NIMS compliance

[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.