DRAFT, 6/05/00. Office of Emergency Services Emergency Response Guidebook for Hazardous Material Decontamination

Transcription

1 BuD W-07 DRAFT, 6/05/00 Office of Emergency Services Emergency Response Guidebook for Hazardous Material Decontamination i. Forward Credits I. Introduction 1. Purpose: recommend interim guidance related to the decontamination of public exposed to hazardous substances To limit secondary contamination, to personnel, equipment, medical services, and other sites To preserve human dignity and respect personal and cultural modesty Improve on-site capability and reduce response times 2. Objectives To provide for consistent procedures which will include: Provide notification More informed risk assessment and situation appraisal General chemical, biological, and radiological procedures for mass decontamination Exposed persons triage, treatment, and transportation coordination Coordination with medical providers before, during and after Identify and consolidate resources for field reference Facilitate equipment purchases by recommending types shown to be successful Initiate tracking of mass decon resources which may be accessed by mutual-aid and/or SEMS 3. What is mass casualty decontamination? Mass decontamination is defined as a response activity involving significant numbers of people or one that exceeds the local capability in a reasonable time frame. The time frame is determined by the toxicity and the anticipated dose.

2 II. Roles and Responsibilities in ICS System Bulle ted Narrative of roles and responsibility Look at HMICP Flow Chart 1. ICS Overview Flow Chart (laminated section divider, FOG Section 13) Emergency Response Team Environmental Health Department/Officers Medical Services Team & Mental Health Law Enforcement Team Public Information Officers 2. Mass Casualty Flow Chart (laminated section divider, FOG Section 14) Flow Chart 3. Notification Flow chart (laminated section divider) Review current process to determine if it permits a single call from responder to the Warning center (or dispatch) and the Warning Center makes all notifications and then back to the local dispatch with relevant information. This ensures ALL notifications are made in a timely fashion. (Would need updating of notifications list by each operational area.) This section is important in ensuring a fast response and accurate information for response action. Possible resource is warning center ICS Form 214 Guidance would read basically the operational area is responsible: 1) to notify the warning center of spill or releases involving contamination of multiple individuals; 2) for updating the notification lists when changes occur; and 3) for maintaining a current call-out list for emergency response. 4. Pre-planning Guidance Determine who is the lead at the local level Utilize FEMA guidance document and provide example matrix This section should resolve the following questions: 1. What reporting is required? When and by whom? 2. Are agency contacts specified for each role or responsibility? 3. Who will disseminate information to victims, public, media? What time frame? What process will be used?

3 4. What legislative mandates are there in place or proposed which may affect this section? 5. When does mutual aid and resources become needed? How can you get them? 6. How does interagency coordination work? Local, State, Federal, Industrial? 7. Where should contact names and numbers be located? Updated? 8. Who is in charge/responsible for decon? 9. What statutory authority does the EMS/Law Enforcement Officers have over decon ops? 10. Who oversees/controls dec on set-up procedures, scope? ll.how does this "fit" with the existing ICS system? 12.Do all emergency medical facilities have ability to handle victims of haz. Materials incidents? How do you know where to take the victim? 13.What if the patient refuses to be decon? What legal rights does a victim have? When does decon become voluntary vs mandatory? 14.What happens when the agencies don't agree about regarding zone control, risk assessment, etc.? Between Environmental Health Officer and Haz. Mat? (I.E. location of zones?)

4 III. Interpersonal Communication: 1. Risk Communication. Reference risk = hazard + outrage theory of effective risk communication. Get public trust. Voluntary participation. 2. Diversity Age Cultural beliefs and fears Language barriers Modesty Gender issues Non-ambulatory, blind, hearing impaired, mentally disabled 3. Media Relations Pre-briefing Public updates 4. Public Interventions Interpretative Guides Telephone communication (1-800-#) Patient information sheets Pre-briefing Keep families together Claim slip and ID bracelets Follow-up (EAP-like) Non-decon population This section should resolve the following questions: 1. What diverse populations need to be considered? 2. What special issues do these populations present? What are possible solutions?

5 IV. Hazard Analysis (Matrix or Risk Assessment methodology) A framework for action flow chart: Analyze the problem> Develop plan of action> Implement plan of Action> Evaluate Progress> Analyze Problem. (FE.MA, Introduction to Hazardous Materials Preparedness) Process for determining if decon is needed Different response levels for different scenarios Is there a regulatory policy that gives authority to responders? What and how much? Based upon what? 1. Safety First- relocation 2. Limiting secondary contamination Ambulance Police & other responders Medical Facilities Offsite staging 4. Selecting Zones Hot Warm Cold 5. PPE- Level A or B This section should address the following: 1. I'm an EMS responder at the site of a pesticide overspray. How do I evaluate, assess and determine whether or not I need to decon the people in the local community who may be affected by the overspray? 2. How do I determine if there is a potential pathway for exposure? 3. Is there a "golden hour" or other time frame for response? Does it vary? What guidance is there? 4. How does EMS determine which areas are "hot"? 5. What difference does it make in operations when the incident occurs at Federal, Industrial, State, public works, or transportation sites?

