NIMS compliance

[floridacyclist]

Does CAP have an official stance on NIMS compliance? I'm in class here at NETC and we've been having some very interesting conversations about various facets of this directive; at least one of our classroom members is here under pressure as his county was turned down for a grant application due to not being in compliance and they needed him to get trainer-qualified ASAP. It seems like a major portion of the training requirements would be met by adding a task or two to various SQTRs. New trainees would be required to meet the new standards and existing personnel would have to meet the new requirements in order to renew.

Based on FEMA requirements, everyone would eventually need IS100 and 700, Field Supervisors (like GTL) would need IS200, unit leaders and branch directors would need ICS300, and all command/general staff would need IS800 and ICS400 (they are already talking about eliminating the requirement for IS800 for middle management - this straight frtom the man in charge of EMI curriculum) . This isn't a comprehensive listing of our job assignments, just a representative sampling of what we would add to our SQTRs  if we played completely by their rules.

Thoughts?

[arajca]

IIRC, the NB decided in Aug that CAP needs to be NIMS compliant and has tasked the ES/OPS folks to develop a plan for this. It is something I've been advocating for about three years now.

[RiverAux]

I would bet that all our ground and aircrews will need to take ICS 100 & 700 and probably 200 & 800.  Most mission staff (except maybe MSA) will probably end up taking those and then some.  If I was an ES officer I'd start the process of talking folks into taking these classes so they can be a jump ahead. 

[arajca]

Everyone involved in ES (MRO, GTM, MS, MO, etc) would need ICS 100 and IS700. MP's, GTL's, CUL, MSA would need ICS 200 and IS 800. Directors, Chiefs, MSO, IO, LO would need ICS 300.  IC/AL would need ICS 400.

[ZigZag911]

Does FEMA (or anyone else) offer online versions of ICS 300 & 400?

[arajca]

No. Those courses require significant interaction among the student for the scenarios. Students are filling out the ICS forms, creating IAP's, evaluating clues, etc. The courses are scenario driven and about 75% of the class is hands on. The courses are similar to multi-day table top exercises with some education.

As far as I have heard, there is no plan to make ICS 300 & 400 online courses.

[isuhawkeye]

Having completed a five day TTT for 300, and 400 I must say that It is imperitive that we adopt these standards.  Our general staff could improve dramatically with teh 300 course. 

[Dustoff]

And it's not enough to just go through the course.  As I tell everybody in my 300 & 400 classes, the class is ONLY the beginning!  Unless you're involved in actively fighting wildfire, NONE OF US get enough experience using the ICS system on real incidents. 

This particularly applies at the 300 & 400 levels.  The next step after completing the classes is to start using ICS for tabletops, functionals and full-scale exercises.  Actually use it for anything you can, just for the practice.

Use it to plan your next SAREX or Wing Conference.  Hey Iowa, how about those WTA's?   

For the reasons already stated, 300 & 400 aren't on-line.  And for folks that are going to be using ICS actively, I don't recommend the on-line versions of 100, 200, 700, or 800.  You will always learn more in the classroom setting.  Your instructors (hopefully) have had some experiences in actively using ICS.  They can add that into the classroom, adding to your learning. 

I've had students attending my 300 & 400 classes who only took the on-line version of those other courses.  After they took the on-line test, they did a brain dump.  Bringing them back up to speed in 300 takes some extra work!  (By the way, that's why the 2006 version of 300 has some options for teaching Unit 2 - the review chapter)

ICS is a tool.  The more you use it, the better it will work for you.

Jim

[floridacyclist]

That's the class I'm in right now (E449) and it has been very interesting. The main thing that caught my attention was that some agencies are already being denied money for not being compliant; maybe it's something we should be paying attention to.

According to the guy that wrote most of the material, 800 should be going away for Middle Management (ie unit leaders, branch directors etc); he feels that it's just way more than anyone not on Command or General needs to know. There's also a new verion of 800 on the way out, so if you did need it, I'd just wait.

300 and 400 will probably never be offered as online courses; in fact, there are no plans to even develop federal databases for them. It is up to the state training officers to track who has those and who is qualified to teach them. I agree about not taking the online-only versions of the other courses as even when we were teaching only the online versions in a live group setting then sending them home to take the test online, folks were learning far more in the classroom settings. I hope they'll get even more out of it as we incorporate the tabletops into the training.

Yes, ICS does have to be used to get comfortable with the tools and concepts. I used it for Field Day, we will use it for our communications camp (along with any other exercises) and my 17yo even used it for his school dance. If you look at the layouts, you will realize that it's not really new; it follows a lot of the best practices of both military and business management combined with a common terminology, which is perhaps one of the biggest advantages to using it.

Some time this Spring, we (I have an assistant instructor who is a full-time college professor, ham operator, and former Air Force instructor who has probably forgotten more about teaching than most of us will learn) will probably be offering weekend ICS300 and 400 classes in Tallahassee. While I am sponsored here at NETC by CAP (or at least signed for - FEMA is paying the bills), we will probably offer the classes through ARES. Not only is it easier that way with less red tape, restrictions, and easier access to training facilities via the asst instructor, but the local chain of command does not feel that we are up to supporting any large-scale training. It will also make it easier to open the classes to other volunteer agencies so that we can have enough people for proper exercise participation. Considering that I would be one of the few if not the only volunteer instructor in this area teaching to volunteer's schedules (nights and weekends), this would be the socially responsible thing to do as well.

None of which tells me where CAP stands on this issue...the knowledgebase doesn't seem to be of much help either as they only have links to FEMA documents but at least we're trying.

[DNall]

I'd bow to the experts here & correct me if I'm wrong, but as I understand it... All the ICS courses just mentioned there (100-800) are to NIMS as GES is to CAP ES right now. To actually do anything you would need to be agency certified under the standards for something like wilderness search &/or rescue. I read over those standards, and it requires a fairly simple PT test (several options, wildland pack test was on there among others). Now, I'm all for a PT test for GTMs. I got no problems making UDF 1-3 & UDF/Ldr, then bumping GTM/L up to the real deal couple things added to Ranger school kind of quals. You know very well if you do that though you're going to drop a few thousand GTMs. Personally I'd be saying they shouldn't have been out there in the first place if that's the case, but that's just me. I think we HAVE to get with the program on this stuff or we're going to increasingly fall out of the big time we used to do before 2001 got all this started & people thought we were this qualified, now they know better. It's going to be really hard selling that though. The time involved for our members is going to be more intense. They're going to have to focus on ES more or get out of the way.

