Safety Report

Fatality

 

On March 17, 2010 we lost another young lineman, IBEW Local 1245 member Maximiliano “Max” Martinez, as the result of an on the job accident.

Brother Martinez, a PG&E Lineman in General Construction, died around 10:00 in the morning while working in an underground J-Box in a residential neighborhood of Benicia.

A five-year PG&E employee, Martinez was initiated into the IBEW in August of 2005.  He worked out of the Calistoga yard.

Local 1245 Business Reps. Ralph Armstrong, Mike Saner, Joe Osterlund and Mark Rolow all came to the scene of the accident shortly after it occurred.  Two bargaining unit members will be part of the company’s serious incident investigation.  CalOSHA is also investigating.

Max was 26 years old.

Safety Meetings

 

The week of March 22 included four more safety meeting presentations using Jeff “Odie” Espenship, a retired Air Force fighter pilot, who delivered his “Target Leadership” message to more of our members.  On March 22 we addressed members from the City of Redding, City of Shasta Lake, WAPA, LMUD at the City of Redding’s Council Chambers.  On March 23 this message was given to members from the City of Roseville, Truckee Donner, WAPA , City of Lodi and City of Gridley.  March 24 included a meeting with MID, TID, City of Lodi, and Merced while on the March 25 we finished up at the City of Santa Clara with their crews along with crews from Alameda and City of Palo Alto.

This was all in addition to the nine separate presentations at eight different locations to approximately 4,000 members at PGE and SMUD.  The message here was that “Operational excellence, safety, and productivity will all come as a byproduct of individual responsibility and leadership”.

Comments and feedback from those who attended those sessions are encouraged.

We will also be reconvening the same group that met November/December  on April 1, 2010 for a one-day meeting to discuss a couple of ideas as well as where we are and where we are headed regarding safety.

 

Second Quarter IBEW /PG&E

Safety Meeting – March 3, 2010

Painters and grounding

 

It was reported during this meeting that PG&E has prepared a variance request to CalOSHA on this topic and should have had it submitted within 10 days of this meeting.

A brief overview of this topic since it has been a carry over item for some time now:

The use of painters to install grounds in substations as well as on towers with one Qualified Electrical Worker present has become an issue on whether or not practice is acceptable per the CalOSHA standards.

Our position on this is that the CalOSHA requirement states that there needs to be two qualified electrical workers or one qualified electrical worker and one qualified electrical worker in-training and painters are neither.  PG&E position is that it does meet the standard since the company has provided training to these employees.

Like I mentioned at the start of this section this is getting close to some type of resolution and will report on it as soon as there is movement.

 

Safety Attire

 

During this meeting the company announced that this new letter was complete and the final signature was being added that day.  Shortly afterwards a copy of this new policy was given to me which in some aspects will be an improvement over what was currently being required.

Safety vests I feel is a big improvement since the company backed off of its original self imposed requirement on all outerwear  meeting the HRC2 requirement.  They removed this requirement on the vests only and by doing so the company will be moving to the mesh type vest which should be cooler in the summer months.

Hard hat requirements have not changed much but a copy of what went out or is going out is covered below;

SAFETY VESTS

The Flame Resistant (FR) vests introduced in late 2008 were uncomfortable to wear in the heat of the summer, and we have found that they are fading at a rate much faster than anticipated. In order to address both of these issues, we have identified and approved a new vest made of mesh material that will maintain its color for an extended period of time and that meets the new ANSI visibility standard. These new vests (shown below) are now available to be ordered. However, in order to effectively manage budgets, we encourage you to wait until existing vests fade or are damaged or ruined.

When deciding which vest (Class III or Class II) to wear, employees should comply with the following regulations:

Class III Vests – Required in traffic areas where vehicle speeds exceed 50 mph; high-volume traffic and unmonitored equipment movement; users and vehicle operators with multi-task loads that divert attention and increase risk; complex backgrounds; work activities taking place in or near unimpeded vehicle traffic; work activities taking place under icy or snowy conditions; and work activities taking place in low light or at nighttime.

A traffic area is defined as any roadway, highway, freeway, street or parking lot area where employees are exposed to construction vehicular traffic, as well as construction sites and PG&E yards where employees on foot are exposed to moving construction vehicles or equipment.

Class II Vests – Required in all other situations.

Long Sleeve Orange FR Shirts with Reflective Material – In addition to the new safety vests, the long-sleeve orange FR shirt with reflective material also meets the Class III standard and the ANSI visibility standard. These shirts are available in the FR catalog (M038Y-FOR). Employees wearing these shirts are not required to wear a safety vest over them.

Substations:

A company-approved florescent orange FR Class II safety vest or shirt is required whenever working in a PG&E substation where personnel on foot are exposed to moving vehicles or equipment.

