powerstream powerpoint template - home - esasafe · • corporate overview ... – overview of...

Powerstream’s Territory

Purpose

• Why…. The intent of the Development and Expansion Expo is to provide information on new issues, new processes.

• Provide reinforcement on important themes.

• TARGET AUDIENCE INVITED:- Contractors - Municipalities- Developers - Regional Staff- Electrical Consultants - Home Builders- Selected Suppliers- Telecom Companies- Gas Company

Our Agenda

• 7:30 – 8:15 Breakfast Buffet• 8:15 AM Welcome & Introductions• Corporate Overview • Engineering Update Health & Safety (THEME)• New Connections Process (PROCESSES)• 8:45 – 9:30 Visit Exhibition Booths (ISSUES)• 9:30 AM - Door Prize Draw

New Look

Development and Expansion Changes

- This has been an annual event of over 10 years- change in format this year allows specific focus of

interest areas- 45 – 60 minutes to visit specific tables of interest

Exhibitor Booths

• Administration• Locates• New Services &

Customer Service• Metering• E.S.A.

• Standards• Design• Inspections• Health & Safety• Conservation and

Demand Management

Physical Setup

Focus on SafetyPowerStream

Health and Safety Officer Eric Rozeboom

New Connections & UpgradesHow we have improved our

process to help serve you better!

April 10, 2008

Volume we are dealing with

More than 12,000 New Connections & Upgrades per year

Categories:• 6,000 to 7,000 New Connections per year• 2,000 Upgrades per year• 2,000 to 3,000 New Suite Metering Connections per year

(a relatively new market for PowerStream)

Two Major Changes

• New Connections Call Centre 905 - 417- 6900 ext 265721-877-963-6900 ext [email protected]

• 7 Digit Reference Number 0 8 # # # # #

mailto:[email protected]

Avenues for Success

• The compressed time frame for this type of venue allows attendees to focus on their area of concern

• Sufficient staff representation to handle all questions• Inclusion of ESA booth to tie in public safety on both

sides of the demarcation point

Promoting Electrical SafetyPromoting Electrical SafetyDon Pitman:

Manager of Communications and Energy Conservation

GWA

Who We Are:

Delivered Cost =2.5 cents kWh vs. 11 cents (approx.) (72 years later)

A Brief History: A Brief History: In 1916 the The Seymour Light Power

Company was purchased by the Ontario Government and placed under the control of the Hydro-Electric Power Commission of Ontario.

In 1929, the electric distribution system in the city was purchased by the City of Oshawa from the Ontario Government at a cost of $310,000 and the Oshawa Public Utilities Commission was born.

•To operate the electrical distribution system, City Council passed a by-law to establish a Public Utilities Commission of 5 members, which would include the mayor.

•The first election of members of this commission was held on January 6, 1930.

History Continued….

• The Commission soon outgrew it’s old location, at 26 King Street West. The result was the building at 100 Simcoe Street South, which opened in 1931, and housed both the electric and water departments..

History Cont….

Business in the 30Business in the 30’’ss

Safety AwarenessSafety Awareness

School Safety ProgramSchool Safety ProgramZapper The Safety DogZapper The Safety DogWatt Wise Safety TipWatt Wise Safety Tip

Our School Safety Program

School Safety ProgramSchool Safety Program

Elementary• 32 public• 14 catholic• 3 otherHigh Schools• 6 public• 2 catholic

The Audience

Approach to SchoolsApproach to SchoolsTwo routes, direct to a single school and organizationGo through higher channelsProvided a letter of introduction on behalf of our contractor.Contractor took it to the program coordinator for the Durham Board and the Separate BoardsProvided an outline of what we were going to do

Approach to Schools Cont.Approach to Schools Cont.Got a letter of approval from both BoardsSchool lists are usually providedPolice check is requiredContractor then made arrangements with the schools directly to schedule and deliver the materialContractor gets handled as all contractors would...insurance etc.

Delivering the messageDelivering the message• The program is set up so the presentations are done for

the entire school population primary, junior & intermediate

• We’ve set up a 3 year schedule where 16 elementary schools are completed each year.

• The schools visited in year 1 will be revisited in year 4• There are approximately 20000 elementary students in

Oshawa • This year we reached approximately 6000 students

Who Does It ? Who Does It ? Outside professionalSolution is turn keyInternal Resources were unavailableOne year ContractEvaluate at the end of thatContractor charges a daily rate

The ToolsThe Tools• Uses High Line Hazard or Hazard Hamlet

Display• Uses laptop, projection display system • Video camera and a video• Wireless sound system• Tools and clothing of the trade

High Line Hazard Unit

Overall layout

Safety Separation

Video UnitVideo Unit

Tools of the Tools of the trade and trade and

F.R. clothingF.R. clothing

•Head protection

•Insulators

•Wire samples

•Plugs

•Timer

•CFL

Wire Samples

Subject ContentElectrical Utility EquipmentSubstations, Transformers, Overhead & Underground circuitsHow to recognize incidents at homeWhat should I do if I doWho should I contact for outside electrical hazards wires down, i.e. a ball inside substation fenceDemonstration of utility specific tools, equipment & PPE used by utility staff.Focus on training & hazard id/recognition

Subject Content Cont.

Develop respect for electricity & awareness on how we can conserve electricity at homeAwareness of energy saving bulbsTips for energy conservation at homeAll lead to saving moneyTransfer this knowledge to family members

Ready for the future (safely)

Zapper The Safety DogZapper The Safety Dog

Website Cartoons :•Kite flying•Cat up a pole•Ball lost in a substation

www.opuc.on.ca

Zapper’s Electrical Safety

Checklist

Zapper’s Energy Conservation List

CostsCostsYou’re probably wondering what this costs.We have invested approximately $13000 per year for this program approximately $2.15 per studentWith the recent theft of copper, we hope this will raise the potential dangers of electricityThe feedback from each of the participating schools has been positiveThey can’t wait until our program returns to their school.

Teacher CommentsTeacher Comments“Well delivered and holding the students attention”“Most informative and the time passed quickly”“I have never seen the students so intrigued and quiet for a full 45 minutes”

Watt Wise Safety TipWatt Wise Safety Tip

Questions or Comments ?

www.opuc.on.ca

Product Safety Regulations

UAC MeetingMay 8, 2008

2

Agenda

• The Case for the Electrical Product Safety Regulation

• Bill 152 Legislative Amendments– Background– Overview of amendments

• Electrical Product Safety Regulation– Background– Overview of regulation

• Guideline Development Process– Timelines– Working Groups– Process– Principles & Outcomes

• Next Steps & Questions

Case for Expanded Role in Electrical Product Safety

4

Why respond to Unsafe Products?

• To reduce or eliminate exposure by consumers to product safety hazards.

• To enforce the section of the Ontario Electrical Safety Code (OESC) that requires approval of electrical products.

• To support the efforts of those manufacturers, retailers and distributors that comply with the certification and approval requirements; to create a level playing field.

5

ESA’s Prior Role in Electrical Product Safety

•

ESA approved products based on rules in the Ontario Electrical Safety Code (OESC).

•

ESA had limited authority in the Act to deal with unsafe product issues ∴

had to rely on the Code which did not provide much.

•

ESA’s approach to unsafe products focused on:– responding to complaints/reports about product

safety, and– conducting investigations prior to issuing safety

alerts.

•

No reporting requirements regarding consumer electrical products.

•

Inadequate provisions to deal with unapproved, counterfeit and unsafe products.

6

The defining Case

• ESA was alerted of suspected fires caused by defective refrigerators.

• The company did minimal public notification regarding the issue.

• A letter was sent to consumers alerting them of a ‘safety upgrade’.

• The Certification Organization would not do anything.

• The OFM and ESA warn the public of safety issues associated with the refrigerators.

7

CBC MARKETPLACE: YOUR HOME » DEFECTIVE PRODUCTS

Dangerous defects Broadcast: March 26, 2006

Do you have an affected LG fridge?

Latest notice from LG [PDF] (Ad appeared in major newspapers on March 24, 2006)The fridges were sold in Canada between June 2004 and April 2005.LG-branded models with serial numbers beginning with 405, 406, 407, 408, 409 and 410 are affected: 3-DOOR MODEL # LRFC 21760ST/SW LRFC25750SB/ST/SW/TT/W W2-DOOR MODEL # GR-729RN LRTX 18311WW LRTN 18320WW LRTX 18321BK/TT/WWConsumer s with an affected refrigerator should contact LG immediately at 1-888- 542-2623 or by email at [email protected].

http://www.cbc.ca/consumers/market/files/home/recalls/docs/mar24_ad.pdf

http://www.cbc.ca/consumers/market/files/home/recalls/docs/mar24_ad.pdf

mailto:[email protected]

The result….A loss in the confidence of the current product safety system

Identified gaps in ESA’s regulatory authority with respect to product safety

Increased demand for regulatory oversight by the Province

Which led to…

Bill 152 Legislative Amendments – Electricity Act, Part VIII

& Product Safety Regulation–

Ontario Regulation 438/07

10

Legislative Amendments Background

• Bill 152, Ministry of Government Services Consumer Protection and Service Modernization Act, 2006 received Royal Assent December 20, 2006.

• Bill 152, amended 53 separate Acts, The amendments to the Electricity Act were intended to:– Make ESA’s legislation consistent with other Delegated

Administrative Authorities (TSSA);– enhance ESA’s public safety mandate;– enhance electrical safety standards; and– strengthen ESA’s regulatory and enforcement powers.

