Incident Prevention Utility Safety Podcast

Lineworkers confront daily risks many can’t imagine – arc flashes, falls, electrocutions and more. Yet there’s a silent, insidious threat currently claiming more lives in the electric utility industry than any physical injury.

We’re talking about suicide.

Safety professionals dedicate their careers to mitigating risk and preventing harm, understanding that serious injuries and fatalities devastate lives and ripple through the workforce. But what if the most devastating injury of all is one largely overlooked in traditional safety programs?

Industry employers already deliver traditional safety training to employees and outfit them with personal protective equipment as their last line of defense against harm. These companies aren’t waiting for a physical injury to occur before providing the necessary tools and training.

It makes sense to ask, then, what’s stopping utility organizations from providing workers with tools and training to prevent self-harm?

Because suicide is arguably the greatest of all personal injuries, it demands levels of training and attention that match or exceed those invested in preventing other types of physical injuries. Fortunately, we don’t need to reinvent the wheel. We simply need to extend the logic of our existing safety principles.

Consider this: We wouldn’t dream of sending a brand-new apprentice up a pole with only a brief classroom explanation about how to climb it, plus a phone number to call or an app to download for climbing instructions. Yet this is often the industry’s approach to mental health. We direct employees to resources, but are we also actively training them to recognize warning signs in themselves and their peers? When is the last time we practiced our intervention skills or worked to destigmatize the act of seeking help?

Just as we train utility crews to inspect every visible wire on a pole, we are also morally obligated to teach them to inspect the invisible one – what we refer to as the “fifth wire” – that connects them as human beings.

Stark Stats
The 2023 national suicide rate among the general population was 14.1 per 100,000, according to the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (see www.cdc.gov/suicide/facts/data.html). Per the 2023 Annual Report on Suicide in the Military, the rate per 100,000 active service members was 35.9 for the Marine Corps, 34.8 for the Army, 22.5 for the Air Force and 21 for the Navy (see www.dspo.mil/Portals/113/2024/documents/annual_report/ARSM_CY23_final_508c.pdf).

The data is even starker for those serving our industry. Among construction workers in 2022, there were over five times more suicide deaths than fatal work injuries (see www.cpwr.com/wp-content/uploads/DataBulletin-September2024.pdf); CDC data from 2021 paints an equally disturbing picture (see https://cdc.gov/mmwr/volumes/72/wr/mm7250a2.htm).

These statistics are a clarion call demanding that we stop overlooking the invisible fifth wire that connects the human crews who keep our lights on. But recognizing that call alone isn’t enough. Utility safety and operations leaders must actively promote a community of belonging within their organizations, equipping the workforce with simple, practical, effective tools – just as they do for physical safety purposes.

A sense of belonging is a critical driver of safety and performance in high-stakes environments like line work. According to a 2019 Harvard Business Review article, “When people feel like they belong at work, they are more productive, motivated, engaged and 3.5 times more likely to contribute to their fullest potential …” (see https://hbr.org/2019/02/the-surprising-power-of-simply-asking-coworkers-how-theyre-doing).

Put simply, maintaining cohesive peer networks is a fundamental need and strategy in the war on lineworker suicide.

Battle Formation: Shield, Sword and Armor
Winning the war requires each of us to employ three critical items to protect ourselves from making destructive choices: the shield of vulnerability, the sword of stigma obliteration and the armor of peer networks. 

The Shield of Vulnerability
Lineworkers make electrical connections every day. As leaders, we must help them connect with each other. This is the basis of the Sweethearts & Heroes Fifth Wire Program, which was founded on one simple, field-tested process built for life’s realities: Circle. One of the world’s oldest human connection practices, stretching back 400,000 years, the Circle process fosters a sense of belonging and purpose among group members, establishes positive social norms, builds networks of support, and develops critical skills for personal and collective well-being.

Vulnerability is encouraged in Circle, nurturing an environment in which individuals are more likely to reach out for help before they reach a crisis point. The act of being vulnerable also provides opportunities for us to share the hope we all carry with everyone else in the group.

Circle is designed to build upon a group’s strengths. Sadly, however, vulnerability is often associated with weakness – and fear of appearing weak can paralyze us. Still, we overcome our struggles and build the strength we seek by finding the courage to talk about difficult topics. Winning the war on lineworker suicide requires us to acknowledge our shared humanity, to create psychologically safe environments in which it’s OK for anyone to say, “I’m not OK” – knowing their admission will be met with support, not judgment. By leading with personal stories of overcoming adversity, we inspire hope in others that they can successfully conquer their own challenges.

The Sword of Stigma Obliteration
Stigma isolates people in their pain. Many communities perpetuate a pervasive stigma around suicide, often reinforcing silence through cultural norms and misconceptions about weakness and resilience.

Under pressure to appear “fine” or maintain a facade of strength, individuals can suffer in secrecy, fearing judgment, alienation or punishment. Modern society’s reluctance to openly address suicide not only deepens the isolation of those struggling but deprives communities of the awareness and empathy needed to foster true healing and prevention.

The sword of stigma obliteration is our tool for tackling this formidable opponent, cutting through the silence and shame that allow hopelessness to fester. Engaging in open, honest conversations is the most potent way to wield it because discussion of complex subjects – especially tough ones like loss and grief – has an inoculating effect on us. When we candidly speak about an immense personal struggle, that act typically helps us and our listeners, piercing through isolation and offering a path forward.

We must actively create platforms and opportunities for these conversations among utility crews with the goal of making them routine and accepted – just like any other safety briefing.

The Armor of Peer Networks
Finally, we must equip ourselves with the armor of peer networks and foster a culture of mutual support and shared responsibility.

One crucial aspect of this is staying “left of bang,” a concept developed by Patrick Van Horne that emphasizes proactive intervention based on behavioral cues. Behavior is communication. When someone begins isolating themselves at lunchtime, giving away their tools or exhibiting sudden changes in mood – even nearly imperceptible shifts – these are warning signs. We must train the workforce to recognize and respond to these signs before “the bang” happens. Fortunately, each of us possesses a profound intuitive capacity in our connections with others, a powerful resource rooted in the subconscious mind that can be intentionally honed into a finely tuned superpower.

For instance, an auxiliary nurse working in a psychiatric facility may be more adept at predicting a patient’s suicidal ideations than a skilled clinician armed with standard evaluation tools. This predictive ability is not mystical; it is developed by consistently observing an individual. Through their interactions, the nurse establishes a baseline of the patient’s nonverbal cues and mannerisms, creating a deep-seated intuitive connection – one that makes subtle, critical shifts in behavior immediately apparent.

During his work with the U.S. Air Force on the Wingman-Connect suicide prevention program, Peter A. Wyman, Ph.D., director of the Network Health and Prevention Program at the University of Rochester, found that peers set the adaptive, healthy social norms for each other. That means whether it’s in the electric utility industry, among our children or in the Marine Corps, people look up to those with prestige and influence within their peer groups. Thus, we must empower these informal leaders – particularly those who have weathered their own storms – to champion mental well-being, model help-seeking behavior and actively support their colleagues.

Much like Wingman-Connect, the Fifth Wire Program has repeatedly demonstrated that strong social bonds within a cohesive group mitigate suicidal ideation and depression symptoms. Circle offers a simple, action-based, lifesaving practice for crew-level check-ins, providing crew members with time and space to inspect and maintain the invisible wire that connects them.

Conclusion
Line work is hazardous in more ways than most people realize. Today, we are losing far too many of our brothers and sisters in the trade by their own hands.

But while the challenge before us is immense, it’s not insurmountable. We can begin to turn the tide in the war on lineworker suicide by recognizing it as a grave personal injury and equipping the workforce with the mental health tools and training they need.

About the Authors: Tom Murphy is founder, CEO and resident superhero of the Vermont-based Sweethearts & Heroes. Reach him at tom@sweetheartsandheroes.com or 802-309-9539.

Brian McKeon is a content writer for Sweethearts & Heroes.

Editor’s Note: For more on this topic, listen to a recent interview with Tom Murphy on the Utility Safety Podcast, available at https://utilitysafety.podbean.com/e/what-is-the-fifth-wire-building-a-human-safety-net-in-the-utility-sector-with-tom-murphy/.

Author’s Note: In this article – the first in a five-part series – we explore the notion of accepting 100% accountability for our safety at work, just as we do at home. This is an act of self-preservation. The hope is that management’s safety focus will overlap with our own preparation. We want as much overlap as possible.

The next article will address mental preparation, which is different than mental health. It’s a targeted focus to reduce risk of serious injuries and fatalities by improving our ability to remain self-aware and vigilant. We must keep our heads in the game.

When you’ve experienced as much loss as I have, safety becomes more than policy – it becomes a personal mission.

During the 31 years I worked for a large utility, I witnessed more tragedy than anyone should in a lifetime. Forty-four employees died on the job, part of 87 total fatalities at the company since 1965. Those individuals were my coworkers and friends, not just statistics.

Among the accidents that took their lives were vehicle crashes, falls from height, helicopter disasters over land and sea, and countless electrocutions. A major steam leak killed my entire shift and carpool partners. Some incidents are simply too painful to talk about. Most involve a person doing something that, if they could, they would choose to take back.

Each loss I’ve experienced has deepened my resolve to pursue what I call “the holy grail” of safety: a way we can end preventable worksite tragedies once and for all.

Serious injuries and fatalities still occur far too often despite decades of systemic improvements and process upgrades within utility organizations. As part of my ongoing journey to help the industry find a solution, I’ve closely examined Total Worker Health (TWH) – a National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health framework that integrates safety, health and wellness – and motivational interviewing (MI), a proven method of fostering lasting behavioral change.

Together, these two approaches offer what traditional safety systems alone do not: a shift from compliance to personal commitment. Real change begins when people choose to work safely because they want to – not because they’re told to.

Who is Responsible for Safety?
Management and frontline workers share safety responsibilities. And while the “don’t blame the worker, fix the system” mindset has value, the reality is that the moment we get into our car or set foot on a jobsite, we accept the risks inherent to that system.

Now, none of us would knowingly walk into certain death, which tells us we have agency. That’s important; each day, we make choices about which risks we’re willing to accept.

For example, most of us trust the rules of the road yet still drive defensively because we know others can make mistakes. The same applies at work. Although management has the obligation to eliminate or mitigate hazards and design systems to fail safely, even the best systems have their limits – which is why workers must take safety ownership, too.

Much as with driving, each of us must work defensively, developing awareness, discipline and personal safety rules that go beyond company policy. Frontline workers need their own safety margins and ways to stay alert because in the end, they are the ones who pay the ultimate price, not management.

Keep in mind, however, that safety isn’t just about you or me; it’s also about those around us. Consider how carefully you drive with a friend’s child in the car. You naturally step up your focus. The same mindset can work on the job, and it doesn’t have to be exhausting.

When my kids were little, they once stepped into a crosswalk simply because the light read “Walk.” I pulled them back, explaining, “Just because it’s legal doesn’t mean it’s safe. Always look both ways.” Over time, that next-level awareness became second nature to them. Ideally, we want to make our safety habits at work second nature, too, because minimal compliance may be insufficient for adequate protection.

Closing the Gap Between Knowing and Doing
Do your personal safety rules exceed your employer’s minimum standards? The truth is that many of us don’t really know how well we follow the rules. We complete our required training and annual refreshers, but we still have blind spots, gaps between where we are and where we need to be to work as safely as possible. Closing those gaps takes effort, which means many of us stop actively improving as soon as we can. Sometimes, deep down, we think safety is mostly a matter of luck.

That attitude changes when the stakes are obvious and high. A World Series outfielder, a U.S. Navy SEAL or a heart surgeon doesn’t slack off – because they can’t afford to. For each of them, being focused is nonnegotiable. For us, the stakes may not look as dramatic, but the consequences can be just as final, as with the coworkers I lost.

Total Worker Health: A More Complete Approach
We must begin approaching our jobs with the same preparation, mindset and sense of personal responsibility that the outfielder, Navy SEAL and surgeon do. That’s where NIOSH’s TWH comes in, expanding safety beyond accident prevention. It combines safety, health and wellness into one holistic framework designed to help people thrive, not merely survive.

Evidence-based and built on bedrock psychological and safety science, TWH is the foundation of an important new approach to workplace safety. Here’s a simple breakdown:

• Safety is about managing hazards – the mechanical, technical and job-specific risks. If something goes wrong here, you call a safety specialist.
• Health means being free from injury or illness. If this slips, you typically call a doctor.
• Wellness is health actively achieved through exercise, nutrition and social connections. If this dips, you might turn to a trainer, therapist, chaplain or friend.

To further explain TWH, NIOSH developed a separate hierarchy of controls for worker well-being (see www.cdc.gov/niosh/twh/php/hierarchy/index.html). The top three levels focus on organizational improvements, while the fourth and fifth target individual improvements (i.e., increasing safety knowledge and promoting safe behavior). To support these goals, I turned to MI, a method designed to help people learn and change on their own.

Sparking Self-Motivated Safety
Developed by psychologists William R. Miller and Stephen Rollnick, MI is a proven approach in health care used to help people change behaviors, from quitting smoking to reversing chronic illnesses. Backed by over 2,000 clinical trials, it is effective across medicine, public health and even sports. Now it’s time to bring MI into the safety world.

When I trained as a board-certified health and wellness coach, MI was at the heart of the program. The health-care field believes in it so strongly that coaches using MI may soon qualify for Medicare reimbursement. While doctors treat illnesses, MI helps people make lasting lifestyle changes.

The technique can help utility workers do the same. Wearing a hard hat, following checklists, learning from incidents – these are all personal choices. The decision to follow the rules is always ours. And although you can’t force someone to care about their safety, you can help them find the internal motivation to do so. That’s where MI shines, replacing the outdated carrot-and-stick model with something far more powerful: self-awareness, confidence and alignment with personal values that truly matter to the individual. It sparks personal motivation – the kind with staying power – and helps people avoid the natural resistance they feel when they’re told what to do.

The Power of Honest Feedback
MI works best when paired with clear, honest feedback, like a health check revealing high blood pressure or cholesterol. We need the same kind of assessment for safety: job-specific, confidential, easy to understand and rooted in real behavior.

Such assessments act as mirrors, helping people see the gap between who they are and who they want to be. Honest reflection, when handled with care, is what kindles real, lasting change. Without it, MI struggles to take hold.

Imagine a lineman receiving a safety psychology score that reveals measurable, objective insight into his approach to risk. That kind of clarity is about growth, not judgment. It enables the individual to be honest about their natural tendencies and creates space for change.

Just as medical tests measure physical health, safety assessments should measure self-awareness and competence across safety, health and wellness. “Knowing gaps” – the differences between how we see ourselves and how we truly perform – are made painfully clear through well-done assessments. The gaps are what drive a person’s motivation to improve. Thus, MI is unlikely to work in the absence of accurate, relevant, accessible and confidential assessments.

Advancing Safety to the Next Level
Helping workers take true ownership of their safety may be more effective than years of traditional training. Doing so requires effort, but an easy solution has never been the goal. Safety is the goal.

To move beyond the current plateau in safety performance, we must look deeper than systems, checklists and compliance. These are essential tools, but they can only take us so far. Complete consciousness of our internal mindset – where self-awareness, motivation and purpose guide the decisions that prevent tragedy – is often what’s missing.

MI is a proven, practical approach that helps unlock that mindset. When paired with NIOSH’s TWH framework and grounded in honest, behavior-based assessments, we create a powerful engine for cultural change that supports people and processes.

This approach isn’t about abandoning what works; it’s about completing the picture. For decades, safety professionals have searched for a way to eliminate – not just reduce – serious injuries and fatalities. That’s been the elusive holy grail. By integrating TWH and MI, we may finally be closing in on it.

About the Author: Tom Cohenno, Ed.D., CSP, CUSP, HWC, is a recognized safety expert and principal of Applied Learning Science (https://appliedlearningscience.com). With deep academic and operational experience as a U.S. Navy veteran, substation chief and former utility executive, he blends real-world insight with evidence-based research to deliver practical, impactful safety solutions.

As we stand on the precipice of a new era in the utility sector, it is clear the future holds transformative potential driven by relentless technological progress.

We are already seeing not just small changes but a complete overhaul. The horizon is replete with innovations aimed at redefining safety protocols and operational efficiency. Predicted advancements – ranging from connected monitoring systems to augmented reality (AR) training to robotics – point to a not-so-far-off future in which advanced technologies will be essential to everyday utility operations.

In the remainder of this article, I offer 10 predictions about the technologies that, in my professional opinion, will become commonplace in the utility sector over the next decade. These technologies are not just glimpses of what might be possible; they represent a significant portion of the foundation upon which future safety standards will likely be built.

1. Smart Grid Technologies
These digital monitors, equipped with sensors and real-time analytics, are already transforming how we track and control electrical grids. Pacific Gas and Electric Co. and other utilities are deploying systems that quickly detect faults and other hazards, a proactive strategy that aids in ensuring reliability and improving operational efficiency.

Timeline: Many utilities have already started integrating smart grid systems. Wider adoption is expected over the next five to 10 years as infrastructure upgrades progress and costs fall.

2. Drones for Infrastructure Inspection
Operators can guide drones – equipped with precision cameras and thermal imaging capabilities – into otherwise difficult-to-access areas, reducing safety risks. PSEG, for example, uses drones to navigate power lines and substations, conducting accurate asset assessments without endangering human lives.

Timeline: Drone technology is rapidly being adopted and could become standard within the next five years, especially within larger utilities that have resources to invest in these unmanned aircraft systems.

