SRS131EMTFF

Correct. For front line apparatus 10 years in service plus 2 as a spare for engines and ladders. The rescues are replaced as needed, the current rigs are only 8 years old replacing 5 year old HME rigs lost at the towers which were replacing 5 year old Macks. Rescue 1 was replaced with the current rig after 4 years.

How sure are you that there was no spill? Are you 100% positive that all of the chemicals released were vaporized and consumed and can not make it into the ground or surface water? What about the runoff, you are telling me that the runoff is pure H20, good enough to drink? That when it enters the water supply there are no problems with it i.e. the pH is fine, there is no increased any chemical concentration? Unless you can guarentee that the water from the fire is safe, the Federal Clean Water Act is in effect. The CWA and CERCLA dictate that what was released could be hazardous, thus unsafe for human consumption thus the need to dispose of it, thus it is a hazardous material and HAZWOPER. There is also a big difference between the gallon of bleach, ammonia, dish soap, pesticides and fertilizer in my mud room and the amount of chemicals, particularly solvents in an autobody shop. Ever hear of TCE, industrial solvent formerly used by the military in jets because it is a solvent but is not flammable, a spill of many gallons of TCE is a HAZ-MAT incident as defined by HAZWOPER, thus disposal laws are in effect. I would not want to the guy holding the buck when asked why the proper agencies were not notified of a spill that is now impacting groundwater. "well we though it was vaporized" type answers will not hold up in court, and in deed it has not. We would consider the smoke and vapor to be hazardous, why not the water?

Even if you know down to the milliliter exactly how much and what substances are present in an occupancy the interactions between the chemicals released can not be predicted, not even by someone with a Ph.D in Chemistry. Once you add heat to a chemical, you can break pi and sigma molecular bonds changing the structure of the chemical. This means that chemical you once had is now going to form something very different. It is very easy to form airborne organic acids with the products incomplete combustion and very electronegative species vaporized by the heat of the flames. Think a refrigerator being heated to the point where freon vaporizes, liberating the highly electronegative species Fluorine, then the fluorine bonding with H+ to form HF or hydrofluoric acid, or as we would call methyl-ethyl eat your face off, literally...... Even if you know whats in there, large amounts of chemicals anywhere will lead to increased interactions with different chemicals literally making the list of chemicals potentially released in a fire absurdly long. I hope the water from the fire was not allowed to leach into the groundwater after the fire there. The water from a fire in an autobody shop in which hazardous chemicals from the machines or fluids were released could be considered hazardous materials.

post the link then because I looked and its not there.

http://www.adamsarea42.com/fullstory.php?114833 Used 1999 E-One Quint From the Adams Area Fire Department in PA. http://www.adamsarea42.com/gallery.php?album_id=1776&mode=child_Gallery Photo of the Seagrave TL is their new TL. Got rid of their 1981 Mack/Baker Aerialscope and this 1999 E-One for the new TL.

congrats and Yonkers is the second safest big city in the nation (insert sarcasm here) http://www.lohud.com/article/20101124/NEWS02/11240376/Mayor--Yonkers-second-safest-big-city-in-the-US

Granted this is a very uninformative and short article but if he was wearing a helmet and jacket that IDed him as a photographer how is being charged with "impersonation of emergency medical/ rescue personnel"?

I completely understand what you are saying. Its not that I dont agree its a problem, I just I dont believe its negligence. Luckily our firehouse lawyers are actually lawyers, including several specializing in medical malpractice, so I will get opinions from them and report back.

With neglect being defined as: "Neglect is defined as a condition of deprivation in which a participant's health and welfare is jeopardized because of inconsistent or inappropriate services, treatment or care which does not meet their needs, or failure to provide an appropriate and/or safe environment. Failure to provide appropriate services, treatment or medical care through gross error in judgment and inattention is considered to be a form of neglect. For example, neglect occurs if a Service Coordinator is aware that an agency listed in a Service Plan cannot provide the requested services, but does not seek an alternate waiver service provider to meet the participant's needs." http://www.nyhealth.gov/facilities/long_term_care/waiver/nhtd_manual/section_10/sri.htm Explain to us exactly how waiting for a aeromedical transport legally constitutes neglect.

I hope I am not misinterpreting the original posters intent but I think that he meant siting in a classroom being lectured at is stupid not the training itself. I think the original poster was looking for ways to provide the training without requiring all of his people to sit through lectures. I.e. hands on training outside in real life situations, not hypothetical thought experiments within the confines of four walls. And I have to agree with him for the most part. The best training sessions I ever had were not spent behind a desk but instead hands on, down and dirty training knowing that I learned x,y and z; not oh my god, 4 hours passed and all I learned was x,y, and z. In this situation I think he means going over how to use the ERG again not in a class room but actually using the ERG in an actual simulation.

my mistake, during the build process I thought you mentioned that since this was going to respond to MVAs that there was going to be a combi tool on it in one of those diamond plate boxes.

didnt you say there was a combi tool on 69-62 as well?

If it is going to work any where it is going to work in Texas I bet you that. If Texas were to build large wind/solar farms and improve the national energy grid, they could make a hell of a profit selling energy that generated basically for free in the long run and can not run out. And thank you for this discussion, it is always fun to engage in non-political discussions on climate change, initiatives and policy.

