|
Lowering the U.S. Flag
Did you know that the law requires the U.S. flag be lowered in tribute on only a
few days each year? Quite appropriately, one of these days is the observance of
the National Fallen Firefighters Memorial Service.
On October 16, 2001, President George W. Bush approved legislation requiring
the U.S. flag to be lowered to half-staff on all Federal buildings to
memorialize fallen firefighters. Public Law 107-51 requires this action to occur
annually in conjunction with observance of the National Fallen Firefighters
Memorial Service.
Let your local media know that U.S. flags across the country will be lowered on
Sunday, October 5, 2008. This includes the U.S. Capitol and the White House, as
well as buildings in your local community.
Remember to lower the U.S. flags at your home, fire department, and business.
Encourage your local community to follow the Federal Government's example. When
you lower your flag this year, you will recognize the brave men and women who
died protecting their communities from natural and manmade emergencies and
disasters and those who carry on the proud tradition.
You may also want to ask your state and local officials to include lowering the
flag in a proclamation recognizing the brave men and women who made the ultimate
sacrifice.
Michigan Fire Service Connection
April 2008
Dear Friend:
Welcome to Michigan Fire Service Connection – the official
e-newsletter of the Bureau of Fire Services. Each month we will be providing
information to you including key program updates, issues, and articles of
interest via email and our website.
To provide a comprehensive newsletter, this communication will encompass a team
effort. Our goal is to focus on what we can do together, sharing information,
resources, and energy to achieve our vision of a Fire Safe Michigan!
We encourage you to share your information by way of submitting short articles
for this newsletter. We will rely on you to provide suggestions, photos of
interest or information that will be useful to all of us involved in the fire
service.
Please send all suggestions, article ideas, and feedback to Karen E. Towne at
townek2@michigan.gov.
Sincerely,
Andrew W. Neumann
State Fire MarshalClick here to download
the entire PDF file
Safe Delivery Act
During the summer of 2000, Governor Engler signed into law the " Safe
Delivery of Newborn Act." This new law makes it possible for a parent to
surrender a newborn infant in a safe and anonymous manner. The primary purpose
of the act is to avoid the tragedy of having unwanted newborns being hidden and
left to die in dumpsters and other places. This law takes effect January 1,
2001.
This act impacts ALL FIRE AND POLICE DEPARTMENTS in Michigan. The act provides
that a parent may surrender an infant to an emergency service provider, and goes
on to define an emergency service provider as " a uniformed or otherwise
identified employee or contractor of a fire department, hospital, or police
station when such individual is inside the premises and on duty." This means
quite simple, that a parent (either parent) of a newborn can drop off an
unwanted newborn at any fire or police department and remain anonymous.
The fire department or police department has statutory obligations under the
law. They can be summarized as:
- Take the infant into protective custody
- Provide information to the person surrendering the newborn
- Obtain medical history relevant to the newborn
-Arrange for transport of the newborn to the hospital
The Family Independence Agency, Adoption Services Division, is the lead agency
and is responsible for developing information packets for the implementation of
this act.
Is Your Safety Officer Freelancing?
Provider: FireFighting.com
Written By: Charles Angione
The safety of our personnel who perform this most hazardous occupation certainly
deserve someone’s undivided attention. Why is it, then, that we operating
personnel sometimes actually seem to resent the one person whose sole
assignment is to look after us? Is Your Safety Officer Freelancing?
Why do we need a safety officer? Isn’t the incident commander ultimately
responsible for the safety of all concerned? Don’t the members of the general
staff,
from the operations chief to his division and group supervisors down to the
company officer on each individual tactical unit, bear responsibility for their
individual commands? Isn’t each firefighter, in fact, held accountable for his
own
actions as they relate to safety? Surely there are enough individuals on the
scene
concerned with safety.
Perhaps, but the primary reason we establish a safety officer is that safety is
his
sole assignment. That is to say, the safety officer, unlike the others
mentioned, has
no tactical objectives to achieve. We all recognize that when given the
responsibility to complete an urgent assignment, the quality and level of safety
concerns can -- in moments of stress and intense desire to achieve a difficult
goal -
- tend to be compromised.
The above not with standing, have you ever witnessed a "safety officer" helping
to
drag in a line, assist in overhaul or otherwise become lured into some
operational
activity? In earlier days of incident command, this was a fairly common sight.