3. Augmented Reality
This training approach changes how utility workers prepare for field challenges. Currently, Southern Co. uses AR headsets that simulate real-world scenarios, providing immersive training that enhances trainees’ hazard recognition and emergency response skills.

Timeline: AR is increasingly being integrated into training programs. It could become a standard tool for utility workers within the next five to seven years as software advances and hardware becomes more affordable.

4. Internet of Things
IoT is a network of connected objects and devices that share information with each other. In the context of utility safety, organizations can integrate IoT to immediately detect system anomalies. DTE Energy, for instance, deploys IoT sensors to monitor underground cables for early fault signals, enabling the utility to perform preventive maintenance and/or repairs. This proactive approach greatly reduces downtime and incident risks.

Timeline: IoT integration in utilities is already progressing and expected to become widespread in the next five to 10 years as the technology becomes more accessible.

5. Advanced Personal Protective Equipment
Today’s PPE advancements combine technology with traditional safety gear to boost user protection, resulting in innovations like smart helmets that provide real-time data and electronic hearing protectors to aid communication in noisy environments.

Timeline: Smart PPE could become standard in high-risk settings within the next five years as technology costs decrease and companies – whether driven by altruism or public pressure – increasingly prioritize worker safety.

6. Robotics for Hazardous Tasks
Set to emerge as essential partners in high-risk tasks, these machines can carry out complex inspections and repairs in hazardous environments, offering protection to human workers even in the most extreme conditions.

Timeline: Although the machines are being used now, full robotics adoption across all utilities could take 10 to 15 years, depending on technological advancements and economic factors.

7. Data Analytics for Safety Management
Duke Energy and numerous other utility companies foster a culture of continuous safety by analyzing past incidents, identifying and addressing patterns to prevent recurrences. In a 2018 industry-wide benchmarking project for public utilities conducted by ProAct Safety, we found that advanced data analytics were already in use at that time.

Timeline: Analytics applications are expected to become more sophisticated over the next three to five years as utilities leverage increasing numbers of data-driven insights to enhance employee and public safety.

8. Fortified Cybersecurity Measures for Critical Infrastructure
Protection against cyberthreats is essential as utility systems become more interconnected. The U.S. Department of Energy’s initiatives – such as the Cybersecurity Capability Maturity Model (see www.energy.gov/ceser/cybersecurity-capability-maturity-model-c2m2) – provide key frameworks to defend against such threats.

Timeline: As digital integration grows, improved infrastructure cybersecurity is a must-have that will likely become widespread among utility organizations in the next five years.

9. Public Engagement and Communication
Through mobile apps and other platforms, communities receive real-time alerts during crises, strengthening the connection between utilities and the public via informed communication.

Timeline: Real-time communication is becoming standard and will likely be fully integrated by utilities within the next five to seven years as part of customer service enhancements.

10. Environmental Safety and Sustainability
Arkansas-based Montrose Environmental Group is a leader in this field, incorporating comprehensive environmental safety protocols into their operations with advanced monitoring systems that track pollutants and emissions in real time. The company’s use of innovative technologies, which also include IoT and data analytics, allows for precise identification and mitigation of environmental hazards before they escalate. Utility companies can look to Montrose’s practices when adopting sustainable technologies like renewable energy sources, waste reduction methods and advanced environmental monitoring tools.

Timeline: Comprehensive environmental safety tools are expected to become standard across most U.S. utility organizations in the next 10 years.

Conclusion
As I noted toward the beginning of this article, the 10 predictions presented above are based on my professional insights combined with current utility industry trends. Adoption of these technologies will vary among organizations and regions, but one thing is for sure: technology will become increasingly vital to utility safety and sustainability efforts in 2026 and beyond.

Now is the right time for industry leaders and policymakers to actively embrace these innovations. Investing in modern safety solutions today both prepares your organization for the future and demonstrates your commitment to protecting workers, local communities and the environment.

About the Author: Shawn M. Galloway is CEO of ProAct Safety (https://proactsafety.com) and an author of several bestselling books. An award-winning consultant, trusted adviser, expert witness, leadership coach and keynote speaker, he has helped hundreds of organizations within every primary industry improve safety systems, strategy, culture, leadership and engagement. Galloway also hosts the highly acclaimed weekly podcast series “Safety Culture Excellence.”

The previous articles in this series outlined the essential components of a strong safety management system (SMS). To achieve safety success, electric power organizations must ensure those components align with and support one another.

This article – the last in the series – addresses two final topics of importance: assessing an organization’s SMS performance and implementing a structured corrective action plan in response to identified performance gaps. We will use ANSI/ASSP Z10-2019, “Occupational Health and Safety Management Systems,” as a guide, focusing on performance measurements, incident analyses, audits and corrective actions.

Measuring Operational Safety Performance
To accurately measure SMS functionality and impact, organizations must take a comprehensive approach that goes beyond tracking incidents and OSHA rates. Understanding past issues can be helpful but is insufficient to assess a company’s overall safety effectiveness. As previously noted in this series, some organizations have accumulated thousands of man-hours without any OSHA recordables, yet they still exhibit poor, misaligned work practices in the field.

OSHA highlights the use of leading indicators to accurately measure safety performance; doing so helps the workforce identify and address potential risks. Organizations struggling to develop metrics for leading indicators can consult ANSI/ASSP Z16.1-2022, “Safety and Health Metrics and Performance Measures,” as well as Chapter 17 of ASSP GM-Z10.100-2024, “Guidance and Implementation Manual for ANSI/ASSP Z10-2019 Occupational Health and Safety Management Systems.”

Comprehensive metrics empower electric power organizations to gain deeper insight into their safety performance and identify areas for improvement. Leaders, armed with detailed understanding of this data, can make informed decisions that enhance workplace safety protocols. Additionally, fostering a culture that prioritizes continuous improvement encourages employees at all organizational levels to actively participate in safety initiatives.

Measuring Employee Safety Performance
Some companies have long relied on lagging indicators (e.g., vehicle accidents, personal injuries) to measure employee safety performance. However, using these indicators for performance evaluations and incentive programs can lead to serious problems, as ASSP GM-Z10.100-2024 points out.

In my consulting work, I have observed that employer incentive programs often reward employees for avoiding incidents and injuries. Some companies even tie bonus payments to an entire crew’s record of zero incidents. In rewarding employees this way, leaders risk creating an environment in which employees feel pressured to hide events that do occur. They may hesitate to report injuries, equipment failures or near misses – critical information to help prevent recurrences.

As part of ensuring a truly safe workplace, organizations must periodically reevaluate their incentive programs and performance evaluations, determining whether it is possible to adopt a more proactive approach to safety. It is also wise to promote active employee participation in safety initiatives rather than reward individuals for zero incidents. This requires working diligently to foster an environment in which open discussion of safety concerns is strongly encouraged, inviting employees to share their thoughts without fear.

Further, leaders should strongly consider using awards, public acknowledgments during meetings and even small incentives to recognize employees who report hazards. Organizations that establish comprehensive feedback systems enable employees to share their experiences and suggestions, promoting transparency and the quest for continuous improvement.

Incident Analyses
The primary objective of an incident analysis – a systematic process used to identify an event’s root causes – is to gain a thorough understanding of what happened and then identify and implement corrective measures to prevent a recurrence.

It’s important to remember that incidents often reveal underlying issues that require immediate, decisive action. While a proactive SMS aims to identify and mitigate risks before incidents occur, we must acknowledge that this is not always possible. Therefore, analyzing incidents is a crucial component of an effective SMS.

Both incidents and near misses provide valuable opportunities to identify and address SMS weaknesses. Near misses in particular should be viewed as valuable learning experiences, offering chances to address hazards before they escalate. Some companies mistakenly view incident analyses as opportunities to assign blame; however, their time should be spent

identifying causes and improving safety processes that support workers.

An organization’s response to an incident is revealing. Many companies have been stuck in a long process of analyzing a single incident. By the time they finish, employees often feel frustrated or have forgotten about the analysis. Leaders should act quickly and keep open communication with employees during the whole analysis process.

Audits
Audits play an important role in assessing how well an SMS works, with auditors reviewing safety processes to ensure they align with organizational goals and meet industry standards. Conducting a thorough audit enables leaders to identify opportunities for improvement, confirm regulatory compliance and foster a culture of continuous safety improvement.

When focused on the following items, an audit helps affirm and improve organizational safety performance:

• System performance verification: Audits confirm that SMS components – including hazard identification, risk assessments, training and incident investigations – are functioning as intended and achieving the desired outcomes.
• Conformance assessment: Do organizational activities align with the objectives, policies and procedures established under the SMS?
• Identification of gaps and opportunities: Well-done audits highlight deficiencies, nonconformance and areas for improvement – a solid foundation for corrective and preventive actions.
• Continuous improvement: Audit findings ideally feed into management review and corrective action processes, providing opportunities to fine-tune the SMS based on factual evidence.
• Objectivity: ANSI/ASSP Z10-2019 emphasizes that audits should be conducted by individuals who are completely uninvolved with the activities being examined.
• Documentation and follow-up: Audit results must be documented, communicated to management, and tracked until corrective actions are implemented and their effectiveness has been verified.

To establish proper oversight and accountability, organizations must create a strong auditing plan that includes both internal and external audits. It is critical to set clear deadlines for planning, conducting and reporting on these inspections. This organized approach promotes transparency and facilitates timely action based on audit results, typically improving organizational performance while building trust with stakeholders. Regularly scheduled audits that align with a company’s goals are key to identifying improvement areas and supporting sustainable growth.

Internal safety audits are a necessity to accurately assess the impact of an organization’s safety objectives, policies and procedures. Their findings can offer valuable insights for corrective actions and management reviews, aiding in performance enhancement and continuous improvement in workplace safety.

External audits, on the other hand, deliver objective findings from knowledgeable third parties. These auditors possess specialized, impartial knowledge, often identifying issues that company insiders cannot due to their familiarity with the organization’s everyday functions. Unbiased evaluations are imperative to align with industry best practices and regulatory requirements. Organizations can also use them as a guide to improve safety and efficiency.

In combination, internal and external audits create a strong framework for regular safety checks, providing a comprehensive approach to quality and compliance validation that helps organizations consistently meet high standards.

Corrective Actions
To effectively employ the corrective action process, a company must first create clear procedures to identify, document and resolve safety-related problems. This proactive approach includes several key steps.

Identification
When a safety issue is identified – whether through an audit, inspection, incident investigation or employee reporting – step one is determining its root cause followed by controlling or eliminating the hazard.

Prioritization
Ideally, organizations will prioritize corrective actions based on risk level, with critical safety issues at the top of the list. It is crucial to assess the impact of these measures; this could involve monitoring the situation, gathering employee feedback and making sure the original problem is resolved.

Documentation
To assist with ongoing learning, transparency and accountability, organizations will want to carefully document their audit findings, the actions they took and any relevant communications. Sharing lessons learned across teams promotes a culture of safety and continuous improvement.

Improvement
A structured corrective action process can resolve immediate safety problems, improving the overall SMS. By learning from past experiences and making informed changes, organizations are likelier to prevent recurrences of similar issues, enhancing safety for all employees.

Summary
A strong SMS depends on continuous evaluation and corrective action. Guided by ANSI/ASSP Z10-2019, organizations must monitor performance using leading and lagging indicators, investigate incidents to identify their causes, and verify compliance via regular audits. A well-structured corrective action process will include documenting safety issues, prioritizing them by risk and tracking progress to confirm their adequate resolution. Together, these practices aid electric power organizations as they build proactive safety cultures focused on prevention, accountability and continuous improvement.

About the Author: Pam Tompkins, CUSP, CSP, is president and CEO of SET Solutions LLC. She is a 40-year veteran of the electric utility industry, a founding member of the Utility Safety & Ops Leadership Network and past chair of the USOLN executive board. Tompkins worked in the utility industry for over 20 years and has provided electric power safety consulting for the last 25 years. An OSHA-authorized instructor, she has supported utilities, contractors and other organizations operating electric power systems in designing and maintaining safety improvement methods and strategies for organizational excellence.

Ferroresonance is a complicated issue, one that industry workers must be educated about. That’s because as the number of URD system installations grows and systems age, instances of ferroresonance increase – as do threats to worker and customer safety, equipment and service reliability.

I first became acquainted with ferroresonance in the 1980s while troubleshooting a pad-mounted, three-phase transformer at night. The pad fed a chemical plant, closed for the evening, in the middle of nowhere. The 480-volt, 2000-amp main was single-phasing, so plant electricians had dropped all the 480-volt sub-feeds except one: a single-phase, 240-volt sub-panel that fed the plant’s fire control systems plus some lighting that was barely functional (keep this information in mind – it will be important a little later).

The underground radial feed was long, and the A-phase pothead fuse had blown; my first thought was a bad cable. We pulled the radial-fed elbows at the transformer, opened the 2000-amp main and re-fused the pothead. It held – so why had the other fuse blown? Next, we checked the meter’s kilowatt demand, which was barely more than half the peak-load capacity of the 1500-kVA transformer. Then we smoke-tested the transformer, closing it in from the potheads, opening the potheads with a load-break tool, and finally closing in the elbows on the de-energized pad.

The 23-kV potheads were dead-ended on a 10-foot heavy-duty double arm. The fuse for A-phase was on the far side of the arm, on the other side of the neutral from where the bucket truck had been set up. I wasn’t going to side-sling the fuse barrel feeding a 1500-kVA pad, so I boomed over the neutral positioning for the A-phase fuse and closed it. As I was booming back over the neutral to close in B-phase and C-phase, I heard what sounded like a car crash coming from the vicinity of the pad, followed by a flash and something going to ground. The A-phase pothead fuse erupted behind me and the feeder relayed. Back at the pad, A-phase and B-phase elbows were blown off the bushings. The A-phase polymer arrester that was plugged into the feed-through bushings had split down the middle and was still smoking. Additionally, the current transformer cabinet wiring and polyphase Class 10 meter were on fire.

What Happened?
Given that the CEO of the chemical plant was on the utility company’s advisory board, some plant personnel were alerted when we blew up their transformer. Three crew members stayed at the plant to pull the bad transformer and ready a spare three-phase. An apprentice and I went to retrieve a new transformer. On our way to the yard, an engineer on-site at the plant radioed us, requesting that we bring back a 2000-kVA transformer. I asked if he thought the damaged transformer had been overloaded; he said no and told us he would explain more later.

His eventual explanation? You guessed it: ferroresonance.

As it turned out, during our troubleshooting, we had created perfect conditions for the loud noise and fire. No one had known that the capacitive reactance of the cable on A-phase and B-phase was nearly equal to – and in series with – the inductive reactance of the 1500-kVA transformer windings. In the evenings during the off-season, the plant reduced operation and electrical loads. With the matching series reactance of the cable and transformer impedance, the lightly loaded transformer would begin to react, creating low-level ferroresonance that overheated and prematurely aged the transformer until the pothead fuse blew. When we began troubleshooting and opened the main, conditions became ideal for runaway core excitation or ferroresonance. The fact that it had taken me a couple minutes to get from the A-phase fuse to the B- and C-phase fuses – combined with the open main and no secondary load – triggered everything needed to blow up that $60,000 installation.

You may still be wondering why the engineer requested that 2000-kVA transformer. The answer: in observing damage from the incident and speaking with the crew, he recognized the problem and opted for the new transformer to raise impedance. That way, the cable capacitance and transformer inductance would no longer be almost equal.

Need-to-Know Info
Ferroresonance is a rare condition most likely to occur with three-phase, pad-mounted, delta-connected transformers. Not nearly as often, ferroresonance has been documented in wye-wye transformers as well as in aerial three-pot banks served by long-dedicated aerial circuits.

When ferroresonance occurs in a transformer, high voltages three to five times the rated primary can appear on the primary and secondary and in the core. Oil heats to temperature extremes in minutes, blowing out of vents and bubbling paint on top of the transformer. Surge arresters – not designed to clamp sustained overvoltages – can be cooked to destruction and potentially fragment during failure. The rise in primary also increases the secondary voltage, sometimes blowing up meters like bombs. Other times, purely coincidental yet ideal conditions create low-level ferroresonance that can boil the life out of a transformer with barely a whimper. I know of one case in which a 1000-kVA transformer was replaced three times in five years. Finally, the utility realized a low-level resonant circuit – yes, without an open phase – was killing the transformer every night when the commercial building load dropped to about 6% of the transformer’s rating.

URD cables are capacitors; transformer coils are magnetic inductors. To create resonant circuits, there must be capacitive reactance and inductive reactance of almost equal value in series with each other, and the inductor must have very little to no load. The most likely situation is a three-phase transformer fed by a long underground circuit. In some of the most dramatic events, a pothead fuse was opened or blew, allowing a still-energized primary cable (capacitance) to be more or less in series with a coil (inductance). If a series-connected phase-to-coil connection is allowed to remain energized, and there is low loading on the transformer’s secondary or the customer’s mains are open, no impedance exists in the primary circuit. Current is free to flow, and runaway voltage rises in the laminated core – hence the “ferro-” component of ferroresonance.

In testing, loading the secondary above 20% has proven sufficient to prevent resonance. The first indication of the condition is typically a loud rattling noise – often described as shaking a coffee can full of marbles – emanating from a transformer due to magnetostriction in the laminated core (note that normally, magnetostriction causes the 60-Hz hum in transformers). The noise is wicked enough that almost no one who hears it stands around to see what is going to happen next.

The two other ferroresonance cases I have worked on both involved amorphous-core, three-phase, pad-mounted, wye-delta transformers. One was 1,700 feet of 1/0 to a 1000-kVA; the other was 2,000 feet of 1/0 primary to a 1500-kVA pad-mount. These are not formulas for determining the potential for ferroresonance but examples of the conditions present when it has occurred.

