Safety

1. 2014 Transmission & Distribution Benchmarking Data Review Conference Safety June 25-27, 2014 Nashville, TN

2. Safety

3. Guidelines & Data Issues

4. Safety performance Analysis • The RIR reported in the 2nd Draft does not include fatalities. We will be revising this. It only affects 3 companies and doesn’t change their position on the graph. OSHARECORDABLEINJURYRATE:COMBINEDT&D (Including Fatalities) OSHARECORDABLEINJURYRATE:COMBINEDT&D This error in our calculation caused us to check all of our calculations…

5. Recordable Injury: This measure includes every occupational death, every non-fatal occupational illness, and every non-fatal occupational injury which involves one or more of the following: loss of consciousness, restriction of work or motion, transfer to another job, or medical treatment (beyond first aid). It measures the total OSHA recordable injury and illness cases based on the exposure of 100 full-time workers, using 200,000 hours as the equivalent (or 100 full-time employees X 2,000 hours per employee per year). The measure is calculated as: Total Number of OSHA cases X 200,000 / Total Exposure Hours. DART Rate: OSHA lost work day rate includes every non-fatal occupational injury or illness which involves restriction of work or motion, and/or transfer to another job (DART). It measures the total OSHA lost work day case recordable injury and illness cases based on the exposure of 100 full-time workers, using 200,000 hours as the equivalent (or 100 full-time employees X 2,000 hours per employee per year). The measure is calculated as: Total of OSHA lost work day cases X 200,000 / Total Hours Worked. Severity Rate: This measure includes every non-fatal occupational injury or illness which involves one or more of the following: restriction of work or motion and/or transfer to another job. It quantifies the severity of OSHA incidents that have occurred by looking at the number of lost workdays that can be attributed to an OSHA incident, based on the exposure of 100 full-time workers (using 200,000 hours as the equivalent….or 100 full-time employees X 2,000 hours per employee per year). The measure is calculated as: Total Lost Work Days due to OSHA recordable incidents X 200,000 / Total Exposure Hours. Lost Workday Case Rate: OSHA lost work day case rate includes every occupational injury or illness which results in a day away from work due and/or fatality. It measures the total OSHA lost work day case recordable injury and illness cases based on the exposure of 100 full-time workers, using 200,000 hours as the equivalent (or 100 full-time employees X 2,000 hours per employee per year). The measure is calculated as: ((Total of OSHA lost work day cases + Fatalities) X 200,000) / Total Hours Worked. There are, however, some safety reporting issues: Vehicular accidents – Most utilities report all reportable accidents, whether preventable or not and regardless of fault. In general, we want utilities to include personal vehicles when used on company business. There are some differences in how utilities treat limited duty work, which will not be resolved as part of this benchmarking. Safety Reporting Guidelines

6. Where the Data comes from All of the data should come from the OSHA form. We need total hours worked by all employees for normalization and the total numbers of each type of case, as well as, the days away and days restricted totals.

7. OSHADARTINCIDENCERATE:COMBINEDT&D • We always like to verify zeros on the safety charts. We checked with this company (27) and they checked their data: “we did actually have one lost day last year.  For 2014 YTD, we have had no lost days and only 2 recordables.” So they are doing very well, but will be correcting this data. Calculationused ((S5.2A+S5.3A)*200000 )/S5.1A Page 7

8. Manhours vs Days • Question SF10 asked for two different answers, the question asked for “manhours”, the field for data entry asked for “days”. Almost everyone responded with days. So we’d like company 22 to convert their response.

9. DAYS ELAPSED ON AVERAGE FROM INCIDENT UNTIL INVESTIGATION REPORT COMPLETED • For SF140, we aren’t clear about calendar days or working days. We do want working days. Also, we’re looking for average. It’s conceivable that some incidents will be very brief requiring less than an hour to investigate and that others would take longer. • We expect smaller numbers. Companies 35 and 28 seem fairly large.