11

Legislative Amendments

• Explicit authority to deal with electrical consumer products

• Regulation Making Authority

• Director’s Orders

• Enforcement powers

12

McGuinty government passes bill to strengthen consumer protection“Over the last few years, Ontario has become a leader in consumer protection, and we are building on this by enacting new laws and strengthening existing ones to protect the people of this province from the current realities of today’s marketplace,”

October 19, 2006

Bill 152 & Regulation 438/07

• The product safety and accident/incident reporting provisions were one of the major policy changes included in Bill 152.

13

Bill 152- media attention• The pre-introduction press

conference by the Minister generated unprecedented media coverage.

• It was estimated that over 3 million people saw the coverage.

• All coverage was positively received by viewers.

• The Minister pushed for the Product Safety regulations to be developed as soon as possible.

14

Increased Pressure

15

Product Safety Regulation Consultation Process

• Bill 152 received Royal Assent Dec 20

• Consultation material and draft regulation prepared February – May.

• Consultation Guide released on June 5.

• Key Stakeholder meeting on June 28.

• Comment/submission deadline June 29.

• Regulation finalized July 5-30

• Printed in Ontario Gazette on August 18.

16

Consultation Feedback

– Canadian Electricity Association– Canadian Standards Association

(two submissions)– Consumer Advocate, individual (two

submissions)– Consumer Advisory Council– Consumer’s Council of Canada– Electrical Contracting Company– Electricity Distributors Association– ESA Inspector– Hydro One – Individual Consumer– Electro-Federation Canada

– Industry Canada, Office of Consumer Affairs

– Intertek Testing Services – Local Distribution Company– Office of the Fire Marshall– OPCC, Member– QPS Evaluation Services– Retail Council of Canada– Standards Council of Canada,

CPIC– Underwriters Laboratories Inc.– Underwriters Laboratories of

Canada

23 separate written submissions were received from:

• All 23 submissions expressed support for the proposed regulation in principle.

17

ESA Unsafe Products Strategy Introduced in 2004

Supportive Legislation / Regulations

Resources, Partners

PreventionProduct Safety

Identification Incident ReportingRisk Assessment

ResponsePublic NotificationCorrective Action

Enforcement

Measure Results and Impact and Adjust as Needed

18

Elements of the Unsafe Product Strategy

• 22 specific elements formed the strategy

• Focused on all 5 strategic areas

• Addressed immediate needs by focusing on response

• Built the foundation for the future

19

Product Safety Regulation Rationale/Intent

The intent of the regulation is to address the 6 key areas in electrical product safety and to:– Ensure that products do not present a serious product hazard;– Ensure that electrical products are approved by ESA;– Ensure accountability for the safety of products offered for sale;– Ensure that the public is notified of unsafe products that pose a

risk to consumers; and– Ensure that appropriate corrective action is undertaken when an

approved product is subsequently found to be unsafe.

ProductSafety

IncidentReporting

RiskAssessment

PublicNotification

CorrectiveAction Enforcement

20

Regulation Overview• The Regulation, as passed, incorporates portions that have been

moved from the Ontario Electrical Safety Code (OESC) and new requirements.

• Portions moved from the OESC:– Product approval process – Prohibition regarding use of unapproved product– Prohibition regarding selling of unapproved product

• New Provisions under the Regulation:– Creation of rules for suspension/revocation of approval process– Revocation of recognition of CBs and FEs & requirement for rules– Reporting of serious incidents, accidents and product defects– Requirements for public notice– Requirement to assist ESA in investigations – Enforcement remedies to remove unapproved product from the

marketplace.

• Requirements for corrective action are being dealt with through the amendments to the Act (s. 113 (11) order making authority).

21

Overview of Regulation Application

• The regulation:– Only applies to electrical products and devices governed by the OESC;

– Creates a more transparent and improved process to address unsafe electrical products; and

– Addresses the sale and use of products that are not approved for the Ontario marketplace. These include:

– Counterfeit products (including products that bear fake certification marks);– Products that have never been certified and bear no certification mark; and– Products that have been approved by another jurisdiction, but do not bear

an approved Canadian certification mark.

22

Overview of Regulation Reporting of Incidents/Accidents

• Previously the OESC did not require the reporting of incidents involving electrical products.

• The regulation:– Defines serious electrical incident/accident;– Requires the reporting of incidents/accidents

as soon as practicable by:• A manufacturer (wholesaler or importer); or• A product distributor; or• A retailer; or• A certification organization or field evaluation agency.

• ESA has consulted on the development of guidelines for the reporting of incidents and accidents based on international best practices.

23

Overview of Regulation Risk Assessment

• Previously the OESC did not require ESA to undertake a risk assessment.

• ESA is committed to following a risk assessment approach to determine the type of corrective action warranted.

• Initially, ESA’s existing risk assessment model, is being used which includes:

– Analysis of the risk;– Risk being categorized as low, medium or high; and– Risk category used to determine appropriate

corrective action.

• ESA has consulted on the development of an enhanced risk assessment model based on best practices.

• The enhanced risk assessment model will be adopted, by a Director’s Order to have force in law.

RISK FACTOR CATEGORIES RISK FACTORS Points

Low 10

High 0High 5Low 0

Yes 5

No or N/A 0

10

5

0Yes 5No or N/A 0

Enclosure made of flammable material 5Heat producing product 5

5Voltage Level, higher than 240V 5

10High Energy emission 10Fail safe 0

Product TypeProtection Device 10

2050

High 5

Low or N/A 0

53

With Quality Control Programs e.g. ISO 9001 050

5No 3Yes 0

0

10

10

10

10

Intensive

Retailer with safety culture

PERCEPTION OF RISK

An individual's perception of a Risk is amplified if the product incident is:

In the news

Catastrophic

Cause of child injury

In the Health care facility

History of non-compliance with approval requirements

Location/Environment

Possibility of unqualified or un-inspected installation

Minor/Minimal

DEFINITION

Proximity to large numbers of people, number of users etc.

Product Use in Tandem with other electrical devices

Manufacturer

Prevalence: product availability/usage rates

Amount of Personal Contact/interface

Exposure

Unknown

Negative Impact of Product failure on other connected equipment

Possibility of Shock/Fire

Medium

Decision Criteria for Unsafe Products

Failure Mode

Widely available

User Qualifications and Safety Culture: level of awareness and level of public education

Certified by other jurisdiction

PRODUCT SOURCE

From ESA Privileged list

Purchasing Restriction/Availability

PRODUCT DESIGN AND

CHARACTERISTICS

USER CHARACTERISTICS

AND HUMAN-DEVICE

INTERCONNECTION

Difficulty or ease of use, adequacy or appropriateness of design, adequacy or appropriateness of materials, components, or equipment, failure mode and application.

Retailer

Certified per Canadian standards

Limited number of manufacturers/distributors

Product certificationNot certified

History of non-compliance with approval requirements

Energy Consuming Equipment

24

Overview of Regulation Notification of the Public

• Previously, the OESC did not provide requirements for the notification of the public.

• The regulation provides ESA the authority to ensure that people are informed of hazardous products by:

– Permitting ESA to identify when public notification is required;– Allowing ESA to require that a communication program is initiated;– Require that organizations/businesses give public notice;– Require that the organization/business communicate with ESA

regarding the program;– Provide for emergency communication measures by ESA when an

imminent hazard warrants them.• To protect business information, the regulation requires

that ESA notify a business of its intended communication and provide the company with an opportunity to review it.

• ESA has consulted with stakeholders to establish guidelines for public notification based on best practices.

25

Overview of Regulation Corrective Action

• Previously, OESC rules:– provided for only one possible corrective action:

the removal of approval;– required that the certification organization or field

evaluation agency make provisions to recall products that are deemed unapproved.

• The Electricity Act provides ESA the authority to order corrective actions (s. 113(11)).

• These corrective actions will be based on the results of a risk assessment undertaken by ESA.

• ESA has consulted on guidelines for corrective actions that follow current best practices.

26

Legislative Process Update Coming into Force

• Bill 152 Proclamation Aug 07– Jan 08– Regulation making authority Aug 15, 2007– Contractor licensing ‘holding out’ Aug 15, 2007– Search and Seizure provisions Jan 1, 2008– All other amendments Oct 1, 2007

• Product Safety Regulation Oct 07 – July 08– Regulation (s. 1-7 and 9) Oct 1, 2007– Orders to Retain (s. 10) Jan 1, 2008– Reporting Requirements (s. 8) July 1, 2008

Guideline Development— Overview of the Process

28

Guideline Development Process

• Stakeholders were invited to take part in the guideline development process.

• The first main stakeholder meeting took place on October 15, 2007.

• 5 seed documents (one per working group) were presented and circulated to stakeholders.

• Three external consultants were hired to produce the seed documents based on international best practices.

29

Guideline Development Timelines

Month Task

September Preparation & Setup of Process

OctoberDevelopment of

guidelines & Consultation

Period

November

December

January

February Finalize Documents & ApprovalMarch

April Transition Period & Operational

ReadinessMay

June

• The documents included proposed wording and identified issues to be considered by each group.

• The seed documents were to be further developed by each working group.

• Stakeholders volunteered to participate on one or more working group to validate the documents and provide input.

Timelines

30

Guideline Development Process Revised Working Groups

Main CommitteeAll stakeholders

Working Group 1

Risk Assessment Methodology

Working Group 2

Accident & Incident

Reporting Guidelines

Working Group 6

Funding OptionDevelopment

Working Group 3/4

Corrective Action & Public

Notification Guidelines

Working Group 5

Revocation of Approval &

Recognition Rules

Peter Jackson Elizabeth Nielsen Suzanne Alfano Peter Marcucci

Group 3 & 4 were combined because it was felt that notification of the public only one type of corrective action.