Preventive Efforts
So, what’s the best way to avoid suspected resonant circuits? Never open three-phase transformers one phase at a time from potheads or lateral taps. Some utilities are using an air-break or AB switch to isolate the coil before switching potheads.

Other methods include shortening the primary run to change capacitance or replacing transformers to ensure different inductive impedance values. Rural electric association specs add a fourth dropout to temporarily ground the high-side floating neutral when energizing or de-energizing three-pot banks. The goal is to split the series path between the primary feed and the transformer coils, removing the series reactance, which is a prime condition necessary to create the resonant circuit.

The last preventive effort is leaving some or all of the secondary load connected. This, of course, contradicts what we have always been told (i.e., “Don’t single-phase the customer”), but not to worry. You won’t kill the three-phase customer equipment in the time it takes to close three pothead switches – and you’ll almost certainly avoid blowing up a costly transformer.

About the Author: After 25 years as a transmission-distribution lineman and foreman, Jim Vaughn, CUSP, has devoted the last 28 years to safety and training. A noted author, trainer and lecturer, he is a senior consultant for the Institute for Safety in Powerline Construction. He can be reached at jim@ispconline.com.

Editor’s Note: This is an update to Jim Vaughn’s article “Ferroresonance Explained,” first published by Incident Prevention magazine in 2012.

In this installment of “Voice of Experience,” I am going to share a safety perspective that struck a real chord with me when someone offered it during a recent meeting. My goal in passing it along during this season of reflection is to prompt readers to contemplate and continue refining their safe work practices.

From the time we are born, we learn about the world in various ways, often in the form of instructions about what we should and should not do. Our parents forbid us from crossing the street without their assistance. We are warned to keep our hands away from hot stovetops. Even before learning to read, we begin to observe and understand visual cues – for instance, a child riding in a car seat might notice different types of lines on the roadways (e.g., a single dotted white line, two solid yellow lines). Such instructions and cues provide details about our surroundings to help us make safer, more informed choices.

As teenagers, many of us learn to operate a car and undergo testing to earn a driver’s license. It would make sense, then, for us to increasingly respect the rules of the road – including those white and yellow lines we noticed well before we were permitted behind the wheel – as we accrue more driving experience. After all, we must protect not only our personal safety but the well-being of our passengers, pedestrians and other motorists. Yet in 2023, U.S. Department of Transportation data tells us that more than 40,000 people were fatally injured on American roadways (see www.transportation.gov/NRSS/SafetyProblem).

Safety vs. Potential Peril
Let’s talk about a different type of line for a moment. Have you ever heard someone in politics or business warn others against crossing a proverbial line in the sand? That is highly likely; it is not an uncommon statement.

When the individual at the meeting I attended shared his safety perspective, what sprang to mind was the industry-specific line in the sand that we can almost always spot on any given jobsite. It is the line that divides a worker’s physical safety from their potential peril.

In terms of line work, where do you think that line in the sand should be, particularly for energized work? A student enrolled in an accredited lineworker development program must complete four to seven years of training to graduate; by the time they finish, they almost certainly know the line’s precise location. But all lineworker development programs are not created equal, nor do testing and proficiency demonstrations always adequately assess whether an employee has received the requisite training. These inconsistencies are significant contributors to incidents that continue to seriously injure and kill our brothers and sisters. Employees who had served the industry for less than three years at their time of death account for far too many of the cases I have investigated during my career.

As I noted earlier, the dividing line between worker safety and potential peril is visible at nearly every jobsite – but only if we are willing to look. On one side of the line, we are guided by regulatory standards and industry best practices; on the other, employees engage in hazardous and even illegal work practices. Here is my question to you: In recent months, how close to that line have you been standing? If you were to cross it, do you truly understand what could happen? Would you be prepared to handle the full weight of any adverse consequences? Because the fact is, workers cross the line every day. And each year, dozens of our brothers and sisters pay the price with their lives.

You may be wondering if there is a specific reason why so many employees cross the line into unsafe work practices. Investigations often determine that an incident stemmed from intentional choices made by an inadequately trained worker or crew who lacked sufficient management oversight. This is why it is paramount for every worker to be appropriately trained on each task they will be required to perform, including the prescribed way to complete it, the reasons it must be done in that specific order, and what happens if any steps are transposed or omitted.

Conclusion
Legally, morally and ethically, standing on the safety side of the line is the right thing to do. Let’s vow to step as far back from that line as possible rather than standing the closest we can without crossing over. We are human, so mistakes will be made; we must give ourselves room to fail safely instead of teetering on the edge of possible catastrophe.

As we head into 2026, I urge you to reflect on the past 12 months and evaluate your performance. Did you cross the line between safety and potential peril, or perhaps find yourself working right up against it? If so, what will you do differently tomorrow to increase your distance – and your margin of safety?

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!

Q: Can I ground through a wave trap?

A: General discussion about wave or line traps centers on their function. At operating frequency, they have extremely low impedance to any voltage at 60 Hz. Some would say that for the sake of convenience, it’s OK to ground at a switch even where there is a line trap on its load side. That is a bit too simplified. Historically, we isolated a transmission line and grounded it to protect the crew. Sometimes a trap would be situated between the ground point and the work location. Today, we don’t ground to protect workers; we bond to protect them and ground to isolate the source.

Most traps have both a surge suppressor and a capacitor parallel with the trap circuit. Does that affect sudden current rise on the grounded circuit? It might, but that depends on existing conditions and what caused the fault current. We create typical ground paths that are expected to be as resistance-free and reliable as possible to accomplish the task (i.e., tripping the circuit). Any circuit elements that might compromise ground path performance should be eliminated, which is accomplished by bonding across the wave trap to ensure a reliable, resistance-free ground path. However, if we examine what we are attempting to accomplish, doing so may not be that important.

Many current opinions are based on misapplied grounding policy, so let’s start there. The purpose of grounding in a substation is to trip the protective devices of an offending circuit. It is the arrangement of the grounding connections to create an equipotential environment that protects the worker. If our bonding arrangement on the field side of the wave trap is effective, the worker will be protected. The grounding of the circuit in the work area passing through the wave trap, just like any ground fault on the circuit, should not be much of an issue. The low impedance will pass the current necessary to cause a trip of the circuit protectors. We think most readers would agree that it is still a good idea to place sufficient grounds at the load side of the open switch in the substation.

Any personnel protected by a transmission ground is in an equipotential zone, meaning near the worker, with much less likelihood of a trap in the pathway. Remember, since the ground scheme requires short-circuiting phases one, two and three, that short-circuiting – as well as any ground – will do its part to trip the circuit while the bonding connection protects the worker.

Q: In an underground transformer, my understanding is that the neutral or concentric neutral should be treated as a potential source when it places a worker in the minimum approach distance. I have always struggled to address bonded neutrals when explaining this concept to lineworkers who have worked them uncovered for years. Can you help?

A: First, we must understand the nature of the overhead system neutral and minimum approach distance, which is not a simple task. MAD includes two modes of protection for the worker. Per OSHA 29 CFR 1910.269(l)(3)(iii)(B), the “employer shall ensure that no employee approaches or takes any conductive object closer to exposed energized parts than the employer’s established minimum approach distance, unless the energized part is insulated from the employee and any other conductive object at a different potential.” This rule has an important difference from insulating the worker, as described in 1910.269(l)(3)(iii)(A). Paragraph (l)(3)(iii)(B) is conditional, requiring the energized part to be insulated from any other potential, including ground. The rule appears to be constructed largely around worker exposure to higher voltages within the vicinity of a neutral while handling conductive objects, especially unfixed objects like jumpers or moving phases. It also applies where a worker’s exposure could be between an energized phase and path to ground, including poles, hardware and crossarms. To comply with (l)(3)(iii)(B), if you are within the MAD of a distribution phase, you must cover the neutral or maintain the primary MAD from it.

It makes sense, then, that per (l)(3)(iii)(A), if the worker is insulated from contact, the MAD for the exposure voltage applies to each level of exposure. Since the voltage of a grounded system neutral is near zero, the “avoid contact” rule from 1910.269’s Table R-6 applies, provided you are outside the MAD for any other exposure.

But we’re not done yet. The question now is, will you be in contact with the system neutral? If so, we must accommodate all conditions of exposure, including a fault condition. Additionally, depending on the grounding and bonding of the neutral, a voltage exposure could exist based on the principle of potential difference. Electrical insulation (i.e., either gloves or coverup) is required where a difference is present. These same exposure conditions apply to insulated URD.

OSHA defines “insulation” as insulating cover rated for the voltage involved. However, we know from experience that URD primary insulation is not universally trustworthy.

When the primary is insulated, properly bonded bare neutrals do not create primary exposure and thus are not treated with primary MADs. Neutrals are grounded and bonded to the enclosure so that the voltage is lower than secondary, meeting the requirements of “avoid contact.” However, the potential between a primary neutral and any ground potential could be lethal under fault conditions or if bonding is poor or nonexistent.

A visual inspection can provide relative confidence that the elbow is safe and insulation for the voltage MAD does not apply. We also know that as an industry rule, we don’t handle elbows with rubber gloves or contact them in any way except with rated sticks. While we have historically treated an uninsulated concentric neutral differently, it is no different than an overhead system neutral.

Covering the elbow with a blanket is one more step toward safety that can be performed with rubber gloves. While this approach is not required, it is permitted under the rules for insulated facilities. Neutrals in pad-mounts should always be handled with rubber gloves. Many employers allow Class 0 for URD neutrals; we suggest Class 2.

Q: Do you have any updates about infrastructure resilience planning? A group of us who work for a small cooperative recently attended a meeting with state officials who asked what’s being done to harden systems due to climate change pressures. We heard a few speakers say that state regulatory actions were forthcoming, particularly regarding storm response plans. I know OSHA requires emergency actions plans, but which agencies require storm response plans? Does FERC or NERC require them?

A: In 2016, the U.S. Department of Energy published a guide titled “Climate Change and the Electricity Sector.” The agency assembled a group of about a dozen utility stakeholders representing municipal employers, investor-owned utilities and cooperatives, with the goal of establishing an approach to future aspects of environmental change. Only a few utilities established a plan, finding it challenging to set goals in the face of a substantial amount of contradictory information.

While utilities may be keeping an ear to the ground regarding the environment, it appears they are still basing their infrastructure growth primarily on predictions, the economy and maintenance of their aging systems. Few utilities can say that there has been a trend of system disturbance related to unusual climate events that did not occur in previous decades, so the urgency seems to be lacking in some respects. Interconnecting grids and microgrids has helped establish reliability as structure technologies are hardened for various reasons, most of which are not related to climate change. Few industry professionals will agree that there is one primary reason for setting these goals.

Each U.S. state has its own version of a public service commission, which is required to carry out various duties. Some commissions, like the one in Texas, mandate emergency action plan filings. Many requirements are related to National Incident Management System coordination.

FERC/NERC Critical Infrastructure Protection (CIP) authorities focus on cyber and physical safety and reliability, particularly with large and bulk suppliers that require incident reports and action plans related to NERC goals. To achieve these goals, many utilities have various levels of CIPs depending on their interconnected transmission and generation infrastructures.

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. Questions submitted are reviewed and answered by the iP editorial advisory board and other subject matter experts.

“This little light of mine, I’m gonna let it shine, let it shine, let it shine, let it shine.”

Light. We literally cannot live without it.

In addition to sustaining life, light can be used in various other ways, including helping us to see clearly and sanitizing unsafe conditions. That sounds a lot like what safety is all about, which means that safety professionals need to be the light. With that in mind, let’s discuss how you can become a safety light – one that shines brightly.

Light is Revelatory
When you lose something in the dark and then turn on a light, what you couldn’t see before becomes obvious. Put another way, what was always there can easily be found in the light.

The same is true with human factors, such as rushing, risk tolerance, overconfidence, distractedness and complacency. People are subject to inaccurate risk perception and unsafe behaviors. They make errors. But these factors are difficult to identify without light.

In your role as a safety leader, you can serve as the light by incorporating human factors discussions into job briefings and huddles. You can also use human and organizational performance (HOP) tools to manage controls and reduce errors. Start with the self-checking tool, remembering the STAR acronym: stop and think before performing a task, take action, and then review performance by comparing desired versus actual outcomes.

Light Helps Us Focus
Sometimes we use overhead lighting to see more broadly. When narrower lighting is required, we might use a flashlight. You can act as an overhead light by kicking off pre-job briefings with general discussion about the day ahead and the work to be completed. Then switch to flashlight mode, using two-minute drills to sharply focus crew members on the task to be performed. Consider how a football TEAM (Together Everyone Accomplishes More) huddles before every play and use that as a model. Huddles are a fantastic opportunity to use the HOP self-checking tool.

Here’s another opportunity to shine your safety light: use football TEAMs watching game film as a model for post-job briefings. Briefings must be ongoing, not singular events.

Light Purifies – If We Don’t Bypass Safety Protocols
With good intentions, people navigating their way through airport security often pick up their empty bins and stack them at the end of the conveyor belt. That’s a problem at many airports. Why? Because there’s an ultraviolet light situated at the end of the conveyor that cleans the bins. Light purifies, turning hazardous conditions into safe ones.

We can draw two points from this. First, you must be the light for your own personal safety. Don’t wait for someone or something else to protect you. Shine your light by identifying and mitigating unsafe conditions; too often we wait for those conditions to correct themselves or be corrected by others. And second, as with the airport bins, never circumvent safety procedures or disable or remove safety devices.

Light Burns
At the start of every summer, I tell my wife, “This is the year I’m going to get a darker tan than you.” She laughs because she knows it won’t happen. I burn and peel because sunlight is a hazard that can cause harm if you don’t protect yourself from it.

Be the light by using the hierarchy of controls to protect yourself from hazards. In this case, I would first opt to stay out of the sun. If that’s not possible, I’ll need to curb my exposure by going outdoors early or late in the day; limiting the time I spend in direct sunlight; finding shade; slathering on sunscreen (reapplying when necessary); and wearing a hat, sunglasses and adequate clothing.

Light Ignites
Kindling catches fire when you use a magnifying glass to direct sunlight onto it. In the same way, you can use your light to ignite your passion for protecting people and encouraging their growth.

Don’t hide your brightness. Shine your safety light from a hilltop for all your TEAM to see, a constant reminder to them that light sustains life. We never want to leave anyone on our TEAM – or ourselves – alone in the dark.

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://ip-institute.com/frontline-online/). Frontline covers critical knowledge, skills and abilities for utility leaders and aligns with the Certified Utility Safety Professional exam blueprint.

Be the Light
January 14, 2026, at 11 a.m. Eastern
Visit https://ip-institute.com/frontline-webinars/ for more information.

As the grid transitions to green energy, battery energy storage systems (BESS) are popping up everywhere—from utility substations to residential neighborhoods. But what happens when lithium-ion technology fails? In this episode of The Voice of Experience, host Danny Raines and Fire Test Specialist Josh Dinaburg from the CSA Group dive deep into the reality of battery fire safety.

Josh brings nearly 20 years of lab experience to explain why the “let it burn” strategy is often the safest choice for first responders and the environment. We dispel common myths about toxic runoff, explore how AI is revolutionizing failure detection, and discuss the rigorous testing standards keeping our communities safe. If you work in utilities, safety operations, or fire protection, this is the essential guide to understanding the risks and remedies of modern energy storage.

Learn More: https://www.csagroup.org/

Contact Josh: josh.dinaburg@csagroup.org

Danny Raines, CUSP Book – Legendas of an Ole’ Lineman: Order Here

Key Takeaways

• The “Let It Burn” Strategy is Intentional: Contrary to public perception, the safest tactic for large-scale battery fires is often isolation rather than active suppression. Attempting to extinguish the fire can leave “stranded energy” in damaged cells, creating a “ticking time bomb” for secondary events, whereas letting it consume itself renders the waste safer for disposal.
• Manufacturing Quality is Improving Rapidly: While cell counts in storage facilities are increasing, the failure rate has dropped significantly—now estimated in the “one out of millions” range rather than hundreds.
• Environmental Impact is Manageable: Extensive testing indicates that water and air quality impacts from these fires are generally comparable to standard structure fires. Runoff has not been demonstrated to cause immediate “forever chemical” threats to groundwater, provided the site is managed correctly.
• AI is the Future of Prevention: The industry is moving toward advanced Battery Management Systems (BMS) that use AI to analyze temperature and voltage trends, allowing operators to identify and isolate failing cells months before a thermal runaway event occurs.
• Firefighter Safety is Paramount: The primary risk to first responders is not just the fire, but the potential for explosion and high-voltage hazards. The current standard emphasizes life safety and evacuation over asset protection.

Q&A: Addressing Common Concerns

1. What is the biggest myth about battery storage fires?

Answer: The biggest myth is that if fire departments aren’t spraying water, they don’t know what they are doing. In reality, standing back and monitoring is a calculated containment strategy. Active firefighting can waste water and endanger responders without effectively stopping the thermal runaway, so isolation is often the professional standard.

2. Does a battery fire pose a unique toxic threat to the local community?

Answer: While lithium-ion electrolytes contain fluorinated compounds, the combustion products are remarkably similar to a typical house fire involving polyurethane furniture or cleaning chemicals under a sink. The smoke should be avoided like any other fire, but it does not generally require unique HazMat protocols beyond standard breathing protection and evacuation.

3. Can technology stop a fire once it starts?

Answer: Once thermal runaway begins in a specific cell, the chemical and electrical energy makes it nearly impossible to stop that specific event. However, engineering controls—such as insulation barriers and novel injection systems—are designed to prevent that single-cell failure from propagating to the rest of the battery bank, turning a potential catastrophe into a minor, contained incident.

