Editor’s Note: This timely article specifically addresses the contemporary issue of green-energy backfeed endangering power-line workers. Unlike engine-powered backup generators, green energy makes no telltale noise to alert workers to its presence and possible hazards. Incident Prevention encourages all employers to assess the risks related to backup energy sources and adopt effective storm-work hazard analysis, isolation and other protective procedures for worker safety. It is night and you are working storm trouble on a single-phase line. The line fuse is blown, and you find wire down. Then you notice that the customer beyond the broken section of wire still has power. Is there a two-way feed on this phase? Did you identify the correct opened line fuse? No, there is no two-way feed, and yes, you identified the correct opened line fuse feeding the downed phase wire. This trouble call is different from traditional radial feed or one-way electric power flow. This call includes solar panels in the customer’s backyard that are attached to battery storage on the side of their house. The battery storage supplied by solar generation is flowing through a non-UL-labeled inverter that is connected directly to the customer’s breaker panel. The 200-amp main disconnect in the breaker panel is closed, and power is backfeeding through the customer’s meter, through the secondary windings of the transformer and out onto the downed primary wire. In an effort to help keep lineworkers safe and knowledgeable, the remainder of this article will cover information on solar distributed generation and how to protect yourself from backfeed. Some History In the past, power corporations owned their generation, transmission and distribution lines and equipment. Traditionally, large power plants produced the power that flowed over transmission networks in the megawatt or gigawatt range to substations that reduced the high voltage of the transmission lines to distribution voltages. The distribution power flowed to the consumer in one direction. However, deregulation separated the traditional generation, transmission and distribution ownership to promote competition. In the 1990s, distributed generation and clean, renewable energy – like solar – became increasingly cost effective. Consumers of electric power could own and install distribution generators and renewable energy technologies on their own property. This upset the traditional electric power infrastructure as some consumers of electric power, even homeowners, became generators of that power. Additionally, this upset the distribution grids by having two-way power flows and significantly reduced one-way power flow that was not traditionally planned for. Two-way electric power flows are acceptable when the power system is working properly and distributed generation, like solar, is passing through utility-approved switches and meters. Such flow is not acceptable when the power system circuits become de-energized by a storm and the two-way electric power flow then becomes backfeed on downed lines. In addition, it is not acceptable for customers to install distributed generation without transfer or manual load-break switches, thereby allowing the distributed generation to become backfeed on the power system’s downed lines. Preventing Unintentional Backfeed By definition, backfeed is power flowing opposite of the usual direction. It can be intentional or unintentional. Through switching, a utility can create intentional backfeed by reversing the power flow to restore power to customers during outages. However, unintentional backfeed can come from distributed generation sources, such as solar, battery storage and generators. Lineworkers must be aware of and always protect themselves from unintentional backfeed. To prevent unintentional backfeed, there are correct ways to install solar panels and related equipment that are tied to the grid. All grid-tied equipment, like inverters, should have the UL label. Standard UL 1741 details the interconnection equipment, the tests that must be conducted, construction, and protection against risks and injury to people. An inverter that is grid-tied with the UL label, for example, should shut off if the power grid goes down or if the AC frequency of the power grid changes. This type of inverter prevents the customer’s house from becoming an island. “A Guidebook on Grid Interconnection and Islanded Operation of Mini-Grid Power Systems Up to 200 kW” describes islanding as a “condition in which a portion of the grid becomes temporarily isolated from the main grid but remains energized by its own distributed generation resource(s). Islanding may occur accidentally or deliberately. Traditionally, islanding has been seen by utilities as an undesirable condition due to concerns about safety, equipment protection, and system control” (see www.osti.gov/biblio/1171616). IEEE 1547 describes intentional and unintentional islanding. An intentional island is a planned electrical island that is capable of being energized by a utility’s electric power system and has one or more distributed energy resources and load. The intentional island can disconnect from the utility’s electric power system and be in parallel with it. An unintentional island is an unplanned island that is capable of being energized by the electric power system and has a distributed energy resource and load. The unintentional island is a concern for lineworkers because the distributed generation continues to operate when the utility’s power grid is down due to fallen lines. Both intentional and unintentional islanding rely on inverters and switches to isolate the distributed generation from the grid. Furthermore, there are customers who have solar distributed generation that is tied to the electric power system that can become an island when the power goes out or the frequency changes. The disconnect switches on these customers’ houses or facilities must be checked open, locked open and tagged on circuits with downed lines. If the disconnect switch cannot be opened or verified, the meter can be pulled and blanked out. Four Rules for Zero Contact Let’s imagine for a moment that a do-it-yourself customer installed his solar panels and equipment for off-grid use, such as when the power goes out. His installation was not inspected by an electrical inspector nor approved by the utility. While working on downed power lines, lineworkers must protect themselves from this type of incorrect solar installation just as they would from any distributed generation (e.g., an incorrect generator installation). Lineworkers can protect themselves by always adhering to the four lifesaving rules for zero contact. The National Rural Electric Cooperative Association and the Federated Rural Electric Insurance Exchange establish those rules in “Commitment to Zero Contacts: Implementation Guide for Field Personnel” (see www.cooperative.com/programs-services/safety-resap/commitment-to-zero/Documents/committozero_guide_fieldpersonnel.pdf). They are as follows:

1. Use rubber gloves and sleeves.
2. Apply proper insulating material or coverup.
3. Use proper clearance procedures.
4. Test lines de-energized and apply personal grounds.

These rules apply not only to traditional power flow but also to distributed generation backfeed, like solar. Lineworkers should always wear rubber gloves and sleeves when working ungrounded lines. Remember that power lines are considered energized until they are grounded. In addition to rubber gloves and sleeves, proper insulating material or coverup is necessary to protect lineworkers. To de-energize lines and equipment, use proper clearance procedures, test the lines de-energized and apply personal grounds. When using proper clearance procedures that align with the OSHA rules, the person in charge of the crew shall request clearance on the line to be worked from operations or dispatch. If operations or dispatch does not exist, the person in charge of the crew takes clearance on the downed lines. Through operations or by the employee in charge, all sources of electric energy are to be de-energized. In 1910.269(m)(3)(ii), OSHA states that the “employer shall ensure that all switches, disconnectors, jumpers, taps, and other means through which known sources of electric energy may be supplied to the particular lines and equipment to be deenergized are open.” Lineworkers shall render such means of energized sources inoperable, unless the design will not allow a lock, and then ensure that such means are tagged to indicate that lineworkers are at work. Solar distributed generation is a source of electrical energy that must be disconnected from the utility’s secondary or primary lines. This means the solar distributed generation disconnect must be opened, locked open and tagged to indicate lineworkers are at work. It is recommended that customer houses with solar generation have manual load-break disconnect switches. The switch locations should be approved by the utility and easily accessible at any time of day or night. Load-break switches – when opened, locked open and tagged open – should prevent power from flowing to the electric power grid. Additionally, utility-sized solar distribution generation should have reclosers or a breaker to break the load and disconnect switches for a visible opening. Utility-sized solar distribution generation may have automatic switches that open if the voltage or frequency changes. A lineworker should not trust their life to an automatic switch. Such switches must be opened, locked open and tagged to indicate employees are at work. In addition, solar distributed generation on secondary lines that are improperly installed should have the meters removed and blanked out to protect workers and the public. De-Energizing and Grounding After taking proper clearance, lineworkers should test lines de-energized to verify all voltage sources have been opened, including distributed generation sources. If all lines test de-energized through use of a voltage tester, then apply bracket grounding per IEEE 1048-2016, “Guide for Protective Grounding of Power Lines.” OSHA refers to IEEE 1048 in 1910.269(n), “Grounding for the protection of employees.” Bracket grounding means applying grounds on both sides of the downed wire. Apply the bracket grounds in a bolted fault configuration on two-phase and three-phase lines by connecting a ground from the neutral to the phase closest to the lineworker. Then, connect a ground from the closest phase to the middle phase, and another ground from the middle phase to the farthest phase from the lineworker. A bolted fault configuration connects the phases and neutral together to provide maximum fault current on the circuit to quickly open breakers in the substation. The grounds being applied in this configuration should be capable of handling the fault current at that location. Obtainable fault currents can be determined by an arc flash study of the utility’s circuits. If grounds are applied, workers on the ground should wear rubber gloves when handling downed wire. Rubber gloves worn by workers on the ground will protect them from touch potential caused by backfeed. At the pole where the wire is down and is to be pulled to sag, equipotential grounds per OSHA 1910.269(n)(3) and IEEE 1048 shall be used to protect workers. Paragraph 1910.269(n)(3), “Equipotential zone,” states the following: “Temporary protective grounds shall be placed at such locations and arranged in such a manner that the employer can demonstrate will prevent each employee from being exposed to hazardous differences in electric potential.” Equipotential grounds are installed from the bracket that attaches around the pole below the lineworker’s feet and then connected to the neutral. Another ground is connected from the bracket to the phase closest to the lineworker. The next ground is attached from the phase closest to the lineworker to the middle phase. Another ground is attached from the middle phase and connected to the farthest phase from the lineworker. Equipotential grounding provides protection for the worker at the top of the pole and in the bucket by making the top of the pole the same potential as the neutral and phase wires. Equipotential grounding also provides a bolted fault configuration to open sectionalizing devices quickly. Conclusion Traditional radial electric power flow or power flow in one direction is no longer. More and more solar distributed generation is being constructed. Lineworkers must use the four lifesaving rules for zero contact to protect themselves. As a final reminder, those rules are to use rubber gloves and sleeves, apply proper insulating material or coverup, use proper clearance procedures, and test lines de-energized and apply personal grounds. About the Author: Jerone Mabe is manager of technical services for the Virginia, Maryland & Delaware Association of Electric Cooperatives. Reach him at jmabe@vmdaec.com.

