FIRESCOPE OPERATIONS TEAM ACTION LIST

Transcription

1 FIRESCOPE OPERATIONS TEAM ACTION LIST WHO WHAT WHEN STATUS Agencies SSM Prog. Office SSM Program Office Distribute revised MACS Procedures. OES needs only to notifity of the revisions. State Fire Training - collect background information for a Board of Directors resolution to Cal Fire Chiefs. Reproduce the new (revised) Field Operations Guide. Revise FIRESCOPE property agreement, add inventory list and acquire proper signatures from OES. 6/1/82 4/15/82 5/15/81 3/1/82 Working Working Ops Team SSM COOK King & Borden Settle on a process for conducting 8/10/81 periodic analysis of the OCC operations. Investigate a source to provide mapping 7/15/81 products to private interests, public agencies and fire services (outside the FIRESCOPE region1. Send a memorandum to non-fire service 7/15/81 governmental agencies explaining t~e mapping process and how they can take advantage. Develop Operations Team Computer Conference System. Develop a specialized equipment software program for agency files. 3/1/82 7/1/81 Training Working 1

2 .mo CONTINUOUS OR REOCCURING ACTIONS ''THAT WHEN STATUS Cook SSM Task Force Task Force Agencies SSM Further development and simplication of computer programs. Provide an action list for the meeting notes and document progress at each meeting. Assure dispatchers input is acquired during the development of tile Order Processing Module and other related programs. Provide Operations Team Members with a list of personnel and time requirements needed to supply Planning and Logistics Technical Content Group as the needs occur. Will designate specific individuals to assure the proper and timely operation of terminals and the following of MACS procedures. Agencies will police themselves. Include the proper use of the electronic mail system in future computer training. (CooK and Uribarri). Continue development of functional checklists for oce operations. 2

3 COMPLETED ACTIONS ~~~ ~~~ ~~~~--~~~:~~ SSM Uribarri Program Office, Task Force, &SSM SSM Computer Systems Admin. Computer ems n. l'r0gra;n Office Program Office SSM, DES Program Office DES Program Office Coordinate a test exercise of the OCC operations this year following completion oe the OCC staffing and control plan. Continue redraft of computer access policy and provide a progress report. Provide resources and expertise as necessary, to train the 5F~'s initial 4 representatives in ICS orientation. Contact State Fire Marshal Eor the status of his coordination of statewide IeS training and report at the next meeting. Respond to the Los Angeles County Sheriff denying his request for a login ID. Provide Los Angeles County Fire Department with a written scenario of the events leading to the request for a login ID ryy the Los Angeles County Sheriff. ~ake necessart revisions to Decision Process for operation and maintenance as reco;ulnended by the Operations Team. Ask the BOD to reaffirm their direction concerning tlle inclusion of other emergency service organizations. Develop a proposed policy for communications,."ith other Eire services. Take over Decision Process management responsibilities at t1le )perat tons Team leve1. Notify chairman of the ad hoc group to be established to develop "cri teri'l" E'H a ~esource Designation System. 3 2/1/82 2/1/82 2/1/82 2/1/82 3/3/82 2/1/82 6/3/82 4/10/82

4 Member A.gencies ICS Lesson Plan development Operatiol15 section - send Program O(fice your nominations. 4/15/82 FS g. Office, T.F. Rep. Meet with Chiefs Bragdon, Griggs, and ~arrows to discuss problems with having two different strike team designation systems. 4/1/82 OBS Develop alternatives on ho~ the Decision Process should operate for: (1) for only operation and maintenance (Action depends on tile ~oards approval for the OES to take over executive management of the Decision Process. ) 4/1./32 Program Office Ensure a seven (7) partner agency full exercise of the OCC is conducted. 4/1/32 OBS Provide MACS procedure direction to other than partner agencies via OES Bulletins. 5/15/82 4

