Improved Firefighter Safety 1. Running head: IMPROVED FIREFIGHTER SAFETY. Executive Development

Transcription

1 Improved Firefighter Safety 1 Running head: IMPROVED FIREFIGHTER SAFETY Executive Development Improved Firefighter Safety Through Appropriate Development and Deployment of the Incident Safety Officer David O. Dixon Norfolk Fire-Rescue, Norfolk, Virginia August 2007

2 Improved Firefighter Safety 2 CERTIFICATION STATEMENT I hereby certify that this paper constitutes my own product, that where the language of others is set forth, quotation marks so indicate, and that appropriate credit is given where I have used the language, ideas, expressions, or writings of another. Signed:

3 Improved Firefighter Safety 3 Abstract The safety of firefighters was being adversely impacted from the frequent unavailability of a trained incident safety officer (ISO). Research identified the optimum sustainable safety level for firefighters through the development and deployment of the fireground ISO. Descriptive research determined the present status and generated a foundation for the correct course of action. Research questions were answered through literature review, and data analysis of feedback questions. The research found the fireground ISO would improve firefighter safety, was needed for all types of structure fires, had identifiable qualities for effectiveness, and was a high profile important fireground function. Any future research should focus on the development and deployment of the fireground ISO as applied toward the circumstances within the individual departments.

4 Improved Firefighter Safety 4 Table of Contents Abstract...3 Table of Contents...4 Introduction...5 Background and Significance...7 Literature Review...13 Procedures...21 Results...27 Discussion...34 Recommendations...39 References...42 Tables Table 1 (Firefighter Safety and the Fireground ISO)...29 Table 2 (Types of Structure Fires for the ISO)...31 Table 3 (Qualities for the Effective Fireground ISO)...33 Appendices Appendix A (Residential Structure Fire Pragmatic Graph)..45 Appendix B (External Feedback Fire Departments)...46 Appendix C (External Feedback Summary Report)...48 Appendix D (Internal Feedback Summary Report)...57

5 Improved Firefighter Safety 5 Improved Firefighter Safety Through Appropriate Development and Deployment of the Incident Safety Officer In the history of Norfolk Fire-Rescue (NFR) there have been 22 firefighters who have died in the line of duty. Many of these deaths occurred on the fireground while performing suppression operations at a structure fire. In the last eight years, NFR has had over 1,400 firefighters injured in the line of duty. Again, many of these injuries have occurred on the fireground while performing suppression operations at a structure fire. Fighting structure fires in the City of Norfolk is a very dangerous profession filled with many hazards. Every day, the department is challenged with making the fireground operational environment a safe place to work. In 1989, the fire chief assigned and authorized a veteran firefighter to fill the position of Health and Safety Officer (HSO). The newly appointed position was responsible for managing the health and safety program, and was responsible for responding to working fires as the Incident Safety Officer (ISO). Today, the department HSO is a battalion chief with administrative and on-call work assignments. The HSO continues to manage the health and safety program, and continues to respond to working fires as the ISO. The HSO response time to a structure fire is delayed and very difficult to predict. The typical response may require the HSO to leave a meeting during

6 Improved Firefighter Safety 6 the day or respond from home at night. There are times the HSO is not available to respond to a structure fire, and there may, or may not be, another administrative chief covering this responsibility. The fireground Incident Commander (IC) is frequently unaware as to the availability or response time of the HSO. This lack of understanding channels the IC to either: delegate the ISO responsibility to whoever may be available on the fireground or maintain the safety function by leaving the position unfilled. The problem was that the positive effect of having an ISO at a structure fire was being unevenly applied because of frequent unavailability of a trained ISO. Therefore, the safety of firefighters was being adversely impacted by the somewhat random application of this safety tool. The purpose of this research was to determine how to provide the optimum sustainable safety level for firefighters through the application of consistent practices in the development and deployment of an ISO at structure fires. Descriptive research was used to determine the present status and generate a foundation for the correct course of action. This type methodology was utilized to answer the following research questions through literature review, and data analysis of internal and external feedback questions. The research questions included the following: (a) what improvements

7 Improved Firefighter Safety 7 to firefighter safety occur from the use of an incident safety officer during a structure fire, (b) for what types of structure fires are the activities of an incident safety officer superior to having the safety responsibility remain with the incident commander, (c) how does experience, training, education and organizational authority relate to effectiveness in performing as a fireground incident safety officer, and (d) is there a point during a structure fire in which the appointment of an incident safety officer is more important than other duties to which that officer might be assigned. Background and Significance In December 1871, the Norfolk City Council disbanded the volunteer fire companies and formed the Norfolk Fire Department (NFD), which is believed to be the third oldest paid fire department in the nation. In early 1970, the City of Norfolk joined other cities across the nation in providing emergency medical services (EMS) to its citizens; establishing the Bureau of Paramedical Rescue Services (PRS). Over the years, the incidents of fire had decreased and the demand for medical services had increased. In April 1991, Norfolk City Council decided to merge NFD and PRS in an attempt to provide improved services and meet changing demands. The joining of departments produced, Norfolk Fire and Paramedical Services (NFPS), a fullservice fire based EMS department. In December 2003, the

