robert benz

47, not being a smartass with this question, what do the housemen do? paperwork? rig maint? equipment maint? along with cleaning up?

we just had a rep in to train us on our new ALF truck, he stressed very clearly that if you damage the TOP RAIL (hand rail)OF THE LADDER YOU RISK THE INTEGRITY OF THE WHOLE LADDER DUE TO ITS TRUSS CONSTRUCTION. That being said we ordered our ladders with a replacable tip section ( notice i didnt use the words breakaway) just for the reason of mech ventilation the most you should damage is the tip section. While on my rant remember it is very important that you leave the ladder off the roof or parapet about a foot in other words cantilevered let the weight of the firefighters bring the ladder down closer.

My wife asks me this question all the time, "why are chiefs cars being driven as personal vehicles all over the county" I always answered that "it is the way it is, it is a perk". But i got to thinking, the cost of fuel, and the liability, and if you are out of town, at work 40 miles away you are out of service. Why use a taxpayer funded vehicle? Does your dept have a written policy on when and where your vehicles can be used?

This isnt about the difference between a chief getting paid or using his chiefs car to go to work. It is about abusing the use of the vehicle, If you cant leave work , or are to far away to respond, then you should leave it in the driveway for 5 days and then when it is time to hand it over to the next guy it will last longer, SAVING THE TAXPAYER THE COST OF A NEW VEHICLE. What are your depts policy's about EX-Chiefs? do they get to have a red lite in thier pov, a portable radio/ do they get to act as IC if nobody else is on scene yet? Where I live that is what the outgoing chief gets.

Hartsdale, Fairview, and Greenville are the other 3 Depts in the study There is a Capt on my Job that is doing the bulk of the study, and talking to him yesterday he ON PAPER has dropped BOUNDRY LINES, moved apparatus, not closed any houses and kept Volunteers where they are now, shown that you can provide much better response 1officer and 3 Firefighters on each apparatus, with 16 (or more)Career Firefighters on scene within the 8 minute standard, 90-95 percent of the time. The point being is that New Jersey did it Prince Goerges County did it and if Westchester really wanted to do it they could. Increasing Firefighters on the scene in the first 5-10 minutes is the single most important thing we can do for the taxpayers and FOR OUR OWN SAFETY!!!!!. Will anything ever come of it I hope so but I am not holding my breath AJSBEAR I understand the need for outside help, but when a person pays his fire tax, he expects a service for it, if you told him that although you are paying for protection to 'X" fire dept we cant put out your fire without the help of A,B,C,D,E,F and G fire depts I think they would be a little shocked. And if that is the case, they should all be combined to provide that service without a tremendous duplication of apparatus and in turn a tax saving look at all the articles that Newsweek ran last year about the cost of providing fire protection on LONG ISLAND. The Taxpayers are getting squeezed too hard. Other comments about the Chiefs not wanting to give up their Kingdoms are very true and very real. I am now off my soapbox MERRY CHRISTMAS TO ALL STAY SAFE

there is a study being conducted right now to consolidate 9 depts in lower westchester. IF it ever were to become a reality, it would increase personal responding in the 4 minute time frame, and the 8 minute time frame NFPA suggests. The way i see things, and this is my opinion only, Most of Westchester County Vol Depts are such a smokescreen, that something has to be done. The patch on your apparatus says FIRE DEPT, yet when a fire occurs, 5 -10 depts are called to put it out. I understand the need for an outside FAST, but for your bread and butter 2 1/2 story frame, to tie up that many resourses, then it is time to look at the reality of the fire service you are supposed to be providing your taxpayers. If it does require 5-10 depts to field a team safely, then CONSOLIDATION IS THE ONLY WAY TO GO. JUST MY HUMBLE OPINION

2120 hrs 12/8 same message

ok instead of the oops, ouch, and marshmellows, all you young kids, tell me what was the problem or problems that led to this happening?

got to disagree with you on the gas call, you have no idea how serious a gas leak it is until you are on scene. this could be as true an emergency as any call we go on, from attempted suicides, attempted murder, plumbers doin work "on the fly", vehicles into buildings, gasoline service station fill up with product seeping into adjacent multiple dwelling strong oder of "gas" I could go on and on

not quite sure how to take that comment??

FOR ANYONE INTERESTED THIS SAT OCT 13TH LOCAL 273 OF THE NEW ROCHELLE FIRE DEPT WILL BE HOSTING A CAR, TRUCK, AND CYCLE SHOW. THE EVENT IS @ GLEN ISLAND PARK AND RUNS FROM 10- 5 LIVE MUSIC, FOOD, RAFFLES AND MORE I AM HAVING TROUBLE ATTACHING THE FLYER FOR MORE INFO. I AM WORKING ON IT