5 \ r DRAF'l' 5/7/82 "TOP HAT" EVALUATION SUMMARY EXERCISE The Top Hat exercise was designed to provide a realistic simulated stress environment on the OCC Situation Status Unit and the MACS GHQ. The exercise included three major wildland fire incidents, occurring under Santa Ana wind conditions; a major urban high-rise fire incident; and an out-of-region environment involving a number of incidents in the Northern California area to which some Southern California fire resources had been previously committed. The exercise covered a three-day period and was designed to force a Mode 3 and 4 condition in order to properly test the objectives. RESULTS The exercise design was adequate to meet the objectives and has contributed significantly to the potential development of an improved OCC Situation Status Unit and ~ACS GHQ. Objective #1 To evaluate the adequacy of ~ACS Procedures and training in the OCC Situation Status (SITSTAT) Unit. At the time of the exercise, position descriptions were available for eleven of the twenty positions identified in the OCC Support and Services Organization for Modes 3 and 4. Several of these position duty statements were drawn from an administrative manua~ lacked operational checklists, and did not adequately reflect Mode 3 and 4 activities. There was a definite lack of training and familiarization with the operational procedures. This was due in part to the problem of trying to obtain the right number of personnel to use in an April exercise without incurring any additional cost. Many operational problems were uncovered ranging from inadequacy of work space, forms, and communications; lack of procedures regarding incident responsibilities; incomplete and inappropriate job descriptions and checklists; insufficient number of personnel; and lack of training. On the positive side, the procedures guide which was used did provide a point of departure for improvements; several 1

6 . personnel received valuable training; and the problems which arose in the simulated situation can be addressed prior to an actual Mode 3 and 4 condition. Objective #2 To evaluate and further develop MACS/GHQ procedures in Modes 3 and 4 operations. In general, the MACS/GHQ Procedures Manual which had been developed for use in the exercise came through with flying colors. Some redundancy and some better structuring.could be done. The procedures need to be distributed to the agencies as several of the checklist items call for Agency Representative actions to be taken prior to departing for the OCC. The GHQ facility and displays need a considerable amount of work in order to be functional for an actual Mode 4 situation. This includes improved communications systems for Agency Representative use; and additional and improved displays within the GHQ facility. It was felt by most of the evaluators that the Support/Services Manager (SSM) could not effectively manage his Mode 3-4 operational staff (five Units persons) and at the same time act as the GHQ Coordinator. Objective #3 To familiarize Agency Representatives with MACS/GHQ operations. With no known exceptions, all the Agency Representatives who attended felt that the exercise provided a valuable learning experience. They realized the importance and significance of resource allocation decisions made within the GHQ; the need for up-to-date information in order to properly evaluate and prioritize incidents; and the need to come prepared to speak for the agency. The Agency Representatives offered many positive and constructive comments regarding improvements in information handling and display that would allow them to perform the job better. The role of GHQ Coordinator done by the SSM was accomplished in a professional and effective manner. Agency Representatives attending the exercise left with a much better understanding of the role and the importance of the Mode 4 MACS GHQ. As a result of the exercise, they will be in a much better position to function in that role under actual conditions or to instruct others within their organizations to perform that role 2

7 Objective //4 To evaluate the FIMS hardware and software in Mode 3 and 4 operations. Some serious problems were discovered in the operation of FIMS as a result of the exercise. Not all have been completely researched as of the date of this writing. In general, the following would seem to apply: Incident 209 The Incident 209 program seemed to work well, both in input at MACS Coordination Points and in the output mode at the OCC. Most comments on it were favorable and the exercise provided a fair test of that program's adequacy ~o function in a live heavy load situation. RESTAT A combination of problems, in some cases related, caused a serious malfunction and disruption of operation of this program. Lack of training in the use of the FIMS system; lack of training in the use of the RESTAT program; a program which is not basically "user friendly;" bad data files; too many simultaneous users; slow throughput; malfunctioning memory board, etc., all were evident. While these were all significant and caused much frustration and irritation, the major problem to be addressed is what amount of information is actually required in order to provide an adequate information base for the decision making which takes place in MACS Modes 3 and 4. It is not useful to try to "fix" the RESTAT program until the above is made explicit in the form of a specification. A more detailed exercise report will be forthcoming once all the analysis are completed. The Top Hat Evaluation Team consisted- of: Leaders C. Bragdon LAC T. Zrelak T. Haney LPF Consultant SITSTAT/RESTAT Operations M. Barrows FIRES COPE T/F OCC MACS/ECC SZ Interface M. Barrows FIRESCOPE T/F GHQ Team Functions R. Irwin Progr. Office F. Borden LFD T. Zrelak LPF C. Bragdon LAC 3