I don’t talk about myself a lot – I listen. I developed this skill after taking on a leadership position with a utility contractor in an industry I knew nothing about. My work history prior to this role included management in pretty much every industry except utilities. In each of my previous jobs, I strived to learn and advance from an entry-level position. In this new position, I no longer had the advantage of knowing how the company ran from the ground up; I had to trust and depend on others to help me. It did not take me long to realize that safety is the most important priority in this industry. Lack of attention to the detail of safety can kill a lineworker and damage a company beyond repair. So, while you could say our company’s journey to interactive safety began four years ago – when I accepted this new role – I would have to say that the real work is just starting. The First Incident In the early days of my employment, I was completely focused on understanding the operations of our business. We were growing rapidly at that point, and it was all I could do to keep up with new customers, additional work, and the increase in staff and equipment that come with exponential growth. I admit I had little time for safety, and my only attempts were to put out a weekly bulletin that was pulled from the internet and addressed subjects such as ticks and layered clothing. I was just checking boxes, trying to get things done. I can remember our first incident during my tenure. It was an overnight fire in eastern New York on a pole that had been improperly grounded. The foreman in the field called me the next morning and suggested that we have an immediate stand-down. I did not know what a stand-down was, so of course I pretended that I did, and I agreed. We stopped work, the field leaders prepared a statement about what had happened and the lessons learned, we covered it at the show-up the next day, and everyone went back to work. The utility had ordered a one-day stand-down and we had complied. We checked that box, too. Over the next few years, the company had a few more incidents. What I remember most about those times is that there seemed to be a cycle that went like this:

1. An incident occurs.
2. We examine the job briefing.
3. We come up with lessons learned.
4. We add some checkboxes to the job briefing.
5. Someone is fired.
6. We cross our fingers and wait for the next incident.

Essentially, everything was reactive in an industry that can kill in a millisecond. Somewhere around that time, I noticed a disconnect. We were working with intelligent men and women who had passed classroom testing and field practicums to become lineworkers. They understood science and were proud of their careers. Yet we were responding to incidents by putting them through retraining or firing them, and most decisions regarding field policy were created behind a desk. I wondered, how did we get to the point where the people doing the work did not have input, and why were we creating a workforce that accepted that we did not value them enough to ask their opinions? In previous jobs, I put a premium on communication and showed the people I worked with my appreciation for the value they brought to the company. This was done through respectful treatment that included requesting and acting on their ideas to improve all aspects of the business. They felt that they mattered and could make a difference. Now I was in an industry that was dictated from the top, and I was uncomfortable with that dynamic. What could we do? Well, I kept checking boxes. We expanded our safety program by adding safety officers in the field, introducing a weekly safety call, tweaking our job briefing and bringing in safety leadership speakers. I truly care about every single person I work with and was doing everything I had seen done to “improve safety.” Intuitively, however, I knew it was not enough, and my knowledge of the typical lineworker skill set and attitude made me think that crew relationships were often at odds, which I suspected affected safety. Then I listened to a podcast about crew relationships, engagement and the so-called “illusion of safety” created by checking boxes and autopiloting job briefings. That’s when everything fell into place for me. A New Partnership Enter our current safety consultant. He is not just any consultant. His ideas combine lineworker and safety experience, medical knowledge, backcountry rescue practices and a deep knowledge of the human brain. Just as important, he has partnered with our safety officer in the field, and their brains vibrate on the same frequency. I believe that changing our company mentality is the secret to expanding our safety program and keeping people alive. The industry has improved every PPE item and added documentation ad nauseam to help our workers. I believe we have reached a wall with the physical aspect of safety and now need to work on relationships and experiential knowledge so that our workers can connect with each other and prevent incidents before they happen. Reacting once an incident has already occurred has not lowered the fatality statistics in this industry. That is a fact. Since working with our current safety consultant, we have instituted two small changes in our field practices. Change 1 Following the dictation of the job briefing, the crew now gets into a circle. Each participant states their role for the day’s work and points out any concerns they have. This