8 Improved Firefighter Safety 8 department was formally renamed to Norfolk Fire-Rescue (NFR). The designation to NFR more closely represented the department s mission to protect life, property, and the environment, by providing public education, preventing and suppressing fires, mitigating hazards, and caring for the sick and injured. Today, NFR provides professional customer service within a 66 square mile dense urban setting with a population of approximately 250,000, which swells to over 350,000 during the workday. The department responds to over 40,000 emergency incidents each year from 14 fire-rescue stations strategically located throughout the city. The NFR is comprised of over 500 dedicated professionals who support the vision of preventing harm in the community while maintaining the public trust. The department operates within three battalions, which include 14 engines, 7 ladders, 2 heavy rescues, and 11 advanced life support (ALS) medic units. Community and support services are provided from the offices of occupational health and safety, fire prevention and investigation, public affairs, special operations, EMS and community outreach, emergency preparedness and response, capital assets and logistics, a training and recruitment facility, and administrative support services. For the first time in decades, the City of Norfolk is experiencing exciting growth through a number of redevelopment and new construction projects that are currently underway or are

9 Improved Firefighter Safety 9 on the drawing board to begin within the next several years. Some of the projects will include new office, retail, entertainment and hotel construction downtown, new residential development along the rivers and bay front, and revitalization projects in many of its neighborhoods. The population is increasing with a projection to exceed 300,000 within the next 10 years. With the challenges of a growing population and city, the demand for public safety services is expected to increase. Throughout history, NFR has enjoyed a relatively low turnover rate as a result of retirements. The low turnover rate was keeping the department full of well trained and experienced firefighters, company officers, and chief officers. However, in 1996 the city offered a retirement incentive that resulted in the retirement of 62 employees. Again in 2005, the city offered a retirement incentive that resulted in the retirement of 48 employees. The end result of the two retirement incentives was the loss of 110 experienced employees, of which, 38 were officers. The retirement incentives, coupled with the natural attrition rate, has forced many new promotions and new hires that have produced officers and firefighters with very little training and experience. The fire chief reported in January 2006, that 36% of the department members had five years or less experience. Over the years, NFR has seen 22 of its firefighters killed

10 Improved Firefighter Safety 10 in the line of duty. In the last eight years, NFR has had over 1,400 firefighters injured in the line of duty. Many of these deaths and injuries have occurred on the fireground while performing suppression operations at structure fires. Mr. Reggie Goble, Safety Officer for the City of Norfolk, who manages all worker compensation claims, reported that in the calendar year 2006, 29 firefighters were injured during a fire related incident. Of the 29 fire related injuries, 21 occurred on the fireground while performing suppression operations at a structure fire. There were a total of 18 time loss injuries that required the employee to be absent from their normal work assignment. Of the 18 time loss injuries, 4 were considered significant; meaning the injury required surgery and the employee was out of work for more than 90 days (R. Goble, personal communication, April 16, 2007). The 21 firefighter injuries that did occur on the fireground had similar circumstances. The injuries occurred while performing suppression operations at a structure fire, and there was no ISO on the fireground. Over the years, NFR has taken many steps to enhance firefighter safety, and reduce the overall number and severity of injuries. The department has a separate Health and Safety Office staffed by a battalion chief who reports directly to the fire chief. All employees benefit from a wellness program that

11 Improved Firefighter Safety 11 includes comprehensive annual medical examinations, a program for improving employee physical fitness, safety related standard operating procedures, and a working group for health and safety concerns. The NFR has participated ever year in the International Fire and EMS Safety Stand Down, and has included safety as one of its core values. However, with all the safety enhancements within the department, very little has been done to improve the response time of the ISO to a structure fire. The HSO continues to respond to working fires, as the ISO, and only if it has reached a second alarm status. A typical response may require the HSO to leave a meeting during the day or respond from home at night. Regardless of the time of day, the HSO response time to a structure fire is delayed and very difficult to predict. Given the fact that, in 2006, there was no ISO on the fireground for all of the 21 firefighter injuries would indicate the positive effect of having an ISO at a structure fire was being unevenly applied. Therefore, the safety of firefighters was being adversely impacted by the somewhat random application of this safety tool. The purpose of this applied research project (ARP) was to determine how to provide the optimum sustainable safety level for firefighters through the application of consistent practices in the development and deployment of the ISO at structure fires.