8 Computer MACS Information Unit and Communications Unit A. Masoner J. Monesmith.Unit G. Timpson GSA Contractor The Exercise Design Group was headed by Gary Ross - CDF. Summary prepared by Terry Haney Prog. Office Prog. Office 4

9 General Information

10 FLARING: AN AILMENT OF COMPUTER CONFERENCING Communicating through machines can lead to unanticipated and at times undesirable results, as illustrated by a phenomenon in computer conferencing called flaring. Computer conferencing is a technique for conducting a meeting where the participants are in several locations and communicate with one another through terminals. All communications are recorded on a computer and are available to all meeting participants, thus constituting an on-going set of meeting minutes. Computer conferencing has been especially valuable in carrying out projects where project team members are geographically separated. because no meeting need ever be scheduled. At a time convenient to his or her work schedule. each team membercan contact the computer, read what has been entered by the other members, enter a report on local progress and offer additional comments and reactions. In this latter area, however. the shortcomings of communicating through machines become evident. It has been found that when a team member disagrees with another, the words entered into the terminal to express that disagreement are much stronger and harsher than would ever be the case if the two were face to face. Needless to say, the reaction and response from the other end to such verbal abuse is prompt and equally strong,'thus escalating a disagreement into a battle. This phenomenon of verbal overkill has been given the name f1aring- and personnel experienced in the use of computer conferencing have become proficient at spotting its occurrence and moving quickly to dampen the response. That it occurs in the first place is indicative of the fact that the many benefits associated with a t!!chnique like computer conferencing do not come free. Any time one substitutes communication through machines for face to face communications, unintended distortions can occur. If these distortions' are not promptly corrected, then the chances of total communications break~. down increase dramatically.

11 Previous Meeting Action Items

12 FIRESCOPE OPERATIONS TEAM ACTION LIST WHO WHAT WHEN STATUS OES Agencies Program Office SSM Prog. Office ~ber ~ncies Prog. Office, T.F. Rep. SSM Program Office OES Take over Decision Process management responsibilities at the Operations Team level. Distribute revised MACS Procedures. OES needs only to notifity of the revisions. Notify chairman of the ad hoc group to be established to develop "criteria" for a Resource Designation System. State Fire Training - collect background information for a Board of Directors resolution to Cal Fire Chiefs. ICS Lesson Plan Development Operations section - send Program Office your nominations. Meet with Chiefs Bragdon, Griggs and Barrows to discuss problems with havig two different strike team designation system. Reproduce the new (revised) Field Operations Guide. Revise FIRESCOPE property agreement, add inventory list and acquire proper signatures from OES. Develop alternatives on how the Decision Process should operate for: (1) a completely funded program (2) for only operation and maintenance (Action depends on the Boards approval for the OES to take over executive management of the Decision Process.) 6/3/82 5/1/82 4/10/82 4/15/82 4/15/82 4/1/82 5/15/8l,.. 3/1/82 4/1/82 1

