Mike Holt’s State Rating of the Electrical Industry - 2012

Here’s the update to Mike’s “Safest States” ranking, which has become widely anticipated by so many of you since 2007

Congratulations to Minnesota, North Dakota, Oregon, South Dakota, Wyoming for their “A+” rating. These states have set the standard for electrical safety by adopting the most current Code on a state-wide level, requiring licensing for Apprentices, Journeymen, Master Electricians, Inspectors and Professional Engineers, as well as requiring continuing education at the state level for all of these classifications.

We'd also like to congratulate the following states for improving their rankings from last year: Colorado, Illinois, Maryland, Montana, Nebraska, New York and Vermont.

Here are some notes to explain the assignment of the points and their effect on the rankings:

1. State-wide mandates: This analysis is based on requirements mandated by the state for apprentices, journeyman and master electricians/contractors, inspectors and professional engineers; this is so that we can have a standard of measurement that is quantifiable, and not subjective.

Important note: We recognize that there are many “safe” counties/municipalities that take licensing and enforcement seriously, but unfortunately, those can’t be reflected in our report, which is based on requirements at the state level.

2. NEC adoption: The number of points assigned for adoption of the most current NEC is 3. This year 2011NEC=3 points, 2008NEC=2 points, 2005NEC=1 point, and prior NEC/local adoption = 0 points. Since last year the current NEC was 2008 (was worth 3 points last year), a state that remained on the 2008NEC this year will have one less point than they did on the prior report [Last year: 2008NEC=3 points, 2005=2 points, 2002=1 and prior/local adoption = 0].

3. We appreciate your feedback! Thanks for the great response after the 2010 published analysis; following are some of those comments, and how we have addressed them for this year’s report:

Journeyman Licensing:

• Lee Jones commented:“No state without a JE license program should get an A”.
• Mike Walker commented: “Ohio has no licensing with the exception of a contractor. Once that license has been issued, any number of people at any number of locations with no certain qualifications can be employed.”
  We agree that this is definitely an important safety issue, but some would argue that the lack of inspectors or of enforcement is equally as dangerous. If you have an idea as to how this could fairly be incorporated into the point system, please post your comment, and we’ll review it for the next report.

Enforcement:

• Jerry Gardner commented:“Does your grading take enforcement into consideration? Hawaii, which gets a well deserved C, requires contractors and journeymen to be licensed but there is very little enforcement.” Jerry Gardner
• Vernon Lippert commented:“I Understand the rating based on rules and regulations, but there needs to be some other input to adjust the factor. Take Iowa for example. Everything you have is correct, but inspection is non-existent and the board continues to pass emergency exemptions from inspection due to the workload.”
• Curtis Parr commented: “I would give Texas high marks in all areas – they are very good at their enforcement”.
  Unfortunately, we cannot find a quantitative way to measure enforcement so we could not consider it in this report. Again, if anyone has a recommendation please post your comment; we would be glad to try to implement it for the next update.

Kansas:

• James Harvey commented: “The information you have about the State of Kansas is slightly mistaken. The state has required CEU hours for both Journeyman and Masters for the last two code cycles.”
  Our research showed that Kansas, with the exception of asbestos abatement and water well drilling, doesn’t license construction contractors at the state level and CEU requirements are managed by the counties.

Texas:

• Ken T. commented:“Take a look at Texas; TDLR has set new standards for inspectors, and requires them to be licensed, insured and bonded”.
  We researched this and our findings show that although most jurisdictions have these requirements, there is no statewide electrical inspection department.

If you have any updated information that you feel would change our rankings on this year’s report, please post your comment! We look forward to your feedback so that we can continue to report the stats accurately and fairly. Remember that all these grades are based on the requirements of the state, and not local jurisdictions.

We acknowledge and congratulate all those states that continue to set high standards in electrical safety.

Below is a summary of the findings.

Click here to see details of the numbers behind these grades.