Since construction activities involve vehicular or equipment traffic, all PG&E employees and contractors are required to wear an approved florescent orange FR safety vest or shirt whenever construction is taking place in the substation. On the other hand, if an employee is working alone in a substation with no vehicular or equipment traffic then he or she is not required to wear a florescent orange safety vest or shirt. However, it would be a good safe practice to do so.

PG&E-Approved Traffic Vests:

Class II – Day and night use for speeds under 50 mph

New ANSI-approved Class II Traffic Vest.

-Flame Retardant, can be worn in Arc Flash Hazard boundaries

-Traffic requirement: must be worn day or night at speeds under 50 mph

Class III – Day and night use for speeds above 50 mph

New ANSI-approved Class III Traffic Vest.

-Flame Retardant, can be worn in Arc Flash Hazard boundaries

-Traffic requirement: Must be worn day or night at speeds above 50 mph

HARD HATS

Hard hats approved by the company with the appropriate PG&E logo shall be worn at all times while in the field, on the job site or in the yard loading and unloading materials and tools. Hard hats not only provide protection, but also professional visibility to our customers. Hard hats must be worn as intended (brim side forward, covering and protecting the face), except where specialty equipment (face shields, welding hood, etc.) must be attached. Only those items approved and intended to be worn under a hard hat are allowable. These approved items are identified in the Safety Equipment Guide (SEG) on the Safety, Health and Claims Web page. Additional details regarding hard hat requirements can also be found in the Code of Safe Practices.

Gas Leak Surveyors and Mark and Locate employees may perform their work without hard hats when working in areas where vehicular traffic is not an issue and they are not in harm’s way. However, they must wear a PG&E hat with an obvious logo to help with identification issues.

Hard hats are required at all times in a PG&E substation, unless working in a control room.

If there is ever a doubt as to when to wear a hard hat, always err on the side of safety and wear it.

Climbing Gear

 

During this meeting I was told that the company has prepared a proposal on how this program will work and that John Parks will be presenting this to PGE senior management in the near future.  I anticipate some problems with this proposal if it is delivered remains as described by Mr. Parks to me in this meeting.  I have on numerous occasions expressed these concerns and the potential for mass shortages in the equipment as well as increased costs associated with it.

Their plan, if they move forward as described by Mr. Parks indicates that the initial cost will be around $180,000 the first year and then $125,000 each year after that.  I feel these costs have the potential to be 10 times that the first year and then next to nothing after that if they move forward as is.

 

Switching Platforms

 

In November it was reported that there was a safety concern over switching platforms in the field that were either missing and/or grounds have been removed.  This situation is a real concern and the problem seems to be more so on transmission structures.  Without the proper grounding platform in place and everything bonded together creates a potentially fatal step and touch potential hazard for the switchman if a fault were to occur at that location while switching.  The platforms must be in place and grounded to the same location as the switch handle when you are required to perform switching at one of these locations.

During the March meeting it was reported that PGE is revising the standard on how to deal with this situation in the field.  These requirements have been communicated to the 35 transmission troubleman since they are the most apt to come across this situation in the field where there are approx. 1,800 switches that have the potential of something being removed from them.  Communications to the rest of the troubleman who may have to switch at these locations is  forthcoming.

 

Commercial Drivers Fatigue Management program

 

As a result of the new law that passed last fall and became effective Jan. 1, 2010 that makes drivers of utility service vehicles exempt from the hours of service requirements in the state of California, PGE has been working on a document to help clarify these requirements.  This document should be out in early April but centers around the requirement of not allowing CDL holders to operate these vehicles if they are fatigued.  These drivers will no longer be required to fill out log books however they will still be limited to the number of hours they will be allowed to drive in non-emergency situations as well as maximum allowable driving hours in an 8 day period.

 

FR Clothing Cycle and Allowances

 

The new clothing cycle is fast approaching and therefore it was discussed at this meeting who was taking over the program and negotiations for PGE.  The company’s FR Clothing team met the week of the 22nd and will be preparing an allowance proposal for the 2010/2011 clothing cycle.  We have not seen this proposal yet.

Headlight on the new Ford Trucks

It was reported at the January advisory Council meeting here in Vacaville that the new Ford Super-Duty pickups being used by PGE had issues with the lighting.  The claim was that the headlights were recessed further than the older models which resulted in reduced side illumination.

This was brought up for discussion in this joint meeting with the company stating that they were well aware of the situation and has looked into it.  Although the side illumination is less than the older models these newer models still fall within the National Transportation Safety Administrations standards for side illumination and are not a concern as it pertains to safety.  It was mentioned that some vehicles have been retrofitted with a kit that increased side illumination but that practice has stopped.