31

Measure of Success

A successful process would create:– Practical guidelines that are supported by all stakeholders– A process that supports a robust product safety strategy,

one that incorporates:

Prevention – Detection – Response

Ultimate success would lead to:– The adoption of this approach at the national level– A single approval process & a unified response strategy

among all provinces/territories and the federal government

32

Consultation Process Overview

• To date, the consultation process has spanned a period of 6 months and consisted of:

– 2 main committee meetingsWith over 50 participants

– 5 working groups Over 55 working group membersBalanced representation of all major stakeholder groups

– 20 working group meetingEach working group met a minimum of 4 times

33

Working Group Membership

– The 55 working group members represented 29 separate organizations including:

– The Government of Ontario– Regulators (TSSA, Health Canada)– Retailers (Wal-Mart, Home Hardware, Sears, Retail Council)– National Brand owners (Wal-Mart, Home Hardware, Canadian

Tire, HBC)– Manufacturers (Electro-Fed, LG, Eaton)– Distributors– Certification Bodies (UL, ULC, CSA, Intertek,)– Field Evaluation Agencies (QPS, Intertek)

– Consumers– Electrical Contractors– Electricity Distributor’s Association– Lawyers– Insurance Bureau of Canada

34

Guideline Development Process Continued

Month Task

September Preparation & Setup of Process

OctoberDevelopment of

guidelines & Consultation

Period

November

December

January

February Finalize Documents & ApprovalMarch

April Transition Period & Operational

ReadinessMay

June

• The results of the guideline development process were presented to the main stakeholder committee at a 2nd stakeholder meeting on December 18, 2007.

• The individual documents have now been consolidated into one document and circulated to stakeholders for final comment.

• The final guidelines are to be reviewed internally, RAC, the Board and MGCS.

• The final guidelines will then be presented back to the main stakeholder committee at a 3rd stakeholder meeting in March.

Timelines

Outcomes to Date

36

Consultation Process Outcomes To Date

• Overwhelming stakeholder participation and engagement

• Balanced participation and representation in the process

• Greater understanding of the process and requirements by all stakeholders involved in the process

• Completion of practical guidelines and rules

• Agreement on guidelines/rules by all working group members

37

Consultation Process Outcomes Continued

– Agreement on thresholds, definitions and processes

– Increased communication and dialogue between affected stakeholders and ESA

– Commitment to review the process in a year

– A clear set of recommendations put forward by the working groups (51 recommendations)

– Understanding of outstanding issues that could not be resolved through this process

– Commitment for continued dialogue and continues improvement

38

WG 6 – Funding Consultation

• WG 6 dealt with the following areas:– Funding principles– Cost Principles– Types of activities (anything

missing)– Determined mandatory vs optional

activities– Activity level assumptions (eg:

number of reports)– Costing assumptions (eg: number

of reports one person can handle in a year)


Working Group 1


Working Group 2

Accident & IncidentReporting Guidelines

Working Group 6


Working Group 3/4

Corrective Action & Public Notification

Guidelines

Working Group 5

Revocation of Approval &

Recognition Rules

39

Product Safety Activities

• Implementation Activities• Prevention Strategies• Partnerships & Strategic Alliances• Detection Activities• Enforcement & Compliance

Monitoring• Response Activities• Governance


Working Group 1


Working Group 2

Accident & Incident

Reporting Guidelines

Working Group 6


Working Group 3/4

Corrective Action & Public

Notification Guidelines

Working Group 5

Revocation of Approval & Recognition

Rules

40

Allocation of Activities/Costs Over 3 Years

Activity Category %

Development & Implementation 5

Prevention , Partnerships, Alliances 14

Detection 15

Enforcement 20

Response 28

Governance 4

Legal, Admin, Insurance & Contingency 14

41

Three Year Projected Cost Summary

Year 1 Year 2 Year 3Development and Implementation Cost Recovery 445,520 29,490 29,490

Prevention Activities 299,800 416,440 373,340Partnerships & Strategic Alliances 48,300 99,700 96,250Detection Activities 233,600 646,600 646,600Enforcement Activities 334,500 848,300 848,300Response Activities 771,000 1,001,000 1,001,000Governance Costs 139,210 129,310 129,310Contingency 227,193 158,542 0Legal, Insurance & Admin Support 276,693 355,584 350,929Total 2,775,816 3,684,966 3,475,219

42

Fee Options Under Consideration

Option 1: Continue cross-subsidization by increasing wiring inspection fees.

Option 2: Apply administrative penalties to those that do not comply.

Option 3: Continue cross-subsidization by increasing fees charged to utilities.

Option 4 (a):

Collect a fee from electrical product manufacturers (brand owner or 1st importer) who imported the product into Ontario.

Option 4 (b):

Collect a fee from electrical product manufacturers (brand owner or 1st importer) as a pass through cost from CBs/FEs.

Option 5: Create an unsafe product fund to be financed by like minded stakeholders, who could also pledge in-kind services.

Option 6: Collect a licensing fee from CBs/FEs (+ cost recovery of PIRs).

Option 7: Recover costs per incident from supply chain on a transactional basis.

43

Overall Guiding Principles

It is recommended that the resource model chosen be consistent with the following principles:

– Be sustainable in the long term;– Cover the cost of implementing the regulations;– Provide future funding for prevention and proactive

marketplace surveillance;– Be shared amongst all (or as many) members of the supply

chain as possible;– Be trade neutral; – Not adversely affect the market for electrical products in

Ontario; and– Be consistent with cost-recovery principles.

Guideline Development Process—

Next Steps

45

Next Steps

• Group 6 continues to discuss resource model (May)

• Funding Business Case issued for comment (due May 23)

– Separate guidelines combined into consolidated document & checked for consistency (completed early March)

– Guideline reviewed by outside stakeholders (RCC & Electrofed) (May)

46

Next Steps Continued

• Final guidelines presented back to main committee (May??)

• Internal ESA policies & procedures developed (May-June)

• Communications strategy developed & requirements communicated (May-June)

• Full implementation of regulation (July 2008)

• Resource model determined (July 2008)

47

Next Steps Initial Communications Strategy

• Phase I (Sept 2007 -March 2008)– Communicate with affected stakeholders;– Complete guideline development process;– Complete funding model consultations;

• Phase II (April 2008 – July 2008)– Communicate new requirements to industry;– Implement funding model;– Align business operations;

• Phase III (at the earliest Jan 2010)– Initiate consumer awareness– Undertake prevention activities and market surveillance– Communicate with other provinces and other levels of government

Questions??

0

Overview of the ESA Emergency Response Plan

UAC Meeting May 8, 2008

1

Rationale for an ERP

Why have an ERP?– To document the process by which ESA responds

and interacts with its safety partners in times of anticipated provincial emergencies

– To develop effective tools and procedures to support emergency preparedness and response

• throughout the organization– field, operations, CSC, Communications, Provincial Office

• with external stakeholders – MGCS, Emergency Management Ontario, LDCs, ffected

municipality & affected public

2

Definition

What is an emergency?

An emergency, as defined under the Emergency Management Act, is

“a situation, or an impending situation caused by the forces of nature, an accident, an international act or otherwise that constitutes a danger of major proportions to life and/or property”

3

Purpose

What is the purpose of ESAs ERP?– to protect the health, safety, welfare and property of Ontarians

– to establish a framework for a coordinated and effective response to emergencies that affect the electrical system in Ontario

– to achieve a timely and appropriate response to emergencies

– to achieve compliance with the Emergency Management and Civil Protection Act, 1990

– Our plan is based on the CAN/CSA-Z731-03 standard, regarding Emergency Preparedness and Response

4

Scope of the ERP

What is the intent of the ERP?– to establish organized procedures that can be followed in

anticipated provincially declared emergencies– NOTE: the plan currently only includes the management of

declared provincial or municipal emergencies

What is out of scope?– Business continuity and restoration plans– Localized events that have not been declared as

emergencies through the EMO

5

Coverage

What types of emergencies are covered?

The ERP applies to:– all declared emergency situations affecting electrical safety in

Ontario – situations when ESA is requested to provide assistance or

conduct operations during a declared emergency– identified hazards whereby a coordinated response involving

ESA resources would be required• (i.e., fires and explosions, utility failures, evacuations or

sabotage, tornadoes and hurricanes, floods, wildfires, earthquakes, lightning storms, severe wind or ice storms)

6

Process

When is an emergency declared?

– only the head of council of a municipality, the Premier or the LGIC can declare an emergency under the Emergency Management Act

– the Head of Council of a municipality determines what part of the geographical area under the jurisdiction of the municipality is included in the emergency

– the LGIC or the Premier may also declare an emergency throughout Ontario or in any part of Ontario.

7

Process Continued

When is an emergency terminated?

– the head of council of a municipality, the Premier, or a municipal council, can terminate an emergency declaration at any time after an emergency has been declared

– an emergency ends 14 days after it is declared, unless the LGIC by order ends it earlier

– an emergency can be extended by the LGIC by order for another 14 days

8

EMO

What is the role of EMO?

