National Incident Commander
and Area Command
Tuesday March 9
Welcome and Introductions Paul Hefner/Rex Mann
Staff Ride - Cedar Incident Carlton
Joseph/Mike Lohrey/ John Hawkins
IC/AC Interface Updates:
1. The Business We Are In – Jerry Williams, Chuck Maynard, Larry Hamilton, Tom Habour |
||||||
|
Discussion: Jerry Williams USFS - Cedar fire: worst fire in history occurred in CA with biggest fire workforce with a combined 2.9 billion assets, need to reassess if we’re on the right track. Great with I.A, struggle with extended attack, good with large fires, struggle with the Mega-fires. Introducing policy requirements on extended attack operations. Mega-fires: we don’t have discrete strategies in place to deal with each of the 4 distinct fires. Working on what to do with the Mega-fires. Not so much an incident defined by size but rather a situation defined by fear and anger, we end up on the defensive with a very narrow decision space. We’ve been looking at more is better. May need to look at smaller, faster, better strategies away from perimeter control. Looking to utilize strategies to engage the social forces that tend to shape our operations. Look more to causal factors. Chuck Maynard CDF – Zoning the Cedar fire was new to CDF. San Diego doesn’t have an adequate fuels program. Lots of interest, lot of meetings, public – don’t want code changes to make homes/communities more defensible, CDF budget: lost about 8 hand crews in past 2 years, loosing foresters/resource folks. Need to utilize science/technology to aid us. Larry Hamilton BLM – Have to deal with change – stakes have been raised in past few years. I.C. role has evolved/more complex but still have to fight the fire. California Blue Ribbon Commission: 32 members, most elected officials and Larry, Jerry and Mark Rey, interesting perceptions coming from the commission. Need to do a better job at educating public. Change: recommendations coming out that will impact.– possibly amend the 1932 Economy Act to use military prior to using contractors, interoperability among jurisdictions (statewide communications system), better coordination and communication with media and officials, more comprehensive training for urban and county firefighters, increasing use of technology, use of heavy air tankers looked at, may test a 747 or DC-10 this or next fire season, other states are interested example, AZ Gov. is looking at changing codes. Cost suppression panel: looking at all recommendations & collapsing redundancies, struggling with OMB perception that cost should be tied to acres burned, looking at criteria to measure cost containment, looking at relationship of LRMP’s and Fire Management Plans – LRMPs may be reducing decision space. Uphill battle to educate folks on the cost of doing business. Challenges: media attention, election year; recruiting, maintaining and training firefighters; type 2 qualified to type 1 qualified transitions; professional firefighter series. Tom Harbour USFS – reflecting on IC group and evolution of meetings. This meeting has too many topics, challenge to group: focus energy on a few things that matter. At the WO there is simply too much to do, constant struggle. More demands on group’s time e.g. received a request for 4 more I.C reps on Credibility thru Accountability group. Mike Useem to visit I.C. in decision making this summer. Struggle with Strategic Leadership component in 520/620 – request to group to share thoughts, suggestions, concerns or ideas. Still a big proponent that Feds and CDF teams need to be together. Please remember to tie back into the Healthy Forest Act when you have the media attention. 747 (22,000 gallons) and DC-10’s are going to be vying for your attention in the next several years. Lark McDonald findings - need to pay attention on how safety issues are viewed –. National Incident Management Organization (NIMO) – not at a decision yet, though we’re facing trouble, do not want to distract from Healthy Forests etc., think about what we need to do. Plan Decide Execute Assess (PDEA) model - it’s very clear that we need better predictive analysis, accelerate decision making cycles reduce planning times, increase speed of operational engagement, and engage more precisely. Jerry: Two competing schools of thought regarding mega-fires: 1 – flawed strategies, flawed system. Fire service needs to do a better job. 2 – this isn’t a fire issue, it’s a land management issue – need to look at causal factors that fuel these mega-fires. Jerry suggests that the IC group think about anticipating the 3/18 meeting; submits a resolution to endorse a fuel hazard abatement program. Jerry fears that we’re at a critical fork in the road that the focus is on better technology (747’s and communications) but not the big issue – fuel reduction. At larger levels of activity is situational anticipation, we need to better managing the land – what can we do to intervene in this area that continues to diminish our decision space every year. |
|
|||||
|
Action items: Lark McDonald findings to group |
Person responsible: Paul |
Deadline: |
|
|||
|
2. FEMA/DHS Update - Sheryl Maddux |
|
|||||
|