#BatteryStorage #FireSafety #RenewableEnergy #UtilitySafety #LithiumIon #CSAGroup

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

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

Read the article – https://incident-prevention.com/blog/safety-by-design-human-and-organizational-performance/

In this installment of the Safety by Design podcast series, host Nick sits down with Pam Tompkins, President and CEO of SET Solutions, to explore the transformative philosophy of Human and Organizational Performance (HOP). Based on her latest article in Incident Prevention magazine, Pam breaks down why traditional, compliance-based safety programs often fall short in high-risk utility environments.

Listeners will discover how shifting from a “blame culture” to a “learning culture” can drastically improve safety outcomes. Pam details the five core principles of HOP, offering actionable advice on how to identify predictable “error traps,” why context matters in human decision-making, and how leadership’s response to failure defines an organization’s future. Whether you are a frontline leader or a safety executive, this episode provides the blueprint for building a resilient system that protects employees even when mistakes happen.

Keywords: Safety by Design, Human and Organizational Performance, HOP Principles, Utility Safety, Safety Culture, Pam Tompkins, Incident Prevention, Error Traps, Operational Learning.

Key Takeaways

• The “Blame” Trap vs. System Design: Traditional safety often assumes employees should be perfect 100% of the time. HOP accepts that people will make mistakes and focuses on fixing the systems (procedures, equipment, pressures) that support them, rather than trying to “fix” the people.
• The 5 Principles of HOP: The episode outlines five foundational principles:
  1. People will make mistakes.
  2. Error-likely situations are predictable.
  3. All human actions are influenced by context.
  4. Operational upsets can be avoided.
  5. How we respond to failure matters.
• Identifying Error Traps: Many incidents are preceded by “error traps”—predictable conditions like fatigue (working 16+ hours), unfamiliar tasks (e.g., a mobile sub not used in a year), or unclear switching orders. Identifying these early prevents errors from becoming accidents.
• The Critical Role of Leadership Response: A leader’s reaction to a failure determines if an organization learns or hides. Asking “Who messed up?” creates fear, while asking “What conditions led to this?” builds trust and encourages the reporting of near-misses.
• Learning From Daily Work: You don’t have to wait for a major accident to learn. Simple habits, like a two-minute “after-action review” at the tailgate or informal learning teams, can uncover operational gaps before they cause harm.

Questions & Answers

Q1: What is the biggest misconception about adopting Human and Organizational Performance (HOP) in the workplace? A: The biggest misconception is that HOP ignores accountability. In reality, HOP shifts accountability from “who is to blame” to “how do we fix the system.” It acknowledges that while individuals are responsible for their actions, they often work within flawed systems that set them up for failure. As Pam Tompkins explains, you cannot fix a human being, but you can fix the pressures, tools, and procedures that influence their decisions.

Q2: What are some practical examples of “error traps” that utility crews face? A: “Error traps” are specific conditions that increase the probability of a mistake. Common examples discussed in the podcast include:

• Fatigue: Crews working long shifts during storm restoration.
• Infrequent Tasks: Performing a job or using equipment (like a mobile substation) that hasn’t been touched in months.
• Poor Documentation: Switching orders that bundle multiple critical tasks into a single step without checks and balances.
• Production Pressure: Implicit or explicit messages from management prioritizing speed over safety protocols.

Q3: How can a team start implementing HOP principles tomorrow without a massive administrative overhaul? A: Implementation can start with a simple question. Pam suggests that frontline leaders ask their crews daily: “What part of your job is most likely to hurt someone today, and what gets in the way of doing it safely?” Additionally, shifting the post-incident conversation from discipline to curiosity—asking “Walk me through what happened” instead of “Why didn’t you follow the rule?”—immediately begins to build the trust necessary for a HOP culture.

#SafetyByDesign #UtilitySafety #SafetyManagementSystem #ProactiveSafety #LeadingIndicators #WorkplaceSafety #SafetyCulture

OSHA Power Electric Standards Course –  https://ip-institute.com/osha-electric-power-standards/

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

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

Telesteps has introduced the world’s first and only DuPont Kevlar telescoping ladders, available in both a Type 1A extension and a Type 1AA A-frame stepladder. Unlike aluminum ladders, these models are fully nonconductive, significantly reducing electrocution risk for lineworkers and electricians working near energized lines. Compared to fiberglass, Kevlar is lighter, stronger, and far more resistant to cracking and UV degradation, extending service life while reducing replacement costs.

Widely trusted in applications ranging from ballistic protection to aerospace, Kevlar brings the same proven strength-to-weight advantage to utility safety. These ladders collapse for compact transport, deploy in seconds and are OSHA compliant, tested to ANSI A14.5 and EN131 standards. For safety managers and fleet supervisors, Kevlar telescoping ladders offer a next-generation alternative to aluminum and fiberglass, combining uncompromising crew protection with durability and portability in the field. https://telestepsladders.com

Gritty Tools designs and builds rugged, American-made tools for the electric utility industry. Built by utility professionals for utility professionals, our products are engineered to make substation and line work safer, faster and more efficient.

From our GT-1500 distribution wire puller to our battery and control equipment lifters to our fully air-operated 5,000-pound wire puller, every Gritty Tools innovation is purpose-built for the demanding conditions faced by field crews. All products are field-tested by experienced lineworkers and substation technicians to ensure durability, reliability and compliance with the highest safety standards. Whether it’s safely moving heavy control equipment in a confined substation or pulling conductor with precision and control, Gritty Tools delivers dependable performance that helps crews get the job done right. www.grittytools.com

STUDSON, an above-the-neck safety innovator, recently announced general availability of the HighBar-Equipped STUDSON SHK-1 Type II safety helmet, featuring the revolutionary buckle-free HighBar safety system with a single, stowable chinstrap.

After introducing the concept version last year, the HighBar-Equipped STUDSON SHK-1 helmet is now shipping to workers in construction, oil and gas, manufacturing, utilities and industrial maintenance industries. The system is a first for the industrial safety market, providing a more adjustable, breathable, hygienic fit compared to legacy designs.

The HighBar system utilizes hygienic, polymer material strap arms that allow for a precise fit for increased comfort and convenience. The arms can be easily rotated up for storage and quickly rotated back down below the chin when the helmet is in use. Different from traditional four-point, Y-shaped nylon harnesses, the simple one-strap system can be intuitively adjusted using a twist dial on the bottom of the strap, enabling workers to tighten or loosen it with one hand, even while wearing heavy gloves.

Like the company’s other helmet models, the High-Bar equipped STUDSON SHK-1 helmets use Koroyd welded polymer tubes designed to absorb shock upon impact more efficiently than traditional EPS foam. The material also enhances heat dissipation and improves ventilation due to its open cellular structure. Additionally, the helmets feature embedded Twiceme Technology, giving users the option to upload critical health data for ease of access by first responders in an emergency. https://studson.com

Milwaukee Tool’s M18 FUEL Covered Conductor Cable Stripper with Adjustable Bushings is the industry’s first cordless tool optimized for end-stripping insulation on aerial, 600-volt secondary and medium-voltage cables, offering an unmatched cable-stripping experience.

Designed for ultimate versatility, the six adjustable bushings accommodate cable diameters from 0.5 to 2.1 inches, eliminating the need for excess accessories while ensuring a clean, precise strip every time. Powered by M18 FUEL, this cordless stripper removes covered conductors at 1 inch per second, up to four times faster than manual tools, boosting efficiency and productivity. With no exposed blades, this solution significantly reduces the risk of cuts and lacerations, providing a safer way to strip the covered conductor. AUTOSTOP kickback control prevents over-rotation in a bind-up, while user-controlled speed and optimized max RPMs provide precise control during operation. Equipped with an adjustable 6-inch depth gauge for precise strip lengths, the tool eliminates over- and under-stripping and can be removed for extended-length applications as needed. Delivering optimized ergonomics, the tool’s pistol-grip design ensures easy maneuverability in tight spaces. The POWERSTATE Brushless Motor delivers more power to handle tough materials in any environment; REDLINK PLUS Intelligence ensures peak performance while protecting against overload; and ONE-KEY delivers easy tracking and tool management. www.milwaukeetool.com/products/2937-21

CM Labs, the leading vendor for simulation-based training solutions in the utilities industry, recently debuted the Intellia Horizontal Directional Drilling (HDD) Simulator Training Pack. It joins a growing catalog of utilities-focused solutions, including the industry’s only mini excavator and digger derrick simulators. The HDD training simulator equips operators with skills needed for the complete underground workflow, from excavation and backfill to trenchless installation.

Presenting a cost-effective, scalable alternative to live equipment and OEM simulators, the HDD training pack combines realistic machine behavior with a complete training management system. Trainees develop essential skills in a risk-free environment, leveraging features like bore path planning, fault and hazard simulation, and a structured HDD curriculum that builds competence and confidence before operators step onto a real jobsite.

Fully integrated with CM Labs’ Intellia Instructor and Intellia Drone View tools, the simulator enables real-time monitoring and performance tracking even below ground, allowing instructors to deliver targeted feedback and track trainee progress with precision. www.cm-labs.com/en/simulators/horizontal-directional-drill-simulator-training-pack

If you spend enough time in the safety world, you’ll notice something about the word “accountability”: everyone uses it and claims to value it. If you listen closely to safety-related conversations, you’ll also discover that accountability means different things to different people.

For some, it’s a co-worker getting written up (i.e., identifying “who did it” and making sure there are consequences). The word essentially becomes a euphemism for “blame.” But while pointing fingers might feel satisfying in the moment, rarely does it lead to meaningful, positive change.

Playing the blame game is short-sighted and potentially dangerous. True accountability, on the other hand – the kind that builds stronger crews and safer jobs – means taking ownership of incidents and the search for solutions. It’s not about punishment; it’s about seeing a problem through to its resolution and being part of what prevents its recurrence.

A perfect example of the industry blame game has been playing out on social media. In a dramatic dashcam video, an employee works from a bucket truck parked just off the shoulder at an intersection. The bucket is positioned over the right lane, beneath a traffic signal. As a semitruck turns through the intersection, you see its trailer swing wide and slam into the bucket, causing the bucket to flip. The employee is ejected but saved by his harness.

Not unexpectedly, online reactions to the video have been intense. Comments point fingers in every direction: “Where was the traffic control?” “Why was the bucket positioned like that?” “That driver wasn’t paying attention.” “Somebody should be fired.”

The truth is that none of us knows all the details involved with that job – not the constraints the crew was working under, the pressures they faced nor the decisions that led to their roadside setup. What we do know is that when a situation goes awry, people can rush to place blame, an instinct that inhibits the continuous development of a healthy safety culture.

Breaking the Habit
To break the habit, we must change our definition of accountability. The book “Extreme Ownership: How U.S. Navy SEALs Lead and Win” by Jocko Willink and Leif Babin is one resource that has shaped my thinking in this area. Its premise is simple but powerful: a true leader owns everything in their world. They take full responsibility for good and bad outcomes, stepping up and saying, “I may not be able to control everything, but I will take ownership of how I lead and respond.”

Any worker who is part of an organizational system can use this approach. That’s ideal because incidents rarely have one cause, meaning that real accountability can only exist where responsibility is integrated across an entire organization, from frontline workers and supervisors to planners and leadership. Too often, we try to assign each failure a singular cause (e.g., “That was human error,” “That was a system flaw,” “That was a leadership miss”), but failure almost always stems from a combination of factors, all of which must be addressed for a solution to stick.

Pivoting From Fear to Solutions
If used as a disciplinary tool, accountability typically creates fear in others. We begin to identify and develop solutions, however, when accountability is treated as a commitment to ownership and learning. Outputs include workers who speak up, teams who care, leaders who listen and safety cultures that continuously improve.

Instead of outrage, the viral video I described above should prompt each of us to honestly assess ourselves and ask, which conversations do I continue to avoid? What shortcuts have become normalized on company worksites? Do I tolerate certain risks because I’ve become complacent?

True accountability forces us to ask – and answer – better questions. On the day that viral video was recorded, for instance, what jobsite pressures existed? Who had the authority to pause work? Did everyone with authority feel safe to exercise it? Was the incident an anomaly or a symptom of something deeper? What will we do differently next time to avoid a recurrence?

To create accountability that goes beyond paperwork and penalties, we must lead differently. Stay involved after incident reports are filed and invite the people closest to the work to help identify and implement solutions. Model what it looks and sounds like to say – implicitly and explicitly – “This happened on my watch, and I’m not walking away from it.”

That’s the kind of safety accountability our industry needs more of. Not blame. Not silence. Ownership.

About the Author: Jamie Conn, CLCP, is a safety professional with over 20 years of experience working as a lineman for electric cooperatives. He earned a theology degree and is passionate about people, purpose and driving cultural change rooted in real-world experience.

Recorded live from the IP Utility Safety Conference in Glendale, Arizona , this free-flowing conversation features Kate Wade of IP magazine , Billy Martin of Think Tank Project, LLC , and Brant Jeffries of Bierer Meters. The group discusses how conferences and networking change our perspectives , using analogies like Billy’s “fire corn” and Heraclitus’s river. They dive deep into the dangers of “reactiveness” , citing examples from Arizona’s freeway development to local city council decisions. The conversation emphasizes the need to move to “upstream thinking” and use the “space between stimulus and response” to build trust and make more rational, safer decisions.

Key Takeaways

Learning requires discomfort. True growth at conferences comes not from seeking confirmation , but from being stretched and a “little bit uncomfortable”.

Shift your perspective. The group uses the analogy, “You’re not stuck in traffic; you are the traffic” , to illustrate how we are the ones who apply negative emotion (the “suck”) to a situation , which blocks our ability to learn from it.

Beware the “reactive” trap. Humans are programmed to be reactive. The speakers note that we often react to problems—like traffic or accidents—long after they began , rather than using “upstream thinking” to find the root decisions that caused them.

Use the space between stimulus and response. Citing Viktor Frankl , the group stresses the importance of taking time before responding. This space allows our “thinking selves” to override an immediate reaction , de-escalate conflict , and choose a rational response.

Modern media may be programming us for reactivity. The group discusses how modern movies and video games, with their “flash, flash, flash” editing , are rewiring our brains for shorter attention spans and making us more reactive.

iPi Forum – https://ip-institute.com/ipi-forum/

You can read the current magazine at Incident Prevention Magazine.

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

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

In this incredibly moving and vital episode of Incident Prevention’s Utility Safety Podcast, host Kate Wade is joined by Rob Duplain, a project superintendent, and Bill Martin, President of Think Tank LLC. The conversation centers on the critical issue of suicide, particularly within the utility and construction industries, sparked by a powerful LinkedIn post Rob wrote in honor of National Suicide Awareness Month. Rob shares his profound personal story of losing both his best friend and his mother to suicide, opening the door to a candid discussion on navigating grief and leveraging trauma to help others.

Together, they explore practical ways to foster genuine human connection and psychological safety in the workplace. The discussion covers simple but powerful actions like a “buddy check”, the importance of authentic leadership, and how to create an environment where it’s safe for employees to be vulnerable and support one another. This episode is more than a conversation; it’s a model for how to talk about uncomfortable but necessary topics to build stronger, safer, and healthier teams.

Key Takeaways

• The Power of the “Buddy Check”: A simple, consistent text message like “buddy check” can be a powerful tool to let a coworker know you are thinking of them beyond the scope of work. It helps build a foundation of genuine care that makes it easier to notice when someone is struggling.
• Authentic Leadership Builds Trust: True leadership isn’t just about being in charge; it’s about showing up for your people, especially when mistakes happen. By meeting people where they are and creating a safe space to be vulnerable, leaders can build the trust necessary for open communication.
• Proactive Connection Over Reactive Rituals: The industry often shows solidarity after a tragedy, such as with bucket trucks at a funeral, but fails to see the weak signals beforehand. The focus must shift to building foundational, day-to-day relationships to prevent tragedies before they happen, as there’s “no party for the thing that doesn’t happen”.

Proactive Connection Over Reactive Rituals: The industry often shows solidarity after a tragedy, such as with bucket trucks at a funeral, but fails to see the weak signals beforehand. The focus must shift to building foundational, day-to-day relationships to prevent tragedies before they happen, as there’s “no party for the thing that doesn’t happen”.

Question 1: What is a simple, actionable step someone can take to support a colleague’s mental well-being?

• Answer: Rob Duplain suggests sending a quick, simple text that just says “buddy check”. This small, consistent action lets the person know you are thinking of them and opens the door for deeper connection beyond just project updates.

Question 2: Why do traditional classroom-style trainings often fail to engage workers in the utility industry?

• Answer: Bill Martin explains that many field workers are kinesthetic learners who “have to move to think”. When forced to sit in rows, they often disengage, slouch, and cross their arms, whereas on a job site, they naturally gather in circles to communicate and collaborate.

Question 3: What does it mean to be “above the line” vs. “below the line” when handling a problem at work?

• Answer: Drawing from the work of Brené Brown, Bill Martin explains that being “below the line” means reacting to a problem by becoming a villain, victim, or hero. To be “above the line,” one must act as a creator, challenger, or coach, focusing on learning from the outcome and moving forward constructively.

iPi Forum – https://ip-institute.com/ipi-forum/

You can read the current magazine at Incident Prevention Magazine.

