We briefly discuss high voltage signs because cracked or missing high voltage signs at the primary power level constitute a significant number of CPSD's alleged violations. Edison believes that these signs should only be repaired on an opportunity maintenance basis, or whenever a worker is in the area for another purpose. Edison alleges that an increase in worker accidents occurs as the result of entering the primary power level for the sole purpose of replacing a high voltage sign. Edison also believes that high voltage signs at that level are not useful, pointing out that numerous states no longer have such a requirement.
The high voltage sign requirement is not only contained in GO 95 but also is a California statutory requirement in certain instances. (See Pub. Util. Code § 8029.11) Thus, Edison's rationale does not excuse compliance. If Edison believes the signs are no longer necessary, it should seek to change the applicable GOs and statutes to more meaningful criteria.
Although it may be dangerous for a worker to make a special trip to the primary power level solely to repair a high voltage sign, there may be less dangerous methods to achieve similar warnings. For example, a worker might be able to post a sign at a lower level on the power pole, warning of high voltage wires above. Or there might be other places where such warnings could be placed with less danger to achieve the same result. We direct Edison and CPSD to meet and confer in a cooperative effort to determine whether adjustments to the high voltage sign requirement would achieve the same results as the sign. If useful alternatives emerge, the parties may wish to raise them in R.01-10-001, or another appropriate forum, or in requesting legislative amendments. A similar exercise may be useful for other items where Edison or CPSD believe the safety repairs pose a disproportionate risk to utility workers. In the meantime, Edison's maintenance priority system should develop a more defined timeframe to repair such violations.