Consider an electrical incident scenario: a maintenance worker is found unresponsive near an open electrical panel, the metal cabinet that houses a building’s circuit breakers and wiring connections. The facility manager calls 911, then the insurance carrier. Within hours, the claims team faces technical questions that may require specialized expertise to answer: Was the panel properly shut off before work began? Did the worker follow safety procedures? Was the equipment up to code?
These are forensic questions, and the answers may influence how the claim is evaluated and how responsibility is ultimately determined.
Workplace electrical fatalities have remained relatively consistent over time t. Between 2011 and 2023, a total of 1,940 workplace deaths involved electricity in the United States, according to the Electrical Safety Foundation International (ESFI). Approximately 74% are reported in non-electrical occupations, including maintenance staff, construction laborers, painters, and others who encountered electrical hazards in the course of unrelated work.
This article is a starting point for claims professionals and legal teams encountering electrical incident claims. It covers what electrical accidents are, how they are classified, what typically needs to happen after an incident, and how forensic investigators work to determine what went wrong.
Key takeaways: What drives electrical accident claims
Electrical accident claims are often informed by physical evidence, technical standards, and analysis separating equipment factors from procedural conditions..
What shapes the claim
- Incidents fall into four categories (shock, electrocution, arc flash, electrical fire), each raising different evidentiary and liability questions
- Physical evidence may degrade or be altered over time, making early scene documentation and preservation important
- Investigators may compare site conditions against applicable OSHA and NFPA standards, including NFPA 70 and NFPA 70E, to evaluate where failures may have occurred
How the investigation connects to outcomes
- Root cause analysis separates equipment factors from work-practice factors, which may influence which parties bear responsibility
- Distinguishing “cause” arcing from “damage” arcing is often central to determining origin
- Code compliance findings may be considered in evaluating responsibility and defenses in claims or disputes
Rimkus provides forensic electrical investigation and expert witness testimony for electrical incident claims; contact us to get started.
What constitutes an electrical accident?
An electrical accident generally involves unintended contact with electrical energy, or an uncontrolled release of that energy, resulting in injury, death, or property damage. Investigators often start by separating two questions: How was the person harmed? And what failed in the electrical system?
A worker touches a wire that should have been shut off. An electrical panel releases a burst of superheated gas and light. A faulty connection inside a wall slowly overheats until it ignites surrounding materials. The cause, evidence, and investigation approach differ significantly across these scenarios, even when the same piece of equipment is involved.
What are the different types of electrical accidents?
Electrical accidents are commonly grouped into four categories: shock, electrocution, arc flash, and electrical fire. Each involves different physical mechanisms and different investigative approaches. Real-world incidents may involve more than one; an arc flash, for example, can trigger an electrical fire.
Electrical shock and electrocution
Electrical shock occurs when current passes through the body. Severity depends on how much current flowed, the type of current (alternating current, the kind used in buildings, is often associated with increased physiological risk compared to direct current at comparable levels, depending on exposure conditions), how long the person was exposed, and the path the current took through the body.
Investigators often evaluate the current pathway: where current entered the body and where it exited. The path may help indicate what organs and tissues may have been affected. Evidence may include burn marks on hands, forearms, or tools; moisture that could have made it easier for current to flow; conductive jewelry; and damaged wire insulation that created a live surface where none should have existed.
Electrocution is the specific term for electrical contact that results in death. When a fatality occurs, the investigation typically widens: Did the circuit breaker or fuse respond quickly enough? Was the system properly grounded, meaning was there a safe path for stray current to flow to the earth instead of through a person? Did physical barriers match the type of work being performed?
Arc flash
Arc flash can produce severe burn injuries without current ever passing through the body. Instead, an electrical arc (a discharge of electricity through the air) jumps across a gap between conductors, releasing intense heat and light at temperatures that can exceed 35,000 degrees Fahrenheit. Burn severity depends on the energy level of the arc and the person’s distance from it.
Investigations often focus on three areas: whether conditions existed for an arc to start (loose connections, debris, or physical damage that brought conductors too close together); whether circuit protection was configured and operated in a manner intended to limit the energy released within design parameters; and whether the work task itself increased exposure by requiring removal of covers or barriers that would normally contain a potential arc.
Equipment labeling, worker training records, and whether protective equipment matched documented safe-distance requirements are also common areas of review.
Electrical fire
Electrical fires can start from arc faults (unintended discharges inside wiring or equipment), connections that overheat due to poor contact, overloaded circuits, or equipment failures. These investigations often reference NFPA 921, a widely recognized framework for fire and explosion investigations in the United States.
A key technique is arc mapping: documenting the physical locations where arcing occurred throughout a fire scene. By evaluating the sequence of arcing events, investigators may be able to identify where the fire started. That sequence may help establish the point of origin and inform liability analysis when multiple parties are involved.