• Emergency Management Ontario is the overall provincial emergency management organization responsible for the promotion, development, implementation and maintenance of effective emergency management programs throughout Ontario and for the coordination of these programs with the federal government– EMO maintains the Provincial Operations Centre on a 24/7 basis; – coordinates provincial emergency response, when required;– provides advice and assistance to communities and ministries in all

areas of emergency management; and– maintains two provincial-level emergency response plans

9

ESA’s ERP Process

What does the ERP include?• ESA has been added to EMO’s primary contact database to

ensure we are alerted immediately of potential emergencies that could impact us– During the day: Peter Marcucci, Scott Saint and Maria Iafano– After hours: 1-877-ESA SAFE

• ESA has developed an emergency plan process once we are alerted of an emergency

• ESA has developed a protocol with MGCS to ensure timely communication throughout an emergency

10

ESA’s ER ProcessEMO declared

emergency

Day or afterhours/weekend

Call ESA contact in

EMO database

Call ESA 1-877-SAFE

Alert Territory GM who assumes control of the

emergencyGM = Director Emergency Response

Alert on call inspector in

territory

GM Responsibility:Invoke ERPTake part in EMO conference calls as requiredAssign appropriate staff to assistDetermine if an ESA Emergency Response Centre is requiredInitiate conference call with ESA Emergency Response Team(communications, CSC, Regulatory, Senior, TA if required)Monitor situationProvide updates as required

Terminate ERP

Emergency Report IssuedDebrief lessons learned

3/6/2008

ESA ERP v.1

11

Emergency Response Team Roles & Responsibilities

GM (Director of the Emergency Response):– Invoke ERP– Take part in EMO conference calls as required– Assign appropriate staff to assist– Determine if an ESA Emergency Response Centre is required– Initiate conference call with ESA Emergency Response Team (communications, CSC,

Emergency Coordinator, Regulatory, Senior, TA, Utility Regs) if required– Monitor situation and provide updates as required– Terminate ERP

Senior Inspector:– Attend emergency location– Retrieve list of affected homes from municipality– Attend local information sessions– Follow hazard BBP and assist inspectors– Prepare emergency report once emergency ends– Report on updates to GM

Utility Regulations Staff:– Liaise with LDC if required– Establish mutual aid agreements with LDC– Provide assistance to GM in dealing with LDC

12

Emergency Response Team Roles & Responsibilities

Communications Officer:– Update website– Prepare news releases– Provide communications material for affected public– Provide high level ESA messaging for inspectors/GM

Emergency Management Coordinator:– Provide updates to MGCS– Liaise with local community emergency management coordinators throughout province– Ensure contact lists are up to date– Maintenance of plan and revisions– Planning mock drills– Organizing debriefs and reviewing emergency reports

CSC Assigned Staff:– Input notifications for each location in the emergency area– Answer calls from affected public– Possibly staff Emergency Response Centre– Provide assistance to GM as required

13

Experience to Date

Big East River Flood Emergency- MuskokaJanuary 2008• Viewed as a success

– EMO was able to contact us and ask for our assistance– it was clear who had control of the situation– Internal communications were clear and ongoing– everyone that was identified as playing a roll; communications, CSC, provincial and

operations were notified within 15 minutes of us being alerted of the emergency. – Website was updated within 1 hour press release issued next day– Senior inspector was available on the ground throughout the emergency– GM participated on EMO calls– Timely information was provided back to MGCS on status

• ESA Debrief session held February 20, 2008

• Debrief with Muskoka Emergency Coordinator, ESA, EMO, local Fire Prevention Officer, Hydro One held February 29, 2008

14

Next Steps

• ESA would like to invite members of the UAC to form a working group to:

1. Create a standard operating protocol or procedures between ESA and all LDCs to ensure a process is developed for connection authorizations of customer owned lines during times of declared emergencies

2. Create links between LDC Emergency Preparedness Planning coordinators and ESA so we can understand each other’s roles and responsibilities more clearly

3. Create a process to create a ‘heads up’ warning system to address times when an emergency has not yet been declared, but emergency like conditions exist.

15

Questions??

May 2008 For Your Safety 1

Long Term Powerline Safety Strategy

UAC Presentation

May 8, 2008


Outline

• Summary• Timelines• Discussion & Motion for Endorsement


Summary• A roadmap for ESA and stakeholders on how

to reduce electrical powerline fatalities by 30% over the next five years. Six basic strategic elements:

• Engagement• Encouragement• Education• Enforcement• Engineering, and • Evidence


• Tactical (action) plans include resource estimates - identified each year.

• The major challenge identified by both stakeholders and ESA staff to implement this strategy is– resourcing and funding.


Timelines

• September 20, 2007 (UAC Meeting)– Motion to create Stakeholder Working Group

for Powerline Safety.– Solicited potential volunteers for Working

Group.• October 2007

– Created Powerline Incidents Database to help trend data and identify high risk activities.


Timelines (Cont’d)• November 2007

– Contacted and finalized list of Working Group Participants, which included:

Canadian Standards Association (CSA)City of OttawaEnersource Hydro Mississauga Inc.Festival Hydro Inc.Hydro One Networks Inc.London Hydro Inc.MEARIE Group

Ministry of LabourOntario Electrical LeagueOshawa PUC Networks Inc.TiltranVeridian Connections Inc.W.O. Schwarz ConsultingWaterloo North Hydro Inc.


Timelines (Cont’d)

• January 31st 2008– Reports issued to Work Group participants:

• ESA report “Ontario Powerline Incidents & High Risk Activities (2001 – 2007Q2)”

• ESA report “Ontario Coroner’s Recommendations Related to Powerline Fatalities (1993 – 2003)”

• February 11th 2008– Working Group Workshop

• Developed a list of potential strategies with detailed action plans.



• March 5th 2008– ESA draft report “Ontario Powerline Safety

Strategy 2009 – 2013” sent to Work Group participants for review & comments.

• March 28th 2008– Final Comments received by Working Group

members.• March 31st 2008

– Incorporated comments from Work Group and finalized report.



• April 2th 2008– ESA issues final “Ontario Powerline Safety

Strategy 2009 – 2013” to Work Group participants.

• May 2nd 2008– The Strategy report including 2 incident reports

sent to UAC participants for review.


UAC Meeting - Recommendation−To endorse the Powerline Safety

Strategy in principle while acknowledging the current lack of funding and resources.

Discussion & Endorsement


Potential next steps

• ESA – discussion at Regulatory Affairs Committee next week

• Influencing stakeholders who are or will benefit who are not currently contributing funding or resources

• Many actions identified in year 1 have already been included in ESA budget


Comments

• Comments Received:1)

My only comment is that you are silent on the source of funding for the proposed program. While I’m confident the LDCs will be willing to contribute to a Powerline Awareness campaign, I don’t think they will accept the lion’s share of the financial commitment. I would like to see at least some commentary on possible sources of funding and who (ESA?) will quarterback petitioning for the funding. The overall program may need to be

scaled back significantly if the funding isn’t there.

2)

From 2003 to 2007 the fatality

rate

(5-year rolling average of powerline related fatalities per 1 million population) declined steadily from 0.59 to 0.34. This rate of decline is approximately 30 %. Since

that decline was possible without a comprehensive strategy aimed at reducing fatalities,

perhaps we should set

a more challenging target e.g. 50 % reduction?


Comments• Comments Received:

3)

Strategy Management Model -

recommend

another strategy called

Enabling Strategy.

The strategy statement would be ... We will develop products that will enable

our partners

to communicate consistent

powerline safety messages to their customers, clients, constituents.

(Aim here is to

equip others to communicate standardized messages.)

4)

Engagement Strategy -

a

"shared approach" is satisfactory, however

a "unified

approach"

would be ideal.

An objective in partnering

should be to establish

Ontario-wide hazard reduction products or services.

The ESA

should

promote and foster consistency.

5)

Suggest revising the Encouragement Strategy statement

to reflect annual awareness raising and training campaigns. Encouragement implies

"doing".



6)

The Education Strategy statement can focus on the development of standard educational

and technical references, such as the best practice guides for equipment operators, contractors, tree planting guides, etc.

7)

Revise "explore"

to "establish" ....

a promotional figure or face of powerline safety.

8)

The rollout plans are indeed comprehensive. Perhaps overly so.

With limited budgets, we should ensure that

priority high risk activities are driving all investments.

9)

The best practice guides (& DVDs?) for small contractors and operators of high reach vehicles/equipment should be developed as soon as possible in 2009

(rather than 2010 & 2011) so that they can be promoted

throughout the balance of the five year plan.

ESA budgets only $60K for each, which is a disproportionate investment

given that most powerline contact incidents occur in these sectors.



10)

ESA's Farmers campaign is $160k per year in 2011 & 2013, yet the farm sector is not a priority High Risk Activity per Table 1

on Page 2.

Will this investment contribute to reducing the 5-year rolling average of powerline fatalities?

11)

ESA proposes a $40K annual investment in years 2011-13 to partner with LDCs to deliver awareness to K-12 schools. With 4,000 elementary schools and over 800 secondary schools in Ontario, this represents an investment of less than $9 per school per year.

What form of partnership is contemplated or possible

at this level of investment?

12)

The ESA annual budget appears to be inadequate. The

ESA

should forecast the budget required to implement all aspects of the plan, and flag the

predicted gap in funding which will need to be made up by partner contributions or sponsorships.


Comments (Cont’d)• Comments Received:

13)

It is reported that there were 198 incidents and 12 fatalities, but in the source report, it was indicated that 3 of the fatalities were vehicular impact with a pole –

these should not be included in the stats as they did not involve contact with overhead lines. If we

want to use a benchmark to track reductions, we need to start with an accurate number.

14)

The partners for engagement could also be expanded –

others to approach for engagement could include:

•

CSAO •

MHSAO•

OFSA•

EUSA •

Municipal works/maintenance departments •

Trade Associations –

e.g. Ontario Sewer and Watermain Construction Association

•

Ontario Road Builders Associations •

Unions such as: International Union of Operating Engineers



15)

ESA's strategy does not involve the construction industry until the second year –

if the intent is to reduce the number of incidents in a short period of time, the construction industry should be the primary focus initially as they have the most contacts at present time.

16)

Engagement strategy should include representatives from the education sector –

Ministry of Education or Colleges and Universities or the skilled trades organizations.