4 Cone Policy

A lot of discussions have been generated around PGE new four cone policy.  The company has stated that due to the large amount of backing accidents that continue to take place the need to implement something that would reduce this trend and feel this policy could help. I have received several comments from our members on this and although these members are complying with this rule, feel it may be impractical in some situations such as power plants.    I was told during this meeting that the 24”-4 cone policy was only applicable to public roadways.  It may not be applicable in some situations such as the power plant setting.

Emergency Response Stand-by Employees

A near miss was reported when a non-traditional employee was dispatched to wire down call during the last major storm.  The employee was directed to remove a section of wire that was down and he complied.  The issue is a systemic issue with the potential if not corrected to lead to a serious accident.  The company states that they need the presence of a PGE employee on site to keep the public clear of the wire until a Qualified Electrical Worker arrives to assess the situation and clear up the hazard.

These employees are only expected to barricade or cordon off the hazard area and not assess or make corrections the reported problem.  This incident has led to a new tailboard document to address the employee’s responsibility when responding during an emergency.  There is still some concerns however over the ability to safely perform these functions when the employee doesn’t really understand what he is looking for as well as the concern for the public who seems to gravitate to the PGE vehicle when it is on site.  If the customer has been without power the first thing they want to do is discuss with the PGE personnel on site what is happening which may bring the customer within the hazard area.

 

1245 Safety & Health Committee

March, 2010

The Local 1245 Safety and Health Committee met on March 18, 2010 in Vacaville at the Local 1245 Union Hall.  Committee members present were; Robert Burkle, Michael Gomes, Darryl Rice, Art Torres, Al White, Dan Boschee and Ralph Armstrong. Committee member absent were Sergio Munez.

First order of business was to review minutes from the prior months meeting.  No changes were noted.

Topics discussed and action items assigned:

The committee discussed the items listed above from the Joint IBEW /PGE joint safety meeting.

 

Accident Reporting

 

Forms and guidelines are on the website. Units should start using them as part of their unit meeting and submit them to this committee whether or not there are accidents or concerns. This should be a standard reporting practice at every unit meeting every month. All accidents reported this month on the green form as well as accidents reported at the safety committee meeting is listed below;

This is our best resource to share the information with the rest of the membership. We are continuing to see an increase in the number of these forms being turned in and want to thank everyone who is doing this.

• A GSR working in a low income housing area opened a steel door which had the hinges removed which allowed the door to fall on him.  The door weight approx. 200lbs and injured the employees shoulder.
• Two equipment mechanics were repairing an air hose reel and in the process of disassembling the unit the rewind spring inside sprung out, striking one of the crew members on the hand and cutting 2 fingers.  The injured mechanic received  2 stitches on his finger and his hand was placed in a cast with a thumb bone splint.

 

Near Miss

 

The Safety Committee is encouraging everyone to report all near misses to the committee through our IBEW1245 Safety Matters web page.  Anyone with a near miss should sanitize the report to omit names and companies as the intent of reporting a near is to provide others with information about potential hazards that members find in the field in order to prevent awareness to others of those hazards.

 

• During the January storms a General Forman for a tree contractor was driving when he came across a downed tree blocking traffic in both directions.  The tree had taken down a 12kV power line.  While waiting for CHP and Fire Dept. to arrive the employee secured the scene.  During the wait the employee observed smoke, steam, arching and an occasionally fire balls coming from the downed power line.  The local utility crew arrived and it was verified that the line was still energized.
• A lineman was in the process of installing a new service to an older house when his foot broke through the roof.  The roof was in pretty bad shape and his foot broke through some  rotten wood.

 

General Discussions

 

There were some general discussions during this meeting which topics included;

 

• Radio communications in the Downtown and surrounding hills of Oakland is less than adequate.  Need to verify and discuss a contingency plan to deal with emergency situations.
• Committee discussed a monthly safety report which mentioned tree crews trimming trees that are burning in the transmission lines due to neglect.
• Discussed a company’s proposal to connect generators to customers for extended outages or emergency shut downs.  This was also from a Monthly Safety Report
• There was an extended discussion on grounding buss bar in substations with large and heavy grounds.  One company had purchased hot sticks with Sheppard hooks which are designed to use as an aid in lifting these grounds to the buss bar.
• It was also discussed, as a result of the Max Martinez accident, the feasibility of having a notification system in place to report to the members when an accident such as this has occurred.  When word of this accident hit the media and local radio stations members were scrambling to find out what happened.  It becomes a huge distraction to the workers in the field as they try to confirm or disregard the reports that they are hearing.  I mentioned when we were back visiting Kansas city Power and Light last summer that they had a text message system in place to notify the crews in the field the basic generic information available at the time.

 

Next meeting scheduled for April, 15,  2010 in Vacaville

 

Submitted by,

Ralph Armstrong, Chair

Local 1245 Safety Committee