I don't know, like I said, correct me if I'm wrong on this stuff. I'd like to know just where we need to get to & what we need to do along the way. A plan to get there is the easy part.

[isuhawkeye]

I know this has been hashed out a few places, but just to clarifythis is how the state of Iowa Views things

ICS 100 (Introduction to ICS, roughly 3 hour class) Is a course that should be taken by ALL emergency responders, City Works personnel, or anyone else who may fall into an emergency response role.

IS 700 (An introduction to NIMS, roughly an 3 hour class) This course outlines how ICS fits into the National Incidnt Management System.  Please note that this is not an "ICS" class.  The Incident Command system is a component of NIMS.  (Other components include JIC's, EOC's, and other aspects of response that CAP has not addressed)

ICS 200 (Basic ICS, roughly an 8 hour class) Is a course that should be taken by all front line supervisors.  If you are a team leader, a crew boss, a strike team leader, or a task force leader you need this course. 

IS 800 (The National Response plan) is for administrators, and agency heads

ICS 300 (roughly a 20 hour class) Is a course for General staff.  These are the floks who will be staff for a Type III incident, and serve as a branch director, or section chief. This course is also needed for elected officials so they now how command works for large scale events.

ICS 400 (roughly 16 more hours) Is a course for command staff.

Iowa does use the ICS system for the WTA's. heavy on the logistics section.  We have commo, medical, transportation, a food unit, and several other positions all working together to feed and house our participants.

All course times are estimates.  They can change depending upon whos ICS course you are using Currently FEMS, Coast Guard, U.S. Fire Administration, and USDA all have their own course.  I am an instructor for the Fire Administration course.

[RiverAux]

If the feds expect volunteers involved in emergency management (CAP as well as the local volunteer fire departments, SAR teams, etc) to take the upper level (300 & 400) courses they're going to have to start making it a bit easier to take.  Right now where I am they seem to be scheduling these primarily during weekdays so it will be convenient for full-time paid personnel to take, but they're going to need to start doing multiple weekend or evening courses. 

[isuhawkeye]

About 1/2 of my class was either affiliated with a volunteer entity, or they were a part of the "outreach Staff"  these staff go out to volunteer departmetns to conduct this training

[Dustoff]

Keep in mind that 300 and (especially) 400 are for middle and upper management types.  Most of the rank-and-file don't need these classes until they get promoted into those positions.

Attached are two graphics (I hope they come through - I'm kinda new at this)

They are SUGGESTED training levels from FEMA.

Many areas are also working on developing regional Incident Management Teams.  IMTs are teams of folks that have additional training and practice/experience in performing at those higher levels for more complicated incidents.  IMTs would be available to respond to your incident (at your invitation) to either help YOU function at more complex incidents (glued to your hip) or, if you feel completly over your head, to take over for you.  As the local folks, it's YOUR incident, so the choice is TOTALLY YOURS.

Jim
(teaching the FEMA courses)

[Dustoff]

WOW, those graphics came out BIG!

Wasn't expecting THAT!

     

Jim

[floridacyclist]

Thanks, those graphs were cool. Even the instructors were saving copies to their thumb drives!

Leaving at 0-dark-thirty in the morning to head back South. Skipping the interstates and taking mostly US highways through West Virginia and Kentucky to Knoxville to visit an elementary-school friend and fellow former cadet, then dropping through Western North Carolina to visit my daughter. Should be a gorgeous drive

Looking forward to getting home and putting our ICS classes together for CAP and other local volunteer organizations.

[arajca]

So, we have at least three FEMA trained ICS instructors on the board. Any others out there? Or any other program's ICS intructors (NWCG, USCG, etc)

[isuhawkeye]

Thanks for posting the graphic.  I was looking for it.

[floridacyclist]

Based on FEMA requirements, everyone would eventually need IS100 and 700, Field Supervisors (like GTL) would need IS200, unit leaders and branch directors would need ICS300, and all command/general staff would need IS800 and ICS400 (they are already talking about eliminating the requirement for IS800 for middle management - this straight frtom the man in charge of EMI curriculum) . This isn't a comprehensive listing of our job assignments, just a representative sampling of what we would add to our SQTRs  if we played completely by their rules.

I got my answer from National today on my original question. The requirements are going to pretty much follow what we outlined above, and yes we can start teaching it that way in order to try to get a jumpstart on NIMS compliance.

Everyone will pretty much need ICS100 and IS700 NIMS

Team and Unit Leaders (GTL, CUL, MO if you consider them the aircrew commander) will need 200

Branch Directors and possibly MSA (because they might be EOC staff unless they make a seperate qualification for that) would need ICS300

Command and General Staff (IC, MIO, MSO, LO, FSC, LSC, OSC, PSC, AL) would need ICS400 and IS800 NRP.

This is by no means comprehensive and definitely not authoritative. Just throwing some of the requirements together off the top of my head based on what was said today and what I know of FEMA recommendations; I could be mistaken on where some of those will land. Once I sit down with a chart of duties and requirements etc when I get home, it will probably make a lot more sense, but in the meantime we can start encouraging folks to work on meeting the NIMS standards by taking the recommended courses.

[DNall]

That's all great. No problems taking some online & a couple in-res classes, if they can work some split wknd versions out for us, fine.

What about the other stadnards for wilderness SaR & such? The ones w/ the PT requirements. Are we going to comply with those standards for operators as well, or just the basic ICS stuff?

Also, if we just do the basic ICS stuff (100-800 as required by position) is that the equiv to GES that still doesn't make you qual'd to hold that IC or even field supervisor (GTL) postion in a joint operating enviro? Cause what I really want to see eventually is a multi-agency operation w/ a CAP member standing there as as branch director or something along those lines. I know that's getting into bigger issues of who in CAP can hang at that level, but obviously some can & we need to be qualing & putting them out there for those jobs. I think that's the route to big business in a disaster. You got a PSC in CAP uniform, sayin hey you know let me makea call I'll get us some resources in here.

[floridacyclist]

I think that the easiest way to get the classroom classes would be to encourage some of our people to get the ICS TTT like I did. Not only does that mean that  we get to pick the schedule and train our own people, but that we get to do the training for other agencies as well - a good PR move I think.

