Bnechis

Since the posts have covered 20+ years of issues and multiple counties I pretty sure its not the same trooper. In twenty years, we have worked with many fine troopers and have gone for years without issue. We have also gone for periods with nothing but issues everytime we responded to I-95. My most vivid image was as a newer FF. arriving at a fully involved vehicle fire in the left lane on a sharp curve and next to the jersey barrier (it probably was still a metal guard rail then) at 3am. My Lt. ordered the Left & Center lane blocked. The Trooper told him under no circumstances would he allow us to do that. So the LT. ordered us back on the rig & we left with the fire still ragging. We went to Exit 16 drove back down to Exit 15 via local streets and waited about 2 minutes till we were requested back. As we arrived a sargent pulled up and he was still yelling when we left. This clearly clouded my image to the point that when a dozen years later and working a medic flycar in the opposite end of the county I was actually stunned to arrive at a man down in a Pvt dwelling, 2 troop cars in the driveway, and the Troopers were not sitting in their cars doing paperwork. I was even more stunned when I got inside and saw they were doing perfect CPR. I was so impressed I wrote a letter to the Troop HQ. To this day I compare the 2 experiences and realize that there are excellent Troopers and there are ........., for some reason Troop T appears to have more of the latter over the years. Is there something different amout this Troop than the others?

Nice cross hair....must be nice to be able to target (& shoot) that clean

#1 Abbey Richmond Amb, they were sold to Transcare #2 Westchester Amb. which has become Westchester EMS (not the same company, but there CON, I believe) in Mt. Kisco.

Take the challenge...wrap both in paper take a sip and which ever tastes better....

In the past (dont know if its still the same), the TA paid the state for NYSP services. The state would bill the full price for a seasoned trooper, but would send a lot of newbies to troop T, since they got paid less. Nice book keeping move.

Most incidents that I've been at on I-95 have "Fire".......1" x 18" red & started by the trooper, they are usually in a pattern of 3 to 6 seperate fires (since they were deleberatly set, does it make them arson, and under NYS law doesn't the fire chief or his designe have to determine the cause of all fires....bring out the C&O team). You know this is a problem when these fires are being started and you have 8,000 gallons of gasoline flowing from the overturned MC406 tanker. I loved the comment about them closing the road for 12 hours to do an investigation, but no way for 12 minutes for an extrication. We see it all the time. Also why dont they have an issue when DOT closes 2 lanes?

I agree with just about everything you wrote. If its a hazmat incident, state law says the IC must be to Ops level. NYSP are only required to be awarness (they have troopers at all levels) so if ops or tech trooper is not there, that MVA is leaking Hazmat. Remember if they threaten to arrest, dont resist, let them.........it will never happen again.

95 & 87 (dont know about 287 & 84) are part of troop "T" which is funded by the thruway authority, but they answer like all other troops up thru the NYSP.

3 left & 3 right. nope not excessive. Our new R-4 will have 5 (3 rear, 2 front)

