Bnechis

Tankers vs. relay, which is better? Depends on many factors. What are your water sources (hydrants, ponds, tanks, etc.)? What is the quality of those sources? What are the distances? How much water is needed upon arrival and in the 1st phase (as a relay or shuttle is established)? ISO has a great test and depts. that have succeeded at it are rewarded with a drop in rating from a 9 down to a 4 or 5. That's a huge savings (30% * every property). The ISO test can be performed using either methods or both methods (particularly one for one section of a community and the other for another (based on water sources). The ISO test really mirrors what fire attack in non-hydrant areas need to be. Within 5 minutes of arrival, stretch a 200' attack line and flow a minimum of 250 gpm without interruption or loss of water. The clock starts when the attack apparatus is 200' from the water (if forward lay is used) and 200' from the fire (if a reverse lay is used). Between the 5 and the 10 minute mark the attack needs to be increased to a level that is need (based on the fire flow requirement for the buildings in the community). This increase only counts in 250gpm increments (500, 750, 1,000 gpm etc.). At the 10 minute mark the flow is documented and must be maintained for 2 hours. So what does this mean in this debate? If you use the hose relay method: The attack engine pulls up at the fire, stretches an attack line and using tank water (usually 1,000 gal) starts its attack. That's less than a 4 minute attack (as you can't get 100% of the tank out the nozzle). In those 3+ minutes the 2nd due and other apparatus must find a water source, hook up & or establish a draft. stretch all of the hose from the source to the attack and establish a flow to maintain the initial attack. Within a few more minutes increase the flow to allow additional attack & exposure lines to be brought into play. Additional time can be gained by using tankers to supplement until the relay is established. Generally this method works best when their are many water sources that are easy to access and relatively close to all properties. It is generally better at mid to long term supply and particularly poor for initial attack. Room & content fires with 2 engines (1,000 gal each) & a 3,000 gal tanker allows a very substantial initial attack and in general if you can not put out a room & content fire with 5,000 gal. it is unlikely that either a relay or shuttle will be successful. If you use the tanker shuttle method: The attack engine pulls up at the fire, stretches an attack line and using tank water (usually 1,000 gal) starts its attack. That's less than a 4 minute attack (as you can't get 100% of the tank out the nozzle). In those 3+ minutes the 2nd due and tankers must establish a drop location. The 1st tanker can either drop its load and go for more or off pump its water as the drop location is established. During this time additional tankers need to be in route and a fill station(s) needs to be established.

While cleaning out some old E-mails I found this press release: FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE: June 19, 2009 SENATORS SCHUMER AND GILLIBRAND SECURE $1 MILLION FOR MOUNT VERNON TO CONSTRUCT MULTI FUNCTIONAL EMERGENCY OPERATIONS CENTER Funding Will Renovate Existing Fire Station to Serve as Emergency Operations Center in Mount Vernon New Operations Center Will Enable Emergency Personnel to Respond to Multiple Disasters Quickly and Effectively Schumer, Gillibrand Secured Federal Funds As Part Of The 2010 Appropriations Bill U.S. Senators Charles E. Schumer and Kirsten Gillibrand today announced that the full Senate Appropriations Committee has approved the Department of Homeland Security FY10 Appropriations Bill which includes $1 million for Mount Vernon to reconfigure, renovate and construct a Fire Station as the City's Emergency Operations Center. Approval by the Committee is the largest hurdled the funding needs to clear. The bill will now proceed to the Senate Floor as the next step in the appropriations process. Schumer and Gillibrand worked closely with members of the Appropriations Committee to include funding for the project in the 2010 spending bill. “Residents in Mount Vernon and across Westchester County deserve top-notch emergency services, which is why it’s vital that we provide our emergency personnel with a base of operations from which they can respond to any incident,” said Schumer. “A functioning Emergency Operations Center will streamline emergency response services across the city to make sure that our first responders can act quickly and respond efficiently when we need their help the most.” “There is nothing more important than the safety of our communities and families,” Senator Gillibrand said. “We need to make sure Mt. Vernon’s first responders are equipped with the right facilities and all the resources they need to do their jobs and keep our families safe when emergencies strike. I will work with Senator Schumer and the entire Congressional Delegation to make sure New York gets its fair share from the federal government.” Currently, the City of Mount Vernon does not have an Emergency Operations Center for the managing and mitigation of a major accident. During emergency situations, the city can use the Mount Vernon Police Department’s Field Command Center vehicle, but this greatly hampers police operations and the ability to manage a multi agency incident. The funds that were secured by Senators Schumer and Gillibrand in the 2010 Appropriations Bill will be used to renovate and construct an existing fire station to be used as the city’s Emergency Operation Center. The facility will accommodate emergency personnel throughout the city who will be able to respond to multiple emergencies such as floods, fires and crime. Schumer and Gillibrand noted that utilizing an existing facility within the city is cost effective and a wise investment in the health and safety of Mount Vernon residents. Now that the appropriations bill has been approved by the full Senate Appropriations Committee, it will be sent to the Senate floor. Following approval by the Senate, the bill will move towards Conference with the House and then to the President for signature