Discussion: HS department in USDA – Secretary signed declaration to step up NIMS. Implemented ICS, training, signed agreement with NARTC S-401, S-402, releasing ICS 100 and 200 courses on golearn.gov website and CD hope to have 300 and 400 up next year. Relied heavily on Incident Teams for Ag issues, Ag would like to become more self-sufficient internally –Command and General training in order to establishing Ag. Teams and rely on National teams for not routine incidents. Work on developing leadership training. Works with DHS, and HS council daily. National Response Plan (NRP)--- operations center, new interagency incident management group, principal federal official designated by Tom Ridge- overall coordination. HS Presidential Directives 1 – 9. HSPD#5 brought NIMS, Federal Response Plan, etc.), preparedness will be very important. HSPD#8 is the preparedness directive. Joint information system ensures one message. NIMS integration center (similar to NIFC). Need to become familiar with NIMS. HSPD#7 recognized Food and Agriculture. #9 – Food and Agriculture defense. NRP – 1st draft sent out for comment. Includes a base plan, ESS (?) (Resource and Skill sets), Resource and Logistics section, finance section. Includes separate integrated plans as components e.g. Agriculture, Catastrophic Incident Response Plan. FEMA – going through a lot of growing pains due to integrating into DHS. FEMA’s recognizing that they too need to become self reliant on Incidents, developing teams (4 – 2 east, 2 west) 10 –12 permanent team members, collocated with Coast Guard facilities – will be recruiting and advertising to fill. Tom: There’s a Powerpoint on NRP and NIMS is good overview – Tom will send to Paul to ship out to group. There was talk on sending FEMA, ERP teams out to National teams to keep skills up as those events are rare. |
|
|||||
|
Action items: Send out NRP/NIMS powerpoint to group |
Person responsible: Tom/Paul |
Deadline: |
|
|||
|
3. Wildland Fire Relationships - Major Bob Baird USMC, Jim Cook USFS |
||||||
|
Discussion: Jim - 1st exposure with Marine Corps University in 2000. Viewed leadership and decision making as #1 job. Similarities – rapid deployment and redeployment, changing scope of operations. Bob – focus on decision-making and how to develop that. USMC looks at command as almost a sacred thing. Focus on relationship between Fire Service and Military…historic connections; presently mobilize Marine resources to fires. WFS – BLM, FS are major federal agencies, fire is one component in broader mission of agencies, due to commonalities have formed strong interagency partnerships. MOU signed in 6/02 formalizing relationships between USMC, BLM, USFS: · Fire leadership under go USMC training – including: sand table exercises, Leadership Reaction Course, staff rides etc. · Fire Leadership Publications adapted from USMC – Wildland Fire book on books, Wildland fire Staff Ride Guide, Designing and delivery of tactical decision making games – Sand Table. · Core Values – USMC – honor, courage, commitment – WFS – Duty, Respect, Integrity · Other influences – unit cohesion, student of leadership, honoring our history, linkages of key battles/fire staff rides. |
|
|||||
|
Conclusions: New way of thinking in fire: move away from reliance on predictive models and on upper level command, strengthen small unit leadership and cohesion, safety must improve, Senior Fire Leadership (NWCG) charters group to look at leadership development. Fire Service forms leadership development, Outcomes: improved safety, improving small unit leadership, understanding lessons learned by USMC, increased professionalism in fire community |
|
|||||
|
4. Developing Liaison with Local Govt. Will Mays IAFC |
||||||
|
Discussion: Supports Jerry’s challenge to group to issue a resolution regarding fuels abatement. Encourage that the fire service is reaching out to other agencies (e.g. USMC) in searching for ways to manage rapidly changing events. IAFC – primarily group of 12,000 fire chiefs throughout the nation. Interest to try to assist the management teams working as community liaisons, etc. Many have worked with Wildland fires and worked with management teams. Would like to develop a program of liaisons to work with you. Long term would like to get involved in training and curriculum development of liaison officers; should look to expand that role. Committee of IAFC has been involved with NFP, can provide that bridge from federal level to local level, developing local communities (changes in planning language). Develop list of folks experienced to NIFC. |
|
|||||
|
Conclusions: Would like to assist I.C.’s: Develop list of folks experienced to NIFC, share liaison officer lesson plan. |
|
|||||
|
Action items: Get IAFC Lesson Plan from Will May |
Person responsible: Paul |
Deadline: |
|
|||
|
Will May requested 1 or 2 persons to contact if group would like to work with IAFC on these items |
Group |
|
|
|||
|
5.
Incident Automation - Mary Ann Szymoniak |
||||||
|
Discussion: Phase 1:Stabilize application for multiple uses; Incorporated IAP; Formal helpdesk; Software test and release; Make I-Suite less “green”; Phase 2: Strategic decisions Phase 3 – Implement multiple components, new products/processes generated from Phase 2 2004: IRSS – enhance data input and save methods, build ROS export, ROSS request numbering system incorporated; improvements to date include input screens, update tables with standard fields, update reports, improve processing ITS – improve processing, ability to create partial pay documents, unique invoice numbering, excess hour report redesigned, ability to fax time to units directly from the application IAP – enhanced spell check, additional items in drop down lists, improved appearance of the 204 ICARS – editing of per unit costs, fix issues found during obligation demo project in 2003, new reports General – Standards for data transfer during team transitions, hardware recommendations, data repository for storage of all I-Suite databases, improved installation package with all Fed. Agencies. 2005: Bar codes/smart card technology, possible supply module, redesign database structure, import tools IQCS, AD rates etc., user help module, data warehouse established, establish O&M process. This summer: evaluate all incident support processes (except radio) ID what works, what needs changing ROSS – changes and updates in 2004. Version 2.0 – infrastructure updated software will aid in overall functionality. Version 2.1 – named requests, search for resources, improved group assignments and reassignments, home units will be able to release their own resources, non-dispatch organizations will be able to use web site to status themselves, incidents can monitor resource status with basic user (read) access, need to provide timely notification to expanded on release of resources, exports from ROSS to I-Suite. |
|
|||||
|
6.