Below is a letter which is posted on the US Dept of Labor "OSHA" website. It confirms that it is illegal in "OSHA Plan States" (which includes NY, NJ & CT). To have a beard and wear any form of respirator (which would include both SCBA and EMS "TB" masks). So if you have a beard get off the ambulance and the fire truck. October 3, 1996 (Name Withheld) Dear (Name Withheld): This letter is in response to your inquiry on beards, respirator use, and fit testing of respirators. As background information it may be helpful to state, in general terms, OSHA's requirements about the respirator face seal and beards. As you are aware, [29 CFR 1910.134(g)(1)(i)] states the following: [(1) Facepiece seal protection. (i) The employer shall not permit respirators with tight-fitting facepieces to be worn by employees who have: (A) Facial hair that comes between the sealing surface of the facepiece and the face or that interferes with valve function; or (B ) Any condition that interferes with the face-to-facepiece seal or valve function.] This requirement applies to both negative or positive pressure respiratory protective devices that rely on the principle of forming a face to facepiece seal. Beard growth at points where the seal with the face and respirator occurs is a condition that has been shown by numerous studies to prevent a good face seal. Copies of relevant articles documenting this have been enclosed. Thus an employer using a respirator to protect an employee with a growth of beard where the seal is compromised by the beard growth is violating [29 CFR 1910.134(g)(1)(i)(A)]. The OSHA standard does allow beards with the use of respirators that do not rely on a tight facepiece seal between the respirator inlet covering and the underlying skin (i.e., both loose fitting helmets and hoods are acceptable in this regard). In response to your list of questions, the following is provided: 1. If a hospital had a policy that any employee that has a beard and can achieve a good face seal may enter an "AFB" isolation room if he has documented proof of a consistent good face seal by quantitative fit testing, would OSHA fine or cite that hospital? Would that hospital be in violation of any OSHA regulation because of such a policy? As has already been stated, it is OSHA's policy to enforce [29 CFR 1910.134(g)(1)(i)(A)]. Also, as already stated, it has been shown that beard growth prevents a good face seal. The regulatory language in the paragraph does not make any exceptions when fit testing shows that a good fit has been achieved for persons with beards. Also, seeing that facial-hair growth occurs daily and, thus, fit testing performed on a previous day may not be valid for the day the respirator is worn, OSHA cannot concur with your hospital policy as an allowable exception to the requirement in [1910.134(g)(1)(i)(A)]. 2. Is there any OSHA standard that states that a person with a beard cannot be quantitatively fit tested? 3. Is there any regulation stating that a beard that does not touch the area of the seal (and the area of the seal is clean shaven) is not permitted when entering a "TB" isolation room? No: if employees can trim their beards so that the beards do not come between their face to respirator seals or interfere with respirator-valve function, then their use of the respirators would be acceptable provided they passed a proper fit test. 4. If OSHA is requiring an employer to abuse an employee's civil rights by forcing an employee to shave his beard or be fired - shouldn't OSHA require the employer to provide a positive pressure hood system instead? The current 29 CFR 1910.134 respiratory protection standard requires that the respirator be certified by the National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health (NIOSH), be appropriate for the intended use, and provide adequate protection against the hazardous exposure. The standard does not require the employer to provide a more protective respirator if its use is not warranted by the hazardous exposure. We hope these answers satisfactorily address your questions. If you have any other comments or concerns, please contact the Office of Health Compliance Assistance at [(202) 693-2190]. Sincerely, John B. Miles, Jr., Director Directorate of Compliance Programs

Most sprinklers are designed to go off at 135 - 170 deg (at the sprinkler head). If this was a dryer fire it may have been contained or partially contained in the dryer. The smoke still would set off the alarm ssytem or a witness could have called FD. In the next 4 or so minutes if the fire continued to grow the heat would build up and set off the sprinkler heads, potentially (but not commonly) as FD was entering

NRFD R-4 will be an SVI/ spartan (not Rescue One). similar, but not. Yes its a walk around, but tandem rear, longer rig. no stairs, and a number of hidden features that no one else has in this region. Due in the fall.

I have seen them, just not in regular occupancies. They are found in ultra high risk chemical facilities and usually set up as deluge or preaction systems.

"City firefighters, responding to a dryer fire that filled a coin-operated laundromat with smoke yesterday morning, had just entered the Welcher Avenue building and were working on the blaze when the smoke triggered the sprinkler system, Fire Chief John Pappas said." Outside of Hollywood how many sprinkler systems are operated by smoke detectors? What is the likelyhood that this laundromat actually had one of these special system?

Actually it means they would have to have paid crews, it would also force many agencys to merge.

Chief....may the Qtip be with you................

Fraud must be proved by showing that the defendant's actions involved five separate elements: (1) a false statement of a material fact, On your letterhead or vehicle: "saving lives 24/7", "Always on call", "we protect our community". Contract with town sayings, etc. (2) knowledge on the part of the defendant that the statement is untrue Your records show that you often do not respond and call MA, but the above statement is on your fundraiser...can you explain that to the jury? (3) intent on the part of the defendant to deceive the alleged victim We don't want the community to know that we cant get out, & we dont want paid in here, but we know we cant cover the shifts (4) justifiable reliance by the alleged victim on the statement I called 911 like it said on the side of the amb. and they never came (5) injury to the alleged victim as a result. My condition worstened because of the delay. I'm not a lawyer (& never played one on TV) but I think a good lawyer could make a jury buy this. Particularly if a child died and particularly if there have been complaints raised in the past about the service (Officer please tell the jury how often the amb. does not respond or takes 30 min. etc.)

Better look at your CON (certificate of need) from the Health dept. See if you responsible 24/7? Do you have a contract with the municipality that says your the primary agency? You agreed with the state youd cover it, you agreed with the municipality? I've never seen anyone consider a non rostered agency does not have to respond. That would also mean every VFD that does not have assigned crews also does not have a responsibility to respond. Which means almost every VFD. I think not

Most if not all career FD's do not fund social functions with municipal funds. And union funds for these activities are raised by the union thru dues and fund raisers. Unions do not recieve tax money for non-firematic events, unless the municipality and union thru collective barganing agree to it and I am unaware of any that do.