13 ~ WHAT WHEN STATUS ~ Program Ensure a seven (7) partner agency 4/1/82 Office full exercise of the OCC is conducted. Ops Team Settle on a process for conducting 8/10/81 periodic analysis of the OCC operations. SSM SSM SSM C. OES King & Borden Continue development, of functional 11/10/81 checklists for OCC operations. Investigate a source to provide mapping 7/15/81 products to private interests, public agencies and fire services (outside the FIRESCOPE region). Send a memorandum to non-fire service 7/15/81 governmental agencies explaining the mapping process and how they can take advantage. Provide MACS procedure direction to other 5/15/81 than partner agencies via OES Bulletin. Develop Operations Team Computer Conference System. Develop a specialized equipment software program for agency files. 3/1/82 7/1/81 Training Working 2

14 CONTINUOUS OR REOCCURING ACTIONS ~O WHAT ~EN STATUS Cook Monesmith Task Force Task Force Agencies ~~ ~e Program Office Program Office SSM Further development and simplication of computer programs. Provide an action list for the meeting notes and document progress at each meeting. Assure dispatchers input is acquired during the development of the Order Processing Module and other related programs. Provide Operations Team Members with a list of personnel and time requirements needed to supply Planning and Logistics Technical Content Group as the needs occur. Will designate specific individuals to assure the proper and timely operation of terminals and the following of MACS procedures. Agencies will police themselves. Include the proper use of the electronic mail system in future computer training. (Cook and Uribarri). Coordinate necessary scheduling to ensure SFM representatives are adequately trained and the overall statewide Ies training plan is developed. Differientiate between support and approval on Board decisions. Assist the 4 SFM representatives in the development of a State-wide ICS training plan. Coordinate expertise from Task Force and Terry Haney as necessary. 3

15 / COMPLETED ACTIONS l'lhat WHEN STATUS SSM Uribarri Program Office, Task Force, &SSM SSM Computer Systems Admin. ~Iter ~ms Admin. Program Office Program Office SSM, OES Program Coordinate a test exercise of the OCC operations this year following completion of the OCC staffing and control plan. Continue redraft of computer access policy and provide a progress report. Provide resources and expertise as necessary, to train the SFM's initial 4 representatives in ICS orientation. Contact State Fire Marshal for the status of his coordination of statewide ICS training and report at the next meeting. Respond to the Los Angeles County Sheriff denying his request for a login rd. Provide Los Angeles County Fire Department with a written scenario of the events leading to the request for a login ID by the Los Angeles County Sheriff. Make necessary revisions to Decision Process for operation and maintenance as recommended by the Operations Team. Ask the BOD to reaffirm their direction concerning the inclusion of other emergency service organizations. Develop a proposed policy for communications with other fire 2/1/82 2/1/82 2/1/82 2/1/82 3/3/82 2/1/82 4

16 Interfacing with other Emergency Service Practitioners

17 At their October 19, 1981 the Operations Team to purpose of increasing the Proposed Policy for Local and Statewide Extension of FIRESCOPE Components "emergency" meeting, the Board of Directors instructed "begin discussion" with other emergency services for the all-risk support for FIRESCOPE. This plan provides specific actions to accomplish that direction, although it goes beyond "discussion" to actually helping other emergency services adopt and implement certain FIRESCOPE components. The plan is based on the following rationale: A. Three components of FIRESCOPE are essentially "completed". These are are (1) the ICS, (2) the Multiagency Mapping Process, and (3) the Communications Concepts. These components are included in a strong national technology transfer effort and there is no reason that they should not be included in local and statewide extension to other fire and emergency services. Extension to others (by FIRESCOPE member agencies) can be done at low cost, without capital investment, or significant impact on the FIRESCOPE Decision Process. If other emergency services implement these three components alone, the coordination between others and the fire services can be improved. Also, ado~tion by others will tend to reduce differences and barriers in the eventual formation of a comprehensive, statewide, emergency management system which is the goal of the Board of Directors. The FIRESCOPE computer was purchased on the basis of a comprehensive set of design requirements. These requirements included the capability to store and retrieve: -over 9 million acres of vegetative and terrain data, -data from 60 or more weather stations -one or more sophisticated wind models -several fire behavior prediction models -"real-time" status of up to 10,000 emergency resources At present, because of time and funding limitations, the major proportion of these data have not been gathered, stored, or programmed for operational use. This leaves the system with a large percentage of its capacity presently unused. Considerable "space" is available for both future development of the design requirements and/or the testing and development of other types of emergency coordination programs. It is anticipated that the Forest Service will continue some level of FIRESCOPE design development consistant with budget and personnel constraints. However, even this use will leave significant capacity unused for several years