6 V. Decontamination Procedures Using Tim Henry's Decontamination as a starting point for general decon. Process. FLOW CHARTS- Written Permission 1. Initial Contact Goals: 1st response within 5-20 minutes; additional assistance within 90 minutes Site preservation for terrorist or criminal activities Pre-briefing 2. Site Layout Establish Triage Maybe from FOG Manual 3. Gross Decon. Solid Wet 4. Dress-down Don't spread contamination on an individual during disrobing, such as pulling shirt over the head Jewelry (is there a policy? Otherwise, have them wash it and let them keep it, medical is better suited to take it. Too much liability?) Clothes disposal 5. Soap Wash/Scrub 6. Water Rinse/ Decon check 7. Re-dress 8. Re-evaluate triage 9. Transfer and release of exposed public Ambulance Emergency Room Patient Information Sheet 1 O.Documentation/Reporting ll.clean-up 12.Disposal Contaminated materials Liquids This section should address the following: 1. Where fatalities have occurred versus non-fatality incident? 2. When does triage come into play? What is triage?

7 3. What effect does relocation to a safe area have on spreading contamination? Is it appropriate to expand the hot zone to find a safe staging area? 4. What about decon waste? When is it ok to let the wash go back to the ground? 5. What happens with the contaminated materials? Who pays for disposal? 6. What minimum PPE is needed in decon situations?

8 VI. Incident Protocols A separate section-divider for: Chemical- give specific decon info. For about 50 products based upon spill database and info. Biological Radiological Unknown Terrorist Can be any of above- would differ in the need to preserve evidence and recognize the potential for additional hidden hazards on site. 1. Pathways involved with the different groups Inhalation Dermal Ingestion Injection 2. Matrix simplifying pathways, symptoms, hazards and decon solutions 3. Resource agency information and notification This section should address the following: 1. What is the difference in handling a chemical contamination versus a biological one? 2. A non-terrorist versus a terrorist incident?

9 VII. Recommended Equipment Key item for focus group. Save Fire/Haz-Mat Units a lot of leg-time. System-based - VS - Population-based Local ICS system Mutual Aid MOU's/ Partnershipping SEMS 1. Decontamination Units Mobile Modular Tagging (to show decon) and segregation 2. Computer Chemical Database Analytical Instrumentation Direct-reading Air monitoring for historical purposes Qualitative Chemical strips Reference Resources Books Consultants #s 3. PPE 4. Communications Public Address IC/Base Media interface Interpersonal Communications (language cards) 5. Accessories Gurney's Water heaters Decon. powders Decon. Solutions (matrix) Disposable wear for victims Barrier systems/ make-shift & make-do This section should be prepared to address the following questions (a Q&A section may be appropriate):

10 1. What equipment is recommended for decon planning in different population communities? 2. What detection equipment would be considered "standard"? 3. Where unknown contaminants are encountered, what detection techniques are needed? 4. What additional equipment is recommended for response to incidents involving weapons of mass destruction 5. What are successes and failures of currrent decon methods?

11 VIII. Funding and Mutual-Aid 1. Reimbursements 2. DADS-FEMA 3. RP 4. Flow Chart 5. SEMS This section should resolve the following: 1. Who will pay for activities of each team? People affected? Responsible party? 2. How does mutual aid factor in? What process?

12 IX. Emergency Responder Regulations Occupational Safety & Health Regulations 1. 29CFR Hazardous Waste Operations/Emergency Response 2. 29CFR19110; FR 54: CAL OSHA, General Safety Orders, Section 5192 Environmental Regulations CFR EPCRA 2. Code of California Regulations, Sections 3203, 3220, 5141, 5144, 5155, 5192, and 5194.

13 ' ' X. Additional Resources I-net Bibliography Firescope California, ICS420-1 April 1999 Chapter 13, HazMat Chapter 14, Mass Casualty "Legal Guidelines for Controlling Movement of People and Property During an Emergency" developed by Andrews Grundman in the Planning Assistance Unit. Hazardous Materials Medical Management Protocols, EMSA, February, 1991 Managing Hazardous Materials Incidents, Medical Management Guidelines for Acute Chemical Exposures, Volume III USDHHS OES Internal Notification Procedure for Significant Spills Managing Hazardous Materials Incidents, Hospital Emergency Departments, Volume II, US DHHS DPR Guidelines for Hazardous Materials Response to Pesticide Exposures DPR Worker Health and Safety Branch, CAC Role in Haz Mat Incidents Involving Pesticide Exposure Managing Hazardous Materials Incidents, Emergency Medical Services, Volume I, US DHHS DOT 2000, Emergency Response Guidebook Jane's Chem-Bio Handbook, California Law Enforcement OES Radioactive Decontamination Protocols Domestic Preparedness Training Program, 1998, Booz-Allen& Hamilton, Inc. and Science Applications International Corporation Introduction to Hazardous Materials Preparedness, June 1994, FEMA California Specialized Training Institute, Emergency Medical Response To Hazardous Materials Incidents; July, 1997 Hazardous Materials Chemistry for Emergency Responders, Robert Burke, Lewis Publishers, 1997 Bioterrorism Preparedness and Response, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention,

14 ' ' DRAFT, Guidance for Developing State, Tribal, and Local Radiological Emergency Response Planning and Preparedness for Transportation Accidents Terrorism Handbook for Operational Responders, Armando Bevelacqua and Richard Stilp, Delmar Publishers Radiological Emergency Medical Response, UC Davis Medical Center