12 Improved Firefighter Safety 12 If improvements are made to the development and deployment of the ISO, firefighter injuries are expected to decline. This ARP is relevant to the course curriculum of the National Fire Academy (NFA), Executive Fire Officer Program (EFOP), Executive Development (ED) course. The ED course is intended to prepare the fire service executive for the 21st century. The desired traits include the leader as a learner, one who can anticipate future trends (National Fire Academy [NFA], 2006). The ISO, as a fire service leader, must have these same traits. If firefighter injuries will decline with improvements to the development and deployment of the ISO, the executive of the 21st century must learn what the needed improvements should be, and then be proactive in anticipating future trends as the improvements are implemented. The problem identified in this ARP was that the positive effect of having an ISO at a structure fire was being unevenly applied because of frequent unavailability of a trained ISO. Therefore, the safety of firefighters was being adversely impacted by the somewhat random application of this safety tool. Every day, in Norfolk, and throughout the fire service, the ISO is challenged with making the fireground operational environment a safe place to work. The need for an ISO on the fireground is paramount to the survival of our firefighters. Any improvements made to the development and deployment of the ISO

13 Improved Firefighter Safety 13 is predicted to increase firefighter survivability rates. A decline in firefighter deaths on the fireground will support the United States Fire Administration (USFA) to reach one of its operational objectives, to reduce the loss of life from fire of firefighters (National Fire Academy [NFA], 2005). Literature Review A concern for workplace safety is not a recent issue. Many of today s safety concerns were first observed over 2,000 years ago. Friend and Kohn (2007) described how the Code of Hammurabi, which dates back to 2100 BC, was concerned with workplace safety, and in particular with personal injury and losses associated with the workforce. Friend and Kohn explain how the Code of Hammurabi prescribed punishment and payments for wrongdoers, and that it was an early form of workplace safety standards and workers compensation. The basic need for personal safety has been studied and taught for as long as one can search. Maslow (1954) studied the total range of human mentality and their relationships. Maslow believed that people had a basic need for survival, were concerned about their personal safety, had the need for selfpreservation, and wanted to ensure future security. Fulghum (1989) positions the early foundation for personal safety by including it as one of the 16 things learned in kindergarten. Fulghum believes you are taught early in life that personal

14 Improved Firefighter Safety 14 safety was important in your family life, and equally important in your work life. Friend and Kohn (2007) concluded that workplace safety involves helping people by preventing them from being injured. Friend and Kohn maintain that under the Occupational Safety and Health Act of 1970, every employer in the United Sates was required to provide a safe workplace that was free from recognized hazards that are likely to cause serious physical harm or death. Murphy (2003) describes how management should realize that workplace safety was not only a law, but was also a long term investment that will continue to pay in years to come. Murphy estimated that seven percent of company profits were spent, directly or indirectly, as a result of a workplace injury. In essence, Murphy views workplace safety as a core value that should receive as much attention from management as any other concerns. Montante (2006) reports that the hazards inherent to a business, especially those not controlled to an acceptable level, would represent a workplace safety challenge that must be addressed. Montante considers the failure of controlling the inherent hazards of a business would result in harm, not just to people, but also to production, profits, and the company reputation. Killimet (2006) concludes that workplace safety was strongly influenced by the quality and type of leadership

15 Improved Firefighter Safety 15 enacted throughout the organization. Killimet states that a good leader will place a high priority on workplace safety and give emphasis to established best practices. Montante (2006) introduces the design of increasing the number of safety practitioners within the business. Montante believes that by doing so magnifies the ability to expand control from the limited capabilities of the organization. Montante concludes that with additional eyes looking for hazards and assessing risk, the potential outcome to lower injury rates would be measurably greater. Foley (2003) concludes that in today s industrial environment, the term safety is an integral component of an organization s manufacturing or system process. Foley believes the industrial safety specialist functions in a manner similar to that of the ISO in fire department fireground operations. The United States Fire Administration (USFA) (United States Fire Administration [USFA], 2006) reports that 115 firefighters died while on duty in For all 115 firefighter deaths, 63% occurred during firefighting activities. There were 27 firefighter deaths on the fireground and 95% of the fireground deaths occurred at a residential structure fire. There were 80,100 total firefighter injuries reported in 2005 with 41,950 of these injuries occurring during firefighting activities. The 2005 fireground injury statistics represent the highest number

16 Improved Firefighter Safety 16 of firefighter injuries, occurring while performing firefighting activities, for the past five years (USFA, 2006). A provisional report from the USFA for on-duty firefighter fatalities in the United States reports that for the first six months in 2007, January 1, 2007 to June 30, 2007, there have been 59 firefighters who have died while on duty. For all 59 firefighter deaths, 47% occurred during firefighting activities. There have been 18 firefighter deaths on the fireground and 47% of the fireground deaths occurred at structure fires (United States Fire Administration [USFA], 2007). Smith (2002) describes how the safety of firefighters operating on the fireground was governed by a multitude of laws, standards, and recommendations including those from Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA), state administrative rules, National Fire Protection Association (NFPA), and other consensus standards. The National Fire Protection Association (NFPA) standard 1500 recommends that for significant incidents, the incident commander (IC) should assign an incident safety officer (ISO) who has the expertise to evaluate hazards and provide direction with respect to the overall safety of personnel (National Fire Protection Association [NFPA], 2007). The NFPA continues by recommending that if the fire department safety officer was not available, the IC should assign someone who has the expertise to