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

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

#MentalHealthInConstruction #SuicidePrevention #UtilitySafety #WorkplaceWellness #AuthenticLeadership #BuddyCheck

In this powerful episode of Incident Prevention’s Utility Safety Podcast, host Kate Wade sits down with Tom Murphy, the founder and CEO of Sweethearts and Heroes. Tom shares the deeply personal journey that led him from the railroad industry and professional mixed martial arts to creating a vital organization focused on “upstream prevention” for mental health. He sheds light on the alarming suicide crisis within the utility sector, where linemen are taking their own lives at a rate of 67.8 per 100,000—more than five times the rate of workplace fatalities. Tom explains the intentional meaning behind his organization’s name, the science of building community, and how their unique “Fifth Wire” program uses an ancient practice called “circle” to forge life-saving connections among workers. Tune in to learn how we can combat hopelessness and prevent “voltage drop” in our own lives and organizations.

Key Takeaways

• Upstream Prevention is Key: The world often focuses on intervention after a crisis has already occurred, but the real work lies in “upstream prevention”—giving people the tools and community support they need before they reach a breaking point.
• The Alarming Suicide Rate Among Linemen: The suicide rate for electrical linemen is a staggering 67.8 per 100,000, significantly higher than the general population (12-14 per 100,000) and even the Marine Corps (34.9 per 100,000).
• The Meaning of “Sweethearts and Heroes”: The name is intentional. In the 16th century, the word “bully” originally meant “sweetheart“—an endearing term for someone who pushes you to be better and gives you hope. “Heroes” are those who choose to jump into action to help others.
• The Power of Circle: Beyond high-impact presentations, the core of the programming is “circle,” a 400,000-year-old practice where individuals sit together to commune and build deep, neurological connections. This helps create healthy, adaptive social norms within a peer group.
• Preventing “Voltage Drop”: Tom uses the electrical concept of “voltage drop” as a metaphor for losing the momentum gained from an inspiring event due to life’s resistance. Sweethearts and Heroes implements follow-up systems, like circle, to keep the “voltage” high and ensure the message sticks.

Questions and Answers

Q1: What is the “Fifth Wire” program? A1: “The Fifth Wire” is the name of the program Sweethearts and Heroes developed specifically for the electrical industry. It builds on the organization’s core principles of upstream prevention and creating strong peer networks to combat the high suicide rate among linemen and other utility workers.

Q2: Why does Tom Murphy say suicide is a male issue? A2: While suicide is a human issue, Tom points out that men are statistically more affected. Young men are five times more likely to die by suicide than young women. He theorizes this is partly because men are evolutionarily driven to seek agency (power and resources), whereas women are more driven to seek communion (social bonds). Modern society has often removed the traditional outlets for men to build agency, contributing to a sense of purposelessness and hopelessness.

Q3: How does Sweethearts and Heroes ensure their message has a lasting impact after they leave? A3: They are only interested in working with organizations that want to fix the system, not just host a one-time awareness speech. To prevent “voltage drop,” they implement spaced, repetitive practices like circle sessions over several months. They also offer a “train the trainer” model, including master classes, to teach people within the organization how to facilitate circles themselves and maintain momentum long-term.

Vist https://www.sweetheartsandheroes.com/

#UtilitySafety #MentalHealth #LinemanLife #SuicidePrevention #SweetheartsAndHeroes #UpstreamPrevention

iPi Forum – https://ip-institute.com/ipi-forum/

You can read the current magazine at Incident Prevention Magazine.

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

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

The MADI 12″ Adjustable Lineman Big Wrench is engineered to give linemen unmatched speed, strength and versatility on the job. Designed for transmission and distribution work, this wrench features a jaw with up to 25% more width and depth, handling a transmission nut up to 1.5 inches with ease. It offers up to 50% faster opening and closing because of the 20% larger adjustment screw, making it the most glove-friendly adjustable wrench on the market. The integrated 12-point sockets (3/4 inch and 9/16 inch) add convenience and eliminate the need to switch tools for common hex sizes. Precision jaw grips deliver maximum nut-gripping torque, while the I-beam handle design provides superior strength and comfort. The black phosphate handle ensures a secure, slip-resistant grip, and laser-etched markings make measurements quick and accurate. Weighing just 2.1 pounds and measuring 12 inches long, the Adjustable Lineman Big Wrench packs powerful performance into a compact, lineman-focused design built for the toughest conditions. www.madilinemantools.com

The Greenlee Remote Pruner is a utility line clearance and vegetation management tool that allows utility workers and tree care professionals to trim branches from a distance, reducing their risk of contact with live electrical wires. As the first remote pruner to deliver greater precision than traditional chainsaws, it features an 18-volt battery-powered heavy-duty lopper that delivers clean, better controlled cuts with ease on wood limbs up to 2 inches in diameter. Designed for both ground use and hot-stick compatibility, the Remote Pruner is ideal for use in energized environments, helping to reduce risk and response time for troublemen and arborists. When paired with a universal hot stick, it extends reach up to 30 feet, minimizing exposure to live wires during high-risk tasks. The Remote Pruner is equipped with a knurled blade for secure grip, automatic retraction and a fixed blade to reduce jams – delivering clean, accurate cuts (up to 80 per charge). Its automatic post-cut blade retraction eliminates the need for manual reset, generating faster cycle times to save time with every cut. Prioritizing efficiency, reliability and accessibility, this tool is specifically designed to support quick field operations and solo troubleshooting tasks. www.greenlee.com

Safeguard, the global leader in connected safety solutions for workers exposed to electrical hazards, has launched Compass Core, the newest device in its expanding portfolio. With Compass Core, Safeguard continues to set the standard for protecting frontline workers, delivering simplicity without compromise and the ability to scale safety as needs grow.

Compass Core was born directly from customer feedback. Crews asked for a safety device that was fast to deploy, effortless to operate and built for rapid restoration work. Compass Core gives workers immediate, reliable protection from electrical hazards in a streamlined format while maintaining the strength of Safeguard’s connected safety ecosystem.

What sets Compass Core apart is its streamlined operation, making protection effortless from day one and providing a clear path to unlock additional detection and protection capabilities as customers’ needs grow. www.safeguardequipment.com

Temporary grounding sets are vital for protecting lineworkers during maintenance on de-energized systems. However, lifting and positioning these heavy sets has traditionally required significant physical effort, often leading to fatigue or injury.

The Barry D.E.W. Line TPG Lift Assist Kit offers a new approach. Using the same dielectric rope technology found in the Barry D.E.W. Line products, the kit replaces much of the physical strain of manual lifting with a simple pulley-assisted system. Equipped with a rope grab, snap hook, anchor slings and carabiners rated for a 300-pound working load limit, it allows workers to safely raise and secure grounding sets from the ground, reducing overhead strain.

By lightening the physical demands of grounding installation, this tool helps open the task to a wider range of workers and supports longer, safer careers in the field. It also maintains compliance with standard safety practices and works with a variety of grounding set types.

The TPG Lift Assist Kit represents a practical improvement to a long-standing procedure, helping utilities increase safety, reduce fatigue, and make essential work more accessible and efficient. www.barry.ca

LineWise has introduced an Anchor Tester designed to verify the proper installation of anchors in utility applications. Available for purchase or rental, this versatile, heavy-duty unit helps companies check compliance while ensuring safety and long-term infrastructure reliability. Proactively testing anchors with the new product also reduces costs by preventing the risk of poles or towers falling in the future.

The highly adjustable Anchor Tester features a test range from 10,000 to 45,000 pounds. Unlike other solutions that require dedicating larger construction equipment, its versatile design features a skid-steer-style quick-attach mounting system, maximizing operational flexibility and efficiency on the jobsite. It also includes integrated tie-down and lift points for simple transport and mobility. https://line-wise.com

In the demanding and often hazardous world of utility work, trust is not just a virtue – it’s a necessity. Crews rely on one another for productivity and survival.

Yet peer pressure is one of the most underestimated threats to both trust and a strong safety culture. When it creeps into safety decisions, peer pressure does more than compromise individual judgment. It undermines the very foundation of a crew’s collective responsibility.

This Tailgate Topic explores three critical topics: (1) how peer pressure affects trust; (2) the reasons it has no place in a healthy safety culture; and (3) why the values of being your brother’s keeper and a steward of safety must always triumph.

Peer Pressure Erodes Trust
In its simplest form, peer pressure is the influence exerted by members of a group to encourage conformity within that group. This influence can seem subtle in a high-risk trade like line work – maybe there’s a joke about wearing extra PPE, a look of impatience when someone double-checks grounding or a silent expectation to hurry up – but its consequences are anything but subtle.

When workers feel pressured to overlook hazards, bypass procedures or ignore their gut instincts, they begin to distrust their own judgment and the intentions of their crew, diminishing their self-confidence and their confidence in their team.

Erosion of trust typically creates a ripple effect. For example, an apprentice who once asked questions now stays silent. The journeyman who used to provide mentoring now shrugs and follows. A foreman who was once a safety advocate begins to prioritize production. Over time, crews become fractured, operating with an unspoken rule: Don’t rock the boat.

And in high-voltage environments, that unspoken rule can be fatal.

Replace Peer Pressure With Peer Empowerment
A great safety culture is built on psychological safety, or the ability to speak up, raise concerns and stop work without fear of ridicule, punishment or exclusion. Peer pressure is the antithesis of psychological safety’s core principles.

When this pressure exists, near-miss reporting declines, risk tolerance increases, accountability becomes selective, and the truth gets filtered – compromising safety, compliance, training and crew morale. No number of policies or safety meetings can compensate for a culture in which people are afraid to voice their concerns. And this is not just about “bad apples”; even well-meaning workers can succumb to peer pressure if the group signals that compliance is secondary to “getting ’er done.”

In great safety cultures, peer pressure has been replaced by peer empowerment, a shared understanding that safety is not just the foreman or safety director’s job – it’s everyone’s job, and everyone has the right and responsibility to speak up.

Beyond Symbolism
In the electric utility industry, the idea of being your brother’s keeper is more than symbolic; it’s operational. Being your brother’s keeper means having the moral courage to look after the person beside you even when it’s uncomfortable or unpopular. For instance, it means saying:

• “You forgot your sleeves.”
• “Let’s double-check that grounding.”
• “We’re stopping here until it’s safe to proceed.”

This kind of leadership doesn’t require a title, but it does require conviction. A true safety steward does not wait until a serious incident occurs to speak up. They don’t employ silence as a strategy or allow camaraderie to evolve into complacency. Real brotherhood protects the people and the process, helping to ensure that everyone goes home after work, every time. Demonstrating a high level of commitment to one another and genuinely caring for each crew member build trust and influence that fortify the safety culture.

Organizations that embody these principles elevate their safety standard from compliance to culture. They move from having safety rules to having safety values. They empower their people to intervene, support and lead even when no one’s watching.

Courage Over Comfort
Giving in to peer pressure may offer temporary comfort, allowing you to avoid confrontation, blend in or save time. But courage to speak up and ask questions is what helps to sustain lives and legacies.

Trust is built as crew members consistently demonstrate they have each other’s backs. It is shattered the moment someone is pressured to compromise what they know is right.

In the end, every worker must choose: Will I go along, or will I stand up?

Stop-work authority isn’t just for a privileged few. Five, six or 10 extra steps will always be better than one serious injury or fatality.

Let’s choose to stand up for safety, each other and the next generation of lineworkers who will become part of the culture we choose to create today.

About the Author: Daniel Cooper, CSP, CUSP, serves as an area and off-site coordinator for American Line Builders Apprenticeship & Training (https://albat.org). He was named the 2024 IBEW Instructor of the Year and has 20 years of combined operations and safety experience in the electric transmission and distribution industry.

• 

  image000000 2

• 

  image000000

• 

  image000001 2

• 

  image000001

• 

  image000002

• 

  image000000

• 

  image000001

• 

  image000002

• 

  image000001 2

• 

  image000002 2

• 

  image000003

Hastings Fiber Glass Products has expanded its extensive portfolio of hot-line tools and equipment with the addition of round and square jib adapter sets. Each option includes an industry-leading sheave and durable conductor holder.

To accommodate various mounting needs, the round jib adapter features an internal diameter of 3.125 inches, while the square adapter includes a 4.1-x-4.1-inch internal diameter.

Serving as the attachment point that connects to a bucket truck’s jib arm, the round or square jib provides secure mounting for the sheave and conductor holder.

The sheave functions as a heavy-duty pulley, allowing users to run rope through the sheave to lift, position or tension conductors and equipment. With capacity for a 3/4-inch-diameter rope and a 1,000-pound working load limit, the sheave can safely handle significant weight, giving crews reliable lifting capacity.

Capable of securing and holding wires in place while work is being performed, the conductor holder can support up to 500 pounds and hold conductors up to 2 inches in diameter. In case of emergency, the quick-release trigger with an oversized loop means a lineworker can rapidly disengage the conductor using a disconnect. www.hfgp.com

Andax Industries has introduced the Tarptainer, a safety containment system for large electric utility transformers and other equipment that allows for minimal ground clearance and enables crews to maintain a safe distance from suspended loads.

The Tarptainer can be placed under transformers or equipment with as little as 1 inch of ground clearance. The sides remain flat during positioning, eliminating the need for crew members to hold them upright while heavy equipment is suspended. Once the equipment is in place, the sidewalls fold up and are secured with locking corners. The Tarptainer’s self-supporting sidewalls help prevent slips, trips and falls without the need for protruding support legs.

Available in three sizes, with the largest featuring a 96-inch-x-96-inch absorbent area, there is ample space for accurate transformer placement. The included webbing straps with buckles can be placed over the transformer so that the equipment can be lifted and moved with the containment system in place. Custom sizes are available to meet specific application requirements. www.andax.com

Nite Owl Software develops and manages software for energy facilities. Specifically designed to reduce plant risk and improve staff productivity, the system is intended for plant environments in which hazardous conditions exist and safety is paramount. The software is operational in various facilities (e.g., electric, gas, wind, hydro, biomass, battery/energy storage) and creates documentation for compliance needs, such as safety permits that meet OSHA requirements.

System features include lockout/tagout; work authorization form and safe work permit; job safety analysis; hot work permit; confined space entry permit; energized electrical; and area hazard assessment.

The software combines central workflow and permit integration. A plant’s status (approved, issued or closed) is easily viewed, including an overlay on a facility map. Users have access to reporting, print integration and indexing.

Nite Owl’s system is built on a Microsoft platform and a Microsoft SQL Server database. It includes a facility site mapping key, dashboard overview and status, and lockout/tagout tag printing functionality. The system integrates with CMMS systems, Maximo and others to streamline operations. https://nite-owl.com

Switched Source, a leading developer of grid-enhancing technologies, recently announced the successful deployment of its Phase-EQ technology in Macon, Georgia.

Southern Company, through its subsidiary Georgia Power, served as an early demonstration partner, offering site access, engineering input and operational data to evaluate the technology under field conditions. The Phase-EQ is designed to help utilities increase usable capacity from existing power lines by up to 20% by balancing electricity and improving reliability.

Southern Company’s research and development organization worked closely with Switched Source to refine and test the Phase-EQ prior to deployment. The installation is already showing promising results, with Georgia Power providing substation-level data to help track device performance. Initial feedback indicates that the unit is running smoothly, with stakeholders eager to see it operate across various operating modes and conditions. The project is modeled to decrease load imbalance by half and voltage imbalance by more than 30%.

“This deployment represents Georgia Power’s continued efforts to partner with industry and use new technologies to improve grid performance while reducing costs for our customers,” said Robin Lanier, director of grid strategy and solutions at Georgia Power. “We have collaborated with Switched Source and ARPA-E to develop this Phase-EQ device, and we are now working to determine its effectiveness under real-world conditions. This testing will allow us to decide if more devices could be useful on other distribution lines in our service territory.” www.switchedsource.com

OSCO Safety’s ReadySeries lineup is one of the industry’s broadest selections of fiberglass-reinforced plastic (FRP) modular systems for jobsite access and safety. From platforms and crossovers to fixed ladders, handrails, guardrails, stair towers and more, the ReadySeries lineup delivers a wide range of components for easy customization and safety needs. Each piece is designed to stand alone or be combined with others, making it simple to build new structures or add to existing ones.

ReadySeries FRP elements are naturally corrosion-resistant, non-conductive and fire-retardant. Built with anti-slip surfaces, these structures stand up to extreme weather and demanding work conditions without losing performance.

Available in a wide array of sizes and shapes, ReadySeries modular FRP products allow you to create custom solutions for any safety or access need. ReadySeries ships quickly, installs easily and delivers OSHA-compliant safety in durable, low-maintenance FRP. https://oscosafety.com

It’s not just downed lines and high voltage you need to watch out for during storm restoration. In the mud and floodwaters lies a hidden, deadly threat: flesh-eating bacteria. In this critical episode, we’re talking about Necrotizing Fasciitis, a rare but devastating infection that can start from a tiny cut or scrape exposed to contaminated water. We break down what every line worker and utility professional needs to know—how to identify the risks on a storm-ravaged site, the crucial first-aid steps that can save your life, and the early warning signs you can’t afford to ignore. Don’t let a small nick turn into a career-ending injury. This is a must-listen for anyone working in the aftermath of a hurricane, flood, or major storm.

Key Takeaways

• The Threat is Real: Necrotizing Fasciitis is caused by bacteria (like Group A Strep or Vibrio vulnificus) found in contaminated water, mud, and debris common after storms. It enters the body through any break in the skin, including minor cuts, scrapes, or even insect bites.
• Prevention is Proactive Wound Care: Standard PPE is your first defense, but it’s not foolproof. The most critical step is to immediately and thoroughly clean any wound—no matter how small—with soap and clean water. Follow up with an antiseptic and a waterproof bandage.
• Know the Early Warning Signs: The infection progresses with terrifying speed. Watch for pain that is far more severe than the injury looks, rapidly spreading redness or swelling, fever, chills, and flu-like symptoms. Do not “wait and see.”
• Time is Tissue: If you suspect an infection, seek immediate medical attention. Go to an emergency room and explicitly state your concern about a severe skin infection from exposure to storm water. Early and aggressive treatment is the key to survival and recovery.