15 IX. Appendices Legal Interpretations Medical References Counter-terrorism Resources

16 DRAFT STATE OF CALIFORNIA GOVERNOR'S OFFICE OF EMERGENCY SERVICES FIRE AND RESCUE SERVICE ADVISORY COMMITTEE/ FIRESCOPE BOARD OF DIRECTORS Meeting Minutes April 12, 2000 Sacramento, California MEMBERS PRESENT Dallas Jones, OES P. Michael Freeman, Los Angeles County Fire Department John Scherrei, Santa Barbara County Fire Department Bob Roper, Ventura County Fire Department Stewart Gary, Livermore-Pleasanton Fire Department Michael Dougherty, OES Fire and Rescue Branch Douglas Sporleder, Santa Clara County Fire Department Dennis Smith, Sacramento City Fire Department Russell W. Richards III, Stanislaus Count Chip Prather, Orange County Fire Authorit Nancy Wolfe, State Fire Marshal- CDF Tom Nichols, National Park Service MEMBERS ABSENT John Jansen, California State Firefighters' Association Brian Hatch, CPF Roger K. Purdie, Vista Fire Department Daniel G. Clark, Kern County Fire Department Ray Quintanar, USDA Forest Service - Fire and Aviation Management William R. Bamattre, Los Angeles City Fire Department Andrea Tuttle, CDF Pat Kidder, Bureau of Land Management OTHERS PRESENT Dan Drake, Orange County Fire Authorit Rick Warford, Los Angeles City Fire Department, representing William R. Bamattre Glen Newman, CDF, OES Deputy Director, representing Andrea Tuttle George Ewan, USDA Forest Service (FIRESCOPE Task Force Chair) Andy Anderson, Quincy FD (FIRESCOPE Operations Team North Chair) Cary Eckard, Kern County Fire Department (FIRESCOPE Operations Team South Chair) Rachel Parks, OES Doug Waggoner, BLM, representing Pat Kidder Chris Wurzell, CDF Mike Harris, CDF, OES Region VI Regional Coordinator FIRESCOPE BOARD OF DIRECTORS ~

17 DRAFT OTHERS PRESENT (continued) Tim Turner, CDF - OES Region V Coordinator Jeff Jones, CDF, OES Region II Coordinator Duane Fry, CDF, OES Region ill Coordinator Hank Weston, Grass Valley Fire Department- OES Region fv Coordinator Neil Honeycutt, OES Gary Glotfelty, OES Pat Cooney, OES Kim Zagaris, OES Bill Bondshu, OES Greg Farmer, OES Bob Irwin, Retired Steve Vittum, SBC Eric Nelson, LAC OPENING REMARKS/INTRODUCTIONS Meeting called to order at 0940 by M. Freeman. Self-introductions were made. Lunch and logistics were discussed. APPROVAL OF JANUARY 12, 2000 MINUTES M. Freeman made the motion to approve the minutes of the January 12, 2000, FIRESCOPE Board of Directors Meeting. Moved by B. Roper, second by D. Smith. Minutes approved as submitted. OES Director Report D. Jones thanked the Fire Services for the work performed during the Y2K turnover. The OES Budget includes $5 million to update the OES Engine Program with the ultimate goal being a 17- year replacement cycle. Communications for the Warning Center are being reviewed. OES is preparing a 3 Year Plan for OJP Grants. The 1999 OJP Grants will be disbursed before the 3 Year Plan is complete. OES will be mailing a letter to the agencies/departments explaining what funds are available and the process to apply for funds. Training, mobilization drills, and equipment will be major parts of the new state plan. Terrorism is a major issue, both at the State and Federal level. Congress has spent billions of dollars, and are now questioning if these programs are being coordinated between State and Federal agencies. Law and fire will be working jointly on these programs. This will also bring to the forefront what the health agencies/departments have developed. The plan will take six months to complete; the target date is October BOD APPOINTMENT D. Jones announced Hank Weston has been appointed to the BOD representing Volunteers Statewide. FIRESCOPE BOARD OF DIRECTORS 2 ~/12/00

18 DRAFT State Fire Marshal Update (N. Wolfe) No report on Certs and Quais at this date. OSFM is streamlining and making adjustments in their programs. Certifications and Qualifications Syste S. Gary reported he had reviewed a draft report on Certs and Quais. At the July BOD meeting, the Certs and Quals group should be invited to make a presentation. C. Eckard to report more on this subject during the Operations Teams Report. ALASKA AIRLINE FLIGHT 261 AFTER ACTION REPORT SUMMARY (P. Cooney) P. Cooney summarized the event of the crash near Oxnard (Port Hueneme) on January 31, The report is based on a 1 0-day operational period. He made a presentation; with hard cop documents. Positive lessons learned were early implementation of ICS, daily MACS meetings, lap's from VNC Sheriff, continuation of ICS after USCG turned over to NTSB, teleconference with NYEMSO, OASIS Transportable, communications with CALCORD, rotation of OES personnel, critical incident stress management, and conference calls. Other lessons learned were that the NTSB did not co-locate their operations center, the NTSB did not fully understand the use of SEMSIICS in California, that the NTSB did not fully understand the MACS process with use of Agency Representatives, limited information sharing between NTSB and MACS Group, USCG set up a Joint Information Center (JIC) NTSB did not coordinate, OES Comm vans were not set up correctly to accommodate activities, radio communications need to be encrypted due to sensitive issues relating to media monitoring, cell phone overload problems, and the lack of cost and expenditure tracking system. B. Roper discussed the crash and felt there has to be direction to the federal agencies that there has to be a MACS function throughout the incident. The California Fire Services needs to be aware of the problems that occurred at the incident. Local government will not be reimbursed if it is not declared a federal disaster. E. Nelson passed out a document Alaska Airlines Flight 261 Crash LACoFD Involvement. He discussed Los Angeles County's Baywatch Crews which were assigned to the incident and were involved in pulling debris from the water. G. Newman discussed the similarities between two CDF airtankers crashes. He felt the NTSB should practice ICS. D. Jones discussed there are requests being made for the Federal government to practice ICS nationwide, and respect State ICS planning that is automatically activated when disasters happen. He agreed with the BOD members that ICS does work in California. The use of the Federal Response Plan, which includes ICS, would be more effective in these incidents. S. Gary felt it is time for California and/or New York to talk and push to get the Federal agencies to participate in ICS. He thanked the OES staff for the After Action Report. He also felt the presentation should be sent out to the California Fire Services to share these lessons. There are many training points that can be addressed in this report. In regards to cell phone issues some FIRESCOPE BOARD OF DIRECTORS 3 04/ 12/00