Incidentally, the Sheriff's Office agreed in theory to come help run next weekend's exercise portion of our local Ranger school, just like they would a real mission. I think they appreciate the chance to practice real SAR, we get to learn how the chain really works, and maybe next time they need some search assets, they'll remember those sharp cadets they did the exercise with. You can see the ops order at http://www.rideforfatherhood.org/rangerschool.pdf .

The scenario is basically a Cessna 150 disappeared enroute to Tallahassee somewhere near Lake Talquin. The Ground Team will have about 5mi of humping and bushwhacking to get there at which time they will find a real crashed airplane with real moulaged victims. After backboarding and carrying them a mile or so to the ICP/helispot to meet the Leon Co paramedics, a medevac chopper will come to evacuate the more critical victim. Once's he's loaded up, the exercise will end, they get a tour of the ambulance and chopper, and we have a hotwash.

This is why we need to learn our ICS/NIMS.

[isuhawkeye]

Thats a great operation for Florida.  Excellent job in building those relationships. 

As far as NIMS goes...

Don't forget that ICS is only a component of NIMS.  To be NIMS compliant we need to type our resources, Participate in JIC's, and meet the established certifications, and standards to function in those roles.

[floridacyclist]

I'll settle for baby steps as long as we're taking steps. It beats sitting around with our thumbs up ours arsenals.

[isuhawkeye]

I agree completely, I just hope that this issue stays in the fore front so that we can continue to provide mission support

[Nick]

To be NIMS compliant we need to type our resources, Participate in JIC's, and meet the established certifications, and standards to function in those roles.

As for resource typing, remember the NIMS Search & Rescue Resources Typing has resource types that were almost written for CAP (Air Search Team, Airborne Reconnaissance, Radio Direction Finding Team, and Wilderness Search and Rescue Team) -- it's just a matter of reading what their requirements are and ensuring you organize teams in the same fashion.  Typing CAP resources is almost too easy with this model, and it helps to lay to rest the question we've had in previous threads about "hey guys, what kind of stuff should you have for a ground team?"

[isuhawkeye]

exacly

[Nick Critelli]

We tasked ISUHawkeye with creating a CAP 101 - NIMS ICS Compliance Matrix.  Here it is.  Get busy. ICS 100,200,and 800 are all on-line.  They're simple and you can do the whole set over a weekend.  See attached.  Feel free to use it but give ISUHawkeye and IAWG credit.


NICK CRITELLI

[floridacyclist]

How do you figure CUL needs 300?

Yes, the online courses are convenient, but you learn so much more in a classroom setting even if you then go home and take the test online (which is how we teach ours). Even FEMA says that they prefer the classes be taught then tested rather than just doing it all online.

Make a squadron training event out of it!

[isuhawkeye]

good point.  Logistics section should be 400, and not just three hundred

[Nick]

Although this is something I know can't be addressed at this level, it might be nice to see some recommendation be passed up to NHQ/DOS about standardization of ALL the CAP ES duty titles to conform with ICS.  Yeah, any of us that's been around CAP for a while is stuck on a lot of the old titles, and NHQ is off to a good start with the majority of titles, but not everyone in the ICS world is going to know what a ground team is, and they sure as hell won't know "GTM" (abbreviations are bad for interoperability, mkay? )  Something more like Ground Search Strike Team (Leader/Member), Air Search Observer and Air Search Scanner (= Tech Specialists), etc. and it'll be a nice comprehensive alignment.  But, just a thought...

[floridacyclist]

I remember when I first came back into CAP that they were starting to play with ICS; we had to memorize which CAP mission title was equivalent to which ICS title such as Mission Commander = Incident Commander.

It didn't really start making sense until we actually started changing over to ICS titles for the senior command and control positions. It won't surprise me if we eventually go all the way with the rest of the titles as well.

[Dustoff]

Thats a great operation for Florida.  Excellent job in building those relationships. 

As far as NIMS goes...

Don't forget that ICS is only a component of NIMS.  To be NIMS compliant we need to type our resources, Participate in JIC's, and meet the established certifications, and standards to function in those roles.

And don't forget my favorite - Preparedness!!!

Go back to the 700 class and take a look at all the things that come under the "Preparedness" heading.  There's alot to work to be done!!!

Jim

[alice]

I got my answer from National today on my original question. The requirements are going to pretty much follow what we outlined above, and yes we can start teaching it that way in order to try to get a jumpstart on NIMS compliance.

>Everyone will pretty much need ICS100 and IS700 NIMS

>Team and Unit Leaders (GTL, CUL, MO if you consider them the aircrew commander) will need 200

>Branch Directors and possibly MSA (because they might be EOC staff unless they make a seperate qualification for that) would need ICS300

>Command and General Staff (IC, MIO, MSO, LO, FSC, LSC, OSC, PSC, AL) would need ICS400 and IS800 NRP.

>This is by no means comprehensive and definitely not authoritative. Just throwing some of the requirements together off the top of my head based on what was said today and what I know of FEMA recommendations...


Any word from CAP HQ when those will be requirements for us?

According to FEMA Region IX last week, NIMS has been required of all states but until this year, self-certification was OK.  Not this year.  FEMA is rolling out new "metrics"  on states this year - and I suspect the fed world, too.  No more pencil whipping.  FEMA will be looking at who has actually passed its online and residential NIMS classes.

As long as CAP is tasked as a state resource in many states for SAR and disaster relief, and so many of our wings depend on their state funds, we can't play the game of we-are-USAF/fed-only on NIMs compliance.  We must start paying closer attention to what the states and counties must do to get FEMA money.

In 2007, FEMA expects to get back many of its directorates - and money - that were taken away by DHS before Katrina thanks to the the Post-Katrina Emergency Management Reform Act of 2006.  Instead of having about 650 million to hand out in grants, FEMA expects to have 4.5 billion.

No reasons CAP wings can't start strongly encouraging our members to do the necessary NIMs courses if our HQ can't move fast enough to suit our local county and state needs - plus FEMA's needs.

[RiverAux]

backchannel word is that national is working on this issue.  They do need to get going on this.  The basic requirements aren't that difficult though applying some of the resource typing and credentialling would be. 

