AGENDA #5b
MEMORANDUM
TO: Mayor and Town Council
FROM: W. Calvin Horton, Town Manager
SUBJECT: Staff Report on Resource Needs in the Fire Department
DATE: December 9, 2002
The attached staff report responds to an October 7, 2002 petition from Mr. Ralph Abrahams concerning resource needs in the Fire Department.
ATTACHMENT 1
TO: W. Calvin Horton, Town Manager
FROM: Daniel Jones, Fire Chief
SUBJECT: Response to Petition Regarding Resource Needs in the Fire Department
DATE: December 9, 2002
The purpose of this report is to provide information in response to a petition from Mr. Ralph Abrahams at the October 7, 2002 Town Council meeting concerning resource needs in the Fire Department.
On October 7, the Town Council received a petition from Mr. Ralph Abrahams requesting that the Town Council consider the resource needs of the Fire Department (Attachment 1). Specifically, Mr. Abrahams questioned the operational staffing level of the Fire Department and the need to improve the training provided to the Town’s firefighters.
Staffing Changes
In the period since the early 1990s there have been several changes in the Fire Department’s operations staffing. In 1993 twelve positions were reallocated to the Fire Department budget. This was not an increase in personnel, but a replacement for the removal of twelve Public Safety Officer positions assigned to the department under the shared police/fire public safety system of that time.
From 1982 until 1999 there were no other changes in Fire Department operational staffing. One fire inspector position was added in 1998 to deal with increased code enforcement work load.
During the 1999-2000 fiscal year the Town Council authorized the addition of six positions to fire operations to meet the Occupational Safety & Health Administration’s mandate to maintain two unassigned firefighters outside of a building fire to act as a safety backup team. These six firefighters serve on Squad-33, a quick-response rescue pumper utilized to ease response load on the large and expensive aerial truck.
During fiscal years 2000-2001 and 2001-2002 a total of twelve firefighters were added by the Town Council to staff the new Fire Station #5 near Southern Village. Although Fire Station #5 was opened primarily for protection of the new southern annexation areas, the overall fire protection of the Town also benefited by this improvement, because this station assists with the coverage in neighborhoods south of McCauley Street, the Morgan Creek area and across the southern portion of the University campus.
Mutual Aid Arrangements
Mutual aid with surrounding Fire Departments also plays a major role in providing fire protection coverage of Chapel Hill, with frequent assistance being received from the Carrboro, New Hope, Parkwood, and North Chatham Fire Departments. Mutual Aid arrangements are an effective resource for major incident response, because few communities can afford to maintain all of the fire resources they may ever need. Mutual aid is facilitated by inter-local agreements between Fire Departments. The agreements basically state that firefighting assistance will be provided from one agency to another whenever needed and the arrangement is reciprocal. These arrangements become especially important during major fires or incidents when resource needs (staffing or equipment) at the scene exceeds what a Fire Department has available. Mutual aid is also used when a department has committed most or all of the available resources to ongoing emergencies and the mutual aid department is asked to move resources into the community to provide continuing coverage.
A good example of both of these scenarios occurred during the July 2, 2002 Southern Village fires, when all of the Chapel Hill fire protection resources were committed to the apartment building fire and further assistance at the fire was utilized from Carrboro and Durham County. At the same time units from other Orange County and Chatham County Fire Departments provided coverage for the other two simultaneous house fires and the remainder of the community.
Laws or Regulations About Staffing Levels
There were two errors in the details of Mr. Abrahams’ petition. The first was an assumption that there are laws that govern how many police officers must be maintained in a community. There are no laws or legal regulations that specify how many police officers or firefighters must be maintained in a community. The second error was the statement that Chapel Hill Fire Department only assigns two personnel to a firefighting unit. Chapel Hill maintains a minimum staffing level of three personnel on each fire engine and aerial truck. Only Squad-33 at Station #3 (corner of Franklin Street and Elliott Road) responds with two personnel, and it is not a primary firefighting unit.
There are no laws or regulations that govern the level of staffing for community fire protection with the exception of the federal Occupational Health and Safety Administration’s requirement to keep two firefighters on standby (2-in and 2-out) outside of a structure fire to assist firefighters who may become trapped during a firefighting effort. Fire protection staffing level is locally decided based on what each community determines is an acceptable level of risk.
Staffing Guidelines
There are two recognized guidelines that communities can use in determining the level of resource they believe reasonable.
(1) The most widely known guidelines are established by the Insurance Services Organization (ISO) that evaluates communities for fire protection risk and provides information used by insurance companies in determining fire insurance premiums.
Insurance Services Organization recommends a staffing level of 18 personnel for each structural fire response and a reserve backup of 50% of that capability. A structural response includes the equipment and personnel assigned to respond to reports of fires in or threatening structures. Insurance Services Organization recommends 2 fire engines and an aerial truck for each response and 6 persons per fire unit for a total of 18 persons.