17 Improved Firefighter Safety 17 assume that responsibility (NFPA, 2007). The NFPA 1521 standard recommends that the fire department have a predesignated ISO system that will ensure there is a separate ISO, independent of the IC, responding automatically to predesignated incidents (National Fire Protection Association [NFPA], 2008). The NFPA predesignated incidents were identified as working fires, multiple alarm fires, fires in commercial buildings, and fires in high risk structures (NFPA, 2008). The NFPA continues by recommending that if the predesignated ISO was not available, or the IC can t perform this function due to the size or complexity of the incident, the IC would be expected to assign someone to the ISO position (NFPA, 2008). The NFPA recommends the fireground ISO have knowledge, skills, and abilities to manage the incident scene safely (NFPA, 2008). The NFPA continues with the recommendation that the fireground ISO have the authority to alter, suspend, or terminate any unsafe acts or conditions (NFPA, 2008). The NFPA recommends the fireground ISO meet the qualifications of Fire Officer I, (National Fire Protection Association [NFPA], 2003), have extensive knowledge of building construction, fire behavior, and the department accountability system (NFPA, 2008). The NFPA has removed the requirement that the fireground ISO be an officer (NFPA, 2008). Dodson (2007) recommends that at a minimum the ISO should meet the professional qualifications as outlined in the NFPA

18 Improved Firefighter Safety 18 requirements for Fire Officer I (NFPA, 2003). The Fire Department Safety Officers Association (FDSOA) also recommended that the ISO meet the professional qualifications for Fire Officer I, and have extensive knowledge of building construction and fire behavior (Fire Department Safety Officers Association [FDSOA], 2006). Shouldis (2005) concludes that the fire service was constantly making readiness decisions based on legal requirements and financial impact, while frequently ignoring the member s own preparedness. Shouldis views the fireground ISO position not as a luxury, but an organizational obligation. Dodson (2007) states that although there was a decline in the number of structure fires in the United States, the fire service was not experiencing a decline in firefighter injuries and deaths. Dodson states that more than ever, the fire service needs to step up its effort to utilize effective fireground ISO s and use them more often. Rubin (2002) states that the fireground ISO was a principal player of the command team. Rubin indicates that the ISO watches out for unsafe acts, unsafe conditions, or unsafe behaviors, and was authorized to shut down or alter any unsafe operations. Rubin believes the ISO should be educated, trained, experienced, and nationally certified for the position. Rubin concludes with identifying the ISO position as a tremendous informational

19 Improved Firefighter Safety 19 resource, and perhaps, the second most important position on the fireground. The National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health (NIOSH) reports that when a response begins, the responsibility for responder safety lies with the IC (National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health [NIOSH], 2003). The NIOSH reports that for small and relatively straightforward incidents, the IC may retain safety responsibilities throughout the response. However, for larger, more complex incidents, the IC may be unable to devote the appropriate amount of attention to this important function (NIOSH, 2003). To accommodate for such situations, the Incident Command System (ICS) provides a mechanism for the IC to delegate this authority to an ISO. The ISO delegation would ensure that sufficient attention was focused on the safety, health, and welfare of emergency responders (NIOSH, 2003). Dodson (2007) concludes that the ISO was most effective when they can arrive on the fireground early. Firefighter risk taking was greatest in the early stages of a fire; the early assignment of an ISO was essential for firefighter safety. Dodson agrees that the ISO should have the authority to stop, alter or terminate activities if an imminent threat exists. Dodson believes the whole purpose of the ISO on the fireground was to make the incident safer. The FDSOA states that firefighter risk taking during a structure fire was greatest

20 Improved Firefighter Safety 20 from the time of arrival until approximately 10 min into the incident (FDSOA, 2006). The FDSOA states that statistics have consistently proven that the ISO was most effective when they arrive on the fireground early. The FDSOA support the ISO authority to alter, suspend, or terminate any unsafe act or condition that may exist on the fireground. Dodson (2007) applied pragmatic graphs to a typical residential structure fire including, the rapidly changing environment, the number of task assignments, and the risk taking of firefighters during suppression operations. Dodson concluded that the most beneficial time to have a fireground ISO was within 15 min of the first arriving unit (see Appendix A). Dodson recommends the automatic response and automatic delegation of an ISO for residential structure fires, commercial structure fires, and target hazard structure fires. In comparison, the FDSOA recommends that for fireground operations, an ISO be on scene or appointed at the scene within 20 min of the first arriving unit (FDSOA, 2006). The FDSOA recommends the automatic response and automatic delegation of an ISO for residential structure fires, commercial structure fires, and target hazard structure fires. The ISO concept was not an absolute within the fire service community. Beirne and Simpson (2002) present a concept that with the unpredictable nature of emergency scenes, the safety officer