Q&A Session

1. I’m always covered in PPE. Isn’t that enough protection?

While waterproof gear and gloves are essential, they can be punctured or torn. Bacteria can also enter the body if you touch a contaminated surface and then inadvertently touch a small, existing cut. The real defense is vigilant personal hygiene and immediate wound care. Think of your first-aid kit as being just as important as your climbing gear.

2. How can I tell the difference between a regular infection and flesh-eating bacteria?

The two key indicators are pain and speed. A typical localized infection might be sore, red, and develop over a few days. Necrotizing Fasciitis is characterized by excruciating pain that seems completely out of proportion to the minor wound. The redness and swelling will also spread incredibly fast, sometimes visibly changing within a single hour. If the pain is the worst you’ve ever felt, it’s a major red flag.

3. What if I get a cut but I’m in the middle of a 16-hour shift?

Don’t tough it out. Stop what you’re doing immediately. At a minimum, douse the wound with clean water from your water bottle and apply antiseptic from your personal or truck first-aid kit. Cover it securely. As soon as you are able, clean it more thoroughly with soap and water. Report the injury to your supervisor, no matter how minor, so there’s a record. This ensures you’re covered and encourages a culture of safety.

iPi Forum – https://ip-institute.com/ipi-forum/

You can read the current magazine at Incident Prevention Magazine.

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

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

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

Purchase Danny’s Book on Amazon – https://a.co/d/556LDvzc

#LineWorkerSafety #StormRestoration #UtilityWorker #NecrotizingFasciitis #Lineman #SafetyFirst #LineLife #WorkplaceSafety #CUSP #FleshEatingBacteria

In this episode of the Safety by Design, Nick sits down with Pam Tompkins, CUSP to discuss her recent article, “Safety by Design, Safety Management System Planning.” This is the third installment of a six-part series where Pam delves into the critical role of planning in creating an effective safety management system (SMS). Pam explains why a proactive, systemic approach is essential for identifying and mitigating workplace hazards, moving beyond a reactive safety model. She emphasizes the importance of conducting a gap analysis to understand the current state of safety, using a systems-thinking approach to risk management, and setting clear, measurable objectives. The discussion also covers the use of leading indicators and key performance indicators (KPIs) to track progress and ensure continuous improvement, all within the framework of the ANSI/ASSP Z10-2019 standard.

Key Takeaways:

• A proactive “safety by design” approach is crucial to move beyond a reactive safety culture that waits for accidents to happen.
• Conducting a gap analysis is an essential first step to identify weaknesses in your current safety practices and align improvements with fieldwork.
• Leading indicators, such as safety observations and near-miss reporting, provide a more accurate picture of safety performance than lagging indicators like incident rates.
• A systems-thinking approach helps to understand how people, processes, and equipment interact, leading to more effective risk management.
• Setting SMART (Specific, Measurable, Achievable, Relevant, and Time-bound) objectives is key to making safety goals actionable and accountable.
• The ANSI/ASSP Z10-2019 standard provides a comprehensive framework for building and maintaining a robust safety management system.
• Engaging employees at all levels in the safety planning process is vital for building a strong safety culture and ensuring that procedures are practical and effective.

Q&A:

Q: What is the main problem with a reactive approach to safety? A: A reactive approach to safety is insufficient because it waits for accidents to happen before taking action. In high-risk industries like electric power, the consequences of an incident can be catastrophic, making it too late to react after a fatality or serious injury has occurred.

Q: Can you provide an example of an effective leading indicator? A: One effective leading indicator is near-miss reporting. A high level of participation in near-miss reporting is a positive sign that employees are engaged in the safety process and feel comfortable speaking up about potential hazards. This allows organizations to address issues before they lead to an incident.

Q: What is “systems thinking” in the context of safety? A: Systems thinking is about looking at the bigger picture and recognizing that safety is influenced by the interaction of people, processes, and equipment. Instead of blaming an individual for a mistake, a systems-thinking approach looks for flaws in the system that may have contributed to the error, such as impractical procedures or a lack of resources.

#SafetyByDesign #UtilitySafety #SafetyManagementSystem #ProactiveSafety #LeadingIndicators #WorkplaceSafety #SafetyCulture

OSHA Power Electric Standards Course –  https://ip-institute.com/osha-electric-power-standards/

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

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

In this vital episode, host Kate Wade sits down with Jenny Lavin, the founder and CEO of the nonprofit Union Care Solutions, to tackle the pressing mental health crisis within the union electrical community. Jenny, a union wife and mother with deep family roots in the IBEW, shares the alarming statistics that prompted her to take action: in the construction industry, workers are five times more likely to be affected by a mental health condition than an on-the-job fatality.

Tune in to explore Union Care Solutions’ “for us, by us” approach to building psychological safety through a powerful “Train, Mobilize, and Deploy” model. Jenny discusses the importance of peer support networks, critical incident stress management for workers who witness traumatic events, and her mission to create a national hub of accessible mental health resources for every local. This is a must-listen for anyone in the utility and construction trades who wants to learn how to support their brothers and sisters and end the stigma around mental health.

Key Takeaways

• The Crisis is Real: In one local community over five years, there were 19 suicides and 22 drug overdoses, compared to five on-the-job fatalities, highlighting a significant disconnect in safety focus. Construction workers are five times more likely to be impacted by a mental health condition than a workplace fatality.

• A “For Us, By Us” Approach: Lasting change comes from within the community. Union Care Solutions champions a peer-to-peer support model, training people within the trade to recognize struggles and connect their colleagues with resources, as they are the true first line of defense.

• Train, Mobilize, Deploy: The organization’s core strategy involves training members in programs like Mental Health First Aid, mobilizing them into peer support networks, and deploying Critical Incident Stress Management (CISM) teams to help crews process traumatic events they witness on the job.

• The Unseen Trauma: Utility workers are often first on the scene of horrific accidents, storms, and fires, and the psychological toll of what they see is rarely discussed or addressed. CISM provides a crucial space for them to process this trauma.

Q & A

• What is the mission of Union Care Solutions? Their mission is to bring advocacy and awareness to mental health issues within the union electrical trade. They achieve this by providing training, resources, and support, with the ultimate goal of creating a hub where anyone in the industry can find vetted, accessible information to build psychologically safe work environments.
• Why is peer support so critical in this industry? Peer support is effective because workers often spend more time with their crew than their own families and can notice when a colleague is struggling. There is a strong “brotherhood” mentality, and workers are more likely to listen to and trust one another. A trained peer who understands the unique job pressures can connect with a struggling individual in a way an outside professional might not be able to.

Reach out:

jlavin@unioncaresolutions.org

www.unioncaresolutions.org

#MentalHealthInTrades #UnionStrong #ConstructionSafety #IBEW #EndTheStigma #PeerSupport

OSHA requires utility employers to provide appropriate personal protective equipment to their employees, such as non-conductive hard hats that meet the ANSI Z89.1 standard. The evolution of Class E helmets represents a significant advancement in worker safety, with 20,000-volt dielectric protection and fully sealed, non-vented designs creating a barrier against electrical conductivity in high-voltage environments.

As utilities modernize their infrastructure, effective PPE remains much more than a regulatory requirement – it is a safety imperative. Numerous organizations are embracing sophisticated technologies to elevate on-the-job safety and efficiency. Others are working to catch up, while some still manage their assets through more traditional means.

Wherever your company finds itself, here’s what every industry employer and employee should understand: The arrival of smart PPE in recent years has created new opportunities to advance worker safety and drive greater operational efficiency. How? By allowing users to digitally store critical personal information directly on the equipment as well as more effectively track those assets.

Inventory Management
Some of the most cutting-edge PPE currently available is designed with embedded hardware for data storage. This enables integration of the equipment into a utility’s connected safety ecosystem within its broader technology stack. Safety teams can use their smartphones to scan and interact with PPE to review equipment age and prior inspection dates. When a lineworker first collects and scans a piece of protective equipment, its status is immediately updated within the company’s inventory system, providing users real-time visibility into its condition and availability.

Because smart PPE helps to eliminate paper logs and redundant data entry, companies that invest in it could reduce their administrative overhead while improving equipment tracking. Multiple touchpoints are no longer required across departments (think inspections, inventory management and compliance reporting). Instead, smart gear provides a streamlined digital workflow that typically reduces human error and strengthens documentation to help ensure regulatory compliance.

Digitized Inspections and Work Documents
Protective equipment must be inspected regularly to ensure safe, proper functionality. With smart PPE, utility organizations can digitize the inspection process, including employee reporting. Workers perform required inspections using their smartphones and upload results to the system. Safety managers have the option to automate reminder alerts to notify employees if an inspection is overdue.

Some cutting-edge smart PPE currently on the market allows workers to digitally store and access important work documents. For instance, a transmission engineer can securely store his qualification records – such as certifications for high-voltage switching operations, confined space entry authorizations and completed training modules – directly on his smart helmet. This helps employers address the challenge of tracking down field personnel for documentation updates and signature verifications.

Enhanced Emergency Response
Users can also securely save personal medical information – including their blood type, medication allergies, pre-existing conditions and emergency contacts – to their smart equipment, offering first responders fast access to vital health data should an accident occur. When every minute counts, this capability is critical.

It is important to note that the chips typically used in smart PPE – such as near field communication or radio-frequency identification – do not emit electrical currents, making them safe for workers in high-voltage environments.

Here’s something else to note: While smart PPE costs more than conventional equipment, potential buyers should consider the total cost of ownership. An investment in cutting-edge gear can deliver significant workflow time savings, effective compliance risk mitigation, enhanced emergency response and other benefits.

Conclusion
The critical nature of protective equipment means utilities rightfully exercise caution when evaluating new technology. With the development of smart PPE, safety leaders now have an opportunity to convert what has traditionally been viewed as a cost center into a strategic digital asset – one that enhances worker protection and operational efficiency.

About the Author: Christian Connolly is CEO of Stockholm-based Twiceme Technology (www.twiceme.com), which focuses on turning bystanders into helpers across the globe. Founded in 2017, the company’s smart technology is integrated into helmets, harnesses, goggles and other PPE.

Editor’s Note: To learn more, check out a recent interview with Christian on the Utility Safety Podcast, available at https://utilitysafety.podbean.com/e/the-future-of-ppe-how-twiceme-technology-is-revolutionizing-ppe-for-utility-workers/.

Part 1 of this article began with discussion of the first American power systems, when lineworkers initially encountered the hazards of working on de-energized lines (see https://incident-prevention.com/blog/the-evolution-of-personal-protective-grounding-part-1/). This led to early personal protective grounding (PPG) efforts using trial and error. We also reviewed Charles Dalziel’s contributions toward a greater industry understanding of dangerous current levels.

In short, Part 1 confirmed the need for PPG as a key lineworker safety precaution. In this second and final part, we will review PPG’s evolution as the industry designed and improved relevant equipment, conducted more testing and developed written standards.

1940-1970: Equipment Design and Improvements
In the 1940s, protective grounds were used sporadically depending on the utility company and the line crew foreman. It was a relatively common practice for lineworkers to make their own ground sets, using #6 soft-drawn copper and hot-line tap clamps. During this period, the industry began moving away from homemade grounding equipment in favor of equipment manufactured by companies including A.B. Chance, J.R. Kearney and Safety Live Line Co.

In the 1950s, A.B. Chance offered various PPG components. Around the same time, Safety Live Line Co. of Oakland, California, manufactured a grounding cluster that featured a removable twist-lock handle. It had been determined by this point that it is best to have the grounding conductors short-circuit the line and connect it to ground.

Further, using wood-handled sticks to install protective grounds had started to become standard. The grip-all or “shotgun stick” developed in the 1950s became popular for protective ground installation and removal. Some manufacturers made protective grounds with wood-handled sticks that were permanently attached to the grounding clamps. The sticks significantly improved safety, placing workers farther from conductors in case a hot line was grounded.

This era also saw an increased interest in testing. The “fuzzing” test procedure was included in the fourth edition of “The Lineman’s and Cableman’s Handbook,” published in 1964. The fourth edition also stated that after the test, two sets of grounds shall be placed on either side of the work area, within sight of the lineworkers.

The fifth edition of the handbook (1976) recommended using a voltage detector for testing, yet it also noted that fuzzing using “fuzz rings” could be effectively performed on higher voltages. These rings were not widely used and are now quite rare. A fuzz ring’s size and shape increased the sound level for lineworkers. It was also around this time when many power companies began providing documented rules and procedures regarding the application of personal protective grounds.

Bonneville Testing
In 1954, Bonneville Power Administration conducted comprehensive testing to evaluate the effectiveness of protective grounds in ensuring the safety of its lineworkers. The tests produced the following key findings:

• “The current practice utilized by most power companies of installing grounds on adjacent structures to the one being worked on will likely not provide adequate protection for the linemen in the event the line comes energized.”
• “The short-circuiting and grounding of all conductors at work locations, using jumpers and clamps of adequate current-carrying capacity, will likely provide sufficient protection for linemen.”

These results caused many power companies to reevaluate their protective grounding practices. Before the BPA testing, protective grounds were typically bracketed around the work location but not on the structure where the work was being done. The theory at the time was that grounds only needed to be placed between the worker and the energy source. From this point forward, the industry slowly evolved toward installing protective grounds at the work location. BPA also performed testing of personal protective grounds exposed to the high fault currents that were becoming more prevalent.

1970-1990: More Improvements
Considerable improvements were made to protective grounding equipment during this 20-year span, including equipment for use when stringing conductors and performing underground work. Manufacturers introduced equipment for testing components to ensure their capacity and reliability.

The sixth (1981) and seventh (1986) editions of “The Lineman’s and Cableman’s Handbook” listed the following requirements for effective protective grounding: a low-resistance path to earth; clean and tight connections; connections made to proper points; and adequate grounding equipment capacity.

The United States Congress enacted the Occupational Safety and Health Act in 1970, which established OSHA. Over time, OSHA issued various regulations related to protective grounding. Here’s what a couple of the first ones stated:

• “Protective grounds shall be applied on the disconnected lines or equipment to be worked on.”
• “Visual inspections or tests shall be conducted to ensure that equipment or lines have been deenergized.”

During this period, power companies gradually started moving toward worksite grounding, with “single-point grounding” and other terms surfacing. The following statement was published in the seventh edition of “The Lineman’s and Cableman’s Handbook”: “The protective grounds are installed from ground in a manner to short-circuit the conductors so that the lineman and everything in the work area will be at equal potential.” It had also been determined that by short-circuiting a line, any protective devices supplying the line would rapidly relay out if inadvertently energized.

The steady rise in fault currents was another factor affecting adequate protective grounding, increasing the need for well-made grounding components, such as clamps and cables. In 1983, ASTM F855, “Standard Specifications for Temporary Protective Grounds to Be Used on De-energized Electric Power Lines and Equipment,” was first published. The comprehensive standard covered the design, materials, ratings and design testing of clamps, ferrules, cables and ground assemblies. It was a key element in standardizing and improving the quality of grounding components.

1990-2020: Equipotential Concept
As power companies and equipment manufacturers conducted more testing, they eventually concluded that the only safe way to protect lineworkers with PPG was to place them in an equipotential zone. In 1994, OSHA issued the 1910.269 standard, which contained this text at (n)(3): “Temporary protective grounds shall be placed at such locations and arranged in such a manner as to prevent each employee from being exposed to hazardous differences in electric potential.” Companies then devised various grounding and bonding procedures to mitigate placing lineworkers between different potentials at the worksite. The industry was slow to change from conventional bracket grounding to worksite grounding as power companies felt compliance with the equipotential theory was unnecessary and would add considerable time to jobs.

Since 1994, the industry has generally accepted the use of bonding and grounding to prevent employees from being exposed to hazardous differences in electric potential.

ASTM F2249, “Standard Specification for In-Service Test Methods for Temporary Grounding Jumper Assemblies Used on De-Energized Electric Power Lines and Equipment,” was initially published in 2003. It provided guidelines for inspecting and testing protective grounds. Manufacturers including Hubbell Power Systems and Hastings developed ground component testers, line testers, simulators and other PPG improvements. Hubbell also issued its encyclopedia of grounding during this period, providing a comprehensive reference on the subject.

The IEEE 1048 standard published in 1990 provided the first comprehensive guide for protective grounding of power lines. Most recently updated in 2016, it remains an excellent source of PPG information.

This period also saw the development of several methods and types of equipment that would eliminate or minimize the potential differences lineworkers might encounter. These included significant improvements in grounding equipment and procedures for wire stringing.

Conclusion
We have come a long way from the days of pulling a chain attached to a water pipe over conductors. There is no question that the subject of PPG has become increasingly complex, with the industry’s experience and research evolving over the years. This complexity underscores the continued need for effective worker training and education. One condition, however, remains the same: PPG has always been a key element of safety for work on electric power systems. It is as important today as it was 100 years ago.

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.

For decades, air has been used to effectively and inexpensively maintain phase-to-phase and phase-to-ground clearances of overhead distribution and transmission power lines and electrical equipment. Air’s extremely high resistance offers excellent protection against the passage of current. The greater the nominal system voltage, the greater the air gap required to prevent a flashover and short-circuiting.

Due to its dielectric properties, air is also used to protect workers from electric shock. Incident Prevention readers who work in the electric utility industry are familiar with the term “minimum approach distance” (MAD). Workers in industries that incorporate NFPA 70E into their electrical safety programs may use the term “restricted approach boundary” (RAB). Although there are slight differences between the two, both the MAD and RAB establish a physical air gap between the qualified worker and exposed energized parts or lines to prevent the worker from inadvertent shock. Readers should note that electric utilities are not covered by the scope of NFPA 70E; however, several portions of the standard offer useful information that utility organizations may want to consider.