18 Because the system was purchased with public funds for the express purpose of improving coordination on "fires and other major emergencies", and because the Board of Directors stands committed to a comprehensive system, the present and future excess capacity should be made available to other emergency services. The capacity should be made temporarily available to others, provided that (1) proposed use(s) clearly meet the intent of the Board, (2) agreements can be reached that protect fire service applications and operations, and (3) no investments or outlays are required from FIRESCOPE member agencies to support development by others. Actual operational use of the FIRESCOPE computer by others is not suggested. C. The southern California, fire service MACS is only about 50% designed. This plan assumes a great deal more development work by FIRESCOPE member agencies to complete the system. No actual involvement of other emergency services in MACS development is proposed here, and MACS issues are not included in the plan. Other than requests for information, no operational activities be made to others by FIRESCOPE member agencies. Prompt notice be forwarded to the member agencies within whose sphere request(s) generated or commitments of the contact of influence will will the

19 GOAL ~CS /\ ~ lall fire services ~~ornia are using the rcs. ACTIONS 1. Get official reaffirmation from State Board of Fire Services. 2. SFM develop capability to provide training to all potential users. 3. F.S. & CDF continue statewide implementation and encourage BLM and seil'" Park Service to implement statewide. NAfIONM-- 4. OES Fire & Rescue Division encourage all Regional and Are.r~ators :9~~ent c~ t syst m and a~ agen~l~ ~~ / im ement 'thi r area of influence. 5. Complete rcs Course Development. -Determine the interest and commitment of other emergency service practitioners toward the adoption of FrRESCOPE technologies. 1. Hold one statewide session with other agency administrators to: a. Explain exportable technology b. Seek their input on how to gain local field level commitment and participation 2. Hold regional seminars according to plans developed in #1. 3. Agencies determine their interest,0ernally ""(, 4. ~ L SFM ~.) Q to set up ~ own ~l~ train 1

20 GOAL Communications Concepts: -Promote the improvement of all-risk multiagency communications capabilities 613Jcc.;f1~ cacuells :> -Extend the concept of Frequency Sharing Agreement to State and local agencies -Promote the use of mobile synthesizer radios and standard programming -Continue to urge industry to develop hand-held synthesizers -Extend the application of Incident Communications Planning, either with, or without ICS adoption. Mapping: -Promote the adoption of the Multiagency Mapping Process by all counties and emergency services. -Publish the Mapping "user's guide" -Publicize system applications to date (Ventura, Santa Barbara, Orange, Riverside Counties, etc.) -Present process to Governor's Emergency Council, and Association of County Governments. -Assure use on all major incidents in FIRESCOPE Region -Board set policy -Develop adequate Document Control and reproduction capabilities -Adopt process at all Dispatch centers (include GEOLOC) -Board set policy -Agencies implement 2

21 GOAL ACTIONS.mputer System: -Continue to operate and maintain system at existing level. -Continue to develop and implement necessary rcs and MACS programs for fire services within MACS area according to existing policies. -Validate and implement wind model(s) and fire behavior prediction model(s). v -Continue to te~t a~~ ~. evaluate ~?nal- ~gra~ for application in southern California. -Assure adequate staffing and funding for OCC/SSM. -Find ways and means to maintain GSA contract programmers. -Establish "Development" or "Management Team" to integrate and activate models. -"Development" Team -Allow "third-party" -Develop policy development, testing, and approving, and evaluation of proposals that activities. can improve all-risk coordination for reviewing, controlling 3