[DNall]

http://www.fema.gov/emergency/nims/rm/credentialing.shtm says:
Credentialing

The NIMS Integration Center is developing a national credentialing system that will help verify, quickly and accurately, the identity and qualifications of emergency personnel responding to an incident. The National Emergency Responder Credentialing System will document minimum professional qualifications, certifications, training and education requirements that define the standards required for specific emergency response functional positions.

The Center is using working groups to identify job titles to be credentialed and the qualifications and training required. Working groups will focus on the following: Incident Management, Emergency Medical Services, Fire/Hazardous Materials/ Law Enforcement, Medical and Public Health, Public Works and Search and Rescue. Although subject matter experts for these working groups have already been identified, the NIC welcomes your participation into our stakeholder review group. As a stakeholder, you will receive updates on working groups' progress and will be able to review draft documents under development.

The back-channel I've heard is that they are having trouble with a few stubborn local agencies using the labels incorrectly, and so within the next year or two will be moving to actually issuing FEMA certification cards. You'd still be trained & vouched for by your agency on most of it, just the instructors would have to be cleared.

If it goes down that way, you're talking about no more time to play games.

[lordmonar]

Looking at the proposed NIMS job description....CAP is NOT going to be able to certify any Wilderness SAR technicians.

Now...this I hope is someone's primary job at National!

Screw new rank requirements, the NB structure or anything else....if FEMA is going to hold the gun to eveyone's head to meet these requirments...someone needs to be down in Colorado working with the NSAR people and developing some new GT requirements.

[Nick]

Just out of curiosity, what's going to be the flaming deficiency for awarding wilderness SAR qualifications?  From my reads on it, ground team members should at least qualify for Wilderness SAR Team Type IV members.

[DNall]

Looking at the proposed NIMS job description....CAP is NOT going to be able to certify any Wilderness SAR technicians.

Now...this I hope is someone's primary job at National!

Screw new rank requirements, the NB structure or anything else....if FEMA is going to hold the gun to eveyone's head to meet these requirments...someone needs to be down in Colorado working with the NSAR people and developing some new GT requirements.

Sincerely:
What can't CAP do? And, what do you want NHQ fixing?

CAP already faught & lost to have the standards lowered. Been fighting for a few years, with a consistent absolutely no chance in hell. This is orders & CAP is expected to carry them out.

As are everyone else in the country. Including others not being able to use non-compliant orgs w/o losing their funding. I don't see what the big deal is. This is nothing private volunteer SaR clubs haven't been meeting for decades, and I haven't noticed anythign we can't handle. Could you be more specific about your concerns.

[DNall]

http://www.fema.gov/pdf/emergency/nims/sar_jobtitle_111806.pdf

SAR Job Title 35:  Wilderness Search and/or Rescue Technician
Description:  A Wilderness Search and/or Rescue Technician is a member of a Wilderness SAR Team who searches for and rescues those in trouble in urban/suburban as well as other environments.45

REQUISITE CRITERIA
The table below lists minimum requisite criteria, based on existing protocols and standards, for a Wilderness Search and/or Rescue Technician to participate in the NIMS Integration Center's National Emergency Responder Credentialing System.

Category
Criteria
Training
Fulfillment of requirement(s) as stated in the following standard(s) :
1. MRA 105 Operational Level; or ASTM F-2209 or NASAR SAR Tech II; or equivalent
2. NFPA 472 HazMat Awareness and/or OSHA 1910.120(Q)(6)(i), HazMat     Awareness Training or equivalent basic instruction on responding to and operating in a CBRNE incident
3. Bloodborne/Airborne Pathogens per OSHA
4. DOI AM B-3 or equivalent
Completion of the following baseline criteria:
5. OSHA 1910.120 and/or 1910.134(f) Respiratory Protection
6. Risk assessment
7. Hazard mitigation, including lifting, dealing with animals and possible armed subjects and criminals
8. PPE for 4 seasons in any of the anticipated areas of operation
9. Use of related SAR tools and devices
10. Various SAR Standards
11. Legal Aspects of SAR EMS, SAR risk, liability, insurance, and injury and death of members
12. SAR ethics, including dealing with families, confidentiality and media
13. Team and crew safety issues
14. For drivers: Driver's safety
15. Personal and team physical, medical and behavioral wellness, fitness, and limitations
16. Wilderness weather
17. Survival and bivouac in four seasons in any anticipated areas of operations
18. Use of other resources including canines and other animals
19. Recognizing possible child predator situations
20. Awareness for search around swift/flood water, underground spaces
21. HazMat awareness to include drug labs
22. Animal technical rescue awareness
23. Documentation and record keeping for SAR and EMS
24. Field Communications, interoperability, equipment, proper use of phones, radios, data
25. Medical aid of self, team members, and customers
26. Customer evacuations, choices, methods, equipment
27. Helicopter operations in SAR for all seasons in all anticipated areas of   operations,  including;
* Types of Helicopters in SAR
* Risk Continuum: low risk to higher risk helicopter use
* Related FAA regulations
* Personal capabilities and limitations and preflight prep
* Helicopter capabilities and limitations
* Safety Briefing/ Aircraft familiarization, storage, Emergency Locator Transmitter (ELT) introduction
* Safety rules, dos and don'ts
* Helicopter-related Communications for SAR personnel
* Night operations
* Customers on helicopters, control of, consent issues
* Basic emergency procedures on ground and in flight
* Uses of helicopter adjuncts, such as NVG and FLIR
* Basic physiological effects of flight on personnel, customers and equipment
* Special-Use issues, hazards, and mitigation
* Ingress and egress training and practice in all methods to be used on operations, such as hover ingress-egress, etc.


Completion of the following courses and/or curricula:
27. ICS-100: Introduction to ICS
28. ICS-200: Basic ICS
29. FEMA IS-700: NIMS, An Introduction
30. CERT (G-371) or equivalent for disaster related responses46

Experience
1. Finger print and background check
2. Participation in an AHJ currency program

Physical/ Medical Fitness
Completion of the following baseline criteria:
1. Medical requirements established by the AHJ
2. Minimum physical fitness standards as required by the AHJ, such as:
* MRA 105.1 Fitness
* CO WSAR Fitness
* NWCG Pack Test "Arduous"
* MCSOMR/CAMRA Mountain Rescue Specific Physical Ability Test (MRSPAT)
* NIMS WSAR Type II and IV Fitness
3.     CDC/ WHO recommended inoculations

Certification
1. Any of the following or equivalent:
* MRA 105.1 Operational Level
* NASAR SAR Technician II or greater
* Colorado State SAR Board WSAR Technician Type II or greater
* Appropriate equivalent State certification

[lordmonar]

Just out of curiosity, what's going to be the flaming deficiency for awarding wilderness SAR qualifications?  From my reads on it, ground team members should at least qualify for Wilderness SAR Team Type IV members.