OK LAST TIME I SCREW THIS UP THE OFFICIAL DATE AND TIME IS THIS SUNDAY OCTOBER 14TH

not crazy about it the way they pushed him out the window to a guy on a ladder? that is not the denver manuever not saying it wont work but we have much better options than that

there is another thread going around about this subject. according to the sources one of them the man who wrote the law, you do not have to outfit your members with a harness and a system, but you do have to make a hazard assesment of your needs, ie: does a fd that doesnt have a building over 1 story or 2 stories need a 50 bailout system with belts and such. our dept isnt buying the system we outfitted every member with 50' of rope / webbing and a beiner, for the self bely method, and the most important, we have had training on how to use it. read the law and the recommondations on the other thread and i am sure you will be as confused as ever

important info about the bailout rope law !!!!! -----Original Message----- From: Tom LaBelle [mailto:tlabelle@nysfirechiefs.com] Sent: Tuesday, September 18, 2007 2:09 PM To: Henry Campbell; Adrian Pilliod; Alfonso Varlaro; Alvon Macauley; Andrew Mancusi; Arthur Lewis; Barry Sens; Bernard Lee; Bonnie Maney; Brian La Flure; Bruce Heberer; Carl Amato; Charles Hungerford; Charles Hajduk; Charles Hammon; Chet Garrison; Christian Delisio; Christopher Morabito; Craig Zitek; Dale Smith; Daniel Lane; Daniel Schwertfeger; David Beaudoin; David Hardman; David Winzig; Debbie Boniface; Donald Chandler; Donald Corkery; Donald Fredericy; Donald Jaquish; Donald Magin; Douglas Staley; Edward Wright; Edward Busch; Edward Di Monda; Edward Kehn; Edward Saunders; Edward Tremblay; Ellwyn Van Vorce; Elton Cappiello; Francis Burns; Frank Mazza; Frank Sylvester; Fred Theadore; G. Michael Godfrey ; Gary Nestle; George Farley; George Maney; George Rivers; Gerald Diskin; Gerard Raab; Glen Miller; Glenn Burton; Gregory Anderson; Gregory Brunelle; Harold Phillips; Harold Harvey; Harold Smith; Henry Campbell; Henry Wehner; Ivan Wager; Jack Henderson; James Hare; James Kavanaugh; James King; James Martin; James Premo; James Staffo; James Wright; John Buchanan; John Cobb; John Haley; John Miller; John Scott; John Sroka; John Steger; John Tighe; John Williams; Joni Ensell; Joseph Battiste; Joseph De Francisco; Joseph Morabito; Judith Schmitz; Julius Leone; Keith McNally; Kelly Donoghue; Kenneth Pienkowski; Kevin Niedermaier; Larry Smith; Lee Shurtleff; Leon Tucholski; Leon VanWie; Lew Darrow; Malcolm Jones; Mark Sheline; Marvin Lemery; Mary Hanlon; Mary Lou Montgomery; Matthew Brisley; Michael Podolec; Michael Volpe; Michael Magin; Michael Murphy; Michael Rankin; Michael Smith; Mike McEvoy; Neil McNeight; Norman Knapp; Owen Magee; Paul Melfi; Paul Schonewolf; Peter Hosey; Primo Biscaro; R. Scott Ewing; Ralph DeBolt; Kiernan, Raymond; Raymond Morgan; Raymond Thatcher; Raymond White; Richard Akey; Richard Armistead; Richard Cary; Richard Giuliani; Richard Messina; Richard Nemier; Robert Doremus; Robert Kloepfer; Robert Burke; Robert Holley; Robert Parese; Robert Welch; Robert Zysk; Ronald Barz; Ronald Garrison; Ronald Dahulich; Ronald Johnson; Roy Althiser; Scott Premo; Stephen Wisely; Steven Myers; Steven Klein; Susan Revoir; Ted Rosko; Terence Hannigan; Thomas Bierds; Thomas Kennedy; Thomas LaBelle; Thomas Wutz; Timothy Boel; Timothy Dahulich; Vincent Kelly; Walter Geidel; Walter Eck; Walter Schoonmaker; Warren Rathke; William Dark; William Kennedy; William Owen; William Palmer; Jim Hannigan; Clinton Soemann; Laurence Vaughan Subject: New Rope requirements First of STOP, if you buying equipment to be incompliance with this new regulation don’t, nobody, and I mean nobody knows what it it going to entail as of 9/18/07 and likely will not for at least another week or two. There are several questions that I’ll try and answer in this note and more will follow but please share this with anyone interested. Question #1 HOW DID THIS EVEN HAPPEN? I certainly can’t speak for other associations but I can tell you what happened with NYSAFC. We had discussed the bill with the sponsors for three years, letting them know our concerns. Up until this year those concerns weren’t addressed but the bill wasn’t becoming law either. Also in the last few years the association has had to cut costs, this has hurt our government affairs program dramatically, this is part of the reason for the recent dues increase, there must be a voice of sanity in Albany, but it costs money to make that voice heard and to keep people informed. The bill was passed but both houses waited until the days right after the NYSAFC conference. NYSAFC staff take all of our computers and files to the show and it takes a few days to bring things back on line, by the time we had everything set up here the bills had already passed. Although many associations wrote letters of opposition to the bill as well as opposition from the Department of State, Department of Labor and the Division of Budget, Governor Spitzer signed the bill anyway. It is also clear that some sponsors believed that this would only apply to career fire personnel. The largest problem is that we now have a LAW that says what kind of equipment to carry. This is a very dangerous precedent as it is much harder to change a law then a regulation. It is also worth pointing out that the Department of Labor had unofficially stated that this type of regulation was going to happen with or without a law sometime in the near future. Question #2 DOES THIS APPLY TO VOLUNTEERS? Although some of the sponsors didn’t mean for it to, which is a bad policy in general as fire doesn’t care if your drawing a salary, the Department of Labor has no choice but to consider all firefighters “employees” and so yes it does apply to career and volunteer alike. Question #3 WE ALL KNOW THIS STARTED FROM AN FDNY FIRE, WHY IS THE CITY OF NEW YORK EXEMPT? There are two reasons. Exemption for NYC is standard in virtually all bills in the legislature in Albany. The language used was very common and is often thrown in without any real thought, second there is a belief that since the City had already addressed this issue they didn’t need a regulation. It is worth pointing out however that the City had issued bail rope before and then recalled it without replacing it. Question #4 ARE THERE SYSTEMS THAT ARE ALREADY APPROVED? Although you can find systems that already meet the NFPA requirements, that does not mean they meet whatever new regulation the state will create. It appears that the new regulation, which can be seen an commented on at the following site: http://www.labor.state.ny.us/workerprotect...DOSH_INDEX.shtm will allow each AHJ to create an assessment of bail out risks and choose an appropriate solution. The solution must be NFPA compliant, but it doesn’t appear that it necessarily needs to be more than safety rope, and compliant carabineers. But again, don’t buy anything until you have an actual final regulation in front of you. Also recognize that the draft will also be reviewed by Governor Spitzer’s office and it is unclear what their desire might be on this matter. NYSAFC is working on a statewide webcast that we’ll be announcing this week to bring folks up to speed on this issue. -- Did you know you can get the latest fire service news at <www.nysfirechiefs.com> Thomas L. LaBelle Executive Director NYS Association of Fire Chiefs 1670 Columbia Turnpike Castleton, NY 12033 Phone: (518) 477-2631 Fax: (518) 477-4430 E-mail: tlabelle@nysfirechiefs.com