17)

A best practice guide could be useful. We have experience and expertise in developing related technical safety user guides, CD

ROMs, Training and Education products and E Learning platforms. We would be interested in helping to contribute to the development of the design, development and delivery of knowledge-based products and services for this area.


Comments (Cont’d)


The Education strategy is very important and there are considerable opportunities to focus on knowledge transfer and to

raise awareness both in K-12 programs, college programs, skilled trades and workplace programs.

19)

For the Education strategy it will be important to integrate this Strategy into existing OHS training for the education sector.

20)

For the Engineering strategy, it would be helpful to explain that CSA has a standards development process which is open and transparent and that proposals concerning the content of the Canadian Electrical Code Part lll

or equipment standards are welcomed as these standards are regularly reviewed and updated.


Comments (Cont’d)


The part of the strategy should state that relevant equipment standards should be reviewed or possible enhancements to equipment standards should be studied or advanced ( CSA has a wide range of equipment standards covering technology such as mobile cranes, aerial devices, sign crane trucks, mast climbers).

22)

We support the recommended action to develop closer links and shared approaches with industry partners –

this is a good place to focus initial efforts and we looks forward to working with ESA and other partners on this important initiative.

23)

Existing initiatives by ESA in the area of farm safety and trucking/haulage need to expanded and tailored for other sectors.



24)

The rollout plans call for Enforcement actions such as mandatory

training for operators of equipment. Industry groups have been recommending mandatory entry level training for all new workers in construction for a number of years. The training could include powerline safety awareness as part of the curriculum. This may be a more effective strategy, rather than advocating for training for a single element such as powerline safety. The Strategy could support or endorse existing efforts in this regard and recommend

collaboration.

25)

Additionally, the strategy should include a monitoring of developments in legislation impacting on regulations for construction projects and working with other partners to incorporate powerline safety issues into these deliberations.

26)

The Strategy calls for Enforcement in 2009 around locating of overhead electrical utilities –

according to construction safety experts, there are revised regulations in existence ( sections 188-

189) which already require the constructor of a project to undertake something similar.

Ontario Powerline Safety Strategy 2009-2013

March 31, 2008

Utility Regulations Department

Prepared by: Aldo Mastrofrancesco, P.Eng


Electrical Safety Authority

Acknowledgements

The development of the Ontario Powerline Safety Strategy was coordinated by the Electrical Safety Authority with the Powerline Safety Strategy Workgroup as part of the Utility Advisory Council. The organizations that contributed to this strategy included:

Canadian Standards Association (CSA) City of Ottawa Enersource Hydro Mississauga Inc. Festival Hydro Inc. Hydro One Networks Inc. London Hydro Inc. MEARIE Group Ministry of Labour Ontario Coroner’s Office Ontario Electrical League Oshawa PUC Networks Inc. Tiltran Veridian Connections Inc. W.O. Schwarz Consulting Waterloo North Hydro Inc.



Table of Contents

BACKGROUND...................................................................................................................................1

APPROACH TO SAFETY.....................................................................................................................4

STRATEGY TARGET ..........................................................................................................................6

STRATEGY MANAGEMENT MODEL ...................................................................................................7

STRATEGIC OBJECTIVES ..................................................................................................................8 Engagement Strategy Statement ............................................................................................8 Encouragement Strategy Statement .....................................................................................10 Education Strategy Statement ..............................................................................................12 Engineering Strategy Statement ...........................................................................................14 Enforcement Strategy Statement..........................................................................................16 Evidence Strategy Statement................................................................................................17

SUMMARY & NEXT STEPS...............................................................................................................18

FISCAL YEAR ROLLOUT PLANS.......................................................................................................20 Powerline Safety Strategy Plan FY2009 ................................................................................21 Powerline Safety Strategy Plan FY2010 ................................................................................22 Powerline Safety Strategy Plan FY2011 ................................................................................23 Powerline Safety Strategy Plan FY2012 ................................................................................24 Powerline Safety Strategy Plan FY2013 ................................................................................25 Strategy Timeline & Budgets FY2009-FY2013 ......................................................................26

Ontario Powerline Safety Strategy 2009-2013 iii


BACKGROUND

Incidents related to electrical powerlines in Ontario represent more than 50% of the total reported electrical occurrences (Electrical Safety Authority & Ministry of Labour). Powerline incidents are shown in Figure 1.

Figure 1 - Total Powerline Incidents (2001-2007Q2)

0

50

100

150

200

250

300

350

2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007

Year

# In

cide

nts

ESA’s strategic plan FY2008 (SA8) included a plan to develop a strategy to reduce powerline related fatalities in the province every year.

Prior to establishing new initiatives in the strategy, it was important to examine existing data to identify the highest risk areas in order to focus initiatives over the next five (5) years.

Ontario Powerline Safety Strategy 2009-2013 1


The powerline data was compiled by ESA in the form of two (2) reports which documented the identification and recommendations of powerline high risk areas; “Ontario Powerline Incidents & High Risk Activities” dated January 22, 2008 and “Ontario Coroner’s Recommendations Related to Powerline Fatalities” dated January 31, 2008. It was identified between the years 2001 and first half of 2007 that the leading sectors for incidents involving powerline contacts are the Construction sector with 1,140 incidents, of which 14 were fatalities and the Public sector with 198 incidents, of which 9 were fatalities. The high risk areas were identified by using risk assessment tools; which included ESA’s Risk Ranking Tool and the United States Department of Energy’s (DOE) Electrical Severity Measurement Tool. The results identified five (5) groups of activities which represent 83% of the overall powerline hazards, see Table 1. Finally, a Powerline Safety Strategy Workgroup was formed with key stakeholders, and a workshop was conducted to help focus and develop the strategies. These strategies along with anticipated resourcing and timelines are presented in this report.



Table 1 - Prioritized High Risk Activities

Activity Equipment Involved/Contact Type Sectors Involved

Haulage – Materials/Waste

Dump Trucks, Cement Trucks, Garbage Trucks, Snow Trucks Construction

Roof/Eavestrough/Exterior Work on

Buildings/Structures

Ladders, Scaffolds, Man Lifts, Extension Poles, Conveyors Public & Construction

Aerial Lifting Cranes, Boom Trucks, Forklifts Construction

Excavating/Landscaping Backhoes, Bulldozers, Vac Truck, Shovels Public & Construction

Tree Trimming/Cutting Trimmers, Chainsaw, Ladders, Bucket Trucks Public & Construction


Electrical Sa

Onta

fety Authority

rio Powerline Safety Strategy 2009-2013 4

Eliminate Hazards

Minimize the Hazard Effects

Use Physical Barriers

Use Warning/Alert Systems

Use Protective Equipment

Use Best Practices

Supervision

Enforcement, Compliance

& Punishment

Training, Education, Motivation

Awareness, Promotion

Emergency Response

Most Effective

APPROACH TO SAFETY

Least Effective

When developing strategies to reduce powerline hazards, the approach involves analyzing the most effective method of hazard reduction, as seen in Figure 2 and integrating with key partners as seen in Figure 3.

Figure 2 – Effective Hazard Reduction

Explore enforcement chan

Explore new messages and communication channels on

hazard awareness.

Explore how to change public/worker

behaviour, procedures and practices.

Explore new technologies,

improved safety controls or changes in technical standards.

ges in the regulations.

Electrical Sa


Regulatory Bodies Safety Organizations

Education/Inform

ation

National S

tandards System

End Users

Governm

ents Safety CulturePrevention Actions

Response Actions

Electrical Products, Electrical Installations and Services Supply Channel

Insurers Technical & Behavior R&D Health Care

Figure 3 - Integrated Electrical Safety System

Electricity Supply System

Detection Actions

fety Authority


STRATEGY TARGET This Strategy aims to reduce the five (5) year rolling average of powerline related fatalities by 30%, from 0.34 (per million population) in 2007 to no more than 0.24 (per million population) in 2013.

Table 2 – Historical Powerline Related Fatalities

2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007Target

2013

Fatalities 10 3 6 2 6 5 2

Fatality Rate (per 1million population)

0.84 0.25 0.49 0.16 0.48 0.39 0.16

Fatality Rate (5 year rolling average per

1million population)

0.66 0.69 0.59 0.48 0.44 0.35 0.34 0.24



STRATEGY MANAGEMENT MODEL A Strategy Model has been developed that incorporates the initiatives identified in the stakeholder workshop. The model is based on a model originally developed by the Australian Road Safety Authority.

Evidence: We will maintain a comprehensive incident database and analytical

system to inform priorities for action, and ensure the effective monitoring

and evaluations of initiatives.

Engagement: We will develop

partnerships with others to implement initiatives to

reduce powerline related contacts and fatalities.

Enforcement: We will direct

enforcement efforts into areas where they are most effective in reducing powerline related fatalities.

Engineering: We will explore developments in

engineering controls and design that will

improve safety around powerlines.

Education: We will direct education, awareness and training efforts into areas where they are most effective in reducing powerline

related fatalities.

Encouragement: We will promote behavior

change, in partnership with others, towards powerline safety, including changing attitudes and

procedures when working around powerlines in general.

Figure 4 – Strategy Management Model



STRATEGIC OBJECTIVES

The strategy statements noted below are a distillation of ideas identified in the strategy workshop. These six (6) strategy statements summarize the overall direction of the strategy.

Engagement Strategy Statement

We will develop partnerships with others to implement initiatives to reduce powerline related contacts and fatalities. Engagement is the core strategy of the model which involves the development of a shared and unified strategic approach to powerline safety with partners from many different sectors of the electrical distribution industry.

