LINEMAN PEER-TO-PEER SAFETY PROGRAM ADVANCES
The Locals Peer to Peer Lineman safety campaign had 3 days of meetings this month. On Aug. 31 the committee met to finalize the presentations that were to take place over the following 2 days. On Sept. 1 the committee presented what they had to the original full committee and on the 2nd the committee presented what it had to a handful of managers from 5 different utilities. It has been the direction and overwhelming wishes of the committee to keep this as a Local union campaign and will be carried out that way.
The next steps are to set up a schedule to roll this out to our members. The plan is to get this presentation and open discussion out to as many members as possible. This will take some time and logistical planning but getting the message out that we all need to do everything in our power to stop unsafe work practices on the job. We can’t afford to continue to have the number of fatalities and serious accidents that we’ve experienced lately. More to come on this in the very near future.
Safety Concerns at DCPP
There continue to be questions and concerns being expressed to the local over various issues and management directions out at DCPP. We have been working with local management and corporate safety to have the company address these concerns sometimes not as quickly as we all would like. Corporate safety has on a regular basis investigated and provided guidance to local management on all concerns that have been relayed to them and has assured us they do not want anyone to violate safety rules or put anyone in danger of getting injured.
It is important to all that these issues are corrected and until they are all hazards will need to be mitigated either by changes in procedures, policies or the use of additional PPE and as always if the hazards are present it is everyone’s responsibility to not perform any work that would lead to injury. Please refer to your workplace postings for additional information on this.
Painters and Grounds Update
On September 22, 2010 there was a joint meeting held with CalOSHA, PGE Safety and the IBEW to discuss the company’s request for a variance that would allow the practice of having the tower painters continue to install personal protective grounds. This has been an issue and debate that has been on-going for over 2 years now.
The company’s position has been that the employees in this work group have been sufficiently trained in this practice with over 5 years of documentation showing there has been no safety issues reported. The company stated that this is because of the heightened awareness of these employees and their attention to detail when performing these tasks.
The unions’ position has been that it is not only a violation of current CalOSHA law but it is allowing non-qualified electrical workers to maintain minimum approach distances which were for Qualified Electrical Workers only.
CalOSHA will be either preparing a report approving the company’s request or denying it. Either way this issue is close to resolution with CalOSHA deciding the final outcome.
FR Cover-alls Replacement PGE
There are a couple of people who have stated that the FR Cover-alls that were issued in the initial clothing allowance are starting to wear out. These cover-alls were intended for double layer situations when the arc-flash calorie exposures are greater than 8 calories.
The life cycle for these items should last considerably longer for the full time users since they are not considered daily wear however if these items are wearing out it has been advised to notify your supervisor of the need to have them replaced.
Tree Compliance Issues
There is a long standing issue which has even led to a letter in 2003 from CalOSHA prohibiting the second worker of a 2 man crews to run the chippers at the same time the other crew member is engaged in line clearance tree trimming. This practice is still be required by some tree company’s in the area.
A big issue here is this appears to be a direct violation of the workplace postings that state “No employer shall require an employee to perform work that is in violation of CalOSHA law.” We are being told that some of these workers are being harassed or intimidated to perform this work or be sent home.
Other concerns are covered in CalOSHA standard 2940.7 which I also attached specifically, (a) (2) (A) and (d) (1) (B) (2) both of which deal with workers on the grounds exposure to the vehicle while the equipment is exposed to energized equipment. In all cases the chipper is attached to the truck which puts the employee on the ground at risk for touch and step potential while the boom is in the air.
We are being told that CalOSHA has been made aware of these concerns and are investigating them. Our staff will be meeting with CalOSHA and one of the companies to discuss this.
Fed OSHA releases new standard on Cranes and Derricks
This new rule takes effect November 8th of this year. However state run OSHA programs such as California have until February 2011. There are some requirement delays which will be helpful for all and they are the operator certification requirement which has been pushed out until November 2014. Something else to note is that this requirement specifically covers construction activities and not maintenance. That definition is very loose and even though someone may work for a utility any upgrades to the system can be considered construction
As mentioned in previous reports some of the differences which will need to be addressed by CalOSHA are the use of digger derricks. CalOSHA has a full exemption for digger derricks where the new standard will only exempt while working on power poles. So if this equipment is being used to set pad mount transformers or in substations or lifting material the exemption would not be applicable. Two more issues are the capacity requirements and the rigger training requirement. Currently under CalOSHA 5006.1 the requirements are anything that has a lifting capacity greater than 14,999 lbs or a boom length greater than 25’. The new fed standard impacts cranes with a capacity greater than 1 ton and the rigger certification will be new.
There is some concerns about Minimum Approach Distances however if the work is being performed by an employer covered under Subpart V of the Fed standard which applies to power line work the MAD’s of that standard apply.
Quarterly Safety Meeting
The joint PGE /IBEW Health and Safety meeting has been postpone this quarter for several reasons. There were several follow-up items from the second quarter meeting that did not get taken care of due to the fatality investigation and the San Bruno gas transmission explosion. A new date has not been set yet.
Accident Reporting
Forms and guidelines are on the website. Units should use 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 are listed below:
There has been a report of an accident that has resulted in flash burns in the east bay area. Details of this accident are limited right now but reports of 1st 2nd and some 3rd degree burns to the injured member. Early reports are that the flash occurred while the member was working on an overhead switch that was reported by the troubleman as inoperable. More details as they become available.
On September 29th An Apprentice Measurement and Control Mechanic, was struck by a third-party vehicle while working near the intersection of West Ripon Road and Fredrick Avenue in the town of Ripon. The employee was working on the road when a vehicle entered the coned work zone and struck the employee. The vehicle then left the scene. The employee is being transported to the hospital and word on his condition at this time are limited.
An incident occurred to a contract crew that was assigned to hand dig holes in on Forrest service land in Southern California. The crew was one of the last to leave the area as they were trying to finish a hole they had started. When they finished they threw their tools in the back of the pick-up truck and headed out down a dirt road. Somewhere along the way a gas can in the bed of the truck fell over. It appears that a metal object such as the digging bar fell across the leads of a battery on a piece of equipment in the back of the truck and ignited the spilled fuel. The foreman in the passenger seat noticed the fire and told the driver to stop. When the vehicle stopped the flames that were being fanned towards the rear of the truck by its movement shifted forward engulfing the cab. The passenger of the truck had no trouble getting out however the driver struggled with his seatbelt for a short time before releasing it. This resulted in some burns to the drivers arm and upper body area.
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 promote awareness to others of those hazards. The latest near-miss is reported on the Near Miss page of this website.
Submitted by,
Ralph Armstrong