STATE	2007 rating	2009 rating	2010 rating	2012 rating	point change	Reason for the Change
ALABAMA	B-	C-	C-	C-	0
ALASKA	B	B+	A-	A-	0
ARIZONA	D	D	D	D	0
ARKANSAS	A-	A-	A-	A-	0
CALIFORNIA	A-	A-	A-	A-	0
COLORADO	C+	B-	B-	B	+1	Now requires Apprenticeship before JE
CONNECTICUT	A-	A-	A-	B+	-1	Did not adopt 2011NEC; remains on 2005NEC
DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA	C	C	C	C	0
DELAWARE	A-	B+	A-	A-	0
FLORIDA	B+	B	B+	B	-1	Did not adopt 2011NEC, remains on 2008 NEC
GEORGIA	B	B-	B-	C+	-1	Did not adopt 2011NEC, remains on 2008 NEC
HAWAII	B-	C	C	C	0
IDAHO	B+	B+	A-	A-	0
ILLINOIS	D	D	D	D+	+1	Now requires Inspector Certification
INDIANA	C-	C-	C-	C-	0
IOWA	D	A-	A	A	0
KANSAS	C-	D	D	D	0
KENTUCKY	A-	A-	A	A-	-1	Did not adopt 2011NEC, remains on 2008 NEC
LOUISIANA	C	C+	B-	C+	-1	Did not adopt 2011NEC, remains on 2008 NEC
MAINE	A	A	A	A	0
MARYLAND	D	D	D	D+	+1	Now requires Inspector Certification
MASSACHUSETTS	A-	A+	A	A	0
MICHIGAN	A-	A-	A	A-	-1	Did not adopt 2011NEC, remains on 2008 NEC
MINNESOTA	A+	A+	A+	A+	0
MISSISSIPPI	D+	D+	D+	D+	0
MISSOURI	D+	D	D	D	0
MONTANA	B	B	B+	A-	+1	Now requires Inspector Certification

NEBRASKA	B+	B	A-	A	+1	Now requires Inspector Certification
NEVADA	D+	D+	D+	D+	0
NEW HAMPSHIRE	A-	A-	A-	A-	0
NEW JERSEY	B+	A-	A-	A-	0
NEW MEXICO	B+	B+	B+	B+	0
NEW YORK	D+	D+	D+	C-	+1	Adopted 2008NEC (from 2002)
NORTH CAROLINA	A	A	B+	B	-1	Did not adopt 2011NEC, remains on 2008 NEC
NORTH DAKOTA	A+	A+	A+	A+	0
OHIO	A-	B+	B+	B	-1	Did not adopt 2011NEC, remains on 2008 NEC
OKLAHOMA	A+	A+	A+	A	-1	Did not adopt 2011NEC, remains on 2008 NEC
OREGON	A+	A+	A+	A+	0
PENNSYLVANIA	C	C-	C+	C	-1	Did not adopt 2011NEC, remains on 2008 NEC
RHODE ISLAND	A	A	A	A	0
SOUTH CAROLINA	B-	B-	B	B-	-1	Did not adopt 2011NEC, remains on 2008 NEC
SOUTH DAKOTA	A	A+	A+	A+	0
TENNESSEE	B	B	B	B-	-1	Did not adopt 2011NEC, remains on 2008 NEC
TEXAS	B+	A-	A-	A-	0
UTAH	A	A	A	A-	-1	Did not adopt 2011NEC, remains on 2008 NEC
VERMONT	B	B+	A-	A	+1	Now requires Inspector Certification
VIRGINIA	B+	A-	A-	A-	0
WASHINGTON	A-	A	A	A-	-1	Did not adopt 2011NEC, remains on 2008 NEC
WEST VIRGINIA	B	B	B+	B	-1	Did not adopt 2011NEC, remains on 2008 NEC
WISCONSIN	C+	C+	C+	C	-1	Did not adopt 2011NEC, remains on 2008 NEC
WYOMING	A	A+	A+	A+	0
PUERTO RICO	B	B-	B-	C+	-1	Did not adopt 2011NEC, remains on 2005 NEC

Note: if anyone has current information for Puerto Rico, please contact us with any updates.

2012 Data
2010 Data
2009 Data
2007 Data