Objectives:

• Develop closer links with the following partners to develop a shared and unified approach to enhance the impact of powerline safety in Ontario.

o Safety Organizations

CSAO



MHSAO

OFSA

EUSA

o Insurers

WSIB

MEARIE Group

o Health Care Organizations

o Standards Development Organizations

CSA

o Municipalities

Planning Departments

Works Departments

Maintenance Departments

o Government & Regulatory Bodies

o Local Distribution Companies

o Trade Associations

Ontario Road Builders Association

Ontario Sewer & Watermain Construction Association

o Unions

International Union of Operating Engineers

o Education & Training Organizations

Ministry of Education

Colleges & Universities

Skilled Trade Organizations



Encouragement Strategy Statement

We will promote behavior change, in partnership with others, towards powerline safety, including changing attitudes and procedures when working around powerlines in general. Encouragement is a strategy to promote changed behaviors, in partnership with others, towards powerline safety, including changing attitudes and work procedures when working around powerlines in general.

Objectives:

• Develop a “Best Practice” guide for high reach equipment operators and owners with particular emphasis on dump trucks, cement trucks, boom trucks and cranes.

• Develop a “Best Practice” guide for small contractors and businesses with particular emphasis on roofers, aluminum siding & eavestrough installers, sign installers, flag pole installers, chimney cleaners and antenna & satellite installers.

• Develop with the Ministry of Transport the inclusion or expansion of powerline hazard knowledge for driver licensing of large trucks.



• Partner with the municipalities and LDCs to create a powerline hazard information package and LDC involvement prior to a permit being issued for buildings, structures or signs.

• Partner with the LDC’s to educate their local municipalities on recommended species and planting of trees under powerlines.



Education Strategy Statement

We will direct education, awareness and training efforts into areas where they are most effective in reducing powerline related fatalities.

Education is a strategy to direct awareness & training efforts into areas where they are most effective in reducing powerline fatalities in the construction and do-it-yourself public sectors.

Objectives:

• Continue current ESA campaigns, i.e. Look Up! Look Out!, Dump Trucks, Farmers.

• Partner with LDCs to deliver awareness to schools K-12.

• Investigate the use of a promotional figure or a “Face” of powerline safety.

• Educate the Do-It-Yourself public with awareness campaigns targeted at Home Depot, Rona, Lowes, lumber yards and tool rental shops.

• Develop a campaign for the small contractor or business with particular emphasis on roofers, aluminum siding & eavestrough installers, sign installers, flag pole installers, chimney cleaners and antenna & satellite installers.



• Develop impactful messages similar to what WSIB has done with their recent TV ads.

• Integrate into existing OHS training, the requirement for mandatory training of powerline hazards for the non-electrical construction trade targeting high-reach equipment operators, tree trimmers, roofers, aluminum siding & eavestrough installers, sign installers, flag pole installers, antenna & satellite installers.



Engineering Strategy Statement

We will explore developments in engineering controls and design that will improve safety around powerlines.

Engineering is a strategy to explore developments in engineering controls and design that will improve safety around powerlines with emphasis on the construction and do-it-yourself public sectors.

This strategy involves the review of current CSA equipment standards and the Canadian Electrical Code part III. Proposals for change will be managed through CSA’s standards development process which is open and transparent. Objectives:

• Review existing CSA standards to determine if current clearances around powerlines are appropriate.

• Explore the feasibility of insulated overhead powerlines.

• Research undergrounding vs. overhead powerlines in high-risk environments.

• Explore the feasibility (cost vs. nuisance) for the improved design of proximity sensors or warning devices used on vehicles with high- reach equipment.



• Research the use of remote control boxes for vehicles that are equipped with high reach equipment.



Enforcement Strategy Statement

We will direct enforcement efforts into areas where they are most effective in reducing powerline related fatalities.

Enforcement is a strategy to direct enforcement efforts into areas where they are most effective in reducing fatalities in the construction and do-it-yourself public sectors.

Objectives:

• Explore the introduction of mandatory licensing for all operators of vehicles with high-reach equipment, currently only large cranes require license.

• Review the use of heavy fines and penalties for both the public and workers for contacting powerlines.

• Explore changes in standards and regulations to have mandatory overhead locates much like how underground locates are performed.

• Explore the changes in standards and legislation for communities with zero set-back, to have mandatory undergrounding of powerlines.

• Develop a website or newsletter to publish infringements, convictions and details of serious powerline related incidents.



Evidence Strategy Statement

We will maintain a comprehensive incident database and analytical system to inform priorities for action, and ensure the effective monitoring and evaluations of initiatives. Evidence is a strategy to help support any adjustments in initiatives by monitoring & evaluating ongoing initiatives.

Objectives:

• The monitoring and analysis of incidents shall be ongoing with update/trending reports issued on a quarterly basis.

• Continue to monitor and benchmark against other jurisdictions related to powerlines.

• Performance indicators will continue to be developed and published to help monitor the success of the powerline safety initiated with this strategy. These will be produced throughout the life of this strategy and will be enhanced to provide more comprehensive data on powerline safety performance.

• Develop an enhanced web-based powerline incident reporting tool.



SUMMARY & NEXT STEPS

This strategy which targets a 30% reduction in powerline related fatalities over the next five (5) years, will be an important step towards the ultimate ESA long-term target of zero (0) powerline related fatalities. The plan is built around the core strategy of Engagement, where collaborative partnerships are key with stakeholders. These closer links will be required for the main set of strategies to be successful:

• Education – strategy built around awareness campaigns and worker training.

• Encouragement – strategy to promote changes in public/worker behaviour, procedures and practices.

• Engineering – strategy to explore new technologies, improved safety controls or changes in technical standards.

• Enforcement – strategy to promote compliance through punishments.

The performance of the plan is monitored by a strategy called Evidence. This is a rigorous component that will ensure that the initiatives will be evaluated on an ongoing basis to help understand what is working (and what is not working) and what needs to be changed or enhanced to meet the target.



The next steps would involve resourcing and coordination of efforts. All stakeholders will need to be actively involved in finding funds to make this strategy happen. Possible sources of funding would be from those who benefit from this strategy.

If we are to share the benefits, we need to share the costs.




FISCAL YEAR ROLLOUT PLANS This strategy is very comprehensive and yet attainable. As with any strategy of this size that is to be implemented over a five (5) year period, early planning is very important. The following tables list the objectives and priority action steps to be accomplished for each fiscal year. The last table shows the five (5) year timelines and budget for the proposed strategy plan.


Powerline Safety Strategy Plan FY2009 30% Reduction in Powerline Related Fatalities

Engagement Encouragement Education Engineering Enforcement Evidence

• Develop closer links & shared approach with industry partners (E1O1)

• Partner with Municipalities on info kit when issuing permits (E2O4)

• Partner LDCs & Municipalities on tree species and planting under overhead powerlines (E2O5)

• Partner LDCs to develop info kit for known hazardous areas for DIY homeowners (E2O6)

• ESA’s Dump Truck & Farm campaign (E3O1)

• Investigate the use of a “Face” for powerline safety (E3O3)

• Partner with Home Improvement outlets and HGTV to target DIY homeowners (E3O4)

• Develop awareness campaign for small contractors & business (E3O5)

• Research Overhead vs. Underground (E4O3)

• Explore warning sensors on vehicles with high reach equipment (E4O4)

• Research remote controls for vehicles with high reach equipment (E4O5)

• Develop changes in regulations on fines & penalties for contact of powerlines (E5O2)

• Explore changes to regulation for requirement of overhead locates (E5O3)

• Committed to issuing quarterly update & trending reports on powerline incidents (E6O1)

• Monitor and benchmark against other jurisdictions (E6O2)

• Develop performance indicators for monitoring success (E6O3)

• Develop web-based incident reporting tool (E6O4)

E1O1:

• Identify and contact key industry partners to organize steering committees.

• Continue to explore the possibility of shared funding of initiatives with the partners.

E2O4:

• Identify ways to contact municipalities

• Contact Municipal Affairs & Housing

• Contact Association of Municipalities

• Attend AMO conferences

• Develop material for AMO conferences to engage municipalities

• Develop material to be handed out by the municipalities

E2O5:

• Identify key tree experts to help develop practices

• Engage LDCs & municipalities to develop a practice guideline.

• Develop plan to help LDCs distribute to their local municipalities

E2O6:

• Identify & develop with LDCs key messages & practices to DIY homeowners who perform:

o Tree Trimming/cutting

o Clean chimney/eavestrough

o Exterior painting of home

o Install antenna/flag poles

• Develop safe practice & guidelines

• Work with LDCs to develop communication channels for such customers.

E3O1:

• Continue with ESA’s Dump Truck & Farm campaign while exploring other sectors with similar campaigns.

E3O3:

• Identify possible options (celebrity, ESA person, animated character)

• Identify if this should be only Powerline safety Face or Electrical safety Face.

E3O4:

• Engage home improvement & media outlets:

o Home Depot

o Rona

o Lowes

o Lumber Yards

o Tool Rental Shops

o HGTV

• Develop plan for type of messages and material.

E3O5:

• Target small contractors:

o Roofing

o Aluminum siding/eavestrough

o Painters

o Antenna, Satellite & Flag Pole Installers

• Develop similar to the Dump Truck campaign.

E4O3:

• Identify if studies in this area have already been done.

• Explore the possibility of funding a study.

E4O4:



E4O5:



E5O2:

• Partner with TSSA to understand their experiences and how it all works.

• Identify the required government approvals to implement administrative fees or fines based on investigation work or penalty assessment.

• Need to draw out how this would overlap with the Ministry of Labour?

• Need to draw out how this would overlap with costs recovered by LDCs for repairs?

E5O3:

• Partner with ORCGA if something they can expand on.

• Research if this is done in any other jurisdiction?

• Monitor & influence legislation revisions in the construction sector (OHS sections 188-189).

E6O1:

• Enhance partnership with MOL for incident data sharing.