U.S. Fire Administration - Robert Margolis |
||||||
|
Discussion: Developing Training: · Developing standard Regional All-risk / All-hazard Incident Training · IM Team training (designed as Type 3, similar to 420) · Develop cross walk with equivalent training for individuals · Issue with certification – designed recommendations: certification at the lowest level agency level. |
|
|||||
|
7.
Lessons Learned Center - Paula Nasiatka |
||||||
|
Discussion: Feedback was great for the 520/620 Survey (57 responses). Improving organizational learning · After Action Reviews and Rollups: Very valuable tool. David Garvin, leading expert in organizational learning, sees this as a way to change work culture. Interviewed mostly field firefighter crews on the Roberts and Wedge Canyon Fires found it’s catching on but need for strong facilitation. I.C.’s set the tone in AARs. Most of the AAR results will be used to enhance or sustain IMT performance. Rollup to the LLC those key items from the AARs. Getting the AAR Rollups on the website – also a lot of guidance on how to conduct them. ·
Key focal areas that the Center is working on:
Changes to website (www.wildfirelessons.net) I.D’s the latest postings. Organizational Learning project David
Garvin – Achieving the Learning Organization Workshop in Salt Lake City
4/15. No fee – nominations due 4/2.
Case Studies posted on website. Search by ICS function ability added. Center
library has Incident Reviews, Incident Management. All-Risk Management
sections. ·
Prototype project with Fire Use Fuels: Prototype knowledge management
system. Networks of people and
sharing of knowledge, LLC working with company to develop community of
practice involving fuels reduction in Great Basin – online Wildland Fire
Community Center (myfirecommunity.net). Developmental right now due to go
on-line in 2004. |
|
|||||
|
Conclusions: · Requests that the teams use AAR’s in Operational Debriefing and upward sharing of that through organizational structure. · Requests that Teams send Rollups to LLC as soon as possible throughout the season e.g after incident instead of all in December. |
|
|||||
|
Action items: Requests to have I.C. member to interface with LLC |
Person responsible: Group |
Deadline: |
|
|||
|
8.
Managing Security and Law Enforcement
Needs - Roger Seawald and Rich Padilla |
||||||
|
Discussion: · Only LE position is the Security Manager working in facilities unit, no training required. · Changes in complexities; non-traditional all risks incidents, multiple jurisdictional issues, Incident camp populations increasing (2,500 +), increased use of contract employees, juxtaposition and relationship to communities. · Currently Law Enforcement provides security for ICP, associated facilities and staging; liaison with state/local LE, Assists with evacuation planning and implementation; potential claims investigations, actual fire investigation, govt. property theft and damage, accident investigations, investigating falsification of pay documents and training documents, sexual assaults, drug trafficking, drug use, personal property theft, public meetings, closures. |
|
|||||
|
Conclusions: · Need for better trained personnel to staff security/LE positions and PD’s for SEC1 and SEC2 · Need for enhanced position descriptions and qualifications for Law Enforcement support · Recommendations: · Develop a Law Enforcement Specialist position and add to IMT · Standards and Qualifications developed by representatives from federal agencies · LESP part of Command Staff · All LE activities coordinated by LESP · Security Manager position removed from Logs & work for LESP · LESP primarily liaison and oversee LE cooperative agreement amendments · LESP responsible for contract security operations · LE supervisors responsible for forwarding nominations of qualified individuals to I.C. |
|
|||||
|
I.C. Decision/Comments: This may be an agency administrator responsibility. Difficult to fill positions now. Off duty Officers have hired a lobbyist, we’ll be seeing them on fires. Question that position may have to go through 520. Concern that we’ll have a hard time getting 16 folks (possibly more with Type 2 teams). Question that the position may not be necessary on all 16 teams. Can implement proposal without changing structure – Liaison Officer position exists. May be best to have a pool of individual available when needed. Caution that focus should be interagency not just feds as teams are interagency. Timing for qualification development or changes is good as there is a big project to look at qualifications and consistencies can roll into that. Supply and demand – due to Homeland Security etc. it’s becoming more and more difficult to supply qualified individuals. Group approves proposal
and charges Roger and Rich to move forward |
|
|||||
|
Action items: I.C.s to provide comments directly to Roger in next 30 days - rseewald@fs.fed.us |
Person responsible: Group |
Deadline: |
|
|||
|
9.
Incident Security Issues - Roger Seawald |
||||||
|
Discussion: · Incidents non-secure, porous and spread out environments. · Little recognition of potential threats · Domestic environmentalism – use of logging equipment · Domestic and International Terrorism · Border related activities · Homeland security issues · What has been done so far? · Identification system initiated by Mike Lohrey’s team · Recognition of need to secure aircraft · What can be done? · Secure access · Look to a broader view of safety · Etc. |
|
|||||
|
10.