21 Improved Firefighter Safety 21 cannot always predict the outcomes within the narrow parameters that are present. Dodson (2007) reported that the Phoenix Fire Department (PFD) was eliminating the use of the ISO at working incidents. The reported rationale was that a single ISO probably would not make a big difference because they cannot be in all places at all times. The PFD sector officers would fill the ISO role in addition to meeting their sector responsibilities. Dodson also states that the fire service doesn t know for sure how many firefighter deaths and injuries have been prevented by the actions of an ISO. Dodson concludes that it was very difficult to demonstrate the value of an ISO when most fire departments were not collecting good data. In summary, the results of the literature review provided adequate background information to apply toward the research findings in an attempt to answer the research questions. This background information, once applied to the research findings, would lead to recommendations that would provide the optimum sustainable safety level for firefighters through the application of consistent practices in the development and deployment of incident safety officers at structure fires. Procedures Descriptive research was used to determine the present status and generate a foundation for the correct course of action. This type methodology was utilized to answer the

22 Improved Firefighter Safety 22 research questions through literature review, and data analysis of internal and external feedback questions. The initial literature review was conducted at the National Fire Academy Learning Resource Center (LRC) in Emmitsburg, Maryland in February of The research from the LRC resulted in 52 applied research projects related to firefighter safety. A refined search found 13 published applied research papers related to the safety officer (SO), or incident safety officer (ISO). The LRC research concluded with 14 fire and EMS journals, six private sector journals, and eight books, all with established subject matter. A comprehensive review was completed and referenced materials have been included in this applied research project (ARP). Next, in March of 2007, an extensive search was conducted at the Tidewater Community College (TCC) Library located in Virginia Beach, Virginia. The TCC library was chosen because of the Fire Science Technology, Occupational Safety and Health, and Business Management programs offered by the college. The TCC library search found numerous resources, with 14 books and six trade journal articles, all with established subject matter. A comprehensive review was completed and referenced materials have been included in this ARP. Subsequently, in April of 2007, an extensive search was conducted at the City of Chesapeake Main Library located in

23 Improved Firefighter Safety 23 Chesapeake, Virginia. This search found numerous resources, with 19 books and nine trade journal articles, all with established subject matter. A comprehensive review was completed and referenced materials have been included in this ARP. Also, in April of 2007, two separate fact finding sessions were completed with Mr. Reggie Goble, the City of Norfolk Safety Officer. Mr. Goble is responsible for the city Worker s Compensation Program (WCP), and Disability Management Program (DMP). The WCP is responsible for the investigation of all job related injuries, worker s compensation payments, safety program development, and the collection of workplace injury statistics. The DMP is responsible for long term treatment and transitional work for employee s who have been injured on the job. The fact finding sessions were conducted in Mr. Goble s office which is located in the city hall building, Norfolk, Virginia. During the fact finding sessions, Mr. Goble provided established subject matter which was subsequently referenced in the background and significant section of this ARP. In addition, Mr. Goble made available hundreds of health and safety related topics for a comprehensive review. In May of 2007, an extensive search was conducted at the Norfolk Fire-Rescue (NFR) Library located in the Fire Administration Building, Norfolk, Virginia. The NFR library is a collection of trade journals and books, all with established

24 Improved Firefighter Safety 24 fire service subject matter. The NFR library search found numerous resources, with two books and 16 trade journal articles, all with established subject matter. A comprehensive review was completed and referenced materials have been included in this ARP. Subsequently, in May of 2007, an extensive search was conducted at the Norfolk Fire-Rescue Training Center (NFRTC) library located in Norfolk, Virginia. The NFRTC library is a collection of instructor training resources, books, trade journals, and educational video presentations, all with established fire service subject matter. The NFRTC library search found numerous resources, with 15 books, 12 trade journal articles, 14 educational video presentations, and eight instructor training resources, all with established subject matter. A comprehensive review was completed and referenced materials have been included in this ARP. In June of 2007, an extensive search was conducted on the Internet. The internet is a worldwide, publicly accessible network of interconnected computer networks that transmit data by using a standard protocol. The internet search revealed thousands of websites, all with established subject matter. A refined search was initiated using the topic safety officer and incident safety officer. A comprehensive review was completed and referenced materials have been included in this

25 Improved Firefighter Safety 25 ARP. Also, in June of 2007, an external feedback form was developed for the collection of current data from external respondents. After clearly defining the purpose of the feedback, an external feedback form was created with the expectations for the collection of current data from external sources. The questions on the external feedback form were short, focused, closed ended, and in a logical order. The external feedback form was entered into the online survey tool known as Survey Monkey. The Survey Monkey tool is an online data collection service that enables people of all experience levels to participate. The external feedback form was ed to 50 fire departments throughout the United States. The fire departments were selected from the National Directory of Fire Chiefs and EMS Administrators. Fire departments were selected from each region of the country in order to gain an expanded perspective. The fire departments chosen were based on similar size and scope of work to NFR. The fire departments chosen were included as (Appendix B). The fire departments were given a two week time period to complete the feedback form. A total of 28 fire departments responded to the feedback questions. The data was automatically collected and analyzed by the Survey Monkey tool. A response summary report for the external feedback questions was included as (Appendix C).