• Develop plan on how & who the reports will be sent to.

E6O2:

• Develop partnership with other jurisdictions on sharing of powerline incident data.

E6O3:

• Develop and evaluate the use of different performance monitors.

E6O4:

• Develop web-based incident reporting tool.

• Engage LDCs on reporting requirements

• Develop training program to be delivered to the LDCs.

Plans

Action

Objectives

Target

Strategies






• Develop best practice guide for small contractors (E2O2)

• Partner with municipalities on info kit when issuing permits (E2O4)

• Partner LDCs & Municipalities on tree species and planting under overhead powerlines (E2O5)



• Develop impactful messages similar to WSIB (E3O6)

• Review National Standards for powerline clearances (E4O1)

• Explore the feasibility of insulated overhead powerlines (E4O2)


• Explore legislation for requirement of underground powerlines for zero set-back locations (E5O4)

• Expand website/bulletins to publish incidents & convictions (E5O5)



• Develop performance indicators for monitoring success (E6O3)

• Develop web-based incident reporting tool (E6O4)

E1O1:

• Continue (see FY2009)

E2O2:

• Target small contractors:

o Roofing

o Aluminum siding/eavestrough

o Painters

o Antenna, Satellite & Flag Pole Installers

• Develop safe work practice guide in cooperation with the small contractors.

• Explore opportunities to distribute best practice guide & training through industry leaders.

E2O4:


E2O5:


E3O1:


E3O4:


E3O6:

• Identify possible media outlets

• Identify partners for possible shared funding.

• Develop plan & budget

• Develop type of message (political sensitivity?)

E4O1:

• Identify current LDC standards for powerline clearances & compare to the national standard.

• Identify powerline clearance stands from other jurisdictions & compare.

E4O2:



E5O2:

• Continue to develop (see FY2009)

E5O4:

• Explore whether this will be supported by LDCs and municipalities.

E5O5:

• Currently underway

• Need to develop a policy on what & how information will be published.

E6O1:


E6O2:


E6O3:


E6O4:


Action

Plans

Objectives

Strategies

Target






• Develop best practice guide for owners and operators of vehicles with high reach equipment (E2O1)

• Partner with the MTO to expand knowledge of powerline hazards in driver licensing (E2O3)


• Partner with LDCs to deliver awareness to K-12 schools (E3O2)


• Continue awareness campaign for small contractors & business (E3O5)






E1O1:


E2O1:

• Target owners/operators of vehicles:

o Dump Trucks

o Cement/Concrete Pump Trucks

o Boom Trucks

o Cranes

• Identify & contact manufactures, distributors of vehicles with high reach equipment to engage in discussions.

• Develop safe work practice guide in cooperation with owners/operators & manufacturers.

• Explore opportunities to distribute guide & training through industry leaders such as CSA.

E2O3:


o Dump Trucks


o Boom Trucks

o Vehicles with Cranes

o Bucket Trucks

• Research requirements for licensing of drivers.

• Identify other government agencies that may be or need to be involved (i.e. Ministry of Training & Colleges)

E3O1:


E3O2:

• Create a working group to develop information kit.

• Develop training material

• Identify possible presenters of material.

• Develop handout material to be included in presentations.

• Develop plan to keep material current and recurring.

• Develop multiple phase of the Kit – Primary & Secondary

• Integrate with WSIB initiative on targeting students who are about to enter the workforce involving high risk activities.

• Explore alternate delivery channels – i.e. YouTube.

E3O4:


E3O5:

• Continue ESA’s Small Contractor’s campaign.

E4O4:

• Re-explore warning sensors on vehicles with high reach equipment (see FY2009)

E4O5:

• Re-explore remote controls for vehicles with high reach equipment (see FY2009)

E5O2:


E6O1:


E6O2:


Action

Plans

Objectives

Strategies

Target









• Develop impactful messages similar to WSIB (E3O6)

• Mandatory training for non-electrical construction trades (E3O7)

• Explore the feasibility of insulated overhead powerlines (E4O2)

• Mandatory licensing of operators of vehicles with high reach equipment (E5O1)




E1O1:


E2O3:


E3O1:


E3O2:

• Continue (see FY 2011)

E3O6:


E3O7:

• Identify what trades to target

• Identify type of training (maybe different for each trade)

• Identify who will develop the training material.

• Identify how to integrate into existing OHS training.

• Identify who will deliver the training.

• Determine when refresher or renewal training required.

E4O2:

• Re-explore the feasibility of insulated overhead powerlines (see FY2010)

E5O1:


o Dump Trucks


o Boom Trucks

o Vehicles with Cranes

o Bucket Trucks

• Research requirements for licensing.

• Identify other government agencies that may be or need to be involved.

E5O2:


E6O1:


E6O2:


Target

Strategies

Objectives

Action

Plans










• Continue awareness campaign for small contractors & business (E3O5)

• Mandatory training for non-electrical construction trades (E3O7)



• Mandatory licensing of operators of vehicles with high reach equipment (E5O1)



E1O1:


E2O3:


E3O1:


E3O2:

• Continue (see FY 2011)

E3O5:

• Continue ESA’s Small Contractor’s campaign.

E3O7:


E4O4:

• Re-explore warning sensors on vehicles with high reach equipment (see FY2009)

E4O5:

• Re-explore remote controls for vehicles with high reach equipment (see FY2009)

E5O1:


E6O1:


E6O2:


Action

Plans

Strategies

Objectives

Target


Strategy Timeline & Budgets FY2009-FY2013 FY2009 FY2010 FY2011 FY2012 FY2013

Strategy Objectives Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4 Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4 Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4 Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4 Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4

Engagement (E1) E1O1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

E2O1 20 20 20

E2O2 20 20 20

E2O3 20 20 20 20 20 20 20 20 20 20

E2O4 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7

E2O5 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7

Encouragement (E2)

E2O6 10 10

E3O1 20 20 20 20 20 20 20 20 20 20 20 20 20 20 20 20 20 20 20 20

E302 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10

E3O3 7 7 7

E3O4 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10

E3O5 40 40 40 40 20 20 20 20 20 20 20 20 20 20 20 20 20 20 20 20

E3O6 65 65 65 65 65 65 65 65

Education (E3)

E3O7 25 25 25 25 25 25 25 25

E4O1 5 5

E4O2 10 10 10 10

E4O3 10 10

E4O4 5 5 5 5 5 5

Engineering (E4)

E4O5 5 5 5 5 5 5

E5O1 25 25 25 25 25 25 25 25

E5O2 15 15 15 15 15 15 15 15 15 15 15 15

E5O3 5 5

E5O4 20 20 20

Enforcement (E5)

E5O5 5 5

E6O1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

E6O2 0 0 0 0 0

E6O3 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Evidence (E6)

E6O4 25 25 25 25 15 15 15 15

Totals ($ 000’s) $537 $796 $420 $790 $510



FARM STRAY VOLTAGE UPDATE


FARM STRAY VOLTAGE UPDATE

• Currently with the OEB• OEB working on some issues and will

be in contact in the near future• April and May Farm Stray Voltage

Investigation courses offered by American Utilities

Electrical Distribution Safety

Guideline Revision Update

UAC Meeting May 8, 2008



• Working group met April 14• Reviewed 4 guidelines:

– Serious Electrical Incidents– Proximity to Distribution Lines– Technical Guideline for Equipment, Design and

Construction– Guideline for Third Party Attachments


• The working group discussed revisions to the Serious Incident, Equipment Approval and Construction Verification and Third Party Attachment guidelines.

• Drafts of the revised Serious Incident and Technical guidelines have been provided to the working group.



• Agreed that sub-groups should be formed for some guidelines as several working group participants have specific interests

• Sub-groups identified in first meeting are Third Party Attachments and Equipment Approvals.



• To date, very few comments or revisions have been received, working group will have to review and develop plan to cover this

• EEMAC Distribution Transformer Section have requested to participate in the Equipment Approval guideline review.



• Another meeting scheduled for May 27 to address remaining guidelines:

– Excavation in the Vicinity of Distribution Lines– Disconnecting Unused Lines– Guideline for Audit– Guideline for Annual Compliance Declaration– Guideline for Change of Ownership



• Still hope to have revised guidelines ready for review and approval by UAC at September 18 meeting.



• Proposed amendments to Regulation are not passed by government yet therefore no details can be shared

• When amendments are passed, it will have to be a priority of working group to address changes required to guidelines.



Copper Theft

Industry Update

UAC Meeting

May 8, 2008


Outline

• Latest Stats• Revisit - Successful LDC Solutions• Raising the Profile

–All Chief’s Police Bulletin–Police Awareness Seminar

• Enforcement & Legislative Update• Next Steps & Recommendations


Latest Stats• Copper Theft Death

–Officially concluded by Durham Police that the person died trying to steal copper (January 19, 2008) from outdoor substation.

• Hydro One Copper Theft Incidents–192 for CY2006 –216 for CY2007– 58 for CY2008Q1


• CopperWeld• DataDot Technology• Extruded steel fencing• Remote Monitoring of Substations

– SmarterFence: highly intelligent fibre optic sensor system that mounts to any existing chain-link fence.

• Partnering with Law Enforcement– Crime Stoppers– Municipalities/Cities have dedicated “Copper Cop”

Working Solutions


Raising the Profile Update

• All Chief’s Police Bulletin– Issued March 5th, 2008.–Sent via Ministry of Community Safety

and Correctional Services.–Sent to Ontario Chiefs of Police and

Commissioner Julian Fantino.–Subject: Public Safety Risks as a result of

the theft of Electric Utility Copper.


Raising the Profile Update

• Police Awareness Seminar–Held April 9th - 10th, 2008.–Purpose: Raise awareness of local law

enforcement agencies of copper theft and the need for partnerships in combating metal theft.