Helo ops. (task 27)

And medical. (task 25)

Now..there is no reason why we should not be able to these things...put we have to change some cap regulations/policies first.

Like I said....we need to get our National ES guys on this ASAP.

[Nick]

I actually went back and re-read the requirements list (my bad).  You can train for helo ops in SARs without actually using helo ops in SARs, if nothing else, just to satisfy the training requirement.

As for medical, that sounds just like giving the self-aid/buddy care class to me.

[lordmonar]

 On the medical issue though....if you are trained to provide medical services to your "customer" then we MAY....MAY cross that line from lay person first aid into the First Responder area.  If that is the case it becomes a liabilty issue.

On the helo ops..by my read...the training is a little more involved than just familurisation training.  Granted CAP does not do helos and maybe a middle ground can be found that will meet both CAP's liability and the NIMS requirements.

Like I said...nothing that can't be worked out...but we do need NHQ to work out these sort of issues.

Also as a side note......I think NIMS compliance will spell the end of under 18 cadets from working ES.

[DNall]

Helos:
What exactly would be the psychological effects on my equipment? Love that govt writing.

The only helo restriction in CAP is that we not fly the thing ourselves. We do work with, on, & around them all the time. The standard there to me just says you can work to/from, know when it appropriate to call for as a resource, capabilities, etc. That all sounds perfectly reasonable, for the most part can be done w/o being near a helo, and nothing that isn't going on already in several places around the country. Just nice to have the standard all spelled out.


Medical:
You are currently allowed to do first aid. The wilderness advanced firsst aid whatcha-all-it, that's what you're looking for. Perfectly acceptable & achievable for CAP, and covered by current insurance. We are by the way considered first responder agency by the feds, generally not by states, which is where the good sumaritan-type laws are, but it's all interpretation & generally going to side with you. FEMA is working on Congress to fix the situation for volunteer medical pers requested in that role. They aren't asking for us & don't care what our problems are. When that gets resolved you'll get the HSO track & it'll be covered like everything else.

This issue you'll get hit with is the stadards above are bare mins for no-big-deal missions. The higher end teams for what you'd consider a disaster zone require a 4-6 team package w/ an EMT. That sounds reasonable too & doable with some targeted recruiting, maybe some scholarships or something too?

Look here last 3 pages, fixed wing is at the begining:
http://www.fema.gov/pdf/emergency/nims/508-8_search_and_rescue_resources.pdf


Oh, and there is no negotiating. CAP has no voice & the fight is over. This is set in stone. You WILL comply or you will NOT get missions, period. It isn't changing. CAP's been losing that fight for a few years now & finally gave in. What we're waiting on now is the implementation plan & see how fas they intend to get in line. My guess is slow, but it'd be easier pull the tape off fast in my view.

[ZigZag911]

Word I got is that Iowa's chart is basically correct, but ICS 400 probably won't be required for lower levels than IC2/AL2

[Dragoon]

What's funny about this is that when they need folks, they'll take what they can get.  Sure, they'll start with the folks who have met the standards, but the higher the standards, the smaller that pool becomes.

And if Katrina happens again, they'll start waiving stuff right and left to get the job done.

That said, the Wilderness Team requirements don't look that bad.  It wouldn't take much to wicker our GTM to the "equivalent" of SARTECH 2, and the rest is pretty much stuff that could be checked off by sitting through some lectures.

[alice]

Am doubting highly NIMS compliance means end of under 18 for SAR ops.  FEMA knows very well many sheriff offices depend on local Boy Scout Explorer SAR teams.

FWIW:  Lots of the NIMS compliance issues are being redone in the current rewrites of the National Response Plan and NIMS.  For example, there is the NRP/NIMS rewrite working group "Functions" for "review [of] all major operational and support functions within the NRP and [to] conduct a succint review of all Emergency Support Functions, Support, and Incident Annexes."  One of those annexes deals strictly with all SAR ops to ensure the integration of ***all*** federal and non-federal search and rescue assets.

CAP HQ should be coordinating CAP's input on all of this through their own POC, and/or through our state ES agencies and 1st AF's NRP/NIMS Point of Contacts.  Anyone can check the rewrite progess at www.dhs.gov/nrp.  FEMA really wants lots of field responders input through those POCs.

First comment period on the first draft of the NIMs rewrite is Feb 1-19.

First comment period on the first draft of the NRP rewrite is Mar 12-30. 

Electronic release of NRP and NIMs is June 1, amazingly fast for FEMA.

June 1.  Easy deadline to remember.

[RiverAux]

keep in mind that these are still draft standards.  We can't exactly go changing all our stuff because of something that isn't yet finalized.  I feel pretty confident that no matter what is adopted there will be some reasonable phase in period for everybody to adapt. 

[Dragoon]

So true.  And given how hard it is to get CAP to adhere to a standard, we need to keep from getting ahead of FEMA.  I know our National Ops guys are involved in the review process.  Beyond that, "wait and see" seems like a good plan for the rest of us. There's undoubtedly going to be a multiple year phase-in period.  There always is.

[Al Sayre]

Have you all seen the latest "Open Cockpit"?  One of the items is about a new regulations procedure that will allow revisions in 60-90 days vice 6-18 months.

[davedove]

I haven't been able to find any credentialing requirements for any of the Fixed Wing Teams or the Radio Direction Finding Teams.  It seems to me this is a big part of what CAP does.

It does look like the Wilderness Search Teams is where our Ground Team training is best focused.

[Dustoff]

The credentialing requirements are still a work in progress.  I think we'll just have to give them some time to get them published.

Jim
NIMS Instructor

[DNall]

The SaR standards are about to become final, probably sometime next week. For us that just covers WSAR which GTM will have to get in line with, and that's the hardest one we're going to face (PFT, medical specialists, SaRTech II, etc).

