Fire/EMS Safety, Health and Survival Week: Day Three: “Dynamic Management of Risk during Combat Fire Engagement”

Protect Yourself: Your Safety, Health and Survival Are Your Responsibility

Of the four (4) Key Focus areas in this year’s Fire/EMS Safety, Health and Survival Week, that include Safety, Health, Survival and Chiefs, the focus area of Structural Size-Up and Situational Awareness within the Survival element become compliment, when combined with the mission critical operation function of Dynamic Management of Risk during Combat Fire Engagement.

•In our previous installment, we posed the operative question that stated: “What do you “really” know about the buildings in your district?”

•The Fire/EMS Safety, Health and Survival Week focal point that reinforce the provision for all personnel to keep apprised of different types of building materials and construction used in your community.

•It was also stated that, Building Knowledge = Firefighter Safety” and that it was imperative to Know Your District and its Risk.

•But what about the Dynamic Management of Risk during Combat Fire Engagement?

The continuing emphasis on improving our safety culture and the reemergence of Safety as a strategic pillar is evident and self-revealing in various facets of current fire service operations, discussions or initiatives. I say reemergence, due to the fact that Safety was THE Fire Service issue in the mid to late 1980’s with the development of the NFPA 1500 Standard on Fire Department Occupational Safety and Health Program and the emerging focus, at the time on firefighter-personnel safety, effective incident operational practices and company officer development.

Following the first National Fire Fighter Life Safety Summit and subsequent publication of the Sixteen Firefighter Life Safety initiatives (2004), coupled with the escalating adverse trends in Firefighter Line-of-Duty Deaths, significant attention and dialog has been directed at the generally accepted fire service practices, culture and, at times; indifference towards safety, combat fire suppression operations & methodologies and command risk management.

THE REAR VIEW MIRROR
The fundamentals of Fire fighting have not drastically changed over the past 75 years. However, the Rules for Combat Structural Fire Suppression Have Changed… Didn’t anyone tell you? Structures, Buildings, compartments, materials, structural systems, assemblies, designs, occupancies, fire loading, fire dynamics and behavior; all have changed-dramatically in the past seventy-five years. In the years since Chief Lloyd Layman’s (1940) Fundamentals of Firefighting Tactics and his groundbreaking “Little Drops of Water” presentation at FDIC in 1950, and the ensuing formulative “firefighting war years” of the 1970’s the fundamentals of firefighting and combat fire engagement have continued to emphasize aggressive interior operations, at times directly opposed to qualitative risk indicators, elements and behaviors. The firefighting doctrines and methodologies of the 1970’s and 1980’s shaped and influenced our culture and have brought us to these crossroads in 2009.

Combat fire suppression and rescue is considered a primary tenet of fire and emergency service agencies. We plan, prepare, train, outfit and anticipate the call for fire suppression services - that alarm dispatch that communicates a possible or actual report of fire in a structure and occupancy and the need to dispatch, deploy and orchestrate the equipment, resources, manpower and expertise necessary to safely handle the fire and incident. Combat fire suppression and interior rescue and support operations, incident severity, magnitude and frequency can vary widely in their application and potential as an incident response factor and with the associated risk that is present to operating companies.

Common themes have promoted risk management and command decision making over the years, related to buildings, occupancies and their relationship to structural firefighting and combat engagement. Since 2008, I have been promoting the mantra that Building Knowledge = Firefighter Safety be added to our continuing efforts for LODD reduction and firefighter safety, aligning with command risk management and the Sixteen Firefighter Life Safety initiatives;

•Brannigan (1971) The Building is the Enemy
•Dunn (1985) No Building is Worth the Life of a Firefighter
•Brunacini (1985) "We Will Risk" Doctrine
•Brennan (1995) Make the Building Behave
•IAFC (2001) Risk Assessment & Rules of Engagement
•Goldfeder (2001) Everyone Goes Home
•NFFF (2004) 16 Firefighter Live Safety Initiatives
•Naum (2008) Building Knowledge = Firefighter Safety

There is one element that is a constant in deployment, response and operations during combat structural fire operations and command risk; and that is the interface and interaction with the structure, the occupancy and its inherent features, hazards, risks and performance characteristics. Chief Alan Brunacini (1985, 2002) wrote; “We will risk our lives a lot, in a highly calculated and controlled manner, to protect a savable human life; We will risk our lives a little, in a highly calculated and controlled manner, to protect savable property. We will not risk our lives at all to protect lives or property that is already lost.”

Of the first four Firefighter Life Safety initiatives, initiatives #3 and #4 provide dominant importance related to combat firefighting and command management and risk;

1.Define and advocate the need for a cultural change within the fire service relating to safety; incorporating leadership, management, supervision, accountability and personal responsibility.

