Monty

I agree with that mostly - I'm sure you'd see career from Westchester and NJ before volunteer - but how about Long Island?

Came across this on facebook .... * Note Date is April 30th 2011 *

I wonder if it is worth getting a Canadian or Central / South American registered vehicle?

I'm not saying all these departments and units are needed - but I was surprised that you were surprised at the number I'll also concede that last year, YHFD did run to more calls than the 'all volunteer' department I was thinking of - by about 90.

Well, actually - are you ready for this ...... Based on Wikipedia, Colonie has a land area of 56 square miles ... Greenburgh has a land area of 30 square miles. Populations are about the same 80-86K. The Town of Greenburgh includes: Ardsley Dobbs Ferry Elmsford Hastings-on-Hudson Irvington Tarrytown Fairview Greenville (commonly known as Edgemont) Hartsdale So - it shouldn't be that hard to imagine that Colonie has 12 departments when a smaller geographical area (about half the size), and less than 10% larger population has 9 departments. I'm sure if you were to look at Long Island you might be even more surprised ........ I also think that there are some that might counter your claim of Yorktown being the most active all volunteer departments in Westchester

They don't have civil service titles as they are employees of a private corporation as nysff said. A bit like contracting with Rural Metro (but probably much better).

I was a member with one of the town departments for several years before moving down state. Back then there was some talk of consolidation. The population is about 80K or so, however it can get close to double that during the working day with offices, businesses, shops, hotels etc. I know my old department (Shaker Road) has gone from having 4 Chiefs and 3 maxi pumpers, 2 mini pumpers, tower ladder and rescue 15 years ago to now having 3 Chiefs, 3 maxi pumpers (2 rescue pumpers) and 1 tower ladder. From the article it mentions some of the other departments downsizing as well and eliminating a truck or a rescue. Probably about 15 years ago the department hired 3 employees, who have to be volunteer fire fighters and respond 'mutual aid' to the department if there are not enough members. It's worked pretty well. About 13 years ago the department instituted a bunk in program. I think all the town depts have membership requirements to remain active. At Shaker Road you have to either attend a minimum 10% of calls (they run 800+ / year) or spend a certain number of hours as part of the duty crew. I agree with some of the other posts here that the Town Departments are well run, good inter department team work, strong mutual aid, consistent SOPs and ICS, well trained. I'm not sure how far consolidation is going to go given the classic local rule but it might happen ... Last thing - the article mentions a budget of $8.8 million, and Colonie EMS budget is $3.8 million. Schenectady Budget for Fire and EMS is $6.6 million (I don't know if they transport). City of Troy Budget is $14.8 million for Fire and EMS. So, the budget for the Town's Fire and EMS is more than Schenectady, but less than Troy - both of which have smaller populations and less area according to wikipedia. A couple of links for the area ... https://twitter.com/#!/WTEN/local-police-fire-depts and http://www.shakerroadfire.com/

Came across this - http://www.nyalert.gov/Public/News/AllHazPRView.aspx?notID=3386794&refer=HOME&source=RSS&messageID=AghxO4T6A& ironic timing giving the recent events in Sleepy Hollow. Interesting timing of this press release Friday at 3:30pm - a time typically reserved for press releases that want as little coverage as possible!

Interesting story on the firegeezer blog about Kansas City ambulance response A laudable goal - but how realistic is this? I don't think any more can be done for less - or even the same. How much are people willing to pay to achieve this level of care?

I think you made some valid points and have valid questions which I presonally don't have the answer to - but I'm sure others more closely involved could supply answers, or provide compromises to the original 'Brown' plan to improve it. As for reducing volunteers - that's quite likely because I'm sure (like most other volunteer departments) there are members whose first priority is not fire suppression. And that is not always a bad thing. However, those volunteers that want to be active in fire suppression stand a very good chance of being a credible addition to SFRD; in the eyes of most of the members. Like everything, there will be exceptions and I'm sure some members who wont want anything to do with volunteers but I expect they would be a small minority. The Tri-Data study from Nov 2008, at http://www.docstoc.com/docs/2875643/Stamford-Strategic-Fire-Study seems to be very thorough and addresses call volumes, travel time etc and has recommendations for relocating stations for better coverage. There is an interesting letter written by an ex-SFRD member that seems to make a lot of sense at http://boardofreps.org/committees/publicsafety/2010/items/ps28011/ps28011_tomczyk_110312.pdf. One of the interesting points is that he addresses the claim of the Administration needing 100+ new SFRD employees to equal the new SVFD capabilities, he points out that SFRD already has a significant amount of these members already in place. The saga continues .....

Likewise, I strongly second that.

I don't believe it is a traditional wet down, in the way that some I've been to are very wet! (Unless of course Mother Nature decides otherwise)

Interesting to see the media, and the Unions in this piece. As always, I'm sure there's more to the story than just this. But where did the £1,500 come from? So, two stations were retained / paid on call. The other crews were on duty so ther's no extra cost for them. Did they have any other calls or backfill with more retained personel? How about fuel? Well, at 10:45 would they be out anyway? Anyway, good to see the local lads took care of it - and were able to do so with out getting reprimanded for it! On a different but similar vein: http://www.portsmouth.co.uk/news/local/east-hampshire/fury_over_rescue_delay_after_man_dies_in_gosport_lake_1_2496102

I forget where I heard it (some training course - SEMO maybe), but I think a nuclear plant is one of the very few places in New York where the local government is NOT the AHJ .....