That's the replacement PA speaker for this:

Todays Boston Globe http://www.bostonglobe.com/metro/2014/03/29/incident-commander-deadly-boston-blaze-was-faced-with-agonizing-decision/IrzBTxR22wbQ0JwcUuMHEK/story.html Department spokesman Steve MacDonald said firefighters are trained to follow protocols and procedures on such things as mayday calls, building evacuations, and trapped victims, although he did not provide specific details on what those policies are. MacDonald said a Rapid Intervention Team of 10 responders is dispatched to each scene of a one-alarm fire to assist firefighters. A team was sent to assist in Wednesday’s fire, he said. How many send 10? How many even have a 4 member FAST (AS per NFPA) and having 6 additional ff's in staging? In some communities we are more concerned with covering the station, but statistically the chance of a 2nd fire is almost zero, while the active fire is more likely to require additional resources. Other parts of the country will send units to staging a block or 2 away and they will also cover the community from staging. That way if needed at the scene they are already geared up a few blocks away. Why 10? How many do you need? Read what Phoenix FD determined when they studied it.

Does NFPA 1403 allow for the windows to be boarded up? Yes these type of drills can be very valuable if run correctly, but one also must consider what happened in Lairdsville NY during a live burn in an acquired structure and the consequences (1 FF LODD, 1 FC sent to prison) http://www.cdc.gov/niosh/fire/reports/face200138.html Alan G. Baird III was found guilty of criminally negligent homicide in May by an Oneida County Court jury for his role in the death of Lairdsville Fire Department trainee Bradley Golden. Baird, 30, faces a maximum prison term of up to four years when he is sentenced on the felony conviction July 8 by Judge Michael L. Dwyer.......... Baird, a Lairdsville assistant fire chief at the time of the exercise, admitted he planned the “live burn” training exercise at a vacant farmhouse on Route 5 in Westmoreland and ignited a first floor sofa bed that burned out of control. The fast-spreading blaze caused the death of Golden, 19, and severely burned Lairdsville fire fighters Benjamin Morris and Adam Croman.

Only if its on your run card

Actually the taxpayers of Somers already pay for it like everyone else, use it or not, its paid for with county taxes. Its always about "control"

On one of the tapes It was at about 8.5min from the initial tone out. You are correct and most depts. have trouble getting a couple of members on scene in this time, much less your full 1st alarm assignment including FAST. This is in a similar time frame to our mayday incident last month. Since the 2nd alarm was struck BEFORE the 1st rig arrived on-scene we had approximately 30 responders in route/on-scene within the 10 minute mark. By then members had already performed a rescue of a civilian and started attacking the fire. At around the 10 minute mark, members were bailing out of upper floor windows. This brings us to the 2 biggest issues for firefighter safety; 1) YOU MUST HAVE SUFFICIENT INTERIOR FIREFIGHTERS ARRIVING WITHIN 8 to 10 MINUTES. The fire does not care if you are career, combo or volunteer. 2) EVERY FIREFIGHTER & EVERY RIG MUST BE ABLE TO BE A FAST or RIT TEAM. This means if you do not have at least 16 (and in most cases 20) interior firefighters on the initial alarm your system is broken. To many depts. are fighting to keep the status quo and this is just wrong.

