Get Custom Virtual Training the Way You Need It!   Learn More

Utility Safety Management Articles

Samy Faried

Arc Flash Mitigating Technologies and the OSHA Final Rule

Arc Flash Mitigating Technologies and the OSHA Final Rule

On April 11, 2014, OSHA issued the final rule regarding 29 CFR 1910.269 and 1926 Subpart V. The final rule included modifications that address minimum approach distances, fall protection systems and hazards of electric arcs. Since the publication of the rule, there have been an extensive number of articles published that detail changes to 1910.269 and 1926 Subpart V. Those articles focus on explaining the changes but most lack information about arc flash mitigating technologies.

This article focuses on current technologies available to minimize and prevent exposure of workers to arc flashes. Employers must ensure workers are provided the necessary protection against these flashes, as it can mean the difference between life and death. According to NFPA 70E, arc flash incidents occur five to 10 times each day and account for 400 fatalities each year. Additionally, the Electrical Safety Foundation International has reported that more than 2,000 workers are treated annually for flash-related burns. The severity of a flash and the related severity of injury primarily depend on the magnitude of the arcing current and the duration of exposure. A typical three-cycle circuit breaker will interrupt fault currents in 50 milliseconds. Exposure to a temperature of 205 degrees Fahrenheit for 100 milliseconds may cause a third-degree burn, which will cause skin to fall off and may result in death.

Continue reading
  11049 Hits
  0 Comments
Jim Vaughn, CUSP

Train the Trainer 101: Practical Personal Protective Grounding

In the last 10 years I have consulted on dozens of induction incidents, eight of which resulted in fatalities. There were commonalities in each one. Just about every Incident Prevention reader will agree that one of the topics that receives the most attention across the power industry – in writing, training and conversation – is personal protective grounding (PPG). Not a week goes by that I don't email or talk to someone about PPG and, in particular, about dealing with induction.

At iP we discuss and share information as well as news about incidents involving induction, and yes, they do occur at an alarming rate. I can't point to any empirical evidence, but my colleagues and I think we, as an industry, are the reason for the confusion over PPG issues. We have been slow to evolve from grounding for the purpose of stabilizing electrical systems and protecting equipment, to grounding for the protection of workers. Even the language of the OSHA standard, to some, seems vague, contradictory or too technical. The ANSI standards establish sound procedures for protective arrangements, but they are not training resources for craft workers. Now, as infrastructure loads and system voltages continue to increase, there are corresponding hazards that were not even discussed just a generation ago. Those hazards are resulting in incidents and, worse, preventable incidents that risk the lives of power-line workers.

Continue reading
  13651 Hits
  0 Comments
Danny Raines, CUSP

Voice of Experience: Power Generation Safety and the OSHA Update

I have never worked in a generation plant, but I have visited many plants during my years of working with utilities. My experience has been in safety and skills training for transmission and distribution systems. I have also worked with generation employees on OSHA and DOT projects, and I am now in the process of helping a company revise their OSHA 1910.269 training program, including the portion that addresses 1910.269(v), “Power generation.” I have to say, I was surprised by the absence of changes to 1910.269(v) in the 2014 OSHA update. The revised section reads almost word for word the way it did in the original 1994 standard. As far as the changes that were made, they consist of a few clarifications and the addition of “the employer shall ensure” to several paragraphs. That language, which is found throughout the entire 2014 1910.269 standard, removes any implied directives and expectations. It also helps to ensure the employer’s accountability and responsibility for employee safety and safe work practices.

Continue reading
  8535 Hits
  0 Comments
Jim Vaughn, CUSP

August 2015 Q&A

Q: I'm wondering about an issue with a third-party safety analysis required by one of our clients. We are required to satisfy their safety requirements, including creating programs and safety manual changes worded to meet their criteria. I have issues with the required changes because they don't fit into our safety program.