Your pretty much wrong on your statement about clouds and cloudy days. 1. Austin, Texas gets 300 days of sun or roughly 80% as defined by the National Weather Service not 98%. Huge difference, like the difference between Western Vermont and a tropical island 2. Any amount of clouds or particles in the air (including humidity too, since water in its gas form is another particle type) interferes with the panel driving its efficiency down to near zero. It does not matter how much cloud cover there is, smog, humidity, pollen etc etc will all interfere with the amount of energy the solar panel is absorbing. Atmospheric properties and principles such as Mie, Reyleigh and non-selective scatter dictate that fact to us. The biggest question is how much did they spend on the panels and what is the energy return on investment. Considering it takes over 20 years to pay off the energy return on investment for one solar panel on your individual house, I am willing to bet ATCEMS does not recoup their losses for installing and maintaining the panels before the useful life of the truck is over. The panel can be installed on another truck but at what cost? Also, if this is for use when idling, how can it be used if the ambulance is under an awning. I give them a thumbs up for their efforts as well but in my opinion, having been trained in environmental economics by the lead environmental economist on the IPCC and the Copenhangen and Kyoto protocols I am very skeptical. There are a lot unanswered questions and I know you are not their PIO but this press release is green propoganda and nothing more considering how little is actually explained. The numbers are fine and good but the derivation of the numbers and how they got there are a lot more important and telling than the numbers themselves. (and this is coming from an ardent environmentalist)

That $160,000 is a pipe dream if I ever heard one. I would be willing to bet that they will be lucky if they get within 2/3rds of that amount. What is the cost of the panels and the EROI? Additionally, what is the cloud cover and run break down (i.e. more runs at night, in the day etc) because it dont matter how many soalr panels you have on your truck, if you are idling at the hospital during a cloudy day or at night or even under an awning like most hospitals have for their ambulance bays, all those soalr panels will produce exactly zero energy. One of the concentrations for my major is Environmental (green) technologies. The math that they did, rarely, if ever is as acurate as what is actually going on in the real world application. Their math is nice, but I would much rather see how and what they are basing these numbers on (the terms/variables) as opposed to the numbers themselves. Statisitcs like these can be very, very misleading and down right incorrect if the wrong initial assumptions are used. Who did these stiochiometric convsersions for them because I promise you these calculations were not done in house. (you need roughly a masters in enviromental economics to speak with an authority at all on this subject) I am just going say this right now, it would be alot easier and less expensive if they just shut the damn thing off as opposed to find new, ingenous, expensive and usually ineffective means to mitigate this problem.

From my prospective we in the Northwestern suburbs have gotten a lot better at utilizing the bird when it is actually needed. Maybe the quality of the EMTs has gotten better or the knowledge that the bird is not 10 minutes away has sunk in but calls that years ago might have gotten a STAT flight response are now being transported by ground. I can not remember the last time I saw or heard of the bird being used in northwest Westchester.

It also a lot more in the way there. If you are going to be repacking a cross lay, waningt an apparatus mounted body light, returning the booster and height restrictions are all problems as could it be getting in the way of the master stream, getting in the way of the aerial device etc etc, the list could actually be quite extensive all things considered...

here is link from ISO dealing with M/A. http://www.isomitigation.com/ppc/3000/ppc3008.html

Could a properly equipped Rescue-Engine or Quint be counted as a ladder and engine spare for ISO.

Agreed. If there was a video camera mounted on the helicopter that is what I would want to see as well. I think that would be a killer video. Sounds like this was a plot from a movie as opposed to an actual rescue So can we expect any of these or are we all forced to imagine what this must have looked like.

Just a case of a government official not actually knowing what the laws actually are Mississippi Office of Health Protection, Bureau of EMS lists the phrase "scene safety" exactly four times in its February 2011 EMS Laws, Rule and Regulations. http://www.msdh.state.ms.us/msdhsite/_static/resources/4007.pdf In order: 103.03 Performance Standards for Medical First Responder The Medical First Responder's primary responsibility is to the patient and should include both an oral exam and an appropriate physical exam. Scene size-up including: scene safety, mechanism of injury, number of patients, additional help, and consideration of cervical stabilization. Page 81 105 PERFORMANCE STANDARDS FOR THE EMT-BASIC 105.01 Performance Standards for EMT-Basic. Policy for Administration 8. State possible steps that the EMT-Basic may take to help reduce/alleviate and explain the need to determine scene safety. Page 111 105 PERFORMANCE STANDARDS FOR THE EMT-BASIC 131. Explain the rationale for crew members to evaluate scene safety prior to entering. Page 118 104 PERFORMANCE STANDARDS FOR EMT-ADVANCED LEVELS 104.01 Performance Standards for Emergency Medical Technician-Advanced Levels. The EMT's -Advanced's primary responsibility is to the patient and should include both an oral exam and an appropriate physical exam. Scene size-up including: scene safety, mechanism of injury, number of patients, additional help and consideration of cervical stabilization. Page 180 I fail to see how the crew from AMR failed in any way to follow the rules, regulations and laws of Mississippi EMS. Sounds like this guy has a problem with the Laws and not crew but is blaming the crew as a proxy for the law

I know Armonk loaned out its old 51B3 before the new 51B3 was put in service when one of the neighboring districts was down a ambulance.

why the need for the spare?

you should see the Cornell Professor freaking out over a yawn. Way funnier.... http://www.noob.us/miscellaneous/cornell-professor-freaks-out-over-a-yawn-seriously/

2 Rye Officers sickened in a similar incident today. http://www.lohud.com/article/20101119/NEWS02/11190382/Carbon-monoxide-sickens-2-Rye-cops--1-civilian--saving-woman-s-life