"NFPA standard of 2 OUT" The term "2 Out" is not an NFPA standard its OSHA LAW (in 26 states including NY & CT). I am amazed that the fire service still does not understand that 2in 2out is the law and has been so now for over 16 years. NFPA 1710 requires an IRIT (initial rapid intervention team) of 2 members. This is to meet the 2 out law. Once a "working fire" is declared, NFPA 1710 requires you upgrade that to a full RIT and add a safety officer.

FDNY mechanic union contract requires FDNY to have them work on the rig in the station and with the age of 99% of the stations this is the only option. Their is no other advantage and they are more prone to leak.

While 1 dept. is often the "abuser" of mutual aid that many have sited here, how many depts. are we really talking about? How many depts. can put 15 plus firefighters on scene? How many can also provide proper command, safety, FAST, etc.? If you respond with 1 or 2 FF's per rig so you call for MA for every fire, are you not an abuser? If you respond with only 1 or 2 rigs so you call for MA for every fire, are you not an abuser? The one dept. is called an "abuser" because of the volume of fires, but the other depts. technically are also abusing since they cant put a team on the field either.

Thanks Officer Ed. I believe paramedics everywhere can administer it. We have here for more than 33 years (& I think longer). The issue is should EMT's with minimal training & police officers with no medical training be able to give it?

True. And since as long as the mayor, manager, council commissioners, etc. have signed on to the mutual aid plan, firefighters will be going mutual aid regardless of weather they think it helps or hurts. So what should the next move be to change the system?

I do not remember exactly how many guys went out. but based on 15, the city hired 15 and paid 22.5 days (OT) plus their cost to go to court and we paid 300 days. So the city saved 177.5 days pay. Since the union was not involved, the court said it was a wildcat action and the union gets to pay it. Based on this I'm not sure this tactic will work anywhere anymore, even in Yonkers

Yes, we've heard it, but based on the 2nd quote, do you think they will hire if mutual aid no longer comes to help?

The union leadership had the majority of the membership backing them. The job action was done by a very small group (less than 7% of the membership).

If memory serves it was left off for cost savings. Need someone to confirm or deny that.

1) yes we call back, but we also get 2E, 2L mutual aid regardless and since we do not own that many spares we keep them until units free up at the scene. 2) 35 years ago and that worked in Yonkers, which is a very different community politically than any other in Westchester. A few years ago a few of our members held an unofficial sick-out. The union was against it and they were warned not to do it. It took the city less than 1 shift to get an injunction against the union and for every shift that members missed, every member (even those not scheduled to work or on vacation) were docked 2 days pay under the Taylor law. So I lost 2 days pay for the 1 day sickout. They also had other penilties like the city would no longer deduct union fees from our pay. I think you will find any dept today that does that will jive up almost as fast as it starts. Want to break your union, hold a job action.

1) And if MA does not show up? Do you think this will really change anything? I do not believe it will because the elected officials do not believe we are essential enough to properly staff us. It will however effect the understaffed crews at a fire. 2) Why would they do it when the unions say we can do a better job without merging? When the chief says its not needed (btw the last group of chiefs that funded the study on this showed that their position was it was none could provide adequate staffing and that consolidation was the best answer. 3)You are correct they have no motivation. The citizens do not want it (because they all know that their dept. is properly staffed, even in communities that do not have an FD [my favorite being told how good the Bronxville Fire Dept. is]), The chiefs do not want it, the commissioners & unions don't want it. We have struck the iceberg, the boiler room is filling with water, their are not enough seats in the life boats and no wants to make a change. Meanwhile I see depts. in other states & countries that have encouraged this and are glad they did. 4) The Mayors do not show up at the fires, they do not understand what is needed and even if no one shows up, as long as they are not blamed by the voters, they have no reason to change, mutual aid does not even come into play. Maybe, because many go mutual aid for FAST Realistically if their was no mutual aid was not available do you really think they would spend the money on improving fire services? Interesting question. How many chiefs are their and how many different answers can their be?