19 DRAFT companies provide specialized equipment to respond to overload problems that would significantly give better services and more lines. M. Harris felt there should be a motivation to get the Federal agencies to practice ICS. The Coast Guard is currently ICS. The BOD thanked all the presenters for their participation. ICS FIRELINE EMERGENCY MEDICAL TECHNICIAN POSITION MANUAL (G. Ewan) The latest document is dated April 10, An Equipment List and Training List will be forwarded to the BOD at a later. Both lists are in the process of being developed at this time. Discussion on the Equipment List included: an easier way to get the supplies to an incident, what the contents of the kit include, and the weight of the kit. The Training List is a recommendation for NWCG for acceptance on a national basis. G. Ewan discussed some of the concerns the Task Force has encountered in the development of the FEMT Position Manual. The FEMT is a wildland fire position that includes arduous situations. There are legal issues regarding the FEMT position that are still unresolved. The position has existed informally for many years; the intent of this document is to formalize it. Fire personnel that are EMT's and have wildland experience may be used in this position. C. Eckard requested approval (conditional or complete) of the FEMT Position Manual. There is the need to get this document in place before fire season begins. FEMT's are out on the line to perform basic life support, and prepare the patients for transport. The Equipment List needs to be in place so the Incident Commander can order the FEMT with the proper equipment. The dispatch centers need to have this information so they know how to order the FEMT. S. Gary suggested that this document conditionally be approved for use this fire season, and then bring back to the BOD later for further review. Suggested that if the FEMT has to function alone attach slhe to a Crew. B. Roper suggested this be accepted, and that the specific training guidelines be part of the document. M. Harris suggested the Medical Unit Leader Training package needs to be reviewed to include the FEMT. C. Eckard suggested the term protocol should be defined. Also, make a difference between protocol and certification. Motion for conditional approval would only cover the Position Manual. S. Gary withdrew his motion to accept the document if the Training List is not attached to the document. FIRESCOPE BOARD OF DIRECTORS 0-l/12100

20 DRAFT C. Wurzell added that ARESCOPE Position Manuals do not contain certs and quais; they are in the training manuals. M. Dougherty felt the training should be in the FEMT Position Manual because FIRESCOPE will not be developing the training for the position. The needed curriculum is already available and in place. Other FIRESCOPE Position Manuals have training developed to support the position. C. Eckard suggested the Position Manual and the prerequisites be accepted. Motion: J. Scherrei conditionally accept the Position Manual and the qualifications, H. Weston second. Use the April lo document with qualifications, with the clarification that it can also be a paramedic. The Task Force will bring forward a final document before the July meeting. Mail to regional/operational coordinators, North and South Ops for document to be in place this Fire Season. Action: BOD to conditionally approve, with attachment of qualifications and with clarification of the EMT-P. A final copy for review to BOD before July meeting. EMT Out-of-Jurisdiction Use (M. Doughertv) EMT' s can function anywhere in the state under their county protocols which they are certified to practice. FIRESCOPE Celebration (G. Ewan) G. Ewan introduced Bob Irwin who was one of the original FIRESCOPE Program Managers. Bob presented historical views on the upcoming celebration. FIRESCOPE is approaching a 30 year anniversary. One meeting has been held with the Task Force Liaison G. Ewan, the CORE Group, and input from the FIRESCOPE PIE Specialist Group. FIRESCOPE was started in 1971 under the USFS. The program was moved under OES in As the CORE Group began discussing an interest in a reunion, the thought entered as to what about the other participants, legislators, outside organizations (NFA, NWCG, and others), etc. that have been active in the past, present, and future. B. Irwin passed out a document titled Presentation to FIRESCOPE Board of Directors Sacramento 4112/00 by Bob Irwin. G. Ewan discussed the theme would be FTRECOPE Past, Present. and Future. The date will be June 200 l. The conclusion of the ARESCOPE Reunion Group is the BOD needs to make a decision whether the reunion will be a large/small celebration, financial support, personnel support, etc. S. Gary suggested to rename this event a training/education seminar. D. Smith suggested an event in Sacramento to include the legislators in the area. FIRESCOPE BOARD OF DIRECTORS 5 0-1/12/00