A recurring challenge is distinguishing “cause” arcing from “damage” arcing: Did an electrical problem start the fire, or did the fire itself damage wiring and create arcing as a secondary effect? This distinction may shape the investigation’s central conclusion.
How does an electrical accident investigation work?
Once the scene is preserved and initial documentation is collected, the forensic investigation begins. Investigators work to determine cause, failure mechanism, and contributing factors through a structured, evidence-based process that moves from broad scene-level observations to detailed examination of individual components and, when needed, laboratory testing.
Established investigation methodology
Electrical incident investigations generally follow a structured process. NFPA 921 is one of the most widely referenced frameworks for fire or explosion incidents, but its core method applies to all electrical investigations: document the scene exactly as found, collect physical evidence, develop possible explanations, and test each against the facts. Explanations that do not align with the available evidence are typically reconsidered or eliminated..
For non-fire incidents such as shock or electrocution, investigators apply the same approach using NFPA and OSHA standards as benchmarks. Hands-on equipment examination typically includes checking wire connections, insulation, internal panel components, and protective devices for signs of overheating, arcing, or physical damage.
Root cause analysis
Root cause analysis asks not just what failed, but why it failed and why the problem was not caught earlier.
Many electrical incidents involve a combination of factors rather than a single defect: deteriorating insulation combined with a missing equipment cover, or a loose connection combined with a work assignment that placed someone too close to a hazard. The analysis generally seeks to connect physical conditions to procedural factors such as hazard assessment, training, and supervision.
For claims teams, this separation matters. Equipment-related questions (was the system designed, installed, and maintained properly?) point toward different responsible parties than work-practice questions (was the task planned safely, were permits in place, was the right protective equipment provided?).
The role of expert disciplines
Electrical engineers analyze system configuration and what failed. Fire investigation specialists bring NFPA 921 methodology and arc mapping expertise. Safety professionals evaluate training and regulatory compliance. When the incident involves mechanical, chemical, or structural systems, engineers from those disciplines may also contribute.
Code compliance and liability
Two sets of NFPA standards are commonly referenced in most electrical incident investigations. These standards provide a framework investigators may use to evaluate real-world conditions.
NFPA 70, commonly known as the National Electrical Code, covers how electrical systems should be installed: what type of wiring to use, how panels should be configured, and how systems should be grounded (connected to the earth to prevent dangerous buildup of electrical charge).
NFPA 70E, the Standard for Electrical Safety in the Workplace, covers how people should work safely around those systems. It addresses lockout/tagout procedures (the steps for shutting off and physically locking equipment so it cannot be accidentally turned back on), required protective equipment, and the minimum safe distances workers must maintain from energized equipment.
OSHA’s electrical safety standards reference both. Together, they provide a framework for evaluating whether the equipment and work practices were appropriate for the hazards present at the time of the incident.
Technical findings and claim outcomes
Electrical incident investigations can span electrical engineering, fire science, safety compliance, and code analysis. For claims professionals and attorneys, the challenge is connecting technical findings to the decisions that may influence claim outcomes: who bears liability, whether coverage applies, and whether subrogation (recovering costs from a responsible third party) is possible.
In many claims, the dispute may hinge on a limited number of key technical findings:: Was a component energized when it should not have been? Did the circuit breaker operate as designed? Was the equipment in safe condition for the type of work being performed?
Addressing these questions often requires coordinated expertise across multiple disciplines. Our global network of credentialed engineers and forensic specialists brings more than 40 years of experience, over 110 offices, and 900+ experts on staff to electrical incident investigations across insurance, legal, and corporate contexts. For organizations navigating an electrical incident claim, contact Rimkus to discuss how our forensic expertise can support the investigation.
Frequently asked questions
How can electrical accidents be mitigated in the workplace?
Mitigation often involves multiple layers: lockout/tagout procedures, routine equipment inspection, ground fault circuit interrupter (GFCI) protection, qualified worker training, and proper protective equipment. Administrative measures such as formal hazard assessments and written energized work permits help address procedural gaps.
How does improper grounding contribute to electrical accidents?
Grounding provides a safe path for stray electrical current to flow into the earth rather than through a person or along exposed metal surfaces. When grounding is improper or missing, there may be limited or no effective path for that current, which can energize surfaces that should not be live and may prevent circuit breakers from shutting off the power.
Authored by: Rimkus Forensics Marketing Team
Published April 10, 2026.
This article is intended to provide general information and insights into prevailing industry practices. It is not intended to constitute, and should not be relied upon as, legal, technical, or professional advice. The content does not replace consultation with a qualified expert or professional regarding the specific facts and circumstances of any particular matter.