Two Critical Components
MAD and RAB incorporate two critical elements to keep workers safe: an electrical component followed by an ergonomic component.

The electrical component – also called the “minimum air insulation distance” or “MAID” – serves to prevent an arcover/sparkover/flashover, in which the voltage stress is greater than the dielectric strength offered by a certain spacing of air. This phenomenon is referred to as the “voltage breakdown of air” or “dielectric strength of air.” Remember that while air offers superb resistance to the passage of electric current, it has voltage-based limitations much like any other insulating material.

The ergonomic component is a safety buffer known as the “inadvertent movement factor.” It targets human error when work is performed near energized parts, mitigating simple employee mistakes, such as overconfidence, loss of situational awareness and incorrectly calculating the distance to an exposed part. This component also accounts for unexpected body movement (e.g., reaching for tools or materials, adjusting PPE, swatting at flying insects).

When the electrical and ergonomic components are combined, a corresponding MAD/RAB is determined. Figure 1 shows the MAD/RAB of the worker’s body in relationship to an exposed energized part.

OSHA’s MAD can be derived via two methods. The first is to employ mathematical calculations. For elevations up to 3,000 feet, use Table R-3 (AC voltages) or Table R-8 (DC voltages) found in 29 CFR 1910.269. Calculations for elevations above 3,000 feet must include an altitude correction factor along with overvoltage transient considerations for voltages greater than 72.5 kV. The second method is to utilize the alternative distances listed in Table R-6 for voltages of 72.5 kV and less; for 72.6 kV to 800 kV, use Table R-7.

NFPA 70E’s RAB distances are predetermined values located in Table 130.4(E)(a) for AC systems and Table 130.4(E)(b) for DC systems. The distances listed in both the OSHA and NFPA tables are limited to work locations with a maximum elevation of 3,000 feet.

Crossing the MAD/RAB: Prescriptive Action Required
As mentioned, the MAD/RAB is established to prevent unintentional contact by providing an adequate safe work zone between the worker and the energized exposed parts. Crossing the MAD/RAB must be treated the same as making intentional contact with the energized parts.

This important point needs to be emphasized: The purpose of the MAD/RAB is to prevent unintentional contact – but entering the MAD/RAB must be treated as making intentional contact.

That is because both OSHA 1910.269(l)(3)(iii) and NFPA 70E 130.4(G) establish prescriptive actions to be taken before a qualified electrical worker is permitted to violate the MAD/RAB: either the worker is insulated from the exposed energized parts, or the exposed energized parts are insulated from the worker.

The first action is accomplished when the worker dons voltage-rated rubber gloves with protectors and, if necessary, rubber sleeves. To complete the second action, install voltage-rated rubber blankets and/or hose sleeves over the exposed parts. An old industry saying – “Rubber up or cover up” – was birthed from this regulatory mandate.

Easy Concept or Confusing Directive?
For most voltages, the OSHA and NFPA 70E tables define a specific minimum spacing listed in feet or meters. The greater the voltage exposure, the greater the distance needed to protect the worker. This is true with most MADs/RABs. An exception occurs in the two standards where increments of length establishing a physical gap have been replaced with this ambiguous phrase: “Avoid contact.”

In Appendix B to 1910.269, “Working on Exposed Energized Parts,” OSHA includes the following footnote: “For voltages of 50 to 300 volts, Table R-3 specifies a minimum approach distance of ‘avoid contact.’ The minimum approach distance for this voltage range contains neither an electrical component nor an ergonomic component.” That means no safety buffer exists. OSHA applies “avoid contact” from 50 to 300 volts, while NFPA 70E applies it from 50 to 150 volts.

At face value, “avoid contact” may appear to be an easy safety concept that needs no explanation. And when electrical workers are asked what “avoid contact” means to them, “Don’t touch it” is a common response. This is logical since neither OSHA nor NFPA 70E provides a technical definition of the phrase. Without clarification, employers and workers are left to interpret its meaning on their own.

Per Merriam-Webster, “avoid” means “to keep away from”; “contact” is defined as “the junction of two electrical conductors through which a current passes.” Consequently, when OSHA and NFPA 70E use the two words together, workers are guided toward an incorrect and dangerous interpretation. They consistently interpret “avoid contact” to mean nothing more than a warning to be careful or refrain from touching an energized part.

Does a warning constitute an adequate barrier between life and death? The obvious answer is no, with fatality data supporting this position. Let’s recall that although the purpose of the MAD/RAB is to prevent unintentional contact through safety margins, crossing it requires precisely the same practices as intentionally contacting exposed energized parts. To enter the MAD/RAB, the worker is required to insulate either themselves or the parts (i.e., rubber up or cover up). Whenever practical, workers should do both.

Secondary Voltages are Hazardous
Some individuals, especially those who work around primary voltages, might think 120 volts isn’t particularly dangerous. Many of us have even said, “It’s only 120 volts” or “It’s only secondary voltage.” But when we review OSHA’s preamble to the final rule, we find that at least 25 electric utility workers died after contact with “only” 120 volts (see www.osha.gov/laws-regs/federalregister/2014-04-11).

OSHA also provided this clarification in the 2014 final rule: “The hazards posed by installations energized at 50 to 300 volts are the same as those found in many other workplaces. … The employee must avoid contact with the exposed parts, and the protective equipment used (such as rubber insulating gloves) must provide insulation for the voltages involved.” This means the worker must implement some type of active countermeasures that will prevent inadvertent contact with lower yet still hazardous voltages.

This concept is better understood by reviewing Figure 2, which shows the practice of rubber up and cover up while a worker takes voltage readings of an uninsulated, overhead, single-phase 120-/240-volt line. Note that while Figure 2 depicts bare wires, workers should wear rubber gloves whenever handling energized triplex or quadruplex secondary service drops. That’s because the insulation can become brittle due to weathering and crack while being handled.

What about working with equipment housed inside cabinets or enclosures, as shown in Figure 3? If the task is troubleshooting a 480-volt starter, Class 0 or 00 rubber gloves are adequate to protect the worker’s hands within the RAB of 12 inches. But in this example, are gloves alone adequate to protect the rest of the body? The answer is no due to the exposed parts mounted on the inside of the hinged door. Door hardware is normally energized at 120 volts, so the corresponding electric shock distance is “avoid contact.” If the worker’s understanding is “don’t touch it,” they would likely position their body to avoid touching the door-mounted components behind them. However, the worker could lose focus, become distracted and then step back into the door, or a breeze could move or close the door on the worker. Although the worker’s intention was to avoid contact, inadvertent contact occurs due to unconsidered factors.

A worker who understands the following is likely to take the action necessary to avoid making contact:

• The risks and severity of contact with secondary voltages.
• The purpose of the MAD or RAB (i.e., to avoid inadvertent contact with energized parts).
• The regulatory requirements that must be met to cross the MAD or RAB, either intentionally or unintentionally.

By placing a voltage-rated sheet or blanket over the exposed door parts, as shown in Figure 4, the worker prevents accidental contact and fulfills the MAD/RAB entry requirement to insulate exposed energized parts from themselves.

Conclusion
Electrical workers must be trained to understand that “avoid contact” does not simply mean “don’t touch it.” Workers also must be taught to properly respect secondary voltages, which can pose extreme health and safety hazards, including death. This pragmatic approach will help employers bridge knowledge gaps and reduce the number of preventable industry accidents and injuries.

About the Author: George T. Cole, CUSP, CESCP, CESW, CIT, SGE, is an instructor and electrical safety consultant for e-Hazard. Reach him at george.cole@e-hazard.com.

Arc flash labels are a commonplace requirement for photovoltaic (PV) projects. However, arc flash studies and the resulting labels are sometimes treated as check-the-box exercises. In my experience as an engineer, I have found that questions are rarely asked regarding integration of PV arc flash labels into a safe, effective operations and maintenance plan. Engineers who charge by the man-hour can generate these labels all day long, yet they aren’t the ones tasked with donning PPE to perform hot work. A fundamental link is missing in terms of safety.

Essentially, arc flash labels provide employees with critical PPE information when work must be performed near energized electrical equipment. But this could make hot work on energized electrical systems sound routine – and it shouldn’t be, ever.

Consider this scenario that a safety expert presented to students during an electrical safety training class in Baghdad: There is heavy nighttime fighting. After shrapnel cuts power lines to a hospital, the emergency generators don’t start. Do you rush to splice the wires back together, hot, because lives are at stake, time is of the essence, and the task is relatively simple?

The safety expert’s recommended response? An emphatic “no.” Unforeseen hazardous conditions could lead to worker injury or death and additional equipment damage in addition to prolonging the outage.

The bottom line here for workers is to perform assigned tasks de-energized whenever possible. Fully inspect and test to determine the scope of work. Make the necessary repairs, check again, and then safely re-energize. No shortcuts.

A Troubling Perspective
Occasionally a client will say they do not want to see PPE categories above Level 3, which is troubling for two reasons. One, if a job requires live troubleshooting, Level 3 PPE may not adequately protect workers. Two, the client’s perspective excludes any mention of the other five levels of the hierarchy of controls (i.e., elimination, substitution, isolation, engineering controls and administrative controls), plus it disregards the fact that certain arc flash hazards may be built into a system based on equipment selection long before the engineer of record begins their design work.

As most readers understand, PPE is a critical component of hazard protection for workers, but it is also their last line of defense. Employers that adhere to industry best practices use the other five levels of the hierarchy of controls to eliminate or mitigate identified worksite hazards, including arc flash risks.

Regarding equipment selection, I recommend that organizations seek and fully consider guidance from reputable, experienced engineers. For example, we may suggest that instead of building a 4,000-kWac system, the company should split it into two 2,000-kVA medium-voltage transformers powering 2,000-kW inverters. Why? If the client chooses a single 4,000-kVA transformer feeding a single 4,000-kW central inverter, they are guaranteed extremely high AC and DC arc flash energies on at least one side of the overcurrent protective devices.

How Bad is the Worst Case?
Engineers will occasionally fixate on identifying worst-case scenarios, examining more factors than necessary. But once we know the worst case, what should we do with that information? While some peer-reviewed industry papers cover worst-case scenarios from every conceivable angle, two IEEE papers reference real-world testing results that indicate true arc flash levels are two to 10 times lower than those calculated by standard methods (see https://ieeexplore.ieee.org/document/9658515 and https://ieeexplore.ieee.org/document/10188331).

Recently, I’ve seen client specifications for PV projects that require use of the Paukert method to calculate DC arc flash values. Some software packages offer users a choice between three major calculation methods (i.e., maximum power, Stokes/Oppenlander or Paukert). Unfortunately, a 2020 IEEE paper states that “none of the available DC arc-flash models are applicable for a PV plant” (see https://ieeexplore.ieee.org/document/9181477). No recommended industry calculation methodologies have been adopted at the time of this article’s publication.

We can’t escape AC grid energy at any time of day, but we can escape most DC energy by avoiding noontime maintenance, even if avoiding peak power could result in longer clearing times by protective devices.

‘Routine’ Troubleshooting
Industry articles mention that arc flash labels are useful when selecting PPE for routine troubleshooting work. Again, while it is essential for workers to use PPE based on their hazard exposure, employers must strongly consider adjusting work practices and system designs to eliminate any need for routine troubleshooting.

Here is an example to help you understand what I mean. Few PV entities manage all the stages of a system’s life cycle (i.e., design, build, own and operate), which could explain their reluctance to invest in string monitoring versus the default design of zone monitoring only at the combiner-box or inverter level. Even with standard combiner-box monitoring, modern artificial intelligence systems can determine if a problem exists with one or more strings. Eventually, a site investigation will be needed to check every string in the combiner box because AI is not granular enough to do it, adding an hour or more to the on-site discovery time. Investing in additional instrumentation that more efficiently identifies problematic strings typically pays for itself by eliminating a “routine” safety hazard while also decreasing the number of truck rolls and employee time spent on-site.

Some inverters now provide IV curve tracing as a built-in feature. Unlike humans, this test equipment does not get tired after a long day of work in extreme heat or cold, which is helpful in accurately identifying and reporting anomalies.

A great number of AC circuit breakers in the main collection panels can be procured with full Modbus sensors and communication, which may sound like a luxury, but consider a worker who over-torques inverter cables at the circuit breakers. Localized heating begins to cause intermittent breaker trips, necessitating lengthy visits from an electrician to take multiple clamp-on meter readings. Now the cost may no longer seem excessive. If a bus voltage needs to be tested – a task that typically requires suiting up and opening the rear of a panelboard – why not spend $500 or less to install indicating lights and test jacks that are accessible from outside the panelboard?

From my perspective, a sizable portion of the money invested in hardware for PV projects could be diverted to safety enhancements with no adverse impact on production or total capital costs. Beyond PPE, use elimination, substitution, isolation, and engineering and administrative controls to eradicate any need for routine troubleshooting. A change in mindset is all that is required.

Two-Level PPE Systems
The following table shows some typical arc flash energy levels for major PV project components based on a review of 12 different PV projects. Most of the projects were in the community solar space of 2 to 5 MWac and a 1.3 to 1.5 DC/AC ratio.

Many facilities, recognizing the complexity of arc flash labels, have implemented a two-level PPE system. The first level is a Category 2 (8 cal/cm²) standard work uniform that also requires gloves, a face shield and other PPE as needed. The second is full Category 4 PPE for the rare occasions when Class 3 or 4 work is necessary. Without retraining, most employees can remember their regular uniform plus gloves and a face shield without issue.

Since there is little variation in arc flash energy levels among similar PV projects – and they are all quite similar – it may be relatively easy to establish a common set of practical arc flash labels for a given fleet of solar projects. Looking at the table above, they should prohibit hot work on any AC equipment upstream of the string inverters. All DC equipment is in the realm of typical Category 2 work clothes. That lower energy risk can be further reduced by work practices and their timing.

Conclusion
Engineers can calculate short-circuit currents and produce arc flash labels at any time, but they aren’t frequently consulted to assist in converting their dedicated efforts into safe, effective work practices. Arc flash labels don’t provide any guarantees, and human performance is far more critical to safety than the presence of a few labels. Ideally, PV owners will continue to use arc flash labels while also developing work methods and investing in equipment to ensure worker exposure to energized system components is a rare occurrence – one that requires a thorough preliminary review and a written hot-work permit.

About the Author: Joe Jancauskas, P.E., CUSP, PMP, has over 40 years of electrical power engineering experience, including 16 years in solar. He has been responsible for numerous arc flash studies as well as implementing an effective arc flash program for an electric utility.

As the grid transitions to green energy, battery energy storage systems (BESS) are popping up everywhere—from utility substations to residential neighborhoods. But what happens when lithium-ion technology fails? In this episode of The Voice of Experience, host Danny Raines and Fire Test Specialist Josh Dinaburg from the CSA Group dive deep into the reality of battery fire safety.

Josh brings nearly 20 years of lab experience to explain why the “let it burn” strategy is often the safest choice for first responders and the environment. We dispel common myths about toxic runoff, explore how AI is revolutionizing failure detection, and discuss the rigorous testing standards keeping our communities safe. If you work in utilities, safety operations, or fire protection, this is the essential guide to understanding the risks and remedies of modern energy storage.

Learn More: https://www.csagroup.org/

Contact Josh: josh.dinaburg@csagroup.org

Danny Raines, CUSP Book – Legendas of an Ole’ Lineman: Order Here

Key Takeaways

• The “Let It Burn” Strategy is Intentional: Contrary to public perception, the safest tactic for large-scale battery fires is often isolation rather than active suppression. Attempting to extinguish the fire can leave “stranded energy” in damaged cells, creating a “ticking time bomb” for secondary events, whereas letting it consume itself renders the waste safer for disposal.
• Manufacturing Quality is Improving Rapidly: While cell counts in storage facilities are increasing, the failure rate has dropped significantly—now estimated in the “one out of millions” range rather than hundreds.
• Environmental Impact is Manageable: Extensive testing indicates that water and air quality impacts from these fires are generally comparable to standard structure fires. Runoff has not been demonstrated to cause immediate “forever chemical” threats to groundwater, provided the site is managed correctly.
• AI is the Future of Prevention: The industry is moving toward advanced Battery Management Systems (BMS) that use AI to analyze temperature and voltage trends, allowing operators to identify and isolate failing cells months before a thermal runaway event occurs.
• Firefighter Safety is Paramount: The primary risk to first responders is not just the fire, but the potential for explosion and high-voltage hazards. The current standard emphasizes life safety and evacuation over asset protection.

Q&A: Addressing Common Concerns

1. What is the biggest myth about battery storage fires?

Answer: The biggest myth is that if fire departments aren’t spraying water, they don’t know what they are doing. In reality, standing back and monitoring is a calculated containment strategy. Active firefighting can waste water and endanger responders without effectively stopping the thermal runaway, so isolation is often the professional standard.

2. Does a battery fire pose a unique toxic threat to the local community?

Answer: While lithium-ion electrolytes contain fluorinated compounds, the combustion products are remarkably similar to a typical house fire involving polyurethane furniture or cleaning chemicals under a sink. The smoke should be avoided like any other fire, but it does not generally require unique HazMat protocols beyond standard breathing protection and evacuation.

3. Can technology stop a fire once it starts?

Answer: Once thermal runaway begins in a specific cell, the chemical and electrical energy makes it nearly impossible to stop that specific event. However, engineering controls—such as insulation barriers and novel injection systems—are designed to prevent that single-cell failure from propagating to the rest of the battery bank, turning a potential catastrophe into a minor, contained incident.