–ESA’s Jenifer Robertson attended.


Enforcement & Legislative Update

• Major cities in North America including Vancouver & Toronto are trying to enforce by-laws that require scrap dealers to record what they buy.

• Ottawa Police are asking recycling companies to install video surveillance and step-up record-keeping to combat scrap metal theft.


Enforcement & Legislative Update

• Municipal/City/State Scrap Dealer Legislation is not working!–Thefts are still occurring….Why?–Metal gets moved around to other cities.

• United States is trying to take federal action with Bill 1136.–Scrap dealers to record information.–Theft of Metal to be classified as “Crime to

the Community” which would make it a first-degree felony ($10k fine & 30 yrs).


Next Steps & Recommendations

• ESA will continue to communicate successful solutions to all the LDCs.

• ESA recommends all LDCs create communication links with local law enforcement and partner with Crime Stoppers.


DUE DILIGENCE INSPECTIONS– Method used to assess 22/04 compliance– Field work focused– Does plan match construction?– Are field changes recorded?

DDI ASSESSMENT


FY 2007 and 2008– FY2007 highlighted the need for crew CVP

training in many LDCs– FY2008 highlighted what construction

areas were most likely not in full compliance

– Structural Integrity – Guying– Electrical Integrity - Grounding

DDI ASSESSMENT


FY 2009– FY2009 will be similar format as previous

years– Utility Regs will start studying the

application of risk based tools to focus DDIs

– Potentially resulting in “Risked Based DDIs”

DDI ASSESSMENT


BEYOND FY 2009– “Risked Based DDIs” may result as an

evolution of the DDI process– Changes to the DDI process depend on

the analysis

DDI ASSESSMENT

3/28/2008

DUE DILIGENCE INSPECTION

ASSESSMENT REPORT & FY 2009 PLAN

Introduction and Summary This report documents Utility Regulation’s assessment to date on Due Diligence Inspections (DDI) carried out in 2006 and 2007 and, as a result of this assessment, the plan for FY 2009 and future approaches to inspection. The report also describes what DDIs are, why ESA is conducting these inspections and the value to Local Distribution Companies (LDCs), the Public and ESA. Based on the assessment noted in this report Due Diligence Inspections (for FY 2009) will continue in a similar fashion with a slight adjustment to the number of inspections conducted at each LDC. For FY 2009 some LDCs will receive more DDIs and some will receive less than FY 2008. This is based on compliance issues with O. Reg. 22/04. The total number of inspections through out the province will increase by 5%.

Rationale and Scope of DDIs Due Diligence Inspections are inspections of LDC electrical distribution installations and are performed by ESA Inspectors. Due Diligence Inspections were created in order for ESA to carry out its due diligence with respect to O. Reg. 22/04. These inspections compliment Auditor reports, the Declaration of Compliance, Serious Incident Reports and any Public Safety Concerns that, when combined, provide ESA with appropriate information to adequately assess compliance with O. Reg. 22/04. Auditors are not required to perform inspections of actual LDC installations. DDIs provide a means of assessing whether LDCs are following their safety regulatory obligations at the site of the installation. Scope: ESA Inspector’s schedule visits with the LDCs to review a sample set of new construction, maintenance, repair, and/or replacement work of electrical equipment owned by the LDC. Construction may consist of Underground, Overhead or Substation sites. Inspectors are given comprehensive guides (developed by the Utility Regulations Department) and LDC Plans or Work Instructions to follow. Training: Approximately 20 ESA Inspectors were trained in-house by Utility Regulations Department staff and given on site training. The Inspectors schedule DDI appointments with the LDCs. ESA Inspectors are encouraged to create a strong working relationship with the LDCs, with open lines of communications. A strong working relationship yields better inspections as quality sites for inspections are selected between the ESA Inspector and the LDC. Inspection Process: While on site, Inspectors observe and record adherence to the LDC construction standards and construction verification procedures. The Inspector acts as an observer and documents these observations. If the construction does not match the Plan or Work Instruction supplied to the Inspector they will make note of this and

3/28/2008

whether the installation change has been recorded. Any additional safety concerns or hazards an Inspector notes are also included in the guide.

Reporting: The ESA Inspector submits the guide to the Utility Regulations Department which in turn assesses the information based on O. Reg. 22/04 and discusses the findings with the LDCs. Utility Regulations produces a report documenting the findings and reviews the LDC action plan and follows up with the LDC for the parts of the installation or processes where the LDC was not in compliance with O. Reg. 22/04. The report also confirms those installations that are in compliance. In FY 2007 ESA performed approximately 100 inspections. Every LDC in the province received at least one Inspection and all Inspectors were trained in the process. With additional training completed, and all LDCs having received at least one DDI, the full scope of DDIs was put in place. In FY2008 ESA scheduled approximately 260 inspections. The number of inspections per LDC was determined by its size based on the equivalent of two full-time inspectors across the province. Public Safety: Electrical accidents and incidents can occur at the electrical installation site, either on private property or public rights of way. The DDI provides the only means of assessing compliance at site installations whereas other assessment tools such as audits are used to assess approval documentation and processes.

DDIs have over the last two years led to, the correction of some new installations that did not meet minimum Canadian standards and, the elimination of a few imminent fire, shock or safety hazards in Ontario. Both ESA and LDC initiatives noted in this report have enhanced the level of safety within each distributor’s territory for the public, workers and have increased compliance to O. Reg. 22/04. Compliance: The Inspections compliment the Audits and Declaration of Compliance and in some cases have identified a different level of compliance than was determined with only the Audit Report and Declaration of Compliance. With these inspections appropriate action can be taken by ESA and the LDC. The following table illustrates the complimentary nature of the audit and DDIs. Audits are conducted by a 3rd Party or an approved LDC Internal Auditor and the focus of the audit is on documented processes and approvals and evidence that these are followed. The DDI on the other hand focuses on actual installations on site and whether the installation is in compliance with O. Reg. 22/04.

AUDIT INSPECTION(DDI)

3rd Party or LDC Internal ESA

Office Focus on Internal Work

Field Focus onExternal Work

Design and Sign-off Procedures Followed

Construction as per "Plan" or "Work Instruction"

DDI Results and Assessments for FY2006 and FY2007 Main Findings: The most significant finding in FY 2006 was the extent to which LDCs were becoming compliant with O. Reg. 22/04 at on-site installations. Prior to O. Reg. 22/04 many LDCs had equipment approval and construction standards in place, however, formal documented inspection procedures had not been in place. Establishing a Construction Verification Program and training staff to adhere to the program was still evolving in 2006. The presence of ESA Inspectors at on-site installations highlighted, for the LDC construction crews, the regulatory obligations that had been put in place. The DDI Report highlighted, for the LDC managers, the need to reinforce adherence to their Construction Verification Program and the need to resolve internal issues between engineering and construction staff. With over 300 Due Diligence Inspection to date, the vast majority of DDI Reports find some areas for improvement. Typical examples of non-compliance were related to; on site changes not being recorded, guying (structural integrity), and grounding (electrical integrity). With respect to guying and grounding, work instructions may not have included instructions on guying and grounding. Or in other cases standards and/or work instructions were not being followed. It is important to note that generalizations could not be made based on LDC size, geographic location or urban vs. rural installations. Each LDC has unique challenges and advantages and as such no trending due to LDC characteristics could be made. Initially, to a limited extent, some commentary from LDCs included uneasiness with a Regulator inspecting their work- that had already been inspected internally. However, the majority of LDCs have commented on the value of Due Diligence Inspections, particularly Managers who use the Report to fine tune their training and processes. In

Page 3 3/28/2008

3/28/2008

some cases the Reports have helped in justifying additional engineering staff or the hiring of engineering consultants to; create detailed layouts and work instructions or, to maintain or change engineering standards to accommodate construction requirements. These in turn lead to compliance with O. Reg.22/04. As a result of the DDI feedback to the LDCs, a significant compliance improvement was noted between Due Diligence Inspections in FY 2006 and FY 2007. Working with the LDCs has resulted in improvements with (i) creating work instructions that provide sufficient direction to construction crews and (ii) the expectation that the construction crews follow the work instructions. There has been a reduction in observations made by Inspectors throughout FY2007. Room for improvement still exists, however significant improvements have been made. Communicate Findings: The Due Diligence Inspection findings have prompted the Utility Regulations Department to issue Safety Bulletins to all LDCs. ESA utilizes in-house and external expertise to share information for the benefit of all LDCs. The Bulletins are used by the LDCs to reinforce practices and standards at their Health & Safety Meetings and are posted on LDC bulletin boards. Bulletins can be found on ESA’s website by clicking on “Bulletins” on the LDC webpage.

Current and Future Implementation of DDIs

FY2009: FY2009 will see a similar format in the implementation of DDIs as in FY2007 and FY2008. DDIs results have been reviewed and adjustments were made based on the previous year’s findings and other factors such as incidents. The overall number of DDIs for FY2009 will increase by approximately 5% from FY2008. The increase is prudent in light of a fatality at an unsafe installation that had been inspected by LDC staff. For DDI Reports that document little or no progress towards compliance with O. Reg. 22.04, enforcement action will be taken, along with increased DDIs. During the year Utility Regulations staff will study the application of risk based tools to focus the DDIs on parts of the distribution that are most at risk of serious incidents. The intent of the study would prepare for the application of risk based DDIs the following year.

FY2010: With the risk based assessments the DDIs may undergo changes, depending on the results and how the analysis will be conducted. Utility Regulations staff are mindful that DDIs may need to evolve to better suit the needs of all stakeholders. Jenifer Robertson Utility Regulations