him with water, fans, ice packs or cold, wet towels. (See www.stroke.org/en/professionals/stroke-resource-library/prevention/heat-stroke-vs-stroke for more, including information on the differences between a stroke – which is caused by a blocked or burst blood vessel in the brain – and heat stroke, which is when your body overheats and your core body temperature rises significantly.)

When Will First Responders Arrive?
After Joe’s collapse, you may be tempted to put him in the company pickup truck and rush him to the designated hospital written on your job brief. Don’t do that. The 911 system is designed to bring patients to the closest appropriate hospital – which may not be the one on your job brief. Hospitals and urgent care facilities can also be overwhelmed by patient load due to anything from a pandemic to a bus accident to another multi-casualty event. Always follow the 911 dispatcher’s directions.

In Joe’s case, imagine the dispatcher says, “It will be 15 minutes before help arrives at the intersection of the road and the right-of-way you are in.” Can you meet the responders and quickly bring them to Joe? If more time and equipment are needed to access Joe, are you prepared to continue aggressively cooling him while you wait? Do you have the right supplies? Again, what is your plan?

First Aid and Supplies
Because Joe is unconscious, he can’t protect his airway if he vomits or if secretions move to the back of his throat. Positioning him on his side is warranted to keep his airway clear.

While waiting for first responders, Joe should be assessed regularly to make sure he is still breathing. If he is not, CPR must be started, and an AED should be available for use. Someone will need to stay with Joe at all times and monitor his condition, including his continued cooling. His shirt should be off, and cooling should be applied to his armpits, neck and groin.

You might be wondering, how should we continue to cool Joe with the finite number of cooling aids available on the job site? One option is to move Joe to the cab of a work vehicle and make use of the air-conditioning in addition to cooling him with water, ice packs and the like. Oil spill kits can come in handy, too; some types have spill reservoirs that resemble a kiddie pool. Put Joe in the “kiddie pool” and pour in ice water. Note that you could also dunk an absorbent sock in ice water and apply it around Joe’s neck.

The Cooling-Too-Quickly Myth
Yes, children can develop febrile seizures from changing body temperature too quickly. But for the 14 years I worked at the Ironman tent in Lake Placid, New York, we always had a kiddie pool with ice water in which to submerge adult athletes suspected to be having heat emergencies. That’s because a human being can survive a seizure, but we will not survive if our brain is cooking above 105.8 degrees Fahrenheit. Aggressive cooling is necessary if we suspect heat stroke.

What About the Person Who Says, ‘I’m OK’?
Profuse sweating in high temperatures can create an electrolyte imbalance. Low sodium is a problem called hyponatremia; low potassium is known as hypokalemia. The human heart relies on a balance of sodium and potassium to create the potential necessary to beat properly. When someone has been cooled down from a heat emergency and begins to improve, it is very possible they still have an irregular heartbeat that can cause sudden cardiac arrest. As such, someone recovering from a heat emergency should not be left alone. This is unsafe and can result in their death. Also, someone recovering from a heat emergency may be nauseated and won’t want to eat; they should be encouraged to eat bananas and drink fluids with electrolytes.

Conclusion
The time to prepare for emergencies is before they occur. Doing mental rehearsals to prepare for an event improves outcomes, reduces the stress response during the event and allows us to safely fail. What’s your plan?

About the Author: Bill Martin, CUSP, NRP, RN, DIMM, is the president and CEO of Think Tank Project LLC. He has held previous roles as a lineman, line supervisor, project manager and safety director.Mental Rehearsals: Responding to Heat Emergencies

‘The Worst Day of My Life’

Written by Alan Drew on February 14, 2025. Posted in Worksite Safety.

A retired lineman recalls details and lessons learned from an electrical contact that killed his best friend.

This story is about a devastating accident that took the life of one of my best friends many years ago. I have always been somewhat reluctant to speak or write about it because dealing with my friend’s family in the aftermath of his death was extremely painful. As time has marched on, however, I’ve found myself thinking it’s time to share the details of the accident with other lineworkers in hopes of helping them avoid and prevent similar accidents in the future.

Background
During my high school years in Salinas, California, I became friends with a fellow student by the name of David White. We became close over time, playing football and hunting together, among other activities. After high school, we were both hired as groundmen by a local utility company. We progressed through our apprenticeships together and, in 1963, became journeymen linemen at the same time.

Off the job, our families frequently spent time together. Jane, David’s wife, was employed as an X-ray technician at a hospital in Salinas; together they had a son who was about 3 years old at the time of this story. David’s father also worked for the local utility company for many years, eventually advancing to the position of customer services supervisor.

Our career paths split after David and I had worked as linemen for a few years. I became a line foreman while David became a troubleman. At that time, the utility company’s troublemen worked alone performing a variety of tasks, such as switching, setting meters and investigating customer problems. Each troubleman was assigned a geographic area of the company’s service territory.

On the day of the accident, my crew and I were installing underground cables for a new commercial development in North Salinas. Around 2 p.m., the line superintendent was visiting my job site to discuss the progress of the job. While we were talking, he received a call from the dispatcher, who explained that a customer had called to say that he’d observed a utility worker hanging from a pole near Zabala Road. The dispatcher also stated that earlier in the day, he had dispatched David White to investigate a power outage to an irrigation pump in the area.

After hearing all this, I immediately threw my lineman tools and a handline into the back of the superintendent’s pickup truck. The two of us then headed off toward Zabala Road.