26 Improved Firefighter Safety 26 Also, in June of 2007, an internal feedback form was developed for the collection of current data from internal respondents. After clearly defining the purpose of the feedback, an internal feedback form was created with the expectations for the collection of current data from internal sources. The questions on the internal feedback form were short, focused, closed ended, and in a logical order. The internal feedback form was entered into the online survey tool known as Survey Monkey. The internal feedback form was ed to 19 chief officers and 31 senior captains. A senior captain is an individual who will fill the position of battalion chief when needed. The NFR chief officers and senior captains were selected in order to gain an expanded perspective. The internal participants were given a two week time period to complete the feedback form. A total of 23 internal participants responded to the feedback questions. The data was automatically collected and analyzed by the Survey Monkey tool. A response summary report for the internal feedback questions was included as (Appendix D). There were several limitations associated with the research. The parameters pertaining to the ISO were limited to the application of consistent practices in the development and deployment of the ISO for residential and commercial structure fire responses. The external feedback was limited to 50 fire departments with similar size and scope of work to NFR. There

27 Improved Firefighter Safety 27 were six fire departments who did not receive the external feedback form due to security criteria, and 44 fire departments who did receive the feedback form. Of the 44 fire departments who did receive the feedback form, 28 responded to the feedback questions within the two week time period. The internal feedback was limited to 50 NFR personnel. They included all four assistant chiefs, all 15 battalion chiefs and all 31 senior captains. Of the 50 internal feedback forms sent out by , 23 responded to the feedback questions within the two week time period. The final limitation was time. The external and internal feedbacks were limited to a two week response time period. This may have limited the number of respondents to the feedback questions, and therefore, the intended audience was not fully accounted for in the results. Also, the six month time limit imposed by the National Fire Academy (NFA) influenced any further detailed and comprehensive research. Results After clearly defining the purpose of the feedback, an external feedback form was created with the expectations for the collection of current data from external sources. Likewise, an internal feedback form was created with the expectations for the collection of current data from internal sources. The data received from the respondents was automatically collected and

28 Improved Firefighter Safety 28 analyzed by the Survey Monkey tool. The author collectively used the response summary report from the Survey Monkey tool, and considered all responses in the strongly agree and agree categories as a positive score; all disagree and strongly disagree responses as a negative score. Equally, all responses in the yes and most likely yes categories were scored as a positive score; all no and most likely no responses were scored as a negative score. The neutral and sometimes responses were considered as ambivalent; therefore, the scores were not used. The research revealed that 100% of the external feedback fire departments (EFFD) used an incident safety officer (ISO) on the fireground. In comparison, the internal feedback revealed that Norfolk Fire-Rescue (NFR) does use an ISO on the fireground, and 95.7% of the incident commander s (IC) have used an ISO a least once at a structure fire. When the ISO position was filled on the fireground, the EFFD would fill the position within 0 to 20 min 96.4% of the time. The NFR would fill the ISO position on the fireground within 0 to 20 min 90.9% of the time. The fireground ISO has the authority to alter, suspend or terminate any unsafe acts or conditions in 96.4% of the EFFD, and 86.4% of the IC s within NFR has allowed their fireground ISO to have this authority. In the EFFD who did allow their ISO to have the authority to alter, suspend or terminate any unsafe act or condition on the fireground, 92.6% of the departments

29 Improved Firefighter Safety 29 have had their ISO use this authority at least one time. In comparison, 40.9% of the NFR has had an ISO alter, suspend or terminate an unsafe act or condition on the fireground at least one time. The actions of the EFFD fireground ISO have prevented a firefighter injury 39.3% of the time. The actions of the NFR fireground ISO have prevented a firefighter injury 13.6% of the time. The research revealed that 42.3% of the EFFD have seen the number of firefighter injuries at structure fires decrease because of the fireground ISO. In comparison, 59.1% of the NFR have seen the number of firefighter injuries at structure fires decrease because of the fireground ISO. Table 1 Improvements to firefighter safety from the use of an incident safety officer during a structure fire Description EFFD NFD Fireground ISO did alter, suspend or terminate unsafe act or condition. 92.6% 40.9% Fireground ISO actions did prevent firefighter injuries. 39.3% 13.6% Firefighter injuries decreased because of fireground ISO. 42.3% 59.1% The research revealed that 71.4% of the EFFD firefighters

30 Improved Firefighter Safety 30 take the most risk on the fireground in the 1 to 20 min time period. The NFR firefighters take the most risk on the fireground in the 1 to 20 min time period 72.7% of the time. The EFFD firefighter injuries occurred on the fireground within the 1 to 20 min time period 32.1% of the time, while 25% occurred within the 20 to 60 min time period. The NFR firefighter injuries occurred on the fireground within the 1 to 20 min time period 30.4% of the time, while 47.8% occurred within the 20 to 60 min time period. Residential structure fires have caused the most fireground injuries for 77.8% of the EFFD firefighters, and 100% of the NFR firefighters. The EFFD would use an ISO 92.9% of the time for a residential structure fire, and 92.9% of the time if additional resources were needed. The NFR would use an ISO 43.5% of the time for a residential structure fire, and 78.3% of the time if additional resources were needed. Both the EFFD and NFR would use an ISO 100% of the time for a second alarm residential structure fire. The EFFD would use an ISO 96.4% of the time for a commercial structure fire, and 100% of the time if additional resources were needed. The NFR would use an ISO 73.9% of the time for a commercial structure fire, and 91.3% of the time if additional resources were needed. Both the EFFD and NFR would use an ISO 100% of the time for a second alarm commercial structure fire.

