Friday March 12 , 2010
People Focused Safety
Written by Lee Marchessault, CUSA, 1 March 2010

Workplace safety is not an exact science. We can determine hazards, measure risks, provide protective equipment, implement policies and procedures – and then inject corrective actions when needed – but may still fall short of stellar performance.

Confused About Arc Flash Compliance?
Written by Pam Tompkins, CSP, CUSA, 1 December 2009

If you’re in a quandary over arc flash compliance, you’re not alone, according to Incident Prevention’s recent survey.

Root Cause Analysis
Written by Donald F. Fritz, CSP, CSHM, 1 October 2009

Even the safest among us will occasionally veer off the road to safety excellence and encounter an incident. When this happens, the best management practice is to identify and correct the cause(s) so that you can get back on track and avoid future mishaps.

A FULL Commitment
Written by Patricia Seeley, CPE, 1 October 2009

We all know the data. Typically, one third to one half of our field injuries are musculoskeletal disorders such as strains and sprains, rotator cuff syndrome, lower back disorders and tendonitis. Workers’ compensation costs for these injuries far exceed those for acute incidents such as burns, cuts and even fractures.

NESC-2012-Part 4: Summary of Change Proposals
Written by Pam Tompkins, CSP, CUSA, 1 October 2009

NESC-2012 change proposals have been published and are available for comment through May 1, 2010. Subcommittee 8, Work Rules Sections 40-44, is responsible for the changes to Part 4 of the NESC. The main change proposal includes a requirement for employers to determine potential electric arc exposures for employees who work on or near lines, parts or equipment 50- 1,000 volts. NESC-2007 does not specifically require employers to perform an arc hazard analysis on low-voltage systems so this will be a major change for 2012.

Soil Resistivity Testing & Grounding System Design: Part II of II
Written by John Howard, 1 August 2009

The sole purpose of the design exercise for grounding systems is to make the performance predictable upon installation. For ground system designs, there are several options for the design process or the method of manipulating the data by formulas, spreadsheets, or software. Likewise, there are alternatives for the design result or the actual instructions showing locations, models and quantity of grounding electrodes required to achieve the grounding system performance indicated by the design.

Huge Steps
Written by Terrell A. Davis, 1 August 2009

If you’ve tuned into the news in the last two years, you have undoubtedly seen reports of crane accidents that have occurred across the country. There have been many injuries and in some cases fatalities due to the highly populated areas in which these events have taken place.

Soil Resistivity Testing & Grounding System Design: Part I of II
Written by John Howard, 1 June 2009

For utilities designing site-specific grounding systems, soil resistivity testing is an absolutely necessary step. Soil resistivity data is required for the ground system to meet a specific performance requirement. With resistivity data, the design becomes predictable so that you know the final ground resistance to expect after installation.

Making Safety a Core Value
Written by Carla Housh, 1 June 2009

E.ON U.S. recently introduced its next phase of safety development at its Operation Safety Summit.

Incident Analysis
Written by Donald F. Fritz, CSP, CSHM, 1 April 2009

The essence of safety is preventing incidents from having the opportunity to occur. When they do occur, it is usually the result of one or more safety systems failures. Failures, however, are the seeds of opportunity. Incidents provide us with opportunities, albeit unfortunate, to improve our safety systems and prevent future incidents. The process used to identify what improvements are needed is called Incident Analysis.

Moving from Operations into Safety or Training
Written by Bart Castle, 1 February 2009

Over the past 50-plus years in production settings of all types, training has been largely made up of new employees spending either specified or unspecified periods of time with more experienced employees. At the end of that period, the experienced employee was responsible for pronouncing the new employee “trained.”

Sometimes, these practices produce an effective safety or training professional. It has been our experience in over more than 20 years of observing and discussing moves from operations to safety or training with several hundred organizations in a number of production industries, including electric utilities, that the move is not automatically successful. Furthermore, it is far less than automatic for some of the individuals that for years have been assumed to be perfect fits for these positions.

What's in a Number?
Written by Donald Brignac, 30 November 1999

Does it really mean anything if the RAI (Recordable Accident Incident Rate) for your non-payroll workers (hereafter referred to as “contractors”) is 6.2? At Entergy, where our most important value is to “Create and Sustain a Safe Working Environment,” numbers like those can be very important.

Strategies for Safety in the Wind Industry
Written by John Dunlop and Chris Madison, 30 November 1999

For the wind power industry, practicing safety has always been more than a mission—it’s required. After all, a wind technician may be working in a space the size of a bathroom located on a tower 80 meters tall, surrounded by massive mechanical and high voltage electrical equipment, in a harsh climate, far from medical services.

Safety Culture Success
Written by Justine O'Connor, 30 November 1999

Organizations rely on numerous metrics—from incident rates to absenteeism—to help quantify and evaluate safety performance. But as lagging indicators, such metrics tell us little about the root causes of safety. Do employees truly buy into the organization’s safety policies and procedures?� Do workers get actively involved in the safety reporting process?� These are questions that are critical to understanding why a culture succeeds or fails in meeting its safety goals.

Free Climbing vs. Safer Climbing
Written by Carla Housh, 1 July 2008

San Diego Gas & Electric recently hosted a Western Fall Restraint Conference. SDG&E is moving forward in establishing safer climbing practices and knew they would benefit from bringing their western partners together to share what has worked for them in launching a new program, best practices, equipment concerns and overall experiences.

Effective Fall Protection for Utility Workers
Written by Jim Hutter, 1 May 2008

A review of the relevant standards and training that companies need to provide.

Managing Safety
Written by Carl Griffith, 1 May 2008

There's no magic to safety; it's management. Just as you manage productivity, quality or any other part of your company, safety management takes planning, organizing, leading, controlling and evaluating. You or your managers will be inspecting, investigating, recording, analyzing and reporting. How you make all this happen is through a safety program that gives you the policies, procedures and monitoring systems to make safety happen. With time and resources in short supply, a safety program has to be approached in a practical and effective manner. How do you assure its successful implementation? Start with some basic questions:

Passion for Safety
Written by Steve Owen , 1 March 2008

We have a responsibility to care for ourselves. In the utility business, for example, safety is about using proper personal protective equipment and approved safe work methods in a controlled environment. When we have a true passion for safety, we not only care for ourselves, but also take responsibility for influencing others in the use of safe practices.

Comcast Cable and CUSA
Written by Ken Flechler, CUSA, 6 January 2008
How Comcast Cable strongly encourages its employees with
responsibility for safety to obtain Certified Utility Safety Administrator (CUSA) certification. Should your utility do the same?
Managing Safety Rule Violations
Written by Tyrone S. Tonkinson, PhD., P.E., 7 January 2008
This is the question I am asked most frequently at conferences and when delivering training. The short, direct answer is "Yes." So, if an individual violates a safety rule, should he or she be punished? It depends.
I know that sounds like a consultant's answer, so let's discuss what I mean. We can start by considering human nature. We all choose our behaviors based on expected consequences. What are the consequences of taking shortcuts on the job? While there are possible negative consequences, like rework or an injury, these problems are few and far between. One definite result is that the job takes less time. Getting done faster is usually considered a good thing. But what if the shortcut involves violating a safety rule? If there are no consequences for violating safety rules, can they be ignored? Will this  affect your safety record?
For the most part, people do not deliberately violate policies and safety rules. Our workers, however, are responding to many influences on their actions, including company goals, a sense of urgency to restore customer service, personal issues at home, and so on. When shortcuts get results and they are not corrected, the decision becomes a bad habit. And while bad habits will not lead to an injury every time, they will eventually catch up to the worker.
Page 1 of 2