22 FIRESCOPE OPERATIONS COORDINATION CENTER DOCUMENTATION CONTROL UNIT P.O. BOX RIVERSIDE. CALIFORNIA May 12, 1982 To: From: Subject: Bob Irwin, Chairman FIRESCOPE Operations Team Gary Ross, Chairman FIRESCOPE Task Force FIMS Computer System LOGIN 1.0. Request The Task Force reviewed and approved a request for a computer LOGIN 1.0. for the North Zone National Forest users. The request was approved for a temporary LOGIN for the period ~lay 17 through August 31, The 1.0. would fall into the Category 3 user priority and would not be used during Modes 3 and 4. This request was approved by the Task Force in accordance with the research application policy on computer time sharing discussed at the FIRESCOPE Operations Team on February 23, This LOGIN 1.0. request was made by Mr. R. D. Harrell, Fuel Management Specialist, in ord~r to test and evaluate a research program called FIRECAST (see attachment). Mr. John Uribarri, Computer System Administrator, was not satisfied with the Task Force action and indicated that he would like to appeal the decision to the FIRESCOPE Operations Team. :sjh cc: John Uribarri Computer Systems Admin.

23 , ' l-~'~1~ Unit~d States ~ ~jj Department of ;;r: Agriculture For~sl Service Fire Management Dale: Hay 5, 1982 S<>O\etl: FIRECAST - Fire Behavior Computer Program R5 To, Director, Aviation & Fire Management Staff Please refer to the attached correspondence, under the above designation, dated 11/4/81, 12/3/81, 1/26/82 and under 6610, dated 10/26/81. On April 29, 1982, I traveled to the Riverside Fire Lab to review the recently completed revisions to the FIRECAST Fire Behavior Prediction program. The ' revisions Jack Cohen has made are, in a word, excellent. Jack has been able to enhance the utility and application of the program and has added some'stateof-the-art updates which research has recently provided, while maintaining the ease of use and tutorial characteristics of the original program. I suggested some minor revisions in the printout format and in the user's guide, which will be incorporated this week. A draft user's manual will be available by the end of this month. The program is currently available to selected users on the FIRESCOPE prime 550 computer. The FIRESCOPE staff plans to place it in the public library as soon as it is completed, where it would be available to all FIRESCOPE partner agencies and to all South Zone National Forests. It was our intent to duplicate the program and install,it on one or more DEC 1170 computers in Northern California, so it would be available to North Zone National Forest users. CDF also planned to put it up on their computer in Sacramento so it would be available to CDF users outside the FlRESCOPE core area. After discussing this with Cohen and the FIRESCOPE staff, however, I propose we alter our original plans. After on~y two hours or so on the computer, I was able to suggest to Jack several rev±sion~ which made the program easier to use, reduced data entry errors and substituted conventions familiar to users of AFFIR}S, which Jack had not used. These conventions make it easier for a person familiar with one system to use another, thereby reducing training time and the potential for errors. It was logical for us to assume that other users might also suggest beneficial revisions once they had a chance to run the program. I propose the following, which is'~greeable to Jack Cohen and to FlRESCOPE: 1. The program will be placed in the public library on the FIRESCOPE prime computer allowing all current users of the prime to access FlRECAST. 2. The program continue to be classified as "developmental" and a testing/development/evaluation period and reporting format be established and published 3. A user ID be established to allow users outside the FlRESCOPE area access to the prime 550 and FIRECAST. This user ID would be tightly controlled as follows:

24 " -2- a. The user would only be able to access FlRECAST, not the entire menu of FlRESCOPE programs. b. Only one 10 would be available for all North Zone users, thereby limiting compute~ access to one at a time. c. The 10 would only be valid during OCC Mode 1 and 2 and would be locked out during acc Mode 3 and 4. Since access to the computer is via TELENET, the cost to an individual user would be minimal. Each North' Zone user, when requesting FlRECAST privileges, would be given the ground rules, a LOGIN 10, a user's guide and an evaluation form. At the end of the test period, say August 1982, I would meet with Jack Cohen, the FlRESCOPE staff, Howard Nickelson and Dave Sharp from COP. Suggested changes deemed beneficial would be incorporated into FlRECAST, the user's manual vlould be revised as necessary and issued as a final draft, and a decision made as to what additional locations (DEC, FLIPS, COP, etc.) would be desirable to allow all California users access to the program. It should be noted that a new "national" fire behavior program is also undergoing testing/evaluation at the same time. This would give evaluators the opportunity to compare both. programs and render an objective evaluation of both. A copy of this letter is being sent to Fire Lab Director Philpot and to Bob Irwin at FIRESCOPE for their review. If you agree with this proposal and research and FlRESCOPE concur, I will prepare whatever additional correspondence is necessary for your signature. R. D. HARRELL Fuel Management Specialist Enclosures

25 " -2- a. The user would only be able to access FlRECAST, not the entire menu of FlRESCOPE programs. b. Only one 10 would be available for all North Zone users, thereby limiting compute~ access to one at a time. c. The 10 would only be valid during OCC Mode 1 and 2 and would be locked out during acc Mode 3 and 4. Since access to the computer is via TELENET, the cost to an individual user would be minimal. Each North' Zone user, when requesting FlRECAST privileges, would be given the ground rules, a LOGIN 10, a user's guide and an evaluation form. At the end of the test period, say August 1982, I would meet with Jack Cohen, the FlRESCOPE staff, Howard Nickelson and Dave Sharp from COP. Suggested changes deemed beneficial would be incorporated into FlRECAST, the user's manual vlould be revised as necessary and issued as a final draft, and a decision made as to what additional locations (DEC, FLIPS, COP, etc.) would be desirable to allow all California users access to the program. It should be noted that a new "national" fire behavior program is also undergoing testing/evaluation at the same time. This would give evaluators the opportunity to compare both. programs and render an objective evaluation of both. A copy of this letter is being sent to Fire Lab Director Philpot and to Bob Irwin at FIRESCOPE for their review. If you agree with this proposal and research and FlRESCOPE concur, I will prepare whatever additional correspondence is necessary for your signature. R. D. HARRELL Fuel Management Specialist Enclosures

26 '. Program Office Report

27 " UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE FOREST SERVICE!, I t I ;, I,, r L! I I J!II Over the past four years fire depart~ents within the FIRESCOPE Region have jointly participated in Multi-Agency ICS Training. The tremendous success of this joint training can be attributed to the dedication and professionalism of a key group of instructors, like yourself, who assumed the responsibility to s~e that training lesson plans \~ere written, instructor cadres formed, and training sessions coordinated each of those four years. The FIRESCOPE Board of Directors is pleased to provide you letter of Commendation for your outstanding performance in it may be included as a permanent entry in your res~e tive file1' On behalf of the FIRESCOPE Board of Directors, thank you. with this Ordel" that personnel I I, i f I t ZGS:pe Zane G. Smith, Jr. Chairman, FIRESCOPE Board of Directors., I " ('fo9)