2.Enhance the personal and organizational accountability for health and safety throughout the fire service.

3.Focus greater attention on the integration of risk management with incident management at all levels, including strategic, tactical, and planning responsibilities

4.All firefighters must be empowered to stop unsafe practices.

The integration of effective command risk management is an integral element in developing our fire service safety culture and creating a safety conscious work environment (SCWE). Understanding building performance, construction and fire dynamics are the other mission critical elements for a SCWE. Expanding and promoting the dynamic management of risk during combat fire engagement and institutionalize this into our strategic and tactical decision-making during combat structural fire operations will provide for enhanced focus and continuing assessment of building structural integrity, fire behavior and construction performance to ensure the safety and integrity of tactical company missions within the incident action plan at all buildings and structures, regardless of their construction type, materials, occupancy classification, age or size.

IAFC'S 10 RULES OF ENGAGEMENT
The International Association of Fire Chief's (IAFC), in 2001, developed and published its "10 Rules of Engagement for Structural Firefighting" that apply to all fires:

Acceptability of Risk
1.No building or property is worth the life of a firefighter.
2.All interior fire fighting involves an inherent risk.
3.Some risk is acceptable, in a measured and controlled manner.
4.No level of risk is acceptable where there is no potential to save lives or savable property.
5.Firefighters shall not be committed to interior offensive fire fighting operations in abandoned or derelict buildings.

Risk Assessment
1.All feasible measures shall be taken to limit or avoid risks through risk assessment by a qualified officer.
2.It is the responsibility of the Incident Commander to evaluate the level of risk in every situation.
3.Risk assessment is a continuous process for the entire duration of each incident.
4.If conditions change, and risk increases, change strategy and tactics.
5.No building or property is worth the life of a firefighter.

The integration of Acceptability of Risk and the aspect of Risk Assessment continue to challenge the fire service in determination, acceptability, applicability and implementation. The critical questions that must be asked is; Does your organization effectively use Risk Management, is it an integral part of command decision making process, and is it practiced amongst ALL operating personnel on the emergency incident scene, at all times? The IAFC Safety, Health and Survival Section is presently working to revise and expand the original "10 Rules of Engagement for Structural Firefighting" and align them with current fire service operational issues and challenges.


IT’S MORE THAN JUST SIZE-UP; SITUATIONAL AWARENESS AND DYNAMIC RISK ASSESSMENT
Dynamic Risk Assessment is commonly used to describe a process of risk assessment being carried out in a changing or evolving environment, where what is being assessed is developing as the process itself is being undertaken. This is further problematical for the Incident Commander when confronted with competing or conflicting incident priorities, demands or distractions before a complete appreciation of all mission critical or essential information and data has been obtained. The dynamic management of risk is all about effective, informed and decisive decision making during all phases of an incident.

Situation Awareness [SA], is the perception of environmental elements within a volume of time and space, the comprehension of their meaning, and the projection of their status in the near future. It is also a field of study concerned with perception of the environment critical to decision-makers in complex, dynamic situations and incidents. Both the 2006 and 2007 Firefighter Near-Miss Reporting System Annual Reports identified a lack of situational awareness as the highest contributing factor to near misses reported.

Situation Awareness (SA) involves being aware of what is happening around you at an incident to understand how information, events, and your own actions will impact operational goals and incident objectives, both now and in the near future. Lacking SA or having inadequate SA has been identified as one of the primary factors in accidents attributed to human error (Hartel, Smith, & Prince, 1991) (Nullmeyer, Stella, Montijo, & Harden, 2005). Situation Awareness becomes especially important in work related domains where the information flow can be quite high and poor decisions can lead to serious consequences.

To the Incident commander, Fire Officer or firefighter, knowing what’s going on around you, and understanding the consequences is mission critical to incident stabilization and mitigation and profoundly crucial in terms of personnel safety. The integration of Situational Awareness and Dynamic Risk Assessment is a mission critical element in strategic incident command management and company level tactical operations as we go forward into the next decade. Traditional incident scene size-up is antiquated and no longer appropriate or applicable to modern fire service operations.

Situational awareness is a combination of attitudes, previously learned knowledge and new information gained from the incident scene and environment that enables the strategic commanders, decision-makers and tactical companies to gather the information they need to make effective decisions that will keep their firefighters and resources out of harm's way, reducing the likelihood of adverse or detrimental effects.

According to a 1998 published Tri Data study report, "Situational Awareness is one of the most difficult skills to master and is a weakness in the fire community. The report goes on to state that "The culture must change so that [personnel] are observing, thinking, and discussing the situation constantly.” It’s all about implementing effective human performance tools; perceptions versus reality, expectations versus realization, comprehension and forecasting, informed decision-making and calculated and formulated risk. It’s a whole lot more than just “Size-Up”. Although size-up has helped us manage risk to some degree, significant cultural and technological impediments to firefighter safety still exisit.