The Fixed-Wing & UDF standards haven't been floated for review yet but will come sometime this year. UDF may or may not require either a physical or PFT. The Pilot standards from the typing guide are pretty interesting. We have a lot of people with advanced ratings though. Have to see how it works out. The Aircrew/Observer side I think is going to include some kind of physical at least, & I think the training will be spelled out to alter ours slightly (we really don't spend a lot of time on scanning techniques & such). Biggest thing there is the type guide spells out advanced gear on the plane as you move up levels, that's going to be good for us. I would expect some changes from these, but nothing overly dramatic. Just get WSAR taken care of starting a week from now.

[RiverAux]

I'm not at all worried about what aircrew standards they come up with.  I think CAP has already set the standard in that field (which isn't very broad in the first place). 

[Hartley]

Hi Y'all,

  I have a question - why is it that CAP does not require CPR/First Aid for it's "active" members? (i.e., those who might have a reason to need it)

  We were reviewing the new CAPR 100-4 (Comm Safety) and CAP-USAF asked why it was simply "recommended" that commcen folks have CPR/1st Aid, when the AF requires ALL members to do it.

  Personally, I think it's a good question..

Hartley

[RiverAux]

Rightly or wrongly, we probably don't require it of everbody because it is seen as an Emergency Services skill and some people don't want anything to do with ES (just like others aren't interested in CP or AE).   But, heck, we don't even require it of all our ES folks. 

It is actually a little embarassing that an organization that has significant ES responsibilities doesn't require such training and even more so considering how many children and older senior members that we have. 

[piperl4]

First thing CAP has to do is learn how to track the courses. So far no one knows who has had what course and SQTRS has not been updated to reflect any sort of recording of that training. You can have all the courses you want but if they are not documented somewhere that counts what good are they. Our records are full of certificates but without it on the 101 whats the point.

[RiverAux]

I'm sure that if the 60-3 revision is approved that they will put it in eservices just like all the other ES tasks. 

[sarmed1]

Type II resource

At least 4 team leaders and 28 team members to support at least 4 operational field units (at least 1 member of
each team must be a medical specialist – see below)

So is this mean 1 medical specialist per 32 person team, or each of the 4 operational field units must have a medical specialist on it? 

Whats the break down of postions on the Type II resource?  1 TL, 3 TM and ?......add in MS and technical specialist per OFU plus management staff or is that number supposed to be based on rotating team mebers in and out to maintain that 48 hour operational expectation?

mk

[DNall]

I took it to mean one Medic per 4 OFUs (GTs), which is about right to my thinking. 

[arajca]

For those interested, here's a FEMA slide show abot NIMS compliance...
NIMS Compliance Slide Show.

[ammotrucker]

I can't believe that they would mandate having a certified first responder on a SAR team. 

This as I see it would or could cause a huge problem with completing one's mission.  ie.  If a EMT walks into a situation where anyone is injured then he must take appropriate action to help that individual.  This may mean that his team would then have to leave without him or cancel there mission to help.

This would be inappropriate in my thinking.

I know that someone will correct me so bring it on. 

I just don't think the EMT or similar position should be requied.  Although I believe that it should be available to any GT that would like one.

[KyCAP]

Just a tidbit to this thread.   My ES officer in my squadron indicates that FEMA ICS courses on NIMS are now being tracked in e-services as of about a week ago.

[CadetProgramGuy]

Type II resource

At least 4 team leaders and 28 team members to support at least 4 operational field units (at least 1 member of
each team must be a medical specialist – see below)

So is this mean 1 medical specialist per 32 person team, or each of the 4 operational field units must have a medical specialist on it? 

Whats the break down of postions on the Type II resource?  1 TL, 3 TM and ?......add in MS and technical specialist per OFU plus management staff or is that number supposed to be based on rotating team mebers in and out to maintain that 48 hour operational expectation?

mk

This is the link to NIMS Resource Typing.

Urban Search and Rescue Task Force (Our UDF Teams)  http://tinyurl.com/5zhg4k
Wilderness Search and Rescue (Our Ground Teams)  http://tinyurl.com/5zhg4k

The Whole NIMS Resource Typing Website:  http://tinyurl.com/55jpxq

[DNall]

urban SaR is not our UDF teams. DF team is our UDF. USaR is collapsed building type stuff that we're pretty well restricted from doing.

The whole SaR typing guide is currently in the process of being changed. WSAR is becoming Land SAR. The standards are changing up quite a bit from what I understand. It's been reviewed already, believe the second draft should be out to public comment any day now. Should be wrapped up after a while. Whatever that says is what we'll need to convert GT to.

[SARMedTech]

On the medical issue though....if you are trained to provide medical services to your "customer" then we MAY....MAY cross that line from lay person first aid into the First Responder area.  If that is the case it becomes a liabilty issue.

On the helo ops..by my read...the training is a little more involved than just familurisation training.  Granted CAP does not do helos and maybe a middle ground can be found that will meet both CAP's liability and the NIMS requirements.

Like I said...nothing that can't be worked out...but we do need NHQ to work out these sort of issues.

Also as a side note......I think NIMS compliance will spell the end of under 18 cadets from working ES.

Taking responders from emergency first aide to medical first responder would require liability coverage which CAP has been historically unwilling to even consider, as has been discussed so many times before.

As for helo ops...Even getting ES teams inside a helo would require extensive training and liability and I cannot see that it is something that CAP is going to want to go anywhere near. In order to get helo ride time (just ride time) for my CEU's for my EMT license, I have to go through a 1 hour safety orientation course and be checked off by the pilot. And who is going to provide the helos? I doubt either the NG or ANG is going to want to get involved to that extent and I can guarantee that privately/corporately owned med-evac helo services WILL NOT even return a phone call about such a proposition.  In any case, what would be the significant advantage of SAR helo ops.  Good Lord...I can just envision a whole new "Ranger" classification at HMRS.  "Advanced Medical Airborne Helo Ranger w/Tin Whistle Authorization." Nah. Nebba gonna happen. I mean, if nothing else, can you imagine the years it would take to authorize the new blingage.

[isuhawkeye]

Actually in my neck of the woods the aero medical ships view it as marketing, and PR opportunities.  I have personally brought life flight, and Mercy1 in to do demonstrations, and our army aviation unit has spent the day flying CAP officers and cadets on orientation flights. 