You are partially correct, Communities will never provide adequate staffing because of cost, but it has nothing to do with mutual aid. Since almost every dept. is not bringing enough manpower to incidents to meet the standards( and in some cases violating state law) even when they are abusing mutual aid your argument holds no water. You claim they will not increase staffing because of mutual aid, but they do not even request enough mutual aid to get to standards. Why are firefighters not complaining about this? Ok so following your logic, we stop sending mutual aid to community X, because the members don't want it. The municipality still will not increase the staffing (or in VFD communities their are no additional volunteers). This means the members will work harder, with higher personal risk and still no help. Plus the community will be at greater risk at both the incident and the uncovered areas. So how will this fix anything? My dept. had 199 firefighters 40 years ago, then 187, 186, 180, 170, 168, 166, 160, 154..........And in the last 25 years we had NO increase in mutual aid. But we went from 187 to 154 (with a threat of lower). During that time all the firefighters kept claiming it would get better if we just fought for it. Everyone of the depts. around us have lost ff's or have been stagnant as call volume increases. You keep arguing for no mutual aid, but then you also admit that the community will not spend any more $$$$. So failing to help each other only hurts us.

If you own a telesquirt (I do not know if there are any left in Westchester), you can have it identified as an engine of ladder (particularly if you don't have one). There were 4 snorkels (Bedford Hills, Mt Vernon, Scarsdale & Verplanck) I believe all have been replaced with tower ladders (verplanck's is articulating). Now I have mixed thoughts on the "quint" designation. If you actually run it as a true quint (with proper staffing to be a quint [min. of 6]) it would be nice to know it. That being said I don't believe anyone in Westchester is really running a quint. They are running an understaffed engine with an aerial or a ladder with not enough hose/water to work as an engine.

Wrong. Get more members on-scene to get the job done and leave RIT/FAST standing bye. WHY DO WE CONTINUE TO ACCEPT NOT ENOUGH STAFFING AT FIRES? While we cant change the on-duty staffing. Their are standards for staffing at incidents. The bosses need to follow them and the unions need to hold their feet to the fire on this. If it means calling every dept. mutual aid then DO IT. But no we then complain that this is abuse. Yes it is, but whats more important is the brothers inside. Maybe if the abuse gets bad enough, the communities will open their eyes and accept change.

Having been assaulted and witnessing other responders being assaulted (after 1 individual was "agitated" he attacked ER staff member causing serious head trauma, then he pulled a knife on security. it took 6 responders to restrain him including 1 ESU officer, who almost lost his gun during the fight). Since that was about 25 years ago and I'm still in it, I am not worried as I KNOW how to titrate (adjust) the dose to bring back respirations, but keep them mellow enough that no one is put in danger. My concern is this is not being taught to all these minimally trained responders. And a BVM will keep them alive. I would rather see that in every PD car before narcan. Since it could help many people, while narcan only helps a small % of that.

As others have mentioned, if you give the recommended dose, you run the risk of waking the patient up and they can get very violent (A number of inexperienced medics have been assaulted. I had a very large & very angry individual grab our drug box and fling it down the stair well of a 4 story walk up, nothing was salvageable). Possible side effects include: change in mood, increased sweating, nausea, nervousness, restlessness, trembling, vomiting, allergic reactions such as rash or swelling, dizziness, fainting, fast or irregular pulse, flushing, headache, heart rhythm changes, seizures, sudden chest pain, and pulmonary edema. But you also run the risk of projectile vomiting. Never knew a patient laying on the stretcher could hit the ambulance ceiling like he was a fountain. If you do wake the patient, they will want to RMA, the problem is the half-life of narcan is shorter than the half life of opiates. So the narcan wears off before the opiate and if they have enough on board they will go back into respiratory depression/arrest after the RMA.

2. Why doesn't Westchester have an accepted minimum training / minimum staffing for almost everything we do? Why did some inner city areas of the county get ALS before most wealthy areas? Why is no one complaining when they hear page after page for manpower? We have depts. that are violating state and federal laws when it comes to this and they are just relying on the fact that no one is forcing the issue. 3. because we have way too many fire departments who can no longer staff to the most minimum of levels and they refuse to consider changing and as long as the public does not demand it we can slide. By their silence they are lying to the public who think they are protected. 5 AGREED!!!!!!!!