The normal structural response in Chapel Hill consists of 2 engines, one aerial truck, the squad truck and Battalion Chief with a minimum staffing of 12 personnel. We hold two fire units and 6 personnel in reserve to cover the community; however, if the incident warrants additional assistance those units are also dispatched. While Chapel Hill currently meets the equipment standard for Insurance Services Organization we would have to add 36 positions overall to meet their staffing standard. We believe that this staffing requirement is excessive and does not recognize the use of modern firefighting technology (such as thermal imaging cameras, large diameter hose and automatic nozzles) to facilitate firefighting. We are not currently aware of any city in North Carolina that fully meets the 6 personnel per fire unit requirement of this guideline.
(2)
The newest guideline is the National Fire Protection Association (NFPA)
Standard 1710 for Organization and Deployment of Fire Operations. The NFPA
guideline recommends an initial structural response of 15 personnel, but does
not recommend a reserve backup. The NFPA guideline also sets objectives for
response time (under 5 minutes to 90% of the calls) and assigned positions per
fire unit (4 personnel). Chapel Hill could meet the initial structure fire
response personnel guideline by sending all on-duty units (except the two
person squad unit) initially, which would total 16 personnel at minimum
staffing level.
We believe we now meet the response time requirements of this standard. Last
year, Chapel Hill Fire Department had an average response time of 3.3 minutes
and was on-scene in less than 5 minutes on 95% of all calls. We do not meet
the persons per unit requirement, as we can only maintain a minimum of 3
personnel per unit. If we attempted to respond to a structure fire using this
guideline, Chapel Hill would be left with the coverage of two firefighters on
the squad in the community and that provided by neighboring mutual aid Fire
Departments. To meet this recommended guideline we would have to add 18 new
personnel. This would add 6 additional positions to each shift.
Comparison to Other Communities
In a comparison survey of ten North Carolina communities ranging in population size from 25,000 to 67,000, Chapel Hill ranks last in firefighters to population ratio (Attachment 4) at 795 citizens to each firefighter. The other communities range from 384 citizens per firefighter to 627 citizens per firefighter. Since each community determines its own fire protection staffing level there is no consistency noted among the ten comparably sized communities. This information was gathered by specifically calling each Fire Department and talking to a member of their administrative staff.
Staffing Considerations
Many factors should be considered when determining whether local fire protection resources are sufficient to provide adequate coverage to a community, including: density of development, population types (age, income levels, duration of residency, etc), building sizes, response times, age of structures, requirements for built-in protection (sprinklers) and special hazards.
A good example of built-in protection is the ordinance that the Town Council enacted in 1996 to require fire sprinklers in commercial and multi-family buildings over 5,000 square feet. In addition, the University is adding fire sprinklers to residence halls as they are renovated and includes sprinklers and other fire protection systems in all new buildings.
Chapel Hill has unique features that make our community risk higher than most similarly sized communities in the region. These features include the University and associated occupancies, large numbers of multi-family housing, larger average sized single family homes and structures, frequent large crowd events and a population that includes a larger than normal percentage of new residents each year.
Recommendations
I believe that the Town Council should consider adding up to eighteen firefighters, phased over the next four budget years. This additional staffing would bring each shift up to an authorized level of 28 personnel (currently at 22) and would result in a minimum staffing of 22. Minimum staffing is the level maintained after accounting for vacations, educational leave and sick or injury leaves. A minimum staffing of 22 would allow us to send 15 personnel on a structural fire response and still have 2 fire units and 7 personnel to respond to another call, thereby relying less on mutual aid. This proposed level of staffing would provide us with additional depth of coverage and some reserve capability when dealing with a normal structure fire. There is no reasonable level of staffing that I can recommend that would provide full coverage for every potential emergency, and we will continue to depend upon mutual aid for response to extreme situations.
Consideration of the initial fireground assignments for a normal structure fire (which the NFPA guideline is based upon) helps to understand why the proposed staffing level is desirable.
Ÿ One firefighter functions as the scene commander setting strategy and coordinating the fire teams.
Ÿ One firefighter operates the fire pump and controls the supply of water to the hose streams.
Ÿ Two firefighters operate a primary fire attack hoseline while two more firefighters operate a backup or secondary hoseline.
Ÿ Two firefighters function in a support role for the two hoseline teams by helping drag the hose to the structure, pulling slack hose and carrying tools.
Ÿ Two firefighters perform the search and rescue for occupants or facilitate evacuation.
Ÿ Two firefighters perform ventilation, which is the task of starting the smoke removal from the building to increase visibility and reducing smoke damage.
Ÿ Two firefighters must standby outside the structure in a ready mode to assist other firefighters in danger. (This is the OSHA requirement for “2-in and 2-out”.)