I'm sure the people feeding the machines scoring aren't looking at the forms - and probably don't have a clue what the test is for, or what is required of that test. Likewise the agency that hire from the list I'm sure just get a list of applicants and scores and never see the test answer form. Now of course, if you can't follow the directions and write the wrong code for the test - then that's a different story ....

A couple of things that have come to my mind seeing this incident - more so the nuclear aspect. I know there exist caches of equipment, decontamination stuff etc in the 4 counties around Indian Point - but who knows how to use it? How long would that take to set up? Secondly, I've often heard both inside and outside of emergency services that a nuclear incident / accident would build up over time. In this case given the earthquake, tsunami and everything else, it has been days in the making - which should give time to evacuate. However, initially, I'm sure there would be chaos with self evacuations. Thirdly, how much faith are people going to have in the 'spin' from the Government, Entity etc? As it is now there are plenty of 'skeptical' experts out there. Who do you believe? Do you believe EPA in the wake of 911? At the very least, there should be lots of additional real life information to consider when next reviewing IP's emergency plans.

Likewise, I made the trip there. I second that Chief Terpak was a great speaker - up there with Chief Goldfeder. Right on target with his presentation, the current political climate and the job. A lot of good reminders with some new information for me. I was very surprised at how few attendees there were. Stamford Local did a great job with the hospitality. I'd definitely recommend attending the event next time - or any presentation with Chief Terpak.

Very well done presentation on where our federal money goes is at http://www.wallstats.com/deathandtaxes/ - you can really drill down and see where money is going and how much of the pie - so to speak.

I've heard that some of the assets (EMS / Fire Gators) that DES has are manned by the Grasslands Fire Brigade and an agreement is in place with a local volunteer department to staff them at other times (Hawthorne I think). I assume requesting these assets would go through the mutual aid plan - via the Battalion cars or 60 Control - who presumably have their own (secret? ) procedures. Maybe management is still working on the plan for the Scene Support equipment ...... perhaps they can find a way to use it as a way to generate income? Anybody want to rent lots of tents?

In my old department upstate it was basically in the bylaws of the department (which was a non-profit contracted by the town for a fire protection district). The bylaws gave the Chief his power and the bylaws stated the requirements for active membership. Around the mid 90's the concept of an online / offline active firefighter was established. If you didn't have a current physical examination, didn't have annual OSHA training, didn't have bloodborne pathogens then you were offline and couldn't respond until you got your training and were placed online again. If at the end of the term and you didn't meet your requirements (drills, fires etc) you were taken off the active rolls (unless you were a life member with >20 years). This way you could still have the prestige of being life active, being recognised for having put in 20+ years of service but no longer able to respond if not appropriately trained as you were now 'off-line'.

Thanks, I know that somewhere it says something similar to States have to set standards that match or exceed OSHA - so NY can certainly set higher standards than the feds - although if they're not bothering to enforce them until the fact you could ask why bother. Bit like shutting the stable door once the horse has bolted. And I agree the standard talks about suspected release of a hazardous substance. One part of the definition (from http://www.osha.gov/pls/oshaweb/owadisp.show_document?p_table=INTERPRETATIONS&p_id=22298) Any biological agent and other disease-causing agent which after release into the environment and upon exposure, ingestion, inhalation, or assimilation into any person...will or may reasonably be anticipated to cause death, disease, behavioral abnormalities, cancer, genetic mutation, physiological malfunctions...or physiological deformations in such persons or their offspring I'm not sure that some of those cases (eg injured person) cover that reasonable anticipation. Sure some cases could, but a very small percentage - and it does make sense to take reasonable and prudent precautions for those small cases (ie proper PPE, barrier protection etc) - but I'm not sure it meets the strict definition. Guess that would be for a jury or judge to decide A good lawyer could probably argue both sides on other examples too.

Actually, that was July of last year (that the results were supposed to be announced)

Is this cited anywhere? In these responses I previously found on the OSHA site it contradicts that and explicitly says awareness is the minimum level for firefighters http://www.osha.gov/pls/oshaweb/owadisp.show_document?p_table=INTERPRETATIONS&p_id=27409 (Nov 2008) However, anyone responding to a reported hazmat incident needs to at least be Hazmat operatins level http://www.osha.gov/pls/oshaweb/owadisp.show_document?p_table=INTERPRETATIONS&p_id=24753: and http://www.osha.gov/pls/oshaweb/owadisp.show_document?p_table=INTERPRETATIONS&p_id=21788, states:

I think one of the thing that complicates the volunteer answer in New York are the different structures of fire protection. I'm not an expert on this but I'd start with the suggestions below. I'd say that in a Fire Protection District, it's the Fire Department and the Chief - the Chief reporting to the Board of Directors. In a fire district with 'true' fire commissioners then it would be the Chief, who answers to the board of Fire Commissioners. In a village fire department, it would be the Chief, who answers to the Village Board. In the structure where individual Companies are part of a larger department I would think it would fall to the Chief as far as PESH would be concerned. However, in this litigious environment I'm sure some lawyer would add the line officers and civil officers of the company to the lawsuit for good measure

Interesting story I came across http://www.wivb.com/dpp/news/southern_tier/Fire-contract-deadline-looms-in-Arkwright Wonder who will blink first? Some interesting things between the story and the comments ... Interesting way to bolster village finances ..... I wonder what other options the Town has from adjoining districts to enter in to a contract? Perhaps the town should create their own fire (protection) district. Reminds me of the posting here last year about the place in Putnam or Westchester where there was no fire district and no mutual aid because there was no Department to give it to! I also wonder what happens to the homeowners insurance? Seems a bit like the situation last year where the fire service didn't respond because the homeowner hadn't paid their optional fire protection fee ....