Area Command
Success
- Rex Mann / Greg
Greenhoe / Edy Rhodes |
||||||
|
Discussion: Rex: 2 assignments – long siege in Montana, short intense assignment on San Bernardino. · Branched Area Command 1st time last summer, was good provided for broader geographies with efficiencies. · Advocates including a lot of fires under Area Command – can move resources more effectively and efficiently than thru the system. · Skunk Works – Brought in 2 local experts to aid in predicting what the fires will do. · Adding IOF to set up joint information center and SOFR position (more geared to assessing and looking ahead) to A.C. · Oversaw WFU. · Need to work on conference calls and team close out · If he brings a team to SoCal again will definitely add liaison to deal with the myriad of agencies. · Almost functioning as unified command with CDF and County worked very well. Edy: Put together CWN team to follow Rex in Montana · Time spent transitioning out teams · Service to agency administrators, added SOFR position pulling together trend data etc., cost reports, assisted with IBA functions – final packages etc., working with contracting issues, community relations, · Unified Command issues, always a challenge · Team operations - consistency, transitions, in-briefings (good coordination needed between A.C. and agency), close-outs · Continue the 620 preparing for success training assignments. Worked well. Greg: 3 assignments - Exotic Newcastle Disease, Montana, Oregon · Operating A.C. as a MAC decision on a geographical decision versus local agency decision. · A.C. teams needed to be extremely flexible –e.g. moved twice, three different names in Montana · Set record of having Area Command Post less that 1 mile from home · At peak, ran 6 or 7 in-briefings in 36-hour period, 12 incidents had deputy as remote Area Commander in Idaho for a short time. · Extremely large area in Montana, we’ve gone beyond A.C. in small geographical areas. Poses real challenge when so spread out. · Combined with Joe Ribar’s team for joint agency administrator calls. · Seeing Agency Administrators are a lot more open to having Area Commands. · Late in season activated to Central Oregon – in unified command with state and tribe. · Close outs limited to C&G · Concern that A.C. was leaving quickly due to reassignments and leaving little transition with teams. · Retirees work extremely well in A.C. support positions. · Co-located with Local Govt. in Montana proved to be very helpful. |
|
|||||
|
I.C. Decisions/Comments: A.C. in San Bernardino was helpful due to extreme fatigue factor experienced by local administrators. Successes in interagency cooperation with Canada. Just signed Interior/FS agreement on positions – issue of using state employees and local employees, retirees going to get more complicated– be real careful in interpreting the rules. What’s big enough and when’s long enough? We have to be thinking about those questions. Need to be thinking about models for the future generations. In Montana, Rex worked with Agency Administrators and let the teams be teams and made it so much easier on the teams. Should we be thinking about adding Branching to the 620 curriculum? Expedited close-outs (limited to C&G and time limits)? **New review process – 1st phase will ask us to look back on landscape and identify what on the landscape played a role (causal and mitigative factors). 2nd phase asks us to determine what needs to be done on landscape to prevent similar incidents |
|
|||||
|
11.
Media Access Guidelines - Rose Davis |
||||||
|
Discussion: Works at NIFC. Background: out of the Rodeo-Chediski Complex issues were raised about unequal access. Media Access Guidelines were generated out of this issue. Guidelines have been approved by NWCG. Final blessing due from WFLEC will be our process in coming years. Nothing new to FIO’s as it’s what is being taught in courses. Red book identifies that FIO’s need to be single boss qualified, fixed that and allows for FIO’s to escort media. PPE’s will continue to be provided. NWCG will no longer administer pack test to media. Shadowing fire crews: had numerous requests to embed reports, decided not to allow for that, will allow for shadowing for a couple days. Red card issue: decision not to provide reporters red cards. Region 5 amendment: there is a state law that we can’t stop media from going anywhere they want. |
|
|||||
|
Decision/Comments: There are no physical requirements for media other than personal judgment? Yes. There’s no discussion for media getting in aircraft? Yes guidelines focus on ground access. |
|
|||||
|
12.
Fire Use Working
Team and WFSA
– Tim Sexton |
||||||
|
Discussion: Fire Use Working Team Recommended: · To continue with threshold analysis and certifications. · During interim period operations are conducted under a “approved” WFSA while waiting certification. · Implementation procedures to combine WFIP and WFSA processes – consider this a a part of longer term reengineering and subsequent business requirements analysis of the WFSA process · Revision of the current WFSA software for the 2004 fire season (process remains the same) · Develop WFSA training tailored to specific audiences · Ten action items (see handout) Working team meets twice a year. Working on establishing fitness standards for fire use operations. Working on training. Establishing white paper for key talking points. Fire Use Management Teams: · Used for less risks and operations geared towards resource benefits. · Tremendous expansion since 1998 in many states. · Managing a lot of events. · Team assignments have increased tremendously · Historically teams used for wilderness, simple events. Have evolved into more complex events e.g. Clear-Nez Fire Complex. · Steadily increase in number of acres burned (accounting for 20% of prescribed burns – can use for non HF targets) Future · Decline in available and qualified personnel is occurring · Recent fire season have shown an increased growth in program · High potential for IMT involvement |
|
|||||
|
Decision/Comments: How big of a piece in federal land in an escaped fire to trigger cost threshold? That issue needs to be resolved. Least cost alternative needs context. Need to include loss+damage. Least cost suppression cost should not be used as the selection factor it is intended to serve as a display to show the damage. At Critical fire levels, the WFSA is near useless, as we have no decision space at that point. We need to support this program and keep front and center. We need to continue to use WFSA. |
|
|||||
|
Action items: Tim to provide white paper to Paul for distribution when complete. |
Person responsible: Tim |
Deadline: |
|
|||
|
13.