#BatteryStorage #FireSafety #RenewableEnergy #UtilitySafety #LithiumIon #CSAGroup

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

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

It’s not just downed lines and high voltage you need to watch out for during storm restoration. In the mud and floodwaters lies a hidden, deadly threat: flesh-eating bacteria. In this critical episode, we’re talking about Necrotizing Fasciitis, a rare but devastating infection that can start from a tiny cut or scrape exposed to contaminated water. We break down what every line worker and utility professional needs to know—how to identify the risks on a storm-ravaged site, the crucial first-aid steps that can save your life, and the early warning signs you can’t afford to ignore. Don’t let a small nick turn into a career-ending injury. This is a must-listen for anyone working in the aftermath of a hurricane, flood, or major storm.

Key Takeaways

• The Threat is Real: Necrotizing Fasciitis is caused by bacteria (like Group A Strep or Vibrio vulnificus) found in contaminated water, mud, and debris common after storms. It enters the body through any break in the skin, including minor cuts, scrapes, or even insect bites.
• Prevention is Proactive Wound Care: Standard PPE is your first defense, but it’s not foolproof. The most critical step is to immediately and thoroughly clean any wound—no matter how small—with soap and clean water. Follow up with an antiseptic and a waterproof bandage.
• Know the Early Warning Signs: The infection progresses with terrifying speed. Watch for pain that is far more severe than the injury looks, rapidly spreading redness or swelling, fever, chills, and flu-like symptoms. Do not “wait and see.”
• Time is Tissue: If you suspect an infection, seek immediate medical attention. Go to an emergency room and explicitly state your concern about a severe skin infection from exposure to storm water. Early and aggressive treatment is the key to survival and recovery.

Q&A Session

1. I’m always covered in PPE. Isn’t that enough protection?

While waterproof gear and gloves are essential, they can be punctured or torn. Bacteria can also enter the body if you touch a contaminated surface and then inadvertently touch a small, existing cut. The real defense is vigilant personal hygiene and immediate wound care. Think of your first-aid kit as being just as important as your climbing gear.

2. How can I tell the difference between a regular infection and flesh-eating bacteria?

The two key indicators are pain and speed. A typical localized infection might be sore, red, and develop over a few days. Necrotizing Fasciitis is characterized by excruciating pain that seems completely out of proportion to the minor wound. The redness and swelling will also spread incredibly fast, sometimes visibly changing within a single hour. If the pain is the worst you’ve ever felt, it’s a major red flag.

3. What if I get a cut but I’m in the middle of a 16-hour shift?

Don’t tough it out. Stop what you’re doing immediately. At a minimum, douse the wound with clean water from your water bottle and apply antiseptic from your personal or truck first-aid kit. Cover it securely. As soon as you are able, clean it more thoroughly with soap and water. Report the injury to your supervisor, no matter how minor, so there’s a record. This ensures you’re covered and encourages a culture of safety.

iPi Forum – https://ip-institute.com/ipi-forum/

You can read the current magazine at Incident Prevention Magazine.

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

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

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

Purchase Danny’s Book on Amazon – https://a.co/d/556LDvzc

#LineWorkerSafety #StormRestoration #UtilityWorker #NecrotizingFasciitis #Lineman #SafetyFirst #LineLife #WorkplaceSafety #CUSP #FleshEatingBacteria

In this powerful episode of the Utility Safety Podcast: Voice of Experience, veteran lineman and safety consultant Danny Raines, CUSP, shares hard-earned lessons from decades of storm response—from Hurricane Katrina to ice storms in Georgia. With hurricane season in full swing, Danny offers real-world guidance on preparing for storm duty, understanding system hazards, and staying mentally and physically resilient in the face of chaos. Whether you’re a new lineworker heading out on your first storm or a seasoned pro, this episode delivers critical insights to keep you safe, sharp, and storm-ready.

Key Takeaways:

1. Preparation is Everything: Danny emphasizes the importance of personal checklists, including meds, hygiene, and weather-appropriate gear.

2. Test and Verify: Don’t assume equipment is de-energized—especially with the increase in generators, solar, and battery backups.

3. Mental & Physical Fatigue is Real: After 14–18 days, exhaustion sets in, increasing the chance of errors. Know your limits.

4. Find a Mentor: For new linemen, a trusted mentor can be a lifeline during complex storm work.

5. Storm Hazards Go Beyond Electricity: Environmental dangers like snakes, alligators, and aggressive customers add to the challenge.

3 Questions & Answers:

Q1: What’s one of the most overlooked parts of storm prep?

A: Personal medications. Many new crew members forget that pharmacies may be closed or destroyed post-storm, making it impossible to refill critical prescriptions.

Q2: Why is it so important to “test and verify”?

A: With so many modern power sources—from Honda generators to solar panels and battery storage—assumptions can be fatal. Always check for voltage, even on lines you think are isolated.

Q3: How long can a lineworker realistically stay sharp on storm duty?

A: According to Danny, the magic number is around 14–18 days. After that, physical fatigue and mental exhaustion dramatically increase the risk of mistakes and injuries.

You can read the current magazine at Incident Prevention Magazine.

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

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

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

Purchase Danny’s Book on Amazon – https://a.co/d/556LDvzc

#UtilitySafety #StormResponse #LinemanLife #HurricanePrep #ElectricalSafety #DannyRaines #CUSP #Lineworkers #StormWork

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.

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

Purchase Danny’s Book on Amazon – https://a.co/d/556LDvz

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

Join Danny Raines, CUSP, as he shares critical lessons learned from the field in this episode of The Voice of Experience. Danny dives into real-world incidents, including a tragic fatality and a near-miss, emphasizing the importance of testing and verifying in the utility safety industry. With decades of experience, Danny provides actionable insights to prevent accidents, improve safety protocols, and foster a culture of vigilance among utility professionals.

Key Takeaways:

1.Testing and Verifying Saves Lives: Never assume safety; always verify conditions to prevent catastrophic incidents.

2.Human Error Is Inevitable: Acknowledge that mistakes happen and take proactive steps to minimize risks.

3.The Power of Speaking Up: Encourage crews to challenge unsafe practices and prioritize safety over production.

4.Importance of Job Briefings: Thorough planning and hazard identification are critical to mitigating risks on-site.

4 Questions to learn from this podcast with Answers:

Q1: What is the primary cause of unsafe practices in the field?

A1: Assumptions and rushing to complete tasks often lead to neglecting crucial safety checks, like testing and verifying.

Q2: Why is “speaking up” vital in utility safety?

A2: It prevents potential accidents by addressing hazards early. Crew members should challenge unsafe practices without fear of backlash.

Q3: How can utility workers improve safety culture?

A3: By consistently practicing thorough job briefings, hazard identification, and compliance with safety regulations.

Q4: What role does leadership play in utility safety?

A4: Leaders must ensure oversight, provide proper training, and foster a culture where safety is prioritized over production.

You can read the current magazine at Incident Prevention Magazine.

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

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

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

Purchase Danny’s Book on Amazon – https://a.co/d/556LDvzc

#UtilitySafety #WorkSafe #CUSP #LinemanSafety #IncidentPrevention #SafetyLeadership

In this episode, safety consultant Danny Raines, CUSP, reflects on critical issues facing the utility industry, including safety practices, training gaps, and the persistent challenges of electrical fatalities. Danny delves into the importance of adhering to safety protocols, fostering a culture of accountability, and embracing innovation in personal protective equipment (PPE). Through stories from his career, Danny emphasizes the life-saving significance of vigilance and teamwork in high-risk environments.

Key Takeaways:

1.Window vs. Mirror Perspective: Evaluate whether you are self-reflective (mirror) or outward-focused (window) in safety practices.

2.“Learn-It-All” Mindset: Embrace a continuous learning approach over the “know-it-all” attitude.

3.The Numbers Don’t Lie: Despite advancements in PPE and training, electrical fatalities remain stagnant, demanding deeper industry introspection.

4.Accountability Saves Lives: The role of dedicated observers and adherence to safety protocols cannot be overstated.

5.A Culture of Safety: Building relationships and fostering open communication among crews enhance workplace safety.

6.Personal Responsibility: Safety isn’t just about individual choices—it impacts families and communities.

You can read the current magazine at Incident Prevention Magazine.

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

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

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

Purchase Danny’s Book on Amazon – https://a.co/d/556LDvz

#UtilitySafety #ElectricalSafety #PPEInnovation #LinemanLife #SafetyCulture #DannyRaines

In this episode of The Voice of Experience, Danny Raines, CUSP, shares his invaluable insights from decades of storm work as a lineman and utility safety expert. From the devastation of Hurricane Katrina to modern-day storm recovery challenges, Danny takes us through the physical and mental toll of responding to natural disasters. He explains the dangers of backfeeds, the rise of alternative energy sources, and the importance of verifying safety before restoring power. Learn from his firsthand stories, safety lessons, and how the landscape of utility work has evolved over the years. Whether you’re in the utility industry or just curious about storm response, this episode offers a wealth of knowledge from one of the most respected professionals in the field.

Key Takeaways:

1. The dangers of storm work: Power restoration involves more than meets the eye, especially with evolving technology like solar panels and generators creating backfeed hazards.
2. Mental and physical challenges: Long hours, dangerous conditions, and the emotional impact of storm recovery can lead to severe fatigue and stress.
3. Importance of testing and verifying: Danny stresses the importance of safety procedures, especially when dealing with energized systems after a storm.
4. Stories from the field: Real-life experiences from Hurricane Katrina and other storms demonstrate the unpredictable nature of storm recovery.
5. Utility evolution: Changes in technology, regulations, and community expectations are reshaping the utility industry’s response to natural disasters.

You can read the current magazine at Incident Prevention Magazine.

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

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

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

Purchase Danny’s Book on Amazon – https://a.co/d/556LDvz

#UtilitySafety #StormWork #HurricaneKatrina #LinemanLife #BackfeedDangers #MentalHealthMatters #TestAndVerify #PowerRestoration #StormRecovery #AlternativeEnergy #UtilityIndustry #SafetyFirst #DannyRaines #CUSP #ElectricGrid #DisasterResponse

Challenging the Status Quo: Rethinking Safety in the Utility Industry

Is safety truly the utility industry’s first priority? And is it even a real thing, or just a byproduct of something deeper? In this thought-provoking episode of Influencing Safety, Bill Martin, President and CEO of Think Tank Project LLC, joins host Kate Wade to challenge traditional views on safety. They explore the critical role of teamwork, communication, and human connection in fostering a truly safe work environment. Bill shares insights on the psychological factors that influence workplace culture, the hidden impact of mental health, and how shifting our focus from compliance to competency could change the game.

Key Takeaways:

✅ Safety isn’t just about compliance—it’s a byproduct of strong teamwork and communication.
✅ A psychologically safe work environment fosters better decision-making and fewer incidents.
✅ The traditional “safety first” mindset might be limiting our ability to create real change.
✅ Human connection and mental health are critical factors in workplace safety.
✅ Small changes, like pre-job huddles and open conversations, can have a major impact.

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

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

#WorkplaceSafety #UtilityIndustry #SafetyCulture #PsychologicalSafety #TeamworkMatters #LeadershipDevelopment #IncidentPrevention #CommunicationIsKey #CUSP #IncidentPrevention

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.

Read the article in iP Magazine – Read Here

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

In this episode of the Incident Prevention Utility Safety Podcast, Kate Wade interviews Dr. Kevin Rindal, DC, chiropractor, human performance expert, and co-founder of Vimocity. Drawing from his extensive experience with the U.S. Olympic Swim Team and industrial athletes, Dr. Rindal shares insights on preventing soft tissue injuries, implementing dynamic warmup programs, and securing organizational buy-in for holistic well-being strategies. Learn how utilities can leverage sports medicine principles to enhance safety, reduce costs, and improve workers’ quality of life.

Key Takeaways

1. Industrial Athletes and Soft Tissue Injuries: How utility workers face similar physical demands to athletes and the role of dynamic preparation in reducing injury rates.
2. Proactive vs. Reactive Approaches: The importance of addressing leading indicators like pain to prevent more significant injuries or reliance on opioids and other pain mitigations.
3. Integration with Daily Routines: Methods to seamlessly incorporate warmups, muscle maintenance, and recovery into existing workflows, making it scalable for smaller organizations.
4. Leveraging Technology and Gamification: How apps, micro learning, and team challenges foster engagement and create sustainable safety habits.
5. Leadership and Culture: The critical role of leadership buy-in at all levels in making safety and well-being programs successful.

Connect with Kevin:

• LinkedIn – https://www.linkedin.com/in/kevinrindal/
• Email – kevin@vimocity.com

Resource Links:

• Short form job-task specific training video | LINK
• Dynamic/ Full-body movement routine (5 min or less) | LINK
• Avoid Slips, Trips and Falls video | LINK

You can read the current magazine at Incident Prevention Magazine.

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

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

#UtilitySafety #IndustrialAthletes #InjuryPrevention #Vimocity #WorkplaceWellbeing #DynamicWarmups

In this episode of Utility Safety In Depth, we delve into the fascinating concept of the 100th monkey effect and its implications for safety in the utility industry. Join us as we discuss how collective consciousness and human connection can drive significant improvements in safety culture and outcomes. We’ll explore practical strategies to foster a more caring and supportive work environment, emphasizing the importance of communication, empathy, and mutual respect. Discover how embracing the power of human connection can lead to a safer and more resilient workforce.

Key Takeaways:

• The 100th Monkey Effect: How collective consciousness can influence individual behavior.
• The importance of human connection in safety culture.
• Practical strategies to foster a more caring and supportive work environment.
• The power of communication, empathy, and mutual respect.
• The role of leadership in creating a positive safety culture.

#utilitiesafety #safetyculture #humanconnection #100thmonkeyeffect #workplacewellbeing #safetyleadership #utilityindustry

You can read the current magazine at Incident Prevention Magazine.

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

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

Are you tired of hearing the same safety jargon without seeing real change? Join Bill Martin, President and CEO of think Tank Project, LLC, and Kate Wade, Editor of Incident Prevention magazine, as they dive deep into the root causes of workplace injuries and fatalities. Discover how to move beyond motivation and empty slogans to create a truly safe and connected work environment.

Key Takeaways from this podcast:

• Importance of Synchronization: The way forward in safety management involves creating a synchronized workforce where everyone is connected on a deeper level. Synchronization allows for better communication and understanding, reducing the chances of injuries and accidents.
• Action Over Motivation: Motivational speeches and slogans alone are insufficient to bring about real change in workplace safety. There needs to be actionable steps that translate motivation into tangible improvements on the ground.
• Understanding Human Behavior: The podcast emphasizes that much of human behavior is automatic, driven by the brain’s need to conserve energy. Safety programs should account for this by focusing on changing automatic behaviors rather than expecting constant vigilance.
• The Role of Leadership: Effective leadership is about asking the right questions and involving workers in safety decisions. Leaders should model the behavior they want to see and create environments that encourage participation and ownership of safety practices.
• Continuous Learning and Experimentation: The podcast suggests that safety improvements should be approached as ongoing experiments, where teams try out new ideas, evaluate their effectiveness, and adjust accordingly.
• Dealing with Resistance: Resistance to change is natural, especially in large organizations with many layers. The podcast highlights the importance of addressing this resistance by aligning everyone around common goals and encouraging openness to new ideas.
• Mental and Emotional Health: Addressing mental health issues, such as addiction and depression, is crucial for creating a safe work environment. A connected and supportive team can help identify and mitigate these risks.
• Practical Applications: The podcast concludes with a call to action—what small, tangible change can be implemented on Monday to make the workplace safer? It’s about translating ideas into real-world actions that have a measurable impact.

#safetyculture #workplaceinjury #safetymanagement #safetyleadership #industrialaccidents #safetytraining #safetytips #safetypodcast #accidentprevention #riskmanagement

You can read the current magazine at Incident Prevention Magazine.

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

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

Welcome to Incident Prevention’s Utility Safety Podcast, hosted by Kate Wade, editor of Incident Prevention magazine. In this episode, Kate sits down with Scott Francis, the technical sales manager for Westex, a Milliken brand renowned for pioneering protective textiles since 1941. Scott brings decades of experience in the safety industry, especially in the flame-resistant and arc-rated clothing markets.

During this insightful discussion, Scott shares his expertise on the latest advancements in flame-resistant and arc-rated apparel, the importance of live demonstrations, and how Westex is leading the way in educating safety professionals. He also touches on the challenges of balancing cost and safety standards, and the critical role of comfort in ensuring protective clothing is worn consistently.

Whether you’re a safety manager looking to enhance your PPE program or simply interested in the latest trends in utility safety apparel, this episode is packed with valuable information.

Key Takeaways:

1. Impact of Live Demonstrations: Live flash fire and arc flash events leave a lasting impression, helping safety professionals understand the severity of thermal hazards.
2. Survivor Stories: Hearing from thermal exposure survivors like Brad Livingston emphasizes the real-life consequences of not wearing proper PPE.
3. Education and Training: Westex offers extensive educational resources, including webinars, regional safety conferences, and online materials to keep safety managers informed.
4. Balancing Cost and Safety: The competitive landscape in flame-resistant fabric manufacturing drives innovation and helps maintain affordable prices without compromising safety.
5. Comfort Equals Protection: Comfortable PPE is more likely to be worn consistently, directly impacting worker safety.

#UtilitySafety #FlameResistantClothing #ArcRatedApparel #PPE #WorkplaceSafety #SafetyPodcast #IncidentPrevention

You can read the current magazine at Incident Prevention Magazine.

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

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