It
was a hold over from the "real firefighters don’t just stand around," school of
thought. Unfamiliar and perhaps a bit uncomfortable with the position, the new
safety officer would frequently drift into the more comfortable operational
duties,
soon becoming carried away with his new self-assigned duties and tending to
neglect his responsibility to monitor and assess hazardous conditions.
I once actually saw a safety officer that I had assigned forcefully swinging an
axe in
a burned out attic of a heavily damaged fire building. His upper body protruded
precariously through a gaping hole in what remained of the roof assembly, and
every blow of the axe caused the entire structure to shake. What was more,
neither
gloves nor a helmet were, apparently, considered necessary for the operation.
That is not what this IC had in mind when assigning the fire officer the heavy
responsibility of protecting our people.
The safety of our personnel who perform this most hazardous occupation certainly
deserve someone’s undivided attention. Why is it, then, that operating personnel
sometimes actually seem to resent the one person whose sole assignment is to
look after us? One reason may be hurt feelings caused by misunderstanding. "This
is my company [or battalion or division, etc.], " a conscientious line officer
might
complain." And these are my people. I’ve always taken good care of them. Why do
I need this outside interference?" The safety officer’s role as a coordinated
extra measure of safety -- which in no way impugns mistrust in anyone’s
capability
or threatens anyone’s command authority -- must be made clear to all.
Another reason for the resentment may have to do with the behavior of the safety
officer, himself. I am thinking of the occasional tactlessly authoritarian and
overbearing safety officer who, drunk with power, barks orders at everyone
within
earshot as if he never heard the words "unity of command." One common
characteristic of all good fire officers is that they jealously dislike anyone
but themselves ordering their people around. Then there is the remaining
confusion
and misinformation surrounding the authority of the safety officer and his
duties.
NFPA 1561 3-2.2.2 states that "Safety officers shall have the authority to
immediately correct situations that create an imminent hazard
to personnel." The operational words here are, of course, "imminent hazard,"
and,
while he enjoys authority over other officers in certain situations, the degree
of
emergency discretion allowed the safety officer is no greater than that borne by
any
ordinary firefighter under such extreme conditions (either of whom may be asked
to
justify any emergency actions afterwards). Still, this statement has
caused some who should know better to believe that the safety officer operates
independently of the IC and is somehow autonomous.
Of course, the same section goes on to explain "at an emergency incident where a
safety officer identifies unsafe conditions, operations or hazards that do not
present an imminent hazard, the safety officer shall take appropriate action
through
the incident commander (italics are mine) to mitigate or eliminate the unsafe
condition, operation or hazard." And, of course, when any emergency actions are
taken to correct an imminent hazard, "The safety officer shall immediately
inform the incident commander."
Consider also the Field Operations Guide (ICS 420-1) as taught by the Incident
Command System National Training Curriculum when I attended the National Fire
Academy:
"The safety officer, a member of the command staff, is responsible for
monitoring
and assessing hazardous and unsafe conditions and developing measures for
assuring personnel safety. Although the safety officer may exercise emergency
action to stop or prevent unsafe acts when immediate action is required, the
officer
will generally correct unsafe acts or conditions through the regular line
of authority (again, my italics). The officer maintains awareness of active and
developing situations, approves the Medical Plan and includes safety messages in
each Incident Action Plan.
" His Duties?
• Obtain a briefing from the I.C.
• Identify hazardous situations associated with the incident.
• Participate in planned meetings.
• Review incident Action Plans.
• Identify potentially unsafe situations.
• Exercise emergency authority to stop and prevent unsafe acts.
• Investigate accidents that have occurred within incident areas.
• Review and approve Medical Plan.
• Maintain Unit Log (ICS Form 214).
As you can see, the safety officer (even with assistants) should be far too busy
to
swagger around the fire ground countermanding orders willy-nilly. As a member of
the command staff, his role is essentially advisory in nature, and he reports
directly
to the IC, from whom his authority derives.
Unless justified to bypass normal channels due to an imminent accident, injury,
collapse, back draft, etc. (in which case he would immediately advise command on
the necessary actions he took), he should clear with the IC any actions he or
she
may wish to take which may affect the action plan. He should also work through
the
appropriate unit supervisor whenever possible. To do otherwise would be to
freelance.