28 FHiESCOPE P.O. Box 1067 P~verside) CA DATE: ~pril 30, 1982 TO: Bob Irwin, Chairman FIRESCOPE Operations Team FROM: SUBJECT: Gary Ross,' Chairman FIRESCOPE Task Force ICS Multi-agency Training Instructor Cadre Recognition The Task Force has recognized the need to show our appreciation to the dedicated individuals who have carried the load in the ICS Multiagency Training over the past four yeais. These individuals wrote their own lesson plans, located classroom facilities, and conducted transfer training and workshop sessions while the Training Specialist Group began the time consuming task of developing the first ICS initial qualification Lesson Plans. Without the dedication and support from this instructor cadre, the overall implementation of ICS would have progressed at a much slower pace. The Task Force would like the attached letter to be sent to the following individuals: NAME AGENCY 1. CHUCK MILLS 2. JIM STur~PF 3. MIKE HARRIS 4. BOB.l'ILVORD 5. RAY SHACKELFORD 6. GREG DAVIS 7. BRUCE CO~I IE 8. GLEN Dlf':GER 9. GEORGE LUND 10. BILL EATON 11. LONNY BR IGGS 12. DALE ALEXANDER 13. ARNIE MASONER 14. MARTY BARP.OWS 15. JOHN URIBARRI 16. MIKE SCHERR 17. BILL LORD 18. DAN SPYK~RMAN 19. DON ELLIS. 20. JIM RADLEY 21. RAY HEBRARD 22. GLEN NE\!M.n.N {2. KEN SIGSBEE 24. FRANK BORDEN 25. PAT COONEY USFS, SAN BERNARDINO NF USFS, ANGELES NF CDF, SAN BERNARDINO RU USFS, LOS PADRES NF LOS ANGELES COUNTY FD USFS, SAN BERNARDINO NF CDF, RIVERSIDE RU LOS ANGELES CITY FD VENTURA COUNTY FD USFS, SAN BERNARDINO NF USFS, LOS PADRES NF USFS, SAN BERNARDINO NF USFS, FIRESCOPE PROGRAM OFFICE USFS, REGIGN5 OES, COMPUTER SYSTEM ADMINISTRATOR OES CDF, RIVERSIDE RU VENTURA COUNTY FD VENTURA COUNTY FD ORANGE COUNTY FD caf, REGION VI HEADQUARTERS CDF, REGION VI HEADOUARTERS CDF, RIVERSIDE RU LOS. ANGELES CITY FD USFS, A:':GELES NF I II,.. " :[.' ~ ': ;:.,,.'

29 26. Donald G. Perry 27. William Nutt 28. Richard Potter 29 Gary Girod 30. Wayne Maynard 3l. Jim Jeffries 32. Roger Land Santa Barbara County FD Los Angeles County FD Los Anfgell!-">County FD Vehtura County FD Ventura County FD Los Angeles City FD OES, Support Services Manager " ~..,. In lieu of an official FIRESCOPE Certificate of Appreciation, this letter, signed by the Chairman of the Board of Directors should serve to recognize their dedication. CfaW\(e~ GFR:pe Gari--~. Chairman Ross

30 BLM Login In

31 v' FIRESCOPE P.O. Box 1067 P~veTside, CA DATE: April 30, 1982 TO: Bob Irwin, Chairman FIRESCOPE Operations Team FROM: SUBJECT: Gary Ross, Chairman FIRESCOPE Task Force FIMS Computer LOGIN 10 Request The Task Force received the attached letter from the BLM Desert District requesting a permanent LOGIN 10 for the FIMS Computer. Since the BU~ Desert District is a resource' coordination point for BLM resources, the Task Force approved the request for a permanent LOGIN 10 in the Priority 1 category. The FIMS Computer System Administrator has been directed to assign the appropriate LOGIN 10. GFR:pe cc: ~~ Chairman John Uribarri, Computer System Administrator

32 United States Department ofthe Interior BUREAU OF LAND MANAGEMENT California Desert District 1695 Spruce Street Riverside. California IN REPLY REFER TO 9210 (C-062.2)!\Pi( Mr. John Uribarri Computer System Administrator Office of Emergency Services P.O. Box Riverside, CA Dear Mr. Uribarri: We request continuance of our Firescope Computer Identification Number on a permanent basis. We now have several people on various committees and have been accepted as a participating agency into the Firescope Program. We are looking forward to future participation in the Firescope Program. Sinee,ely, ~ ~~: Gerald E. Hillier ACI\N.G for Di strict Manager