A: You are not alone in your concerns. OSHA issued a warning about this exact topic, and it was a reason for changing the language in the proposed rules from June 2005. In the proposed rule, 29 CFR 1926.950(c) required contractors to follow a utility’s work rules as if they were statutory OSHA rules. Further, in the preamble to the proposed rules, OSHA clearly indicated the intent of the new rule’s language was to leverage utilities under the Multi-Employer Citation Policy in order to improve contractor safety. All of this created a concern for utilities that gave rise to third-party evaluations. The purpose seems to be both a means of qualifying the contractor and also providing a buffer between the contractor’s performance and the utility’s newly proposed responsibilities. For those readers who are not familiar with this process, the third party signs on to represent the utility in the evaluation of contractors. The utility also signs on to the process. The utility’s contractors, or proposed contractors, pay to join the third-party program and work to attain an acceptable rating for their safety program.

Continue reading
  5765 Hits
  0 Comments
Pam Tompkins, CSP, CUSA, CUSP

Understanding OSHA Electric Power Training Requirements

Understanding OSHA Electric Power Training Requirements

Are your employees performing work on or near electric power generation, transmission or distribution facilities? If so, whether they are performing electrical or nonelectrical work, electrical training is required. The training provided must ensure employees can identify electrical hazards and employ safe work methods to remove or control the hazards for their safety.

Covered Work
To simplify the application of OSHA 29 CFR 1910.269 and 1926 Subpart V, many companies use the term “covered work,” which includes work areas with electrical system hazards. For example, the construction of a power plant is the same as general building construction until the plant begins startup and commissioning. Once electrical systems are started, the job tasks become covered work due to the additional electrical system hazards.

Another example is the construction of a substation. Substation construction is similar to general building construction until the substation becomes energized or is being built in an area with transmission lines. Consider the difference between a substation built in an open field with no transmission lines and a substation built under transmission lines. Although each substation has hazards, the substation under the transmission lines has electrical hazards that would not be found in the substation built in an open field. The substation built under transmission lines is considered covered work due to the electrical system hazards.

Continue reading
  12733 Hits
  0 Comments
Raffi Elchemmas, AEP, MBA

Making the Switch

Making the Switch

It is an undisputed and well-known fact that workers’ use of manual tools increases repetitive movement, introduces awkward working postures and elevates the risk of ergonomic injuries and illnesses. Throughout the past decade, the utility industry has done a great job of recognizing these ergonomic safety issues, and a number of utility tool manufacturers have responded by developing new battery-operated tools and tool features that address them. Slowly but surely, ergonomic safety is increasing in the workplace as investor-owned utilities, contractors, cooperatives and municipalities make the switch from manual to battery-operated tools.

However, even with the progress that’s been made, there are many workers who are still using manual cutting and crimping methods on job sites across the country, which means those individuals face a greater likelihood of carpal tunnel syndrome, tendonitis, sciatica, sprains, strains, soft tissue damage and other injuries.

According to the most recent data available from the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics, among upper body injuries involving the repetitive use of tools, approximately 61 percent involve injury to the hands and wrists, 20 percent involve injury to the shoulders, 10 percent involve injury to the arms and 9 percent involve injury to the trunk and back. Signs of these of musculoskeletal disorders include decreased range of motion, decreased grip strength, swelling, cramping and loss of function. Other symptoms of these injuries include numbness, pain, tingling and stiffness.

Continue reading
  10698 Hits
  0 Comments
Derek Sang, CSHEP, QSSP

How to Navigate the FR Clothing Marketplace

How to Navigate the FR Clothing Marketplace

When the original version of the OSHA 1910.269 standard was published, flame-resistant (FR) clothing wasn’t even mentioned. The dangers associated with electric arcs were known, but the standard only required that an employer not allow an employee to wear clothing that, when exposed to flames or electric arcs, could increase the extent of injury sustained by the employee. This was covered under 1910.269(l)(6)(iii). The rule eliminated the use of garments constructed with synthetics such as polyester, nylon, rayon and acetate, which could melt and drip, and led to the adoption of clothing made with 100 percent cotton. The problem was that non-FR cotton – once exposed to thermal energies beyond its ignition point – will ignite and continue to burn, thus adding to an injury.