21 DRAFT C. Prather suggested the BOD set the objective of the year long planning before the formal event. The media campaign needs a target. D. Jones suggested the FIRESCOPE Reunion and the dedication of the new OES (Senator William Campbell) building coincide. M. Freeman suggested contacting groups that have already developed this sort of event, and asking for suggestions. Motion: Develop a working group that would include the CORE Group. Develop a solid location. Develop a plan for a two-day event. Develop a Working Group to develop a plan for a significant celebration. Identify representatives from each agency to put the concept together and submit to G. Ewan. MACS EXERCISE NORTH (N. Honeycutt & G. Glotfelty) May 3 will be the orientation for the southern area in Riverside. May 10 will be the exercise for the northern area in Redding. This is a training exercise not an evaluation of the fire season. In the future, the Task Force would like to have a CALMAC Exercise to test the system statewide. At the next BOD meeting, the Task Force submit a report of the MACS Exercise North. TASK FORCE UPDATE (G. Ewan) The Task Force has been working on two major projects FEMT and Swiftwater/Flood SAR. Another major project is the FIRESCOPE Website. Changes to the site will be the ICS 209, GIS OES, Damage Inspection, and ICS Documents. The ICS 209 will have drop down menus, Three Letter Identifiers conforming to the FOG, adding PVT to identify Private Vendors, resources assigned columns, and the ability to calculate numbers of personnel assigned to an incident. The 209 will stay in place for this Fire Season (with minor changes); major changes will be Fire Season Other changes will be to allow the attachment of other documents such as GIS maps and Incident Action Plans. Another function would be to allow plotting of locations of incidents on a map of the State of California. The Damage Inspection Database will be added to the Website with proper security functions at a later date. The Task Force is developing a Priority List of all ICS documents, forms, training materials, for publication on the Website. Swiftwater/Flood SAR OSD (G. Ewan) At the January 2000 BOD, meeting the Task Force was asked to provide an Operational System Description (OSD) for Swiftwater/Flood Rescue by the April 2000 meeting. The Task Force, and numerous other interested parties, has reviewed the OSD in an attempt to meet this deadline. With each review there have been numerous changes recommended that do not necessaril conform to the needs and wishes of the agencies involved in Swiftwater/Flood rescues, i.e., fire and law. FIRESCOPE BOARD OF DIRECTORS 6 Q.l/12/00

22 DRAFT M. Dougherty stated that the law group had reviewed the OSD and will take it to the California State Sheriffs Association. The Sheriffs are reluctant to specific training and equipment requirements in the document. His suggestion is to review the document when it comes back from the Sheriffs, and verify if the document meets standards to perform the job safely. The Task Force will review the document to make sure it includes minimum standards in accordance with the FIRESCOPE format. The Task Force will then develop a list of issues and problems for the BOD. OPS TEAMS UPDATE (C. Eckard and A. Anderson) The Joint Operations Team North and South Meeting at Bucks Lake in July. The group will review FEMT Equipment List. Certs and Quais: the Operations Teams suggestion to the BOD is that the State Board of Fire Services Certs and Quais document include certification at the Type l level before the FIRESCOPE BOD reviews the document. OES FIRE AND RESCUE BRANCH (M. Dougherty) 27 Engines have been ordered, the Fire and Rescue Branch expects delivery to begin in July. NEW BUSINESS S. Gary passed out a document Administration Intergovernmental Affairs Contacts he felt might help agencies/departments to request funds back from the federal government for local government operations. These contacts could also be reminded of the value of the state fire and rescue operations and request more funding. M. Dougherty will research to find out how mutual aid affects local government budgets and present his findings to the BOD. D. Sporleder explained in his county unincorporated areas, outside of fire districts, that are unprotected areas. San Bernardino and San Diego counties have these areas. These areas occur throughout the state. REGION REPORTS Region I, M. Freeman, working on plans for DNC. Region IT, G. Newman Region III, D. Fry Region VI, H. Weston Region V, T. Turner Region VI, M. Harris All regions are relatively quiet, and anticipating next fire season. FIRESCOPE BOARD OF DIRECTORS 7

23 NEXT DRAFT MEETING July 12, 2000 in Sacramento at the Department of Health Services. FIRESCOPE BOARD OF DIRECTORS 8 ~111100

24 FIRESCOPE JOINT OPERATIONS TEAM Board of Directors ARESCOPE/Fire and Rescue Service Advisory Committee Subject: Statewide Incident Qualification System Background f', /) (6~' In July, 1999, the Board of Directors charged the Joint Operations Team with assessing the current progress in the California towards a statewide incident qualification system to certify participants to incident assignments in an all-risk environment. Previously, deficiencies had been identified in various FIRESCOPE documents. For example, the white paper addressing the 1993 Southern California firestorm and the Los Angeles County correspondence to FIRESCOPE regarding the Calabasas incident and subsequent fatality both identified the need to institute an incident qualification system in California. Your Board, in turn, a'cknowledged that need and appointed Dan Francis, CDF, to represent this body at the national level. Discussion at subsequent Board meetings has continued to maintain interest and commitment in this area. Prior to the charge given to the Joint Operations Team and at the same meeting, a presentation was made by the Northern Division of the California Fire Chiefs Training Officers Section outlining work that was already in progress to establish a regional certification system. After presentation and discussion, the Board charged the Operations Team to assess current efforts in the State regarding certification and qualification. Should it be determined that there were fragmented efforts to design a system, your Board would determine what steps would be necessary to implement a single system accepted by all jurisdictions. Findings Efforts to establish a certification and qualification system exist around the State and can be loosely categorized three ways: Single jurisdiction Training Officers Section of the California Fire Chiefs Association State Board of Fire Services A few jurisdictions have enacted a certification and qualification system through adoption of the NWCG PMS document. For the most part, federal agencies have a system in place (i.e., "Red Card'') and certify their employees in all positions of the Incident Command System in accordance with NWCG PMS The emphasis, however, is fairly exclusively designed for wildland fires and, for the most part, does not address all-risk types of incidents. Local jurisdictions (e.g., Kern County Fire Department) pattern their systems after that of the federal agencies and also through adoption of NWCG PMS for their employees only. These systems may also