The safety officer is a vital tool in our incident management toolbox. As such,
the
position must be used correctly. Misuse tends to dull that tool and ultimately
render
it less useful -- even unsafe.
Charles Angione, former Operations Chief for the City of Plainfield (NJ) Fire
Department, is a freelance writer and a frequent contributor to fire
service publications. The decorated 25-year veteran, a line deputy chief
for 13 years, is a National Fire Academy alumnus, a certified fire
instructor and a long time student, instructor, and practitioner of the
incident command system.
Michigan Receives Funding for Response Team
WASHINGTON (AP) -- Michigan will get a specialized military team to
respond to chemical and biological attacks, Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld
announced Thursday. Michigan was selected to receive one of five Weapons of Mass
Destruction Civil Support Teams authorized in this year's Defense Department
budget. Twenty-seven other states already have one, and Michigan lawmakers had
been pushing the Pentagon to assign one to their state this year.
"Given that Michigan is an international border state with multiple border
crossings, the state is a potential entry point for would-be terrorists, and its
bridges, tunnels and transit routes are potential terrorist targets," said
Senate Armed Services Committee Chairman Carl Levin, D-Detroit. The other states
who got a team Thursday were Alabama, Kansas, Tennessee, and West Virginia.
Each team has 22 full-time National Guard members under the direction of their
governor. Their job is to identify the danger -- be it chemical, nuclear or
biological -- advise local authorities on how to handle it, and prepare for any
other military units on the way. "Michigan has already had in place an excellent
emergency preparedness plan, and this additional team will add to our efforts,"
said Michigan Gov. John Engler,who wrote Rumsfeld in October requesting a team
for the state.
The Clinton administration set up the teams in the wake of the World Trade
Center bombing in 1993 and the Oklahoma City bombing in 1995, and the government
started funding them two years ago. The Michigan National Guard has a part-time
team in place, but state officials say it would take several hours to mobilize
the team. Currently, the closest Weapons of Mass Destruction Civil Support Team
is in Peoria, Ill., more than 300 miles away from the state's southern border.
Rep. Pete Hoekstra, R-Holland, said it would take half a day for the team to get
to parts of his district.
"In an emergency, half-a-day is too long," Hoekstra said. "Given the size and
population of our state, the best protection the federal government could
provide to our people is to have a team based right here in Michigan." Michigan
National Guard spokesman Maj. Jim McCrone said after the team is hired it will
begin 14 months of training after the first of the year. The Defense Department
plans to begin certification of the team in early 2003, he said. It has not been
determined where the team will be based, McCrone said.
The teams have come under some criticism. A few years ago, a report from the
General Accounting Office, the investigative arm of Congress, questioned the
need for the units. A Pentagon review of the teams said many had defective
safety equipment and poor training. The review said preparedness is so bad that
Guard members at one point were given mobile labs with air filters installed
backward and gas masks with incompatible parts. But Michigan lawmakers have said
the teams are necessary to respond to possible terrorist attacks.
"We're battling two fronts right now -- one a world away in Afghanistan, the
other right here at home," said Rep. Fred Upton, R-St. Joseph. "It's a huge task
to adequately protect our people and infrastructure, and we're grateful for this
help."
Michigan Glove & Supply Company Inc.
12751 Capital Ave
Oak Park MI 48237
800-543-1878 x231
I represent Michigan Glove & Safety Supply Company a complete personal
protective equipment supplier to area business and industry for the past 50
years. We supply respiratory products for general industry and protective gear
for firefighters and escape/rescue devices for home land security. The newest
product on the market is a 15 minute escape hood which filters contaminated air
in the event of a nuclear, biological or chemical disaster. It meets the SBCCOM
regiment of the military, and is being used by many federal, state and locals
governments.
We are planning a seminar at an area hotel to demonstrate and educate agencies
interested in providing their personnel the most state of the art equipment.
This seminar will be held sometime in the first quarter of 2003. If you would be
interested in attending please confirm via this email address
verde@c-mg.com. Depending on the level of
interest we may offer a couple of dates.
Please call me to set up a meeting or to answer any of the questions you may
have.
I look forward to meeting with you.
|
|