Reports and Findings
Unfinished Business
– Jim Webb |
||||||
|
Discussion: South Canyon investigation proposed about 35 actions and evolved into 80 additional actions. Jim Webb and Steve Pettigoe are looking back to see if we have embraced those changes. Looking at report and are calling folks to see if actions have been completed. Found that for the most part paperwork is done. But no cohesive policy in place. Are checking with firefighters to see if actions have taken hold. Scheduling focus group sessions. List of 12 questions (handout) provided and would welcome comments. |
|
|||||
|
Decision/Comments: Cramer fire resulted in small group to analysis the trends. Found that within the past ten years, there is a 33% probability that we’ll face a fatality. Common denominators: – extreme fire danger risk thresholds in older fuels, each unit dealing with new multiple starts, occurred on units generally perceived to be high performance units, occurred on consolidated or zone units causing overextended supervisory control, occurred in extended IA (we have no policy), this year there will be a policy that IC’s establish control objectives prior to engaging. |
|
|||||
|
14.
Fires in So California – A historical perspective Greg Greenhoe & Lynn Biddison |
||||||
|
Discussion: Tremendous changes from Laguna fire – shape direction of the fire lines up with Cedar fire. When we do have fires with problems, it’s when the Santa Ana’s break down and wind change occurs. Lynn Biddison – · Book by Bob Sermak “Fire History in National forest of California” All the hotshot sups have that book. · Cooperation – early days not a whole lot of cooperation. Cooperation began to improve that by the 1950’s that Cali was shown as a model. · Burns in SoCal – 1919 big fire in San Gabriel Canyon @50,000 acres, 1953 Fish fork fire (?) – follow closely the 1919 fire · 1924 another fire in San Gabriel Canyon @50,000 , 1953 Monrovia Peak fire burn front behind Pasadena in same area. · In SoCal fires repeat earlier fires and tend to burn the same way. · 1942 Matilaha fire on the LP @200,00 acres · 1966 Coyote fire @60,000 acres on LP behind SB started with sundowner winds and burned toward the city. Priority was watershed, not homes. · 1970 Laguna Fire – Big fire, homes burned, started with Santa Ana winds – burnt in 1st hours 120,000 acres. Another fire started at that time. No common radio frequencies, evacuations of 100’s of home. Lot of City Fire departments with no Wildland experience involved, Lyn came as fire boss. Following the fire: 120 homeowners sued the forest service on the basis that the FS let the fuel build up. Sierra Club was suing the FS at the same time because the FS was treating the fuels. FS paid ½ of the damage claims. · 2003 Cedar Fire – 1,000’s more homes and people in the area. Though they benefited from Firescope (that resulted from the Laguna Fire) better communications, common terminology, better coordination etc. Common knowledge and reliance of the ICS system. · IC’s today face much more complexities than earlier. |
|
|||||
|
15.
Strategic Issues Panel On Fire Suppression Costs - Paul Hefner & Mike Lohrey |
||||||
|
Discussion: · Currently analyzing all the data and components that contribute to the costs of fire suppression. · Looking at LRMPs and their relationships to fire suppression objectives and decisions. · Hope to have findings and recommendations out by early summer to WFLC in order to make recommendations to change policies, procedures, and CFR’s if needed. · Group is also focusing on values to be protected and what it costs to protect them. |
|
|||||
|
Decision/Comments: We need to communicate what the legitimate realistic costs back to the administration etc. 66% of costs on fires are contracts (little or no control over that). Seems to be a great deal of focus on costs of values lost but not the values protected. Resource issues - costs a great deal e.g. noxious weeds, etc. need to look at how to reduce the costs of mitigating those concerns |
|
|||||
|
Action items: I.C. group needs to identify our position on contracting; identify the fundamental need to run an ICP. |
Person responsible: |
Deadline: |
|
|||
|
16.
National Incident
Management Organization – Paul Hefner |
||||||
|
Discussion: In 1999 the Forest Service commissioned a review of the Fire Management Program, which produced the Jacob’s Report. Resulted in a Task Group to review this report. Task group started out small and evolved to grow a bit. Draft 6 of their report just released (unedited draft sent out to I.C.’s) · Objectives: meet management objective on the local unit · Meet the needs of organization · Meet organizational needs for suppression · Identified management objectives Supply and Demand – need and use of IMTs is growing, while available number of IMT is decreasing (trend appears to be continuing) · Believe that the teams have been exhausted 5 out of the last 10 years · Looking at team rosters, agency composition, and non-fire and fire personnel. · Numerous reports have shown the need for a more aggressive fuels program and the same people responsible for accomplishing this work are on teams. · 16 T1, 35 T2, 22 State, 7 FUMTs, 4 ACT · 03 57% FS, 18% DOI, 25% State/Local/Pvt. . 04 data may show 50% FS. · Tremendous imbalance of assignments. · Turnover next 5 years turn over 92% due to retirements, inability to participate etc. · Given the current structure of training the needs will not be met. · Need to figure out a way to get folks thru the system. Issues and Concerns: safety, demands by congress, competing needs of the local units, highly decentralized organization and differing cultures, Mega-Fires have become common and collectively the agencies do not have a shared strategy. Options Please see latest NIMO Version 7 . What we’re looking at a strategic decision – stay the same or do something different. |
|
|||||
|
Decision/Comments: Need to include all risk assignments. If 3 year commitment, then will we be in the same jam in 3 years? 3-year commitment is minimum requirement. Issues with the cost of “lost work” is that happening? Problem with finance shortages: maybe should be home unit responsibility. How to get folks experienced? Maybe start folks at the T3 level and work up to T2 and T1. May want to bring in line officers to assist with lost of work issue. This may be a larger organizational issue – what’s the priority. Suggestion that NIMO be expanded to include Fuels Treatment (organize to treat fuels like fire suppression), Need option to fix the current system – strategy to move folks through management system. Where are the costs coming from? NIMO discussions regarding the costs e.g get on board with DHS for the costs. May be more realistic to out on the table a Professional Centralized Fire Org., NIMO options do not address the attrition problem faced, needs to be a focus on how are we going to get folks in and trained? We have to bridge the gap – maybe look at retirees as reserves to fill in on teams during times of shortages. There’s probably a series of stopgap measures to deal with it. The other dynamic is that the rate of fuel loading is outpacing fuel treatment – we may simply not have the folks available to deal with it. Without a larger strategic effort to deal with the fuel problem, we’ll never catch up. We may not be thinking big enough – may need to reach out to the wider circle of government to staff teams. Losing woods-wise militia, question are we going to be an Org. of doers or one that leads and manage others to conduct that work? Need to develop contract workforce that will meet our needs. |
|
|||||
|
Action items: Feedback to Task Force to Paul by 4/1 |
Person responsible: |
Deadline: |
|
|||
|
17.