the rebar cutter or "lobster tool" as it is called could be very effective we carry one on each truck and rescue, as for a torch we have 2 petrogen torches (gasoline and oxygen) easy to use and learn how to use, to go along with the before mentioned wizzer saw and band saw

if a "new system" is to be put in place, IE: belts, decent devices, etc who is gonna train the trainers??? As an sfi we only teach / train using a body belay, which in my personal opinion, works fine, but i have only used it in training.

this topic has been addressed more than once on this forum at least they had one lane closed

ok i'll bite, my rig with my gear is inside the building I am sh*t out of luck there, every apparatus that did show up should have dumped his booster tank via a master stream at the interior of the building. If there are hydrants, no reason not to have large amounts of h2o in a short period of time, no hydrants, even more reason for each rig to blitz it, and give it there best shot, figuring a tanker shuttle takes time to set up. Firehouses like anybody elses house can and will catch fire. The basics dont change.

officers have to have the brains to stop this kind of action, to prevent the freelancer / glory seeker from getting in that position in the first place. BUT look at the first pic ahhh theres the answer A CHIEF IS ON THE LADDER DIRECTING HIS TROOPS. MAYBE IT ISN'T THE FIREFIGHTER WE HAVE TO WORRY ABOUT AS MUCH AS IT IS THE GUY GIVING THE ORDERS.

ok now that the pics are there is it just me or is there something wrong with the way this fire is being attacked I sure hope these pics are fake but i dont think so and we keep on killing firefighters

I dont remember if i read about this or saw it on tv, but that little black box that holds all the vital info about your vehicle is not yours although you bought the vehicle it is placed in. A guy tried to use the info against the car manufacturer and a court declared it belonged to the manufacturer of the car. I find it unbelievable that you buy a car and you dont own the black box that could be used against you but not to clear you say if the brakes failed due to a defect. if anybody knows different please let me and everybody else here know Be very aware that info down to the second is recorded as we just read about on the other thread. slow down, buckle up, and as officers on a responding apparatus if you are the one screaming go thru the light or go faster its your a$$ also if you dont stop the driver from acting that way guess what it is your a$$ again. Being an officer is a whole lot about responsibility in this day and age not just the white front piece

ez pass i have a choice to have it in my car or not i remember the point of the story was the owner tried to use it to his advantage and a judge sided with the car company thats what made it stick in my head and i dont know if it is a box or tied into the onboard computer

just goes to show you act professional while in public view CONDUCT UNBECOMING no FD should wind up on the news for that, you never know who is video taping your every move. in my opinion those sirens should go the way of the firehouse bar's. wasnt that fight fought in westchester not too long ago?