31 Improved Firefighter Safety 31 Table 2 Types of structure fires the activities of an incident safety officer are superior to having the safety responsibility remain with the incident commander Description EFFD NFD 1st alarm residential structure fire with 7 companies and 23 personnel on scene. 92.9% 78.3% 1st alarm residential structure fire with 9 companies and 30 personnel on scene. 92.9% 91.3% 2nd alarm residential structure fire with 12 companies and 38 personnel on scene. 100% 100% 1st alarm commercial structure fire with 8 companies and 26 personnel on scene. 96.4% 91.3% 1st alarm commercial structure fire with 10 companies and 33 personnel on scene. 100% 100% 2nd alarm commercial structure fire with 13 companies and 41 personnel on scene. 100% 100%

32 Improved Firefighter Safety 32 The research revealed that 50% of the EFFD support the minimum experience level for an ISO at 10 to 15 years. Likewise, 56.5% of the NFR support the minimum experience level for an ISO at 10 to 15 years. Both the EFFD and NFR totally agree with a score of 100% that the ISO should have a positive safety attitude. The EFFD support the ISO having the knowledge, skills, and abilities to manage the incident scene safely with a 92.9% score. The NFR support the ISO having the knowledge, skills, and abilities to manage the incident scene safely with a 95.4% score. The EFFD support the ISO meeting the professional qualifications of the National Fire Protection Association (NFPA) with an 82.1% score, and support the ISO having additional training and certifications from the National Fire Academy (NFA) or Fire Department Safety Officers Association (FDSOA) with a 78.6% score. In comparison, the NFR support the ISO meeting the professional qualifications of the NFPA with an 85.7% score, and support the ISO having additional training and certifications from the NFA or FDSOA with a 71.4% score. The EFFD consider formal college education for the ISO as not needed with a 42.9% score, and the NFR also consider formal college education for the ISO as not needed with a 56.5% score. The EFFD support the ISO having the authority to alter, suspend or terminate any unsafe acts or conditions with a 96.4% score. Likewise, the NFR support the ISO having the authority to alter,

33 Improved Firefighter Safety 33 suspend or terminate any unsafe acts or conditions with a 100% score. The EFFD support the ISO as a chief officer with a 35.7% score. In contrast, the NFR has equal support for and against the ISO as a chief officer with a 39.1% score in support, and a 39.1% score in opposition. Table 3 The experience, training, education and organizational authority of the effective fireground incident safety officer Description EFFD NFD The ISO should have 10 to 15 years experience. 50% 56.5% The ISO should have a strong safety attitude. 100% 100% The ISO should have the knowledge, skills, and abilities to manage the incident scene safely. 92.9% 95.4% The ISO should meet the professional qualifications of the NFPA. 82.1% 85.7% The ISO should have certification from NFA or FDSOA. 78.6% 71.4% The ISO does not need to have

34 Improved Firefighter Safety 34 a formal college education. 42.9% 56.5% The ISO should have the authority to alter, suspend, or terminate unsafe acts or conditions. 96.4% 100% The ISO should be a chief officer. 35.7% 39.1% The research revealed that the EFFD agree with a 92.9% score that there is a point during a working structure fire in which the appointment of an ISO is more important than the other duties to which that officer would be assigned. In comparison, the NFR agree with an 86.9% score that there is a point during a working structure fire in which the appointment of an ISO is more important than the other duties to which that officer would be assigned. The EFFD agree with a 92.8% score that there is no point during a working structure fire in which the ISO position should be terminated in order to assign that officer to other fireground duties. The NFR agree with a 69.6% score that there is no point during a working structure fire in which the ISO position should be terminated in order to assign that officer to other fireground duties. Discussion The purpose of this research was to determine how to provide the optimum sustainable safety level for firefighters

35 Improved Firefighter Safety 35 through the application of consistent practices in the development and deployment of incident safety officers (ISO) at structure fires. Comparing the literature review with the results, the author can now determine the present status and generate a foundation for the correct course of action toward the identified problem. The problem was that the positive effect of having an ISO at a structure fire was being unevenly applied because of frequent unavailability of a trained ISO. Therefore, the safety of firefighters was being adversely impacted by the somewhat random application of this safety tool. There are improvements to firefighter safety when an ISO is used during a structure fire. With additional eyes looking for hazards and assessing risk, the potential outcome to lower injury rates is measurably greater (Montante, 2006). The ISO is always watching out for unsafe acts, unsafe conditions, or unsafe behaviors, and if found, would shut down or alter the unsafe operation (Rubin, 2002). The ISO with the authority to alter, suspend or terminate an unsafe act or condition on the fireground will use this authority ultimately improving firefighter safety. The ISO is most effective when arriving on the fireground early (Dodson, 2007). The risk taking of firefighters during fireground suppression operations is greatest from the time of arrival until 20 min into the incident. The number of firefighter injuries on the fireground