Rapid Assessment – Tim Swedberg |
||||||
|
Discussion: Group’s mandate is to: · Evaluate science and technology information needs associated with fires · Organize science to meet needs of fire Group on a timeline – process – scoping, synthesis, and analysis, delivery. Scoping is complete Need 1 or 2 folks from group to provide priorities Passed out handout with 8 Key Info. Needs Question to I.C.’s “Did we ask the right questions? Next the group will: · Establish conclaves of scientist · Client workshop Conduct synthesis and analysis |
|
|||||
|
Decision/Comments: Rose: make sure to tie in with her and WO for delivering message. Don: Have you looked at past work? Paul: Is the team interest in looking at fixing existing problems? Fuels treatment – What is the sustaining yield of biomass? |
|
|||||
|
Action items: Tim request 1 –2 members to work with team |
Person responsible: |
Deadline: |
|
|||
|
18.
Interagency Wildland Fire Records Project - Richard Boyden National Archives |
||||||
|
Discussion: IC Directory Structure Initiative. Partnership with NARA and Fire Agencies. Looking at the problem of Loss of Fire Documentation. Solution: Revised Retention Standards – incident records, WFU records, Rx Burn records. Archives looking at those documents in the fire record that should be permanently preserved. Fire Incident History file – Permanent, Operational Fire Management Records – Temporary 7 year retention. ( see handout for details) . This retention need ties into Paul Hefner’s work to develop standard Documentation Package file and nomenclature. Envision that file structures are provided to IMTs with “read me” directions. Also looking at Retention standards for Fire Use and Prescribed Burn. |
|
|||||
|
Decision/Comments: GIS data should be permanent. As IMT workshop, would be good to provide handout and draft for planning section breakout and good to discuss at Team breakouts. Would be great to have a product out to field-test this fire season. |
|
|||||
|
Action items: Pass on any existing, good filing structure to and any input to Richard richard.boyden@nara.gov |
Person responsible: |
Deadline: |
|
|||
|
19.
Narratives - Paul Hefner |
||||||
|
Discussion: Is there any way to standardize Narrative? Same format? |
|
|||||
|
Decision/Comments: Group decides that this is a good idea. Need a way to include T2 Teams, suggestion to provide template and process out to all to review. |
|
|||||
|
Action items: Group to develop a standard format |
Person responsible: |
Deadline: |
|
|||
|
|
Don, Mike, Jeanne |
6/1 |
|
|||
|
Forward Narrative formats to Group by 3/31 |
I.C.s |
|
|
|||
|
20.
Incentives - Tom Cable |
||||||
|
Discussion: Incentives to help retention team members. Ray Q. supports it but we don’t have the money. Passed around monetary benefits proposal, compiled feedback (see handout). WFFA are working on several of these proposals, suggestion to write letter and provide that as well to Association for supporting documentation. Suggestion to keep on plate to create incentives for individuals to move up and move to T1. |
|
|||||
|
Decision/Comments: Several in group felt #1 would be best (OT count towards high three retirement) |
|
|||||
|
Action items: Move this forward – draft letter |
Person responsible: Tom and Paul |
Deadline: |
|
|||
|
21.
