Going Overboard With NIMS?

[x635 4,066]

I understand the command structure and policies of NIMS, and that routinely doing it gets us used to it, but do any others feel that it is being taken overboard?

Regardless of "national requirements", if we don't adhere to a host of other guidelines, why so on the ball with this one?

For example, some departments call on scene, and "Establish Anyplace Street Command" for simple 1 Engine company EMS calls or for fluid spills. They also terminate command.

Is this necessary for every incident? I can see fire scenes, auto accidents, or establishing a command when an incident escalates uneccasarily. But are we wasting airtime on an already crowded radio frequencies when we do this? And to me, it takes twice as long and more breath to call "Anyplace Street Command" then to got "E-500 to 2991". But it sounds cool though, and does intergrate with the national system.

Edited December 23, 2006 by x635

[ex-commish 490]

I understand the command structure and policies of NIMS, and that routinely doing it gets us used to it, but do any others feel that it is being taken overboard?

Regardless of "national requirements", if we don't adhere to a host of other guidelines, why so on the ball with this one?

For example, some departments call on scene, and "Establish Anyplace Street Command" for simple 1 Engine company EMS calls or for fluid spills. They also terminate command.

Is this necessary for every incident?  I can see fire scenes, auto accidents, or establishing a command when an incident escalates uneccasarily. But are we wasting airtime on an already crowded radio frequencies when we do this? And to me, it takes twice as long and more breath to call "Anyplace Street Command" then to got "E-500 to 2991". But it sounds cool though, and does intergrate with the national system.

←

The feds held money over our heads...either comply with NIMS or look elsewhere for grants. As far as it being necessary, you can use the system to fit your needs based on the size of the incident.

[Doc 11]

I think initially people were making NIMS out to be a lot more (and worse) than it is. Yes, tieing grant money to compliance gets people's attention and the implementation people are certainly keeping everybody worried and nervous about the next wave of FY requirements. But I think a well run department was already employing much of the NIMS content - just without the cool names and organizational charts. I'm glad to hear departments formalizing the establishment of command on scene, but as far as daily reality's concerned, it's no differnet than the ten codes and old radio coms... Establishing command still means a chief is on the scene and operations are underway. Terminating command means it's time to go back home. It just forces a more formalized way of doing things we take for granted.

It's also a good way of familiarizing people with what will happen at a big incident. One of the consistent critiques of large incidents is that mutual aid personnel from far-off places spend a lot of time being confused and unsure of local ops. This wastes time and endangers lives. It seems that just by having people take the classes before hand, they're more aware of what's going to happen when they're mobilized to assist at a major disaster - as opposed to being completely lost looking down the street for the tanker that's hovering over their heads.

For the daily smells and bells, bumpercars and gas pains, though, I think you can just keep doing what you were doing - having a consistent operation... an incident commander overseeing safe operations, a clear chain of command, a clear set of objectives and tasks, awareness of your resources, and accountability for your qualified people. As long as departments realize this and don't spend the first ten minutes of an incident passing out vests, drawing diagrams, and calling the probie "Supply Unit Leader", things are going to be fine.

I do, however, feel that NIMS was designed to present a hurdle to the grant application process. Having personally contributed to scientific research grant proposals, I know that the funding agencies like to create complicated criteria to eliminate applicants. The quicker they can narrow down the list of eligible projects, the quicker they can go home for dinner. So they invest time in coming up with the most impossible applications, procedures, and endorsements - then they subject you to riddiculous scrutiny, paying attention to insignificant details - disqualifying applicants for infuriatingly small departures from normalcy. Many worthwhile projects get the can for simple mispellings or bad punctuation. So I see NIMS as the Fed's new money filter. Everybody wants free money - now we have to work for it.

[EJS1810 7]

I believe Rockland units "Assume Command" when arriving on any calls. Please any Rockland guys correct me if I'm wrong.

[Guest alsfirefighter]

1. can't assume something not established.

2. x635....you have to start somewhere. If we keep saying why should we follow this when we don't follow that gets us nowhere.

3. It makes no difference in time of transmission. It assists with accountability and function. E-999 doesn't tell me what they were doing..but if I track properly and I say "command to attack 1" (I don't need to say the entire command name unless I'm calling dispatch) I know that the crew of E-999 is on the attack line.

4. I agree EMS calls unless mutliple patients its not needed. Fluid spill...eh...but you know what you are using it to get better at it. Just like you should do it at drills so it gets more proficient in the field.

Gang we have to get out and get more CLASSROOM training on ICS...based on the NIMS model. It works...we have to use it properly.

[Fireman488 57]

Elmsford FD first trained everyone on IS-100 and IS-700.

We later followed with IS-200.

We have used the ICS NIMS terminology on every run since this past July.

As a result we have become proficient with its use; and it has really structured

our operations at all types of incidents, large and small.

We are very pleased with the results.

[firecapt32 282]

there you go x635 --see practice makes it better. well said fireman488 glad to see you guys like the results.

Edited December 23, 2006 by firecapt32

[DOC22 1]

there you go x835

x835????????????????? who might that be??????????lol

[helicopper 1,050]

The use of ICS is only one part of NIMS. The fact that agencies all over the place are using ICS on a daily basis and recognizing that formalizing the process that Chiefs and other bosses have been using for years is just one benefit.

Hopefully, the powers that be in agencies all over are reading the rest of NIMS and starting to develop better plans, SOPs, etc. as part of the preparedness requirements are going to benefit us all!

Training and exercises are another part of NIMS that will benefit us all by compelling agencies to become proactive and exercise the plans that may have been collecting dust and never been tested.

Standardizing equipment, personnel qualifications, resource categories, etc. are other benefits that will be realized as people get more involved with NIMS compliance.

That it took the threat of withholding money to kick all this activity into gear is unfortunate but I for one am glad it finally happened!