A key point in the article was the problem with existing safety standards. The  writer, Tiffany Hsu,  asserted that: “Watchdog groups say a hodgepodge of state and federal renewable energy safety standards haven’t kept up with the growth of the industry. Some were adapted from other industries and don’t specifically cover wind and solar projects, while others are guidelines rather than mandatory regulations. Many are old and are just now being updated.”

As a company that spends a fair amount of time training wind turbine workers, I wasn’t quite sure what was meant about this “hodgepodge” of regulations. It would seem that OSHA has pretty well spelled out the minimal requirements for working on these structures. In the areas of all protection, confined space entry and hazardous energy control (which are the main hazards workers face), the safety requirements are simple and hard to misinterpret.

If workers are exposed to fall hazards, then the employer has to identify these hazards, develop the means and methods for controlling these hazards and train and equip workers. If the workers will be entering enclosed areas, then again the employer is obligated to identify the hazards and develop the means and methods for controlling or eliminating them. Lockout/tagout has the same requirements.

As far as being adapted from other industries, solar and wind are regulated by OSHA’s 1910.269 “Electric Power Generation, Transmission and Distribution.” These standards, it would seem, provide pretty specific guidelines for identifying and controlling hazards. And I think if you looked back at accidents that have occurred on wind farms or solar arrays, my guess is that the root cause of these accidents was due to an employer violating on or more of these standards. 

Accidents mentioned in the article include: “Technicians have fallen hundreds of feet; others have been crushed by parts or trapped in twisting machinery. Pilots in small planes have crashed into the towers. Electrical explosions last year left a worker in Illinois with third-degree burns and two others in San Diego County with similar injuries.”

Again, bad pilots notwithstanding, each of these accidents are addressed by specific provisions of the OSHA codes. Add to that OSHA’s General Duty Clause and it’s hard to see where additional regulations are needed.

If there is an area of confusion it might be that many employers haven’t carefully thought through their emergency action plans but that is true in a wide variety of industries, not just solar and wind.

While it’s easy to think that a whole new host of regulations are needed for the supposedly “new” industry, it’s my sense that employers simply need to go back and revisit their current obligations under the existing standards.

Just to review, a belay is a safety line that will catch the rescuer or patient if the mainline fails. An unconditional belay will catch the load without any action being taken by the person operating the belay (the belayer). A conditional belay requires the belayer to take some action (e.g., pull, wrap, or tighten the belay rope) to catch the load.

So is there that much a difference between these two?  I think so.

Several years ago I attended a rescue competition and watched a team set up a system that used a Rescue Eight (or Figure Eight) to create a conditional belay. When the rescuer placed his weight on the mainline, the safety checks had not been completed. When the system was loaded the mainline operator was assisting the belayer in checking the belay system and no one had a hold of the belay line or the mainline.

It all happened so quickly there was not even time to yell stop. Fortunately, the belayer was able to grab the rope and apply the pressure needed to arrest the fall. At that moment I realized that if teams trained to perform at a high level can make this mistake, then it can happen to anyone; at least anyone who uses a conditional belay. This is why D2000 has adopted the practice of only instructing teams to set up unconditional belays. Sometimes we say that the system has to pass the “Roswell Test.” This means that if, in the middle of a rescue, all the persons operating the rope system were suddenly beamed up to a UFO (or chased away by a cloud of chemicals or a swarm of bees) the patient would simply hang there until the rescuers returned.  

The two types of unconditional belays that we use heavily in training are the tandem prusik and the Traverse 540 belay. A self-retracting lifeline (SRL) also makes a great belay device. Sometimes these systems may take a few more minutes to set up than a Rescue 8, but you should always remember that when it comes to rescue, it’s not how fast you get to your patient but how efficient you are at getting your patient out.

Remember that efficient is defined as: “The ability to function without waste, capable of achieving the desired result with the minimum use of resources, time, and effort.” When a rescuer’s or patient’s safety is compromised by the use of a conditional belay, then your team’s efficiency will suffer.