Contracting
Update
- Paul Hefner
& Mike Lohrey |
||||||
|
Discussion: Engine and Crew resources · National Contract - there will be another contract but this will be the last year. Next year, the Directors are asking that each GA will be using standard requirements. · NWCG released a Contractor Package in 2/04 (Mike will sent out to anyone who doesn’t have one). · Geographic Contracts: Looked at current status by GA, found most used National Contracts and EERA’s with the exception of Eastern G.B/Rockies and Oregon. · Oregon Contract has caused the most difficulty for IC’s. In 2003, there were significant changes in response to the problems we encountered including; engine crew configuration, personnel qual’s, laundry service, pre-season inspections, crew transportation issue (airport to ICP). · New for 2004; web based application system, more resources will be coming out of this contract, generated 400 engines/tender contractors (900 pieces of equipment) to date,. Contractor hired to oversee contractors (training and safety) · Under development – Specialized equipment (skidgens etc.) Currently outside of R1 there are no standards, Spring meeting agenda (agencies/contractors) includes alcohol/drug issues, English speaking and comprehension, working relationships. |
|
|||||
|
Decision/Comments: Interior is interested in assisting with this area but would like IC to provide information. IC’s as a group needs to ID issues to address, take a position on. · Need to quantify the number of contracts needed. · Configurations of resources need to be identified. (e.g. 50% of contractors need to be in S/T configuration) · Region 5 will be putting out one configured designed ICP contract; though will not cover waste management. · Last year F&W Service put out a mop up contract. Decision: IC/AC supports (wants) one National Contract |
|
|||||
|
Action items: |
Person responsible: |
Deadline: |
|
|||
|
Write letter stating position |
|
|
|
|||
|
Discussion: What computer kits etc. is necessary what are the requirements? · Major Components of Kit include: quick deploying, auto acquiring satellite antenna, VSAT indoor unit, Encryption Unit, wireless access point, Base to Remote Link, Web Flight Follower · One kit was put together and deployed on the Old Fire, Cedar East (cost $3,000 per day) – Worked exceptionally well on both fires. · The Service – on-demand service model: pre-position kits at existing national caches that can be deployed to incidents within 24 hours of request, airtime unlimited to satellite and 10 phones, non-agency owned equipment and service, IBM can build kits to individual specifications, etc. · Kits are available this year on existing EERA. 6 now may be up to 15. · Kits could be housed at Cache sites, goal to deliver within 24 hours after ordering, set up within ½ hour. EERA information on handouts. Bob Williams Contracting involved. · EERA Number 56-91S8-0015 (USDA Forest Service, Region 5 North Ops, Redding) · Contractor IBM Business Consulting Services – 877-217-0134 |
|
|||||
|
Decision/Comments: Suggestion that a cost analysis be developed to share with IC’s to help justify the expense on incidents. Question regarding implementation, where are they housed, how do you access it? Still working on that. Should be on a National Contract. Satellites invaluable due to all the internet needs on incident (IR data maps, GIS data, 209’s, incident web site development etc.) We’re being asked to work more on internet every year. |
|
|||||
|
23.
Incident Identification
Badges - Mike Lohrey & Doug Parker |
||||||
|
Discussion: Issue started during Shuttle Recovery, this summer PNW 2 and PNW 3 developed and tested badge system this past summer (information on handouts and CDs). Overview of badge effectiveness, security, more accountability at supply, cost containment etc. · Options on implementing e.g. everyone vs. supervisors etc. · Decide if you need to use it on an Incident and decide if you will take photos of everyone or some other options? · Suggest that it should be implemented on every All-Risk Incidents · Time per badge – 1 –2 minutes per person. · Costs: $3,000 w/out a computer (though recommend dedicated computer. $1.25 per card. Cost to an incident $5,000 - $6,000. One badge issuing station seems to meet the need + 2 people to work it. |
|
|||||
|
24.
Safety and
Health Working Team and
work/rest–
Scott Vail |
||||||
|
Discussion: New work rest and driving guidelines. Won’t see much change this year only affect helicopter tenders, fuel trucks etc. |
|
|||||
|
25.
IOS Working Team – |
||||||
|
Discussion: New policy printed (14-1) will have out this year. Plan to update Tech Spec qualifications. |
|
|||||
|
Decision/Comments: If available it’d be good to have a representative. |
|
|||||
|
26.
Urban Wild
Interface Working Team
– Mike Donderro |
||||||
|
Discussion: Jim Smalley with NFPA is contact. Run out of NFEA in Boston, Edy can provide contact info. Major conference scheduled this fall in Tucson. Joe Stam is on team. |
|
|||||
|
27.
HRSP – Wally Bennett |
||||||
|
Discussion: Jane Everett is National Coordinator for HRSP position. Trying to get position identified as a national position, will be added as position and will have a task book. Wally handed out Geographical Coordinators list. Northern Rockies is putting on another training and will have up to 10 –15 fully qualified positions in Northern Rockies. Working on conducting training sessions in other GA and to get more qualified positions. Passed out Alcohol Misuse Report. Passed out draft letter from Jerry Williams on statistics from last year. |
|
|||||
|
28.
National Hotshots – Dennis Baldridge |
||||||
|
Discussion: Currently 92 IHCs. This year no big issues, most things are working through regional groups. Decision not to have National IHC workshop in ’05. · In last year: completed National IHC Ops guide, updated committee charter to allow folks to stay longer for continuity, updated crew contact list, finalized standardize crew survey list, (average assignment was 5 14-day assignments, average 35,000 miles per crew driven 1.1 million miles in R5 with 7 minor accidents), completed consolidated input to work/rest guidelines (worked with smoke jumpers), · Currently working on: Proposal for a physical fitness manual, testing digital radios, staff ride development for the Inaja Fire, challenge to all regions to develop on staff rider, continue to work on getting foot in door to all committees that affect the IHCs. · New Issues: working on needs assessments on ability to meet 401 series requirements, support helitack folks on developing short haul capabilities (see handouts) · Reminder in the IHC organization, they have the ability to staff out any issues, working closely with IC/AC group (Paul) to handle rumor control. · Crew sizes: continue to be an issue. |
|
|||||
|
Decision/Comments: New chair is Shane Greer .Dennis will continue to be the Rep for the IC/AC group |
|
|||||
|
29.