Ÿ One firefighter must be ready to assist with ladder or aerial truck operations. He or she may also assist the pump operator with establishing the water supplies.
This division of tasks totals fifteen firefighters and is a reasonable first fire attack personnel plan.
Currently, with 12 personnel initially on-scene, we must delay some operations in order to accomplish the most essential tasks. Personnel are assigned to carry out more than one assignment or to complete the assignment with less than the number of personnel identified above. For example the smoke ventilation task may not occur in the early stages of the fire attack or there maybe no initial secondary fire hoseline. We do not delay tasks such as initial attack hose and search and rescue operations. When the fire involves multiple units (such as an apartment building), or is larger (such as a university building), the needed numbers of personnel for each task increases significantly. Firefighter safety can also become a factor when fewer firefighters are on scene initially to handle all of the necessary tasks. Exhaustion occurs more quickly during an incident when firefighters stretch to meet the work demands and injuries are more probable.
The table in Attachment 5 provides detail of the current authorized shift staffing, also showing minimum daily personnel assignments contrasted with the level of staffing recommended in this report.
Cost of New Position
The cost of a new firefighter position with equipment, training, benefits and salary is approximately $41,000. The cost of eighteen new firefighters would total $740,000. A potential future funding source for a part of this need may be a grant program similar to the law enforcement grants of the mid 1990s. The U.S. Congress has recently considered legislation that would provide grants to communities for the hiring of firefighters, but to date that legislation remains in committee and must be reconsidered in the next session of Congress.
Need for Training Officer
We believe the highest priority staffing need is the addition of a full time training officer. Staff officers or shift officers (in addition to their primary duties) currently conduct in-service training. This approach to training personnel is difficult to manage, and consistency in program delivery is hard to maintain. These officers must split their attention, resulting in a lower priority for training than a dedicated fire instructor could provide. We believe the addition of a full time trainer in the Fire Department is crucial for maintaining services.
Adequate and well-coordinated training is the foundation of an effective Fire Department regardless of the staffing levels maintained. There are 41 different subject areas on which each employee must receive training for each calendar year. These subjects range from fire hose practices to breathing apparatus wearing techniques. There are 6 subject areas that must be addressed to meet federal or State requirements for fire and emergency services, including subjects such as Blood-borne Pathogens, Hazardous Materials, fit testing of personal equipment and Cardio Pulmonary Resuscitation. There is inconsistency when training is a part-time assignment for a staff officer or shift officer with other primary assignments.
We recently learned that the North Carolina State Fire Commission will transfer recertification responsibilities from the State to each Fire Department. Such a transfer of responsibility will require a new level of testing and record keeping for training purposes. Training programs for 73 employees in emergency service discipline requires considerable planning and coordination to ensure that objectives are met. Effective, complete and well-documented training is the key to maintaining a high level of emergency services and to insuring consistent and competent actions at the emergency scene. The increase of Fire Department staffing and the retirement of senior fire personnel in recent years has lowered the overall experience level of the Department which amplifies the need for a quality, objectives based training program.
A full time training officer in the Chapel Hill Fire Department would be assigned to three primary functions.
Ÿ First would be the in-service training of existing personnel on all three shifts and in the staff. In-service training would consist of the subject areas listed above and the introduction of new techniques and technologies.
Ÿ The second function would be the training of new personnel, thus enabling us to hire civilians instead of already-trained firefighters. We believe this would facilitate the hiring of more women and minorities into our firefighting ranks.
Ÿ The third function would be to serve as departmental safety officer, observing for safety violations, making safety recommendations to command officers and incorporating safety into training and evaluations.
It is common for municipalities with comparable sized Fire Departments to provide training through a full time training officer whose primary responsibility is the ongoing training and education of fire personnel. Of the ten Fire Departments surveyed in Attachment 4, six departments have one full time training officer and the other four departments have 2 full time training officers. The cost of a full time training officer including salary, benefits, equipment and overtime for major fires and special events would be $60,000.
While we believe it is clear that staffing needs in the Fire Department should be considered by Town Council, we also believe staffing levels could be addressed in the normal budget consideration process over a period of several budget cycles.
We plan to recommend creation of an additional Fire Captain position dedicated to training and education functions in the proposed budget for fiscal year 2003-2004. We would also be pleased to discuss the Fire Department staffing needs with the Town Council as part of the budget considerations.
Attachment 1 – Petition from Mr. Abrahams (p. 9)
Attachment 2 – Information request from Mr. Abrahams (p. 10)
Attachment 3 – Fire Department information letter sent to Mr. Abrahams (p. 11)
Attachment 4 – Fire Staffing Comparison Chart to other North Carolina cities (p. 13)
Attachment 5 – Chapel Hill Staffing Assignments, Current and recommended (p. 14)