Now that the much-anticipated revisions to the 1910.269 standard have been published, they have introduced a number of new challenges to the electric utility industry and those entrusted with their employees’ safety. Specifically, page 20317 of the final rule (see www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/FR-2014-04-11/pdf/2013-29579.pdf) states that the “new provisions for protection from electric arcs include new requirements for the employer to: Assess the workplace to identify employees exposed to hazards from flames or from electric arcs, make reasonable estimates of the incident heat energy to which the employee would be exposed, ensure that the outer layer of clothing worn by employees is flame resistant under certain conditions, and generally ensure that employees exposed to hazards from electric arcs wear protective clothing and other protective equipment with an arc rating greater than or equal to the estimated heat energy.”

Continue reading
  9671 Hits
  0 Comments
Laura McMillan

Arrive Alive

Arrive Alive

On a clear, sunny day following a fierce thunderstorm the night before, Mark drove off to work. The schedule for the day was busy with repairing downed lines in several heavily trafficked neighborhoods followed by some scheduled maintenance at a router station. Mark met up with his crew, reviewed the schedule and then the team headed out for what they expected to be a long day. The crew was experienced, though, so Mark felt confident they would be able to complete their list of tasks.

In the driver’s seat of the crew cab on the way to repairing the downed lines, Mark thought about the task ahead; it would pose a challenge, but he and his team knew the drill and felt comfortable navigating to the assigned areas. In fact, he had grown up in one of the neighborhoods on their route and knew a few shortcuts. They were somewhat off the mapped routes, but Mark and the rest of the crew felt they could save some time by following the shortcuts. Indeed, the crew did save some time and found themselves a bit ahead of schedule.

Continue reading
  12651 Hits
  0 Comments
Jim Vaughn, CUSP

Train the Trainer 101: Back to Basics: ‘Gentlemen, This is a Football’

I recently spent several weeks studying an incident, trying to understand how it had happened and – more importantly – how it could have been prevented. Maybe the answer was associated with human performance, or maybe culture, or it could have been procedures, or ... well, maybe it could have been associated with any number of things. In other words, even with all of my experience and training, I had a hard time finding the singular root cause. This dilemma made me recall a question I missed on an engineer-in-training exam I took in the 1970s. The question had ladder diagrams and loop schematics and required me to determine why indicator light I-107 was off. After a long study of the supporting documents and employing all of my superior intellect, I proudly answered the question 100 miles off. Why? The correct answer was, “The lamp was burned out”; this is probably why I never became an engineer.

Continue reading
  7845 Hits
  0 Comments
Danny Raines, CUSP

Voice of Experience: Fundamentals of Underground Padmount Transformers

In recent months Incident Prevention has received several questions about underground (UD) padmount transformers, so in this installment of “Voice of Experience,” I’d like to take the time to cover the general aspects of these types of transformers.

To begin, there are a few different types of single-phase and three-phase UD padmounts: live front with exposed live primary parts, 600-amp bolt-on elbows and loop feed with bushings and elbows. All of these transformers are available in several voltage ranges.

The proper PPE must be worn when an employee is opening, entering and working on energized transformers. This includes a rated hard hat, eye and face protection, rubber gloves, heavy leather boots and arc-rated FR clothing. Additionally, all PPE must be worn by any employee exposed to energized equipment and cables until the transformer has been de-energized and checked for the absence of voltage, and all exposed parts have been properly grounded.

Continue reading
  15517 Hits
  0 Comments
Jim Vaughn, CUSP

June 2015 Q&A

Q: Are there any changes to steel-toe boot requirements for lineworkers in the recently revised OSHA 1910.269 standard?

A: OSHA still leaves it to employers to decide whether hard-toe or protective footwear is required. As with all other PPE, the decision should be made based on risks and history. Wearing safety footwear is not required by the PPE rule. However, what is required in OSHA 29 CFR 1910.136, “Foot protection,” is a mandatory assessment of the work environment. The rule states that the employer “shall ensure that each affected employee uses protective footwear when working in areas where there is a danger of foot injuries due to falling or rolling objects, or objects piercing the sole, or when the use of protective footwear will protect the affected employee from an electrical hazard, such as a static-discharge or electric-shock hazard, that remains after the employer takes other necessary protective measures.”