Radio Cache/Narrow
Banding
- -Paul Hefner
for Steve |
||||||
|
Discussion: All VHF radio and repeater will be configured analog narrow band. 5/1 is the date to shut off all non-narrow bands. Cache will have a whole new frequency scheme. FRS radios are not authorized. Some crews, military and Canadian crews have been using them, availability of frequencies should not be a problem, lumped radios under supplies in ROSS last year, was a problem. Radios lumped under Equipment seemed to not be a problem. New radios have a problem (weak volume) folks did not like them. Very difficult to program. |
|
|||||
|
Decision/Comments: Question regarding 170 air to ground frequency – is Boise removing that? |
|
|||||
|
30.
Red Book Update – Paul Hefner |
||||||
|
Discussion: Not a lot of work, but folks at NIFC worked hard in getting qual’s in Aviation similar. Problem with Redbook – appendixes left out when printed. Not sure what the fix will be. You can now get it out of the Cache in a direct order, on NIFC website (under Operational Documents). Need new IC/AC rep on Redbook group |
|
|||||
|
Action items: Need new IC/AC rep on Redbook group |
Person responsible: |
Deadline: |
|
|||
|
31.
Leadership Curriculum
(L480, L580) Committee - Bill
Waterbury |
||||||
|
Discussion: Bill is chair of group. Working on prospectus for lesson plans, simulations built. Looking at it being a pre-requisite for 420, 520, 620. Working on curriculum stressing motivation, self-learning, speaking skills, and political issues. Proving to be a big challenge to develop the curriculum. Work in progress |
|
|||||
|
Discussion: Still not resolved. Group wants it to be on top of priority list. Edy will help steer it. |
|
|||||
|
33.
520/620 Update – Edy Rhodes |
||||||
|
Discussion: 2005 Course 1/30 – 2/11 § 2 OSC per IMT § Will be at NARTC § Successful recruitment – Would like to have 18 positions per. Lower numbers in IC, PSC, LSC, FSC doing well with OSC. § Preparing for success unit– Mentoring program in place – 1 season Mentor-trainee before training. § Selections for actual attendees will not occur until Nov. Going back through OSC nominations to see if there are second choices or go through as different position. § AC slots successful recruitment, still looking for Planning. § Approximately 43% FS, 22% DOI, St/Co/PVT other 35% § Future plans – review curriculum for 520/620 (others looking at 420). Will be inviting folks to work with the group. § Enhancing Success Unit – Tie In with LLC, liaison with Current IMTs, Online Info support. |
|
|||||
|
Conclusions: Proposal to IC/AC –IMT Forum/Summit for C&G. Pilot in April 2005 (NARTC open 4/15). Refresher Emerging Issues etc. |
|
|||||
|
Decision/Comments: IMT Forum – concern of costs, suggestion to use resource ordering system to and pay through pre-suppression |
|
|||||
|
Coordinate NWCG zoning of
incidents to include in IC training. |
|
|
Who: Mike
Lohrey |
When: 5/31/04 |
|
Action Item: |
|
|
Provide position paper
supporting hazard fuel reduction to the CA Blue Ribbon Panel |
|
|
Who: Paul
Hefner |
When: |
|
Action Item: |
|
|
Identify IC/AC contacts to
IAFC. Write letter to IAFC supporting
IAFC qualified Liaisons to work with teams. |
|
|
Who: Bob
Anderson, Paul Summerfield & Steve Hart |
When: 3/30/04 |
|
Action Item: |
|
|
Identify two members to
interface with the LLC |
|
|
Who: Jeff Whitney & Mike Lohrey |
When: |
|
Action Item: |
|
|
Website assistance for the
IC/AC Website |
|
|
Who: Mike
Lohrey (will check for R6 possibilities) |
When: |
|
Action Item: |
|
|
Prepare letter stating
IC/AC position supporting National Contract |
|
|
Who: Paul Hefner & Mike Lohrey |
When: 3/12/04 |
|
Action Item: |
|
|
Standardized Narratives |
|
|
Who: Don Studebaker & Mike Lohrey |
When: 6/1/04 |
|
Action Item: |
|
|
Incentives Letter |
|
|
Who: Paul Hefner & Tom Cable |
When: 3/19/04 |
|
Action Item: |
|
|
Identify IC/AC
Representative to Red Book Committee |
|
|
Who: Jeff Pendleton & Paul Broyles |
When: |
|
Action Item: |
|
|
Draft position on
liabilities and Authorities |
|
|
Who: Bob Anderson (Edy to network) |
When: 3/19/04 |
|
Action Item: |
|
|
Validate concurrence on
expedited close-outs |
|
|
Who: ALL |
When: |
|
Action Item: |
|
|
Group approved of L.E.
proposal. Charged Roger and Rich to move
forward to define position and duties.
Not an agreement to add a position to IMT’s. |
|
|
Who: Greg Greenhoe to carry message to Roger. |
When: |
|
Action Item: |
|
|
Provide feedback on NIMO
to Paul |
|
|
Who: ALL |
When: 4/1/04 |