10. Issues Found: safety

11. Analysis and use of Text Answers

12. Looking for Best Practices • We want to find a way to identify best practices and initiatives in the safety area. One way to do that is to find out what the best performers are doing that other companies aren’t doing. So we need to find out who the best performers are. Our methodology is explained on the next pages, but we haven’t yet identified the 2014 best performers.

13. From 2013 Total T&D Recordable Incidence Rate Safety Record Good Poor Companies want to have good performance and be either stable or improving – putting them in the lower left corner of the chart. Not Improving Improving • Compares the 5-year average value to the 5-year change in value

14. From 2013 Total T&D lost Workday case Rate Safety Record Good Poor Companies want to have good performance and be either stable or improving – putting them in the lower left corner of the chart. Not Improving Improving

15. From 2013 Total t&D Safety Ranking - total Putting all of the data together for the 5 measures, we calculated a total for each company. Westar Energy had the highest total score – meaning that they had generally low safety rates and were improving. Best Performing companies: 31, 30, 35, 39 (honorable mentions: 37, 27)

16. From 2013 Total T&D Safety Ranking - Breakdown Aside from Westar, we also took a closer look at answers from other top performing companies when comparing answers to all of the text questions. Value Score Improvement Score Improving companies: 31, 35, 37, 39 Consistently Good companies: 31, 30, 35, 27

17. From 2013 Contractor Safety Once we knew who the best performers were, we could look at text answers to see if anything stood out as making a difference. Here’s a slide on contractor safety. • Two-thirds of the respondents track contractor safety, all but two of the top performing companies do – (SF45, pg 37); • Two-thirds of the respondents do not have incentives or penalties for contractor safety performance, two top performing companies do (31, 39) – (SF50, pg 39); • All but one respondent uses contractor safety as a selection criteria – (SF55, pg 39); • Several top performing companies review contractor safety monthly or quarterly. (30, 31, 35, 37) – (SF60, pg 40) • Several companies include safety expectations in the contract documents (37, 30, 32, 39, 17); most provide some sort of manual or require contractors to adhere to OSHA guidelines, several have pre-job meetings (37, 28, 32, 17) – (SF70, pg 42) ID numbers are color coded: 99 = consistently good; 99 = improving; 99= both

18. From 2013 1QC Community Key Success FactorsSafety From all of the pages where best performers stood out as doing something different, we developed the Key Success Factors list below. For Insights we’ll validate it against this year’s data. What’s your impression of our Key Success Factors for Safety?

19. From 2013 Where Are We: 1QCIndustry Perspective for Safety Last year, we first shared this graphic at the Insights Conference. For Insights we’ll validate it against this year’s data. What’s you’re impression of our SCQA on Safety?

20. Other Analysis • We’ll update the trend charts. • We’ll update the ranking analysis we developed last year • We’ll use these to identify companies that are consistently low or are continually improving. • We’ll also try to correlate the information from all the text questions against the performance measures. • We’ll see what develops.

21. Thank you for your Input and Participation! Your Presenters Ken Buckstaff Ken.Buckstaff@1QConsulting.com310-922-0783 Dave Canon Dave.Canon@1qconsulting.com 817-980-7909 Dave Carter Dave.Carter@1qconsulting.com 414-881-8641 Debi McLain Cook Debi.McLain@1QConsulting.com760-272-7277 Tim. SzybalskiTim.Szybalski@1QConsulting.com 301-535-0590 About 1QC First Quartile Consulting is a utility-focused consultancy providing a full range of consulting services including continuous process improvement, change management, benchmarking and more. You can count on a proven process that assesses and optimizes your resources, processes, leadership management and technology to align your business needs with your customer’s needs. Visit us at www.1stquartileconsulting.com | Follow our updates on LinkedIn Satellite Offices Corporate Offices California 400 Continental Blvd. Suite 600El Segundo, CA 90245(310) 426-2790 Maryland 3 Bethesda Metro Center Suite 700Bethesda, MD 20814(301) 961-1505 New York | Texas | Washington | Wisconsin