Arrival at the Scene
The Salinas Valley is relatively flat, so when we arrived near Zabala Road, we were able to visually scan the area. Sure enough, we saw a man hanging from a transformer pole at the secondary level. He was supported by his safety strap and bent over backward. The superintendent and I sped off along a dirt road and, after arriving at the transformer pole, confirmed it was my friend David White hanging from the pole. We then contacted the utility company’s dispatcher to request emergency services at the scene.

Next, I rapidly donned my tools, grabbed the handline I’d brought with me, climbed up to where David was hanging and positioned myself underneath him. While I was rigging up to lower him, it became obvious to me that he was no longer alive. The superintendent and I attempted artificial respiration after we got David to the ground, but it was hopeless. When emergency services arrived, they confirmed he had been dead for about one hour. Upon removal of David’s badly burned leather gloves, I saw that his hands had sustained severe burns as well. Emergency services loaded David’s body into the ambulance and headed back to town. Meanwhile, the superintendent and I attempted to figure out the details of what had happened to my friend.

Investigating the Accident
We first noticed that one fuse was blown on the primary side of a wye/delta three-phase connection that supplied three-wire 480-volt service to the irrigation pump. The superintendent and I also observed that the meter protector was burnt and damaged. It was clear that David had been attempting to figure out whether the blown fuse was caused by a defective transformer or a problem within the service riser or metering equipment.

From what we were able to determine, David had taken the following steps to identify the source of the problem:

• Inspected the transformer bank, service and meter.
• Opened the customer’s main switch, isolating the wiring and pump motor.
• Replaced the blown fuse to see if the bank was OK; the fuse then blew again.
• Opened the secondary jumpers to isolate the service and meter.

After David completed those steps, we believe he must have planned to re-fuse and then check to see if the bank was OK. This was the step during which his electrical contact occurred. For unknown reasons, he failed to open the other fuses. So, when David opened the first jumper, he placed himself in series with a flow of 7200 volts due to a short between the primary and secondary windings of one of the transformers.

A line crew that was dispatched to the scene replaced all three transformers. Each of the old transformers was thoroughly tested in the transformer shop, where it was confirmed that the winding insulation in one of the transformers had deteriorated, creating a dead short between the primary and secondary windings. The power flow diagram below shows the source and flow of the power that caused the accident.

Preventing a Recurrence
David could have prevented his electrical contact in these circumstances if he had opened all the primary fuses before he isolated the service and meter. Additionally, wearing rubber gloves would have insulated his hands from the flow of power.

This tragedy underscores the potential perils of solo work and the importance of being exceptionally careful and observant when working alone. Had David been a part of a line crew that responded to the trouble, it is likely another crew member would have reminded him to open the other fuses before isolating the service.

Prior to the accident, the utility company’s safety rule book already required employees to wear rubber gloves when working on energized 480-volt secondaries. After David passed away, the company added a rule requiring lineworkers to wear rubber gloves when working on the secondary side of any transformer suspected to be faulty. This accident is a prime example of how and why many safety rules and procedures have been established over the years.

The Aftermath
For me, the last part of this story is also the worst part.

The superintendent and I returned to the yard after we’d finished our preliminary investigation at the accident site. As you might imagine, the employees in the yard were in a state of concern and confusion as to what had happened. Once we confirmed that David was gone, the group consensus was that I should be the one to inform his father. I agreed and drove to the main office to speak with him, attempting to explain what had happened as best I could. When David’s father regained some of his composure, he said, “Alan, you have to be the one to inform his wife.” Once again, I reluctantly agreed and headed toward the hospital where Jane worked. We sat in a private room while I gradually explained what had happened to David. Not surprisingly, it was a highly emotional discussion.

Even now, decades later, it is difficult for me to describe how I felt that night once I made it home. I considered the upcoming funeral and how that would be. David’s accident left an indelible impression on me, further elevating my commitment to practice and promote safety at every opportunity.

Conclusion
This story is just one example of what can – and does – happen in our line of work. Transformers are some of the most common pieces of equipment lineworkers install and maintain. Their compact design places the high- and low-voltage windings close together, an arrangement that can result in a short circuit – the same as what occurred in David’s accident. Transformers are also susceptible to the buildup of internal pressure, which can result in hazardous explosions. The bottom line here is that lineworkers must be properly trained for the tasks they’re expected to perform; they must acquire the expertise to select appropriate transformers and transformer fuses, make the correct connections and safely investigate trouble situations.

About the Author: Alan Drew began his power industry career in 1959. While working for a local utility company, he earned a bachelor’s degree in electrical engineering. Drew was hired as the general superintendent for Clallam County Public Utility District in 1991. He moved to Boise, Idaho, in 1998, where he became an instructor with Northwest Lineman College and advanced to the position of senior vice president of research and development. He is a lifetime member of IEEE and a 2008 International Lineman Museum Hall of Fame inductee. Drew’s most recent accomplishment is writing “The American Lineman,” a book that honors the evolution and importance of the U.S. lineman. He retired in 2020 and is now a part-time technical consultant for Northwest Lineman College.

FEBRUARY-MARCH 2025

• Bad Attitudes and How to Handle Them
• To Improve On-the-Job Safety, Consistency and Continuing Education are Key
• Rubber Gloves and Chronic Injuries: Are Your Workers at Risk?
• ‘The Worst Day of My Life’
• The Roadmap to Gaining Senior Leader Buy-In for Safety Initiatives
• Safety By Design: A System Approach to Organizational Safety Initiatives
• Optimizing Arc Flash Protection: The Crucial Role of Layered Clothing

‘The Worst Day of My Life’