If those member are showing up for points, but not actually improving your response, it did exactly what it was designed to do. It cost the taxpayers $$$ and raised the dept numbers so it looks like you are in better shape. I have spoken with a number of consultants who run LOSAP and not one can show a single study that proves it works to recruit or retain members. If anyone can provide such data, please advise. If it had been sold as a way to reward members, I would not be so negative (If a community wants to provide it, thats up to them) but in most communities it was sold as a way to save money by maintaining the volunteers. If it is not providing you members who actually provide the service, is it not possible that some day some of these depts will have career personnel and still have to payout the LOSAP?

Unclear Sounded like you have to still be with them, but past time counts I ment that sarcastically (which I know you know nothing about). But it was interesting to listen to what the politicians were saying and were not saying. 1 legislator that spoke about how it would help 1 dept in that legislators district, failed to mention that the 3 or 4 comb depts. volunteers would be paying for it. That sight gives great info, but I could not find the reference to the report on underfunding LOSAP. But I suspect thats the reason for all of the auditing requirements now.

On the ISO time tests side dumping is almost always faster, even with a smaller dump valve. And even with a spoter, you run the chance of a major issue, as todays FF funeral in Elizabeth NJ points out (RIP) The offset dimond takes up the same space A preconnected suction. This makes it a one man operation. Those who have done best on water delivery time tests use up to 4 per rig (2 x 6" and 2 x 3") Yes the pond siphon. If you have a 1500 GPM pumper that is feeding the scene and is using 250gpm to move water from one pond to the other, then ISO will only credit that rig as a 1,250 gpm. There are much better ways to move water from tank to tank, but the rig needs to be set up to do it. ISO 1 is best (only 50 depts out of 43,000) 10 is worst (no FD coverage). Reducing the rating is improving it The other major issue that very few depts consider is speeding up the fill side. Tons of ways to do this. Overhead fill, automatic overhead fill sites, cisterns, special fill units, etc.

I would not show that to some of the new probies, they might not understand he was saving it for the owner(s)

Thank you for spending the time and effort to put this together Why not, many states have it, and as you point out your VFD can meet or exceed this. Why does there need to be two standards? Does society really fail to support it or are the told that it is not needed, because you get it for free? There are depts at all levels of service and if the public really understood what they get, would they change the system. As a paid flycar paramedic I did a call to a baby in respiratory arrest in (2002) the vol ambulance could not get out the door, MA #1 was tied up on a call, MA #3 & #4 was unable to get out. while I was starting an IV, the patients mom was bagging her intibated 8 month old and asking me Where is the FD Ambulance? Do you think this mother knew before she dialed 911 what level of service she was paying for? Do you think the local dept. has told the community that they had a problem almost every single day?

I just finished watching a fasinating cable broadcast on this thread. It was a rerun of the Westchester County Board of Legilature's budget hearings from last month. And the topic was county tax exemption for volunteer FF's and EMS. The legislation which passed 9 to 7 allows a discount (I believe 10%) to all volunteers whose depts. have 5 or fewer career personnel. And a lifetime exemption for members with more than 20 years service (they did not clarify the amount, but stated the time could be retroactive). The following volunteer (& or Combo) fire departments would not be eligible: Fairview, Greenville, Hartsdale, Larchmont, Mamaroneck (town), Mohegan, Peekskill, Pelham, Pelham Manor, Port Chester, Rye & Scarsdale That means the taxpayers in those communities and in Eastchester, Mt. Vernon, New Rochelle, White Plains and Yonkers will have to help fund the reduction in revenue to the county. In effect what this does is means the volunteers in the communities listed above will pay more to support the volunteers in the communities that are not listed above. It is unclear which of the VAC's or VFDAC's will be affected, since many have some hired personnel. Another interesting item that was discused was that the county determined that 2,100 volunteers that would be covered under this. I thought this number was very low, but maybe a high % of volunteers do not own homes? Or is the county just guessing? I remember a time when the county claimed there were 11,000 vol ff's. If we were to consider each vol/combo dept. that does not get the exemption to have 100 volunteers that adds up to 1,200 do the remaining 42 fire depts actually have 8,900 volunteers (an average of 212 members each) I suspect somewhere along the way someones numbers were inflated. As a side note: the newly passed legislation has no requirement that the member actually be qualified, or even show up. all that is needed is a letter stating they are a member. So as an honorery member of a volunteer agency (I did one call 20+ years ago) am I entitled to the exemption, since I am a "member"?