Continue reading
Recent Comments
Guest — Eddie Taunton
I believe the question on grounding through a switch is derived from the note in 1910.269(n) which states: Note to paragraph (n)(4... Read More
Thursday, 09 July 2015 14:07
Guest — Jim Vaughn
Eddie, thanks for the suggestion and I apologize for not getting to this comment earlier. There is no issue with grounding throug... Read More
Wednesday, 09 September 2015 11:39
  7521 Hits
  2 Comments
Ted Granger, CSSBB, CUSP

OSHA and the Host-Contractor Relationship

OSHA and the Host-Contractor Relationship

The revisions to OSHA 29 CFR 1910.269(a)(3) and 1926.950(c) regarding information transfer have brought many changes to the relationship between host and contract employers in the utility industry. As OSHA noted in the preamble to the revised standard, the existing Multi-Employer Citation Policy is insufficient to ensure workplace safety, and hence the agency has implemented a host-contract employer information transfer standard. The following article will shine light on what information must be communicated by which employer as well as how it should be communicated.

Continue reading
Recent comment in this post
Guest — Joe Foster CSP, CUSP
informative article, thank you,
Wednesday, 11 March 2020 08:24
  17279 Hits
  1 Comment
Ed Hunt, CUSP

The Roller-Coaster Life Cycle of IEEE 1307

The Roller-Coaster Life Cycle of IEEE 1307

IEEE 1307 is a little-known work group that is part of a larger IEEE subcommittee known as ESMOL, which stands for Engineering in the Safety, Maintenance and Operation of Lines. Both IEEE 1307 and ESMOL fall under the umbrella of the IEEE Transmission and Distribution Committee. IEEE 1307 is also the title of a utility fall protection consensus standard that has existed since the early 1990s. In light of the recent OSHA changes to fall protection, it seems appropriate to spread the knowledge about this industry standard.

Continue reading
  10026 Hits
  0 Comments
Kekai Batungbacal, CUSP

Facing Unique Challenges

Facing Unique Challenges

Established in 1891 by a royal charter from King David Kalakaua, today Hawaiian Electric provides electric service to 95 percent of the state of Hawai‘i. The company has approximately 1.4 million customers on five islands, with Hawaiian Electric providing service to O‘ahu; subsidiary Maui Electric providing service to Maui, Moloka‘i and Lana‘i; and subsidiary Hawai‘i Electric Light providing service to Hawai‘i Island.

The state of Hawai‘i is located in the middle of the Pacific Ocean, about 2,000 miles away from the coast of the continental United States. This isolated geographic location, combined with the state’s clean energy initiatives, continues to pose unique challenges to Hawaiian Electric as the company strives to meet the demands of customers and the state’s Public Utilities Commission for lower bills and increased levels of renewable energy.

Continue reading
  8929 Hits
  0 Comments
Jim Vaughn, CUSP

Train the Trainer 101: The OSHA-EEI Subpart V Settlement

In February of this year, Edison Electric Institute (EEI) circulated an agreement with OSHA. This agreement – which can be viewed at www.osha.gov/dsg/power_generation/SubpartV-final-settlement.html – ended the petition for review filed over several new provisions of the April 11, 2014 final rule affecting the general and construction industry rules for transmission, distribution and line clearance work. The agreement as delivered consisted of the final agreement and four exhibits that specified the agreed-upon terms. Exhibit A is a series of 46 questions and answers reflecting more detailed terms of new enforcement dates and general terms of agreement found in exhibits B and C. Since the Q&A in Exhibit A and the scope clarification for line clearance tree trimming in Exhibit D are pretty straightforward, we won't treat them here, but we will attempt to simplify and illuminate as best we can the terms found in exhibits B and C. At the time of this writing, the agreements were not signed by all parties, but we hope and assume the agreement will go forward as written.