36 Improved Firefighter Safety 36 is highest during the early stages of a fire; occurring most often within 20 min of the incident. The ISO will prevent firefighters from being injured if on the fireground within 20 min of the first arriving unit (FDSOA, 2006). The concept that the ISO cannot always predict the outcomes for firefighter safety due to the parameters in which they operate is legitimate (Beirne and Simpson, 2002). The ISO cannot always predict outcomes; however, the ISO can sometimes predict outcomes. The ISO cannot be in all places at all times. If the ISO is in the right place at the right time the unsafe act or condition will be identified and corrected. The actions of the fireground ISO will improve firefighter safety and will decrease fireground injuries (FDSOA, 2006). The ISO is needed for all working structure fires. This includes residential fires, commercial fires, multiple alarm fires, and fires in high risk structures (NFPA, 2008). The objective of not overloading the fireground IC with the added responsibility for incident scene safety is widely supported. The dynamic environment on the fireground will at times divert the IC s attention away from firefighter safety (NIOSH, 2003). The IC s want an ISO who will support the added responsibility of incident scene safety. There is a multitude of recommendations on how experience, training, education and organizational authority relate to the

37 Improved Firefighter Safety 37 effective ISO. The ISO must have the expertise to evaluate hazards and provide direction with respect to the overall safety of personnel (Rubin, 2002). It is essential the ISO meet the qualifications of Fire Officer I, and have extensive knowledge of building construction and fire behavior (Dodson, 2007). The 10 year veteran firefighter has the optimum experience level for the fireground ISO position. The ISO must have the knowledge, skills and abilities to manage the incident scene safely, and have a strong safety attitude (NFPA, 2008). Although highly recommended, it is not necessary for the fireground ISO to have a college degree. It is necessary for the fireground ISO to have extensive training on building construction and fire behavior (FDSOA, 2006). The effective fireground ISO also needs to have certifications from the NFA or FDSOA. It is irrelevant for the fireground ISO to be a chief officer, company officer, or firefighter (NFPA, 2008). What is relevant is for the fireground ISO to have the knowledge, skills and abilities to manage the incident scene safely, and have the organizational authority to alter, suspend or terminate an unsafe act or condition (Dodson, 2007). There is a point during a working structure fire in which the appointment of an ISO is more important than the other duties to which that officer may be assigned. The dynamics of the fireground and resources available will dictate this

38 Improved Firefighter Safety 38 decision. The ISO is considered by some as the second most important position on the fireground (Rubin, 2002). The fireground ISO will be most effective if appointed within 20 min of the first arriving unit (FDSOA, 2006). Once the ISO position has been filled, that officer should not be reassigned to other fireground duties. The literature review and results have sufficiently answered the research questions. The fireground ISO improves firefighter safety, is needed for all types of structure fires, has identifiable qualities for effectiveness, and is a high profile important fireground function. The research purpose was determined with established opinions on how to provide the optimum sustainable safety level for firefighters through the application of consistent practices in the development and deployment of the ISO at structure fires. The established opinions must now be applied to the original problem. The problem was that the positive effect of having an ISO at a structure fire was being unevenly applied because of frequent unavailability of a trained ISO. Therefore, the safety of firefighters was being adversely impacted by the somewhat random application of this safety tool. The established opinions have determined the optimum development and deployment of the ISO, but, offer no opinions on how to get there. In order for NFR, or any fire department, to evenly apply the positive

39 Improved Firefighter Safety 39 effects of having a trained ISO on the fireground an implementation strategy must be identified. Recommendations The Norfolk Fire-Rescue (NFR) needs to develop an incident safety officer (ISO) program that will deliver a trained ISO to every working structure fire. The ISO program should be developed by a working group of NFR executive level officers within the next 90 days. The ISO program should have an established training criteria, formatted response matrix, and organizational authority through the use of standard operation procedures (SOP). After the ISO program has been developed, the NFR training division should, within 90 days, deliver a 40 hour ISO training session to all operation battalion chiefs (OBC) and senior fire captains (SFC). The SFC will fill the position of battalion chief when needed. The ISO training session curriculum should consist of eight hours in NFPA 1021 Fire Officer I refresher topics, eight hours of advanced level building construction, eight hours of advanced level fire behavior, and the 16 hour ISO certification program from the National Fire Academy (NFA) or Fire Department Safety Officers Association (FDSOA). The ISO training sessions can be held within the NFR regular in-service training criteria and will be funded through the approved training budget.