[SARMedTech]

Actually in my neck of the woods the aero medical ships view it as marketing, and PR opportunities.  I have personally brought life flight, and Mercy1 in to do demonstrations, and our army aviation unit has spent the day flying CAP officers and cadets on orientation flights. 

But I think you will agree that PR opportunities are vastly and greatly different than med-evac or military rotor-wing airships being available "on call" or "on standby" for CAP's missions to America.  And, in a not unconnected concept, while military helos such as the ones you picture here may have more ability to carry number of...weighty...fliers, this is not the case of med-evacs. When I fly with the four different private med-evac helo crews in my home town, I am always reminded to make sure that I carry my cell phone because, due to conditions varying from the cumulative weight of the crew on a given day, to atmospheric and weather conditions, the distance of the evac flight and on and on, it is not at all uncommon that persons aboard the helo may have to be left behind. I have had the experience of flying 20 minutes from the hangar to pick up a patient only to find myself having to wait for a ground crew to transport me back. And of the four helos in which I fly, two are BK-117s, one of the largest and more powerful helos in common use for private medical flights.

Further, private medical helicopters are not designed for a SAR crew and their gear. For those who have ridden in them either as a patient, crew member or other passenger, you know that once you locate yourself in the helo's crew seats, that is where you stay until landing. Even in a helicopter with as much "umph" as the BK-117, patients who are frightened of flight in a helo and who begin to thrash or move excessively have to be sedated, paralyzed and intubated to reduce the amount of extra movement within the helo's cabin. Imagine a couple of cadets with 72-packs (the weight of which would be determined by the helo's pilot and first officer/flight nurse/flight medic) trying to get into that cabin, fit into their seats and maintain relative stillness while in flight.  Perhaps military helos would have more advantages than an medical helo being used.  Also, do we then train cadets and SM's in helo landing zone operations which can often be specific not only to each different type of helo or its service of origin, but also to how the particular crew prefers to fly and land depending on their air frame.

Its just not practical, let alone easy and when we cant get CAP to provide liability to EMS personnel, how are we going to get them, let alone cadet's parents to sign off on a release of liability from the medical chopper's operators which says that they are not responsible for "serious, severe or crippling injury including burns and the distinct possibility of death from various causes including the very real possibility of an unplanned emergency landing (read as crash) or any injuries resulting from an auto rotation (read as controlled crash) should the airship lose power?"

CAP hasnt ever used helo's. What's the major necessity now? I agree it would be a great asset to insert ground crews into crash sites, but it would also be an equally if not superior assets to have those ground crews themselves have medical officers allowed to do anything but place bandaides and hypothesize about what they might do if they were protected by the organization whose missions they are carrying out.

[isuhawkeye]

I agree with many of your comments, 

however I have been on 4 searches where aero medical birds have been activley assigned search sorties, and 2 missions where a "ready" helo, and cap ground team were waiting ab assignment.  fortunaitly never used.

[SARMedTech]

As a ground pounder, I would like nothing better than to be set down on a search grid by a sky-blender, I'm just not sure it is practical or incredibly safe without extensive training on the part of the CAP teams and training in interoperability between the air crews and CAP teams. And I certainly would rather be dusted-off with a crash survivor than having to hump them out to the road on a Stokes.

[isuhawkeye]

unles I am mistaken LZ operations is a requirment layed out in the GT SQTR.  is that not correct/enough?

[SARMedTech]

unles I am mistaken LZ operations is a requirment layed out in the GT SQTR.  is that not correct/enough?

I was previously certified in LZ ops, and that was accepted so I cannot say exactly what the quals are for LZ ops in CAP since i dont have those regs in front of me. As I get back into CAP ES more, I intend to memorize ES regs ver batim, but right now my masters degree work is taking precedence.

[SAR-EMT1]

unles I am mistaken LZ operations is a requirment layed out in the GT SQTR.  is that not correct/enough?

Si...

In a nutshell... (For CAP or otherwise)

Clear a level area of brush to form a square grid being 50 yards by 50 yards.

Check for overhead wires and ensure that personnel are outside of said grid when aircraft is on final.

Mark with strobe (at night) or smoke grenade/ flare (most pilots I know prefer Blue or Purple)

Place said strobe or smoke grenade securely  on the ground right about where you want the nose of the bird (at the top center of the grid when viewed from uprange)

Place an observer/FLM in view of pilot

[KyCAP]

Also,

CAP itself hasn't used rotary wing aircraft, but in the past two years as the IC in the field I have requested support from the Kentucky State Police and the National Guard for various reasons.   Just last fall I requested an OH-58 to help search a valley loaded with brambles and bushes. 

We had two ground teams on the ground and one G-1000 circling above that at search altitude.

Knowing how to operate with these aircraft and their benefits is very useful.

[sardak]

This is the link to NIMS Resource Typing.

Urban Search and Rescue Task Force (Our UDF Teams)  http://tinyurl.com/5zhg4k
Wilderness Search and Rescue (Our Ground Teams)  http://tinyurl.com/5zhg4k

The Whole NIMS Resource Typing Website:  http://tinyurl.com/55jpxq

While those are the links to the current typing documents, they are in the process of being revised.  The thread about their revision, with copies of the proposed changes, is here: http://captalk.net/index.php?topic=4657.0  There are significant changes, particulary in Land SAR, formerly Wilderness SAR.

As for the status of the revisions, this what I received from FEMA a couple of weeks ago:
Over the next two months, the National Integration Center (NIC)'s Incident Management Systems Division SAR Working Group will be reviewing all comments received by the NIC. The SAR Work Group will then forward recommended responses or resolutions to the Incident Management Systems Integration Division for incorporation into the current documents.

Among the proposed changes, all Land SAR team members must have "Basic Aviation Safety, such as the Department of Interior, Aviation Management B-3 course."  The B-3 course, which includes helo and fixed wing ops, is online at: https://www.iat.gov/online.asp  This site also has a 3D library of fixed and rotary wing aircraft at: https://www.iat.gov/aircraft_library/index.asp

There are no LZ ops certifications required.  While some organizations may require it, many don't.  Ground team leaders have an LZ task, "O-1002 Establish A Helicopter Landing Zone."  I've never known a private medevac helo program that hasn't been willing to come out with a helicopter and give a presentation on helicopter safety and LZ operations, which I recommend should be done to complete this task.  Law enforcement agencies with helos are also willing to give these briefings.