25 include some emphasis on all-risk incidents. Although some of these "Red Card" systems may be more stringent than a state all-risk system, they should not conflict with other efforts either around the state or statewide. The Northern Division of the Training Officers Section began the task of developing a system to certify local government fire service personnel for Incident Command System positions primarily for wildland fires and with the hope of extending the certification to all-risk status. According to representatives of their organization, their efforts are now endorsed by the Southern Division of the Training Officers Section and the parent organization, the California Fire Chiefs Association. A similar presentation to the one given to the FIRESCOPE Board was presented to the task force appointed by the State Board of Fire Services. The two organizations are now working in conjunction with each other to produce a statewide system. The State Board of Fire Services has appointed a task force to develop a statewide, all-risk incident qualification system for review and approval. Among the issues being addressed, four are of particular importance: 1) a method of integrating historical experience into certification, 2) referencing or consulting NWCG PMS to insure compatibility, 3) a peer review and certification method acceptable statewide, and 4) determining equivalency between existing curriculums in the state. The task force has reviewed and edited several successive drafts and has nearly completed a document to present to the State Board. Operations Team Discussion The Joint Operations Team held a two-day meeting January 27 and 28, As directed by the FIRESCOPE Board of Directors, the team addressed the issue of a California Incident Qualification System (CIQS) as proposed in draft document. The document) and it's successive drafts) were prepared by the State Fire Marshal's Office, Certification and Qualification Committee, which is subcommittee to the State Board of Fire Services, as well as, similar work that is being done by California Fire Chiefs Association Training Offers Section, Northern Division. \(I I ") The purpose of review and discussion of this item was to attempt to gain input from the Joint Operations Team that would enable the development of a recommended position for the Board of Directors. The following are recommendations that the FIRESCOPE Joint Operations Team suggests the Board adopt regarding endorsement of current efforts to implement a statewide certification and qualification system. Suggested Recommendations The FIRESCOPE Board of Directors supports the concept of a single statewide Incident Qualifications System (IQS), and the tasks currently in progress to develop and establish such a system. The FIRESCOPE Board of Directors strongly endorses the current efforts that a statewide IQS be under the auspices of the Office of the State Fire Marshal's State Board of Fire Services, and that this agency be the central point of contact for development of gui elines, and implementation of an IQS. -z-

26 Based on input from the FIRESCOPE Operations Team, the Board feels strongly that a statewide IQS should encompass wildland position qualifications onlv at this time, and not attempt to differentiate by risk type. While there may be value to differentiating qualifications based on risk type, the reality is that most incidents other than wildland, are of short duration, and often handled with local area staffing as opposed to wildland incidents of a protracted nature, with overhead positions being filled from throughout the state. The Board of Directors feels the following points are important for inclusion in future discussion, design and development of a statewide Incident Qualifications System: Goal should be to achieve 100% voluntary participation of all fire agencies in california. The system should ensure consistency of certification and qualifications throughout the state, based on or parallel to NWCG PMS 310-1, with the realization that many (, fire agencies in California already utilize this document as a guideline and are already meeting most of the requirements contained in it. 1 f t :J The system should be specific to wildland positions until such time as a statewide system is in place with sufficient historical data to evaluate extending this to other risk types (i.e., High Rise, Hazardous Materials). Focus should be on development and implementation of a system that will maintain consistency of certification and qualification, insure incident safety, and improve incident management effectiveness and efficiency. There should be minimal cost associated with the development and implementation of this program. Assuming the State Board is responsible for adopting a system, efforts need to be made to assure all stakeholders (fire agencies throughout the state) are provided an opportunity for input in the system's development and it's progress towards adoption and implementation. There is a need to educate, inform and receive input from stakeholders. To foster a cooperative attitude and approach, the Board recommends the following phases: ).> Development of Guidelines: While some work has been done on developing guidelines, there is still a need to spend time seeking input from stakeholders during this phase, and begin the education process necessary to achieve a high level of voluntary participation. ).> Implementation: A phased implementation schedule should be developed in conjunction with the certification and qualification system. Local fire agencies will need to make adjustments in their training programs and budgets in order to implement the system. The Board of Director would like to maintain FIRESCOPE's involvement in an advisory capacity in the development and implementation of a statewide Incident -3-

27 Qualifications System. The current arrangement of using a liaison with both the Operations Team and the Task Force will accomplish this objective. Summary The Joint Operations Team identified primary efforts in place to develop an incident qualification system for California. Those efforts were discussed at the Joint Operations meeting held in January of this year and it was determined that the progress various organizations have made is both positive and will have the desired results verbalized by the Board during its many discussions on the subject. The work now being done by the task force appointed by the State Board of Fire Services speaks to the issues important to FIRESCOPE and its members. They are addressing four primary areas critical to a comprehensive and effective system: l) A method of integrating historical experience into certification, 2) Referencing or consulting NWCG PMS to insure compatibility, 3) A peer review and certification method acceptable statewide, and, 4) Determining equivalency between existing curriculums in the state It is, therefore, the recommendation of the Joint Operations Team that the FIRESCOPE Board endorse the efforts and goals of the task force appointed by the State Board of Fire Services to produce an incident qualifications system for California. It is also our recommendation that the Board continue to monitor progress in development and ~ J,. '1 <?:!~d implementation of the system with the intent of possibly integrating all or part of it into the Five-Party Cooperative Agreement, hopefully, within five years.~current appointees (Cary Eckard from the Operations Team and Keith Larkin from the Task Force) can keep Board members apprised of the progress of the incident qualification system. Respectfully, Andy Anderson Chair, Operations Team, North Cary Eckard Chair, Operations Team, South -4 -