practice activates communication and connection with others in a big way. Many aspects of the crew are affected; I will mention just a few. First, by looking each other in the eye, workers’ brains are synchronized. Once synchronization occurs, crew members will naturally behave more as a team. Second, lineworkers are competitive. If one states a concern, others will want to keep up, and information will cascade. This happened recently when a safety officer in the circle pointed out a rotten pole top. His observation queued up another team member, who noticed that a guy wire would create an obstacle in transferring a primary. Third, by speaking up at the beginning of the day during the job briefing, apprentices are more likely to speak up later in the day as well. This is called the “activation phenomenon,” and I have noticed this in my private life. I am shy by nature, and if I am in a group of people and do not contribute early to the conversation, I sometimes shut down and feel nervous about speaking at all. Change 2 We now conduct mental rehearsals of injuries and other medical emergencies so that our team can improve the chances of their brothers’ and sisters’ survival and create better health outcomes. These rehearsals are discussions as to what should happen first, second and so on if a co-worker is hurt. We were recently in a meeting in which a working foreman stated that he was unsure of the order of actions to take if his co-worker collapsed. However, he also believed he would know what to do to help if something happened. This is a commonly held belief and the furthest thing from the truth. Without planning and practicing, your brain is flooded with emotion when a real incident occurs; you may become a deer in the headlights, so to speak. An injured person deserves your full attention and knowledge to help them. Imagine the guilt a crew member would carry if their co-worker died or had another serious outcome because they could not remember how to perform first aid or missed the symptoms of heatstroke. Is It Working? As a company leader, I realize the difficulties with this new initiative. How do we prove it is working? As our safety consultant is fond of saying, “There are no parades for things that do not happen.” If you walk into a bank, notice that the doormat is rumpled and straighten it, how can you prove that the elderly woman who entered five minutes later did not trip and break her hip because of your action? The simple answer is that there is no proof. Our new initiative derives from a much higher place, and I believe it is my place to grow this program. At this point, our company has met with each of our employees for an introductory three-hour meeting followed by field visits to put the crew synchronization practice into place. We hope to encourage the “role and concern” job briefing practice for the next 30 to 60 days and see where it takes us. I am also suggesting that crews personalize the discussion after the job briefing; they can call it anything they want and conduct it in whatever manner is comfortable for them. We want to accomplish a mission that improves crew relationships. We want to help crew members sync. If this plan does not work, I am committed to exploring other options that focus on psychological safety and the role the human brain plays in creating a safe dynamic. Conclusion I am excited to begin this journey that will have no end and whose success will be difficult to prove or quantify. Our safety team has instilled a new sense of confidence in the company by asking our team members for their opinions and helping them to realize that they are our safety. We must rely on the experience and ideas of those who perform the work. They are a valuable part of this endeavor, and their support to help us adjust and make this a practice will ultimately determine whether it succeeds or fails. It is groundbreaking. I believe that the small changes will cascade into other changes in both work life and personal life for many of us. My lack of knowledge of this business and working in a male-dominated industry were initially of great concern to me. How could I possibly lead when I did not fit the stereotype of what is expected from a leader in this business? What path would I follow? I had such intense internal worries about these challenges in the beginning. Through the support of the people with whom I work – and I mean from those working in every area of the company – I have grown to believe that the things that I initially considered deficiencies are the reasons we are where we are today. My lack of knowledge has created a situation wherein I do not do things “the way we have always done them.” I ask questions, and I ask for the input of many people. I live by the adage that we must be as safe as or safer than every other contractor, but we do not have to operate like every other contractor. The fact that I am female has brought a different level of caring to this company. While I hope that valuing everyone for what they bring to the table is noticed, the reality is that the culture will benefit from that dynamic. In closing, I believe engagement will produce men and women who possess a new level of intelligence to model safety that can change outcomes. In turn, that may mean fewer funerals and fewer injuries – and that is our mission. About the Author: Cheryl Richardson is the president of New York-based H. Richardson & Sons (http://hrsutilities.com).