As for CAP personnel being flown in a helicopter, it doesn't happen very often.  However, riding on a helicopter doesn't take extensive training.  Many SAR members' first ride on a helicopter came after a 3 minute briefing by one of the helo crew members.

CAP certainly has allowed helicopters. CAPM 55-1 "CAP Member-Operated Helicopter Operations" dates back to at least 1983, my earliest reference.  Per the manual:
The mission of CAP member-operated helicopters is for search and rescue on emergency services missions. Helicopters can be used for concentrated search efforts, confirming sightings and recovery of victims when justified.  Member-operated helicopters will not be used for the sole purpose of transportation of personnel or equipment."  There were even Helicopter Mission Observer and Scanner ratings, as well as training for flight line personnel.

CAPM 55-1 was superseded by CAP Regulation 55-1 which still allowed member-operated helo ops for SAR, DR, CN (CD) and OPLAN 1000 missions. The manual and reg contained helicopter marshalling signals, LZ setup and a section on remote area helo ops.  Helicopter ops were removed from CAPR 55-1 in the October 1998 revision.

Mike

[sarmed1]

I imagine just like in the military the only reason to have an "extensive familirization" on helos is if acting in a crew capacity.  Military wise for example when I was with the guard in a helo unit and more recently in the AF with fixed wing non-crew personnel on board are pretty much considered cargo.  They get the same kind of airline passenger safety briefing that we give if you get a ride on a CAP aircraft...ie "sit here, heres how the seat belt works, dont touch this this or that, if things go bad do this, and listen to this guy here, if you survive meet us here...."

like sardak said, the B-3 safety cours is fine for passenger types its free and its on line, took me a couple of hours to work thru one work night...very informative.  Since its the specifically mentioned standard, I am pretty sure it meets the training requirments...

mk

[DNall]

There's not a whole lot to helo ops. Don't walk in front of my gun, don't come up in a blind spot, don't touch the freakin airplane, and don't get hit by any moving parts.

There is a decent PPT file on the national website:
http://www.cap.gov/documents/u_787049185176045394.ppt

There is a need to be able to move around a helo in operation. It does happen that teams/individuals infil/exfil by helo. You'll recall a couple months ago I put two members in a state police helo on a REDCAP, located/landed/confirmed/secured crash site. I did the same thing from a CG helo years ago as a CAP GTM. There is the possibility that we'd be involved in helping move/load patients to helos. We must be able to deal with active air resupply. All that stuff does currently happen in CAP, maybe not everyday, but a few times a year around the country. It doesn't take a whole lot of training to stay safe in that enviro. That's all the standard NIMS is asking for. It doesn't require any change to our liability coverage.

Medical does require some changes. There's nothing wrong with wilderness first responder. We already require first aid. It's not a big deal. It's actually a good thing. Providing serious EMT services would be more of an issue legally. It's actually not hard at all to operate with the AF acting as medical director out of AFRCC. There's a little bit of an issue with state licensing & not being able to necessarily use those people out of state in all cases, but that's not a common problem anyway. Obviously it requires additional insurance coverage, and obviously in order to be IMS compliant that's something AF is going to have to help us take care of. It's not a big deal, just some minor complications that need dealing with on the administrative/legal side. That'll happen in time. In the meantime, press on for the quals we need so we're there when NIMS gets it together. And you need to be on the top of your game anyway.

[SARMedTech]

unles I am mistaken LZ operations is a requirment layed out in the GT SQTR.  is that not correct/enough?

Si...

In a nutshell... (For CAP or otherwise)

Clear a level area of brush to form a square grid being 50 yards by 50 yards.

Check for overhead wires and ensure that personnel are outside of said grid when aircraft is on final.

Mark with strobe (at night) or smoke grenade/ flare (most pilots I know prefer Blue or Purple)

Place said strobe or smoke grenade securely  on the ground right about where you want the nose of the bird (at the top center of the grid when viewed from uprange)

Place an observer/FLM in view of pilot

Actually, most non-military helo pilots will not land with smoke, especially colored smoke, as it distorts their visibility something fierce. Understanding that one of the reasons for someone trained in LZ Ops bringing the airship down is because often they cannot tell when the skids are on the ground, would you want to land in a cloud of smoke. It worked in VietNam, because they had no choice in many cases. I have only had the chance to ask two of our four medical helo pilots here, but they state without question that they will not land in smoke and have told ground crews to reset a landing zone to another location because they were not coming down in or near smoke, and I would think the darkness of purple of blue could be especially disorienting.

Also, as far as DNall's comments, yes there is a possibility that a GTM or the whole team could be involved in helping to load patients onto a evac airship. However, it is a very small possibility. Around here, fire fighters, LEO's and even ground EMS crews stay well clear of that helo especially since here they tend to do hot landings and at least in my area of the state, non-trained individuals are not welcome with rotor's range of a helo during a hot landing. And if the rotors are slowing down and someone is going in to load a patient, on a BK-117, I hope someone has reminded them that the rotors can droop to as much as six feet lower than their rotating position.

Again, I say while it would be better than having to carry a Stokes a mile or two to a ground ambulance, CAP is never gonna go for it. Its just not all that relevant or necessary to the types of missions that CAP regularly performs, REDCAP or not.

When we took LZOps during my EMT course, 17 year olds were allowed to sign up for the EMT course as long as they would be 18 by the time they had to do ride alongs. When it came to helo ops and safety, the three 17 year olds in our class had to sit it out because their parents (one set of siblings and another student)  would not sign the waiver of liability form which contained the language (in addition to what I said in a previous post on this subject) that there was the further possibility for serious injury and death "as a result of decapitation from improper movement in the area of the tail rotor." Given that we had a Sheriff's Deputy seriously injured when she walked into an almost stopped tail rotor, I don't think its too much of stretch that a 14 year old cadet might just walk into the thing. And I disagree that it doesn't take much to stay safe in a helo dust off enviroment. A  BK-117, let alone a much larger ship, throws so much FOD out in its down draft that for my course at least, all persons who were not actively involved in landing the ship had to stay outside the 100x100 foot LZ. Inside the LZ, I ended up with FOD in my pockets that had not gotten there by entering the pockets opening, but rather by blowing through the material of my uniform.

Also, I wasn't aware that the CG loaned CAP its helos from GTM use. Now that would be an experience I would pay money for. Around here, they don't want anything to do with CAP.