Continue reading
  9493 Hits
  0 Comments
Danny Raines, CUSP

Voice of Experience: OSHA Updates to Arc-Rated FR Clothing Requirements

Over the last few months I have delivered several presentations and webinars on the recent revisions to OSHA 29 CFR 1910.269. During these sessions, attendees asked for clarification on a variety of topics, particularly arc-rated flame-resistant (FR) clothing. This month’s “Voice of Experience” is devoted to helping readers understand more about the impact of OSHA’s changes on this subject.

Continue reading
  14001 Hits
  0 Comments
Jim Vaughn, CUSP

April 2015 Q&A

Q: We are a 100-year-old municipality and we have discovered some wood tools and a baker board in a long-overlooked storage area. The tools are rotted and termite-damaged, but the situation raised a question: Is it permitted to use wood hot sticks?

A: We did some checking with manufacturers and most agree that wood tools were first replaced by fiberglass-reinforced plastic (FRP) in the 1950s when utilities started transmission voltages over 240 kV. The first published FRP manufacturing standard was for fiberglass tools in the 1960s. We don't currently know of any consensus standards for wood tools, but the 2009 version of IEEE 516 states that some wood may still be in use. Additionally, OSHA still has a voltage withstand test for wood tools, so we assume that means that it is not prohibited to use wood tools that meet the standard for both electrical and physical integrity.

Continue reading
  7697 Hits
  0 Comments
Allen L. Clapp, P.E.

The Importance of Matching Evidence Marks in Accident Investigations

I have personally investigated more than 800 incidents involving serious permanent injury, death, equipment failure and structural failure. Time after time, we were pulled in late to assist with investigations in which early investigators had failed to properly investigate the incidents. They had jumped to erroneous conclusions, thus resulting in incorrect admissions, strategies or other actions in the related litigations. When properly analyzed, each incident was shown to have occurred differently than originally assumed, and often a different party or action was the precipitative cause. Finding this out late in the game really hampered effective defense or prosecution, resulting in higher litigation and settlement costs, and even in improper jury decisions because the jury believed the earlier, confusing conclusions.

Continue reading
  7832 Hits
  0 Comments
Ken Palmer

Measuring, Planning and Cutting Methods for Chainsaw Operators

Measuring, Planning and Cutting Methods for Chainsaw Operators

The first two articles in this series discussed the risks of chainsaw operation as well as chainsaw safety, planning and precision felling techniques. In this final article, I will discuss several other topics that chainsaw operators should be knowledgeable about, including how to estimate tree height, make an open face notch and use felling wedges.

Estimating Tree Height
An important part of felling trees is the ability to estimate a tree’s height in order to determine its position as it falls, hits the ground and comes to rest. Accurate height estimation allows the operator to determine if felling the whole tree is truly the best approach in a given situation and, if it is, helps the operator to avoid hitting or brushing against obstacles, hanging up trees and leaving behind dangerous branch hangers. Remember that the height of the felling cut will affect the felling path and the position of the tree when it reaches the ground.

Continue reading
  18696 Hits
  0 Comments
David W. Bowman

Growing a Human Performance Culture

Growing a Human Performance Culture

Human performance methods help us to understand some key aspects of business: accountability, conservative decision-making, and overall commitment to goals and values. These fundamental principles comprise a larger objective known as organizational alignment.

The concept of organizational alignment derives from years of studying, using and teaching human performance techniques, and even from an old TV rerun, which I’ll soon discuss. The constant challenge is demonstrating to employees how to relate to management and vice versa. I have continued to search for the reason why there are disconnects. It seems that everyone wants the same things, but the processes to achieve them do not reflect these shared goals.

Continue reading
Recent comment in this post
Guest — Carlos Abarca Serrano
Excellent article, I'm hopping to get as much as I can from it. Clearly this things are unfortunately forgotten by a lot of manage... Read More
Tuesday, 03 March 2015 09:16
  15330 Hits
  1 Comment

KNOWLEDGE, INSIGHT & STRATEGY FOR UTILITY SAFETY & OPS PROFESSIONALS

360 Memorial Drive, Suite 10, Crystal Lake, IL 60014 | 815.459.1796 | This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.
© 2004 - 2020 Incident Prevention. All Rights Reserved.