Accuracy Above All: Authoring Articles for iP Magazine

For over 17 years, I have had the distinct privilege of writing for Incident Prevention magazine. I am genuinely honored that iP continues to publish my articles. My first column was about the four principles of distribution cover-up. At last count, I had written and submitted more than 100 articles over the years. During that time, many of my industry associates have also expressed interest in contributing to the magazine. To them and anyone else who wants to share their industry knowledge, I have and will always recommend contacting Kate Wade, iP’s editor, at kwade@utilitybusinessmedia.com. She provides guidance about the submission and publication process and can answer any specific questions you might have.

If you are entertaining the idea of submitting an article, there is information I want you to know about what is required. Writing for a publication that is read around the world can be an intimidating task. You must do your homework. I have had many discussions with industry colleagues regarding their thoughts on work practices, regulations and standards. Everyone is entitled to their opinions, but writing for a trade publication like iP requires identifying the correct reference materials and best practices. You must consider OSHA standards as well as the National Electrical Safety Code, ASTM and ANSI standards, and NFPA 70E (note: workers must follow 70E when maintaining low-voltage electrical systems inside buildings owned and operated by utilities).

When I first joined the safety world, Jerry Cates, Jim Lancour, Billy Carver and the safety staff I worked with helped me sort out the relevant codes and standards, teaching me the relationships between them and how they apply to industry work practices. You, too, must understand these things to craft an article that provides readers with valuable safety information meeting all the requirements industry employers are legally bound to uphold. iP has protocols in place to verify the accuracy of the articles contained within its pages – which I will cover a little later – yet it is also incumbent upon contributors to submit technically accurate documents.

Research, Verify, Write
I keep myself informed by reading often and listening to various podcasts. Part of my process is taking time to verify the accuracy of what I have read and heard. That is because I discovered long ago that even the slightest deviation from reality can create a great deal of confusion, something I encountered again just recently as I was reading an article about maintaining clearances. Here is my concern. A civil case I once consulted on involved both the improper selection of procedures and failure to follow the procedures while establishing a clearance, resulting in severe worker injuries and allegations of PPE failure. The investigation made it glaringly apparent why the accident and injuries occurred. I questioned how the employees identified the chosen procedures, the reasons they were not followed, and why no one – including the supervisor in charge of the crew who allowed all the errors to occur – asked questions about what was happening. Was there a lack of training? Was this a human performance issue? Could the crew members have read an article online or in a magazine that proffered erroneous information? Were they influenced by one of the many social media posts that highlight incorrect, unsafe industry work practices? The point here is that field employees can be directly influenced by what they see, hear and read.

That leads me back to my earlier statement. If you are thinking about writing an article for iP, you must start with research. Review the industry’s accident statistics. Consider which work methods appear to be the most misunderstood. For instance, I have found that 29 CFR 1910.269(l), (m) and (n) are the OSHA regulations that most perplex my clients. Paragraphs (p) and (q) are occasionally mystifying as well. As many of you know, I am a strong proponent of distribution cover-up and system grounding, which are the training programs my clients request most. But how much cover is enough? Multiple options exist for system and equipment grounding. Which ones are best? I typically choose the most conservative. Of course, when forming my opinions, I study the facts of the investigations and lawsuits I have consulted on over the last 18 years. They have educated me about the myriad ways employees misapply work practices and standards. Some industry professionals have said they do not agree with my opinions. Others have told me they have been doing cover-up or grounding their way for years and nothing bad has happened. That is all well and good. However, there is real risk involved when someone who does not fully comprehend the industry’s regulations and standards writes about them with the intention of helping readers safely control worksite hazards and mitigate risk.

The fact that many iP readers are interested in contributing to the magazine is a wonderful thing. Our industry can gain valuable and much-needed information and insight when workers share their experiences. Occasionally, though, writers submit articles to iP containing opinions that do not align with the minimum regulatory requirements we all must meet. The magazine welcomes writers’ opinions regarding task performance, but they cannot contradict OSHA standards.

iP’s Editorial Advisory Board
For all the reasons I have noted above, each article published in iP magazine is first reviewed by a dedicated editorial advisory board to ensure the accuracy of its contents. Currently serving as board members are Garrett Bush (Pike Enterprises); Rod Courtney (PowerGrid Services); Matt Edmonds (SET Solutions); Nazir Fazli (Los Angeles Department of Water & Power); George Gela (Berkshire Electric Transmission Consulting); and Mack Turner and Jim Vaughn (Institute for Safety in Powerline Construction). I am friendly with this group and have complete confidence in their efforts to ensure every iP magazine article fully aligns with our industry’s regulations and standards.

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!