28 Task Force Report July 12, h Celebration The next meeting for the Planning Group for the 30th Celebration will be July 18-19, 2000, in Sacramento. Expected participants will PIE North and South, the Task Force, assigned Agency Representatives, and Retiree's Planning Group. The Task Force accepts the recommendation of the BOD that the celebration should be held in Sacramento, in conjunction with the new William Campbell building. Dates will be determined based on projected completion dates of the building. Swiftwater Update The Task Force previously suggested an Issue Paper to be developed to describe the conflicts between the fire and law communities that hindered completion of the OSD. Since that time another draft from the Swiftwater/Flood Working Group was presented to the Task Force and was once again considered unacceptable to fire. The Task Force feels that we are at an impasse. A meeting is planned for July 25, 2000, in Bakersfield to discuss the direction for the continuing development of the OSD. MACS Exercise See attached letter dated June 13, 2000, to Chief Freeman. During the MACS Exercise North the MACS 429 was identified as being over 20 years old, and a request was made to research the need to revise and redefine the terms. The Task Force believes the terms used focus on setting overall incident priorities for resource allocation. At this time, the Task Force feels the definitions are generic and should remain as such. The forum in which this form is used drives the form; this form is used by a group of decision makers (ie, MAC representatives) who must come to consensus and not used as a document to set priorities within an individual agency. The MACS 429 is relative to the dynamic information the group is receiving from the respective agencies. The Task Force will add some short definitions to the Instruction Page that should clarify the intent of the form. FIRELINE EMT See the attached letter to Chief Freeman dated June 22, Attached is the final package being presented to the BOD for approval. WEATHER SPECIALIST GROUP The Task Force is in the process of updating the original Charter for the Weather Specialist Group. The Task Force plans to reactivate the group, in conjunction with CWCG, this will provide continuity for any projects and be a benefit of all users of incident related weather.

29 His original work includes the ICS Operational System Description, initial MACS procedures, early ICS position descriptions and training requirements, and the first instructor guides for ICS training. He also designed the Document Control System. Terry designed, directed, and evaluated the first prototype OCC operations in 1976 and '77, and contributed layout and functional requirements of what is now the So. Calif. Coordination Center. Using Decision Process input from all levels he prepared the first versions of the ICS Field Operations Guide. Haney prepared the analysis that led the National Wildfire Coordinating Group to adopt ICS as a national system for federal wildland fire agencies, and later adapted all ICS components into what became the National Interagency Incident Management System. He has carried on continual work to update ICS position descriptions and training modules and has conducted extensive training at local, state, and federal levels. Terry was an initial contributor to the law enforcement version of ICS (LEICS) and later became the principal author of the Statewide Emergency Management System (SEMS) Guidelines. He also developed the Approved Course of Instruction for SEMS and is currently working with the SEMS Specialist Training Group to update training modules. Haney has been conducting multidiscipline ICS Basic, Intermediate, and Advanced Field Courses for local and state agencies since He has a total of 27 years association with FIRESCOPE development and extension. BOB IRWIN (USFS) was Program Manager from 1975 to He was fully responsible for all activities and products of the Program during that period. Early-on, Bob upgraded the status and function of the directors and chiefs of participating agencies from that of an "advisory team" (as they had been) to the Board of Directors with significant decision-making powers. He established the Operations Team to improve agency internal communications and supported the activation of Specialist Groups to provide technical input to decision-makers. Irwin revised the original FIRESCOPE Program Charter and gained Forest Service and Congressional approval to change the Program's original mission from that of "improving wildland fire suppression in southern California" to a new one that reflected "all-risk" applications. He contributed to the ICS Incident Action Planning process development and later wrote the frrst narrative description of the Unified Command concept.

30 After his FS retirement, Bob continued ICS and MACS extension efforts. He developed OES-approved ICS Emergency Plans for Mono County and the City of Fresno. He prepared Mono County's "Volcano Response Plan" for a potential Mammoth Lakes eruption and got unanimous approval of the Plan from the 21 involved agencies and departments. He was a major contributor to the development of the law enforcement version ofics (LEICS) and taught that subject for the Peace Officer's Standards and Training Commission for five years. Irwin provided ICS/MACS training for state and local agencies in Oregon, Colorado, and Alaska over a period of several years. He was a minor contributor to the early SEMS development, and has close to 20 years involvement with FIRESCOPE products. Bob will serve as "contact point" for the RPG ( bobwin@mlode.com) and for early FS Research and Admin folks who got the Program started. ARNIE MASONER (USFS) served as Assistant Program Manager for FIRESCOPE for five years. His primary responsibilities were in the areas of business management. In addition, he served as the Program Office liaison with the Specialist Groups, Task Force, and Operations Team, helping to forge and format acceptable recommendations from those bodies to the Board of Directors that the Board could (and did) endorse. He wrote, and got approval for, a number of "first-ever" procurement contracts that enabled the Program Office to obtain "one of a kind" products and services that forwarded FIRES COPE progress. Most of those contract deliverables were unique to the Program and had never before been obtained under Federal contract regulations. He wrote the first Frequency Sharing Agreement approved by the Federal Communications Commission for use of multi-channel radios by fire services. In 1978, the first time res was "operational" in southern California, Masoner helped to provide "ICS transition training" on the spot for more than 3,000 firefighters coming into the Ontario airport from other states for that year's fire emergency. After leaving the Program Office, Arnie provided leadership in the d~sign and training of the ICS Finance module, and helped rewrite the Interagency Fire Business Management Handbook. Masoner can provide national media exposure for the reunion through "Wildland Firefighter" magazine, and has a current roster of interested retirees. He is also interested in assuring that deceased FIRES COPE contributors are appropriately honored at the reunion.

31 KEITH METCALFE (CDF) served on the Task Force for two years during the early struggles to defme a more perfect ICS and MACS. After that he spent ten years at the field level extending and implementing those products on a daily basis at the Unit and project level. He has many legislative contacts and a strong public information background. He offers his help to the reunion planning Public Information Officers and to assist with current legislative contacts. MIKE SCHERR (OES) is another 20-year veteran ( ) of FIRESCOPE development and implementation. He served on the Task Force until 1982 when Congressional funding for the Program ended. During that period he also served as Advisor and Evaluator on the earliest incidents where ICS was applied. He then became Assistant and then Deputy Chief of Fire and Rescue for southern California. In addition to those duties he took on the job of OCC Support-Services Manager and concentrated heavily on the improvement ofmacs effectiveness. He conducted numerous training sessions on both ICS and MACS. JIM SMITH (VENTURA COUNTY) served on the Task Force from 1974 to ' 76. His duties included writing some of the first ICS position descriptions, based on conceptual work of earlier TF members. He participated in the difficult task of "start-up" training, introducing the totally new ICS concept to firefighters from all member agencies who were not at all sure this new system had any value. He also participated in staffmg of the prototype OCCs, and made evaluations that helped improve MACS procedures. After 1976 he instructed Strike Team Leader classes for southern California agencies and became a contributor to the Mapping Specialist Group. The FIRESCOPE mapping process has spread world-wide. He served as Incident Commander on multi-agency teams and trained potential IC's in the I-400 courses for five years. He also served occasionally in an Acting capacity on the Board of Directors until his retirement as Assistant Chief in Jim now lives in Arizona, but he can contribute to the reunion planning from that location.

32 13771 Mark Trail Sonora, CA (209) com May 22,2000 Mr. P. Micha Freeman, Chief Los Angele County Fire Department 1320 East Avenue Los Ang es, CA las Jones, Director ia Office of Emergenc eadowview Aven Sacr ento, CA 95 Gentlemen; This letter has three objectives. First, I want to thank you again for the warm reception I received at your April 12 meeting, and for the total support of all agencies in sponsoring a 30-year recognition of FIRES COPE. Second, I transmit to you (by enclosure) the "Brief Histories" of retirees who will be involved with the agency personnel assigned to the "working group" planning the event. Hopefully, knowing something about us will facilitate the overall planning process.. By copy of this letter I am asking Mike Dougherty and George Ewan!9 distribute copies of the histories to all those "c-' - involved in the plannirig. w-<'1-~~ Finally, I urge you to make certain that the FIRESCOPE recognition/reunion is plarmed as a separate and distinct event. It most certainly should include some connection with dedication of the new Sen. Campbell building, but it should not be diluted by any other focus. There has been mention of combining other activities within and around the FIRESCOPE ceremony, primarily to reduce costs. Not wise.

33 Freeman/Jones.... pg /22/2000 Anything that detracts from the contributions of the Program and its evolutionary success will also diminish the value of the fire and emergency services participants that worked so hard to get you where you are today. Public, political, and media attention should be pointed directly at where the efforts came from, where they are today, and what they need in the future. Emphasis on other topics may actually confuse the issue and reduce potential future support. I hope you agree. Sincerely, Robert L. Irwin Retirees Planning Group

34 FIRESCOPE TASK FORCE June 13, Mulberry Street Riverside, CA FAX Mr. P. Michael Freeman Chief, Los Angeles County Fire Department 1320 N. Eastern Avenue Los Angeles, CA Dear Chief Freeman: [t is my pleasure to report on the outcome of the calendar year 2000 Multi-Agency Coordination System (MACS) review and simulation training recently completed. This endeavor is a direct result of direction given to the Task Force from the FlRESCOPE Board of Directors. May 3, 2000 the Task Force conducted a MACS Mode 4 review at the Operations Coordination Center (OCC) in Riverside, CA. The primary goal of them session was to familiarize fire agency or department operations personnel, from southern California, in the use of MACS forms and general procedures. Participants in Redding, CA, via videoconference \' ith excellent results, viewed this session. A total of twenty (20) personnel from ten ( 10) agencies participated. The following week was devoted to presenting a complete simulation in Redding, CA. On May 10, 2000 the Task Force facilitated the simulation to participants from the federal agencies of the U.S. Forest Service, Bureau of Land Management and National Park Service, California's Department of Forestry and Fire Protection and the Governor's Office of Emergency Services and National Guard. Representatives of Plumas County, Nevada County as active participants, joined the City of Redding in the simulation. The MACS Procedures Guidelines as outlined in the MACS were followed. The simulation was based on the northern California 1999 Fire Season. Videoconference technology \vas used to provide observation points in adjoining rooms and a link to CDF Headquarters in Sacramento, CA.