DYNAMIC RISK ASSESSMENT
The term ‘Dynamic Risk Assessment’ is commonly used to describe a process of risk assessment being carried out in a changing or evolving environment, where what is being assessed is developing as the process itself is being undertaken. This is further problematical for the Incident Commander when confronted with competing or conflicting incident priorities, demands or distractions before a complete appreciation of all mission critical or essential information and data has been obtained.

The dynamic management of risk is all about effective, informed and decisive decision making during all phases of an incident. All command and supervisory personal and operating companies must be able to recognize and appreciate the risks which are present at an incident in order to carry out an effective dynamic risk assessment. The definition of a dynamic risk assessment is: “The continuous process of identifying hazards, assessing risk, taking action to eliminate or reduce risk, monitoring and reviewing, in the rapidly changing circumstances of an Operational incident.”

In the early 1990s the United Kingdom (UK) Fire Service embarked upon a campaign to introduce effective systems of command, based upon a foundation of risk assessment and evaluation. The initiative was due to the large number of firefighter fatalities, which resulted in extensive investigations by the Health and Safety Executive (HSE), a quasi-autonomous government agency which has significant statutory powers in relation to the Health and Safety of the U.K. workforce. The level of scrutiny to which the HSE exposed the UK Fire Service was unprecedented in its history and resulted in a fundamental root and branch evaluation of operational safety and performance. This is not unlike the current issues facing the United States Fire Service and our adverse LODD trends, impacts and initiatives.

Deputy Chief Fire Officer Mark W. Smitherman, Nottinghamshire Fire & Rescue Service stated. “The process heralded a difficult and, to some extent, a traumatic time for many brigades throughout the U.K. A considerable level of resources was focused on addressing the many problems that were uncovered in [fire brigade] systems and procedures. Most importantly, the self evaluation [is] still ongoing and is firmly embedded into the U.K. fire service dimension as a dynamic and continuous process. In essence, the impetus for change stemming from the early 1990s has embedded within the U.K. fire service a structured and all-encompassing approach to operational risk management.”

Deputy Chief Smitherman goes on to state that, at the strategic and systematic level, through a process of vertical and horizontal managerial integration, provides the support necessary to ensure that operational personnel are able to remain safe in dynamic and hostile environments. However, the foundation of Dynamic Operational Risk Assessment is the ability of individual firefighters to make professional judgments about the appropriate use of available resources in order to maintain their own safety and to contribute to the safety of others.Therefore all firefighters must be:

•Competent to perform tasks assigned,
•An effective member of a team,
•Self-disciplined to work within accepted systems of work,
•Adaptable to changing circumstances, and
•Able to recognize his or her own abilities & limitations

“Selection, training, and competency programs must ensure that each of these prerequisites are embedded within individual firefighters. In reality, the ability of an officer to command an incident is inextricably linked to the ability of individual firefighters to operate as a Safe Person and to be part of the total command process and not merely a result of it.”

The Incident Commander, in effect, is dependent on the command vision of all participating firefighters and officers for success. Therefore, each firefighter must fully understand and continually make dynamic assessments within their area of operations. All firefighters in the U.K. have received structured training inline with this risk assessment methodology.

MODERN ENVIRONMENT
The built-environments that form and shape our response districts and communities pose unique challenges to the day-to-day responses of fire departments and their subsequent operations during combat structural fire engagement. With the variety of occupancies and building characteristics present, there are definable degrees of risk potential with recognizable strategic and tactical measures that must be taken. Although each occupancy type presents variables that dictate how a particular incident is handled, most company operations evolve from basic strategic and tactical principles rooted in past performance and operations at similar structures. This basis is based upon Predictability of Performance.

•Modern building construction is no longer predicable
•Command & company officer technical knowledge may be diminished or deficient
•Technological Advancements in construction and materials have exceeded conventional fire suppression practices
•Some fire suppression tactics are faulted or inappropriate, requiring innovative models and methods.
•Fire Dynamics and Fire Behavior is not considered during fireground size-up and assessment
•Risk Management is either not practiced or willfully ignored during most incident operations
•Some departments or officers show and indifference to safety and risk management
•Command & Company Officer dereliction
•Nothing is going to happen to me (us)

STOP THE ENTERTAINMENT
But there’s another factor contributing to unsafe practices, one that we rarely talk about. In short, we need to stop “entertaining” ourselves during fire suppression operations and instead focus on comprehending and reacting to evolving risks.

What do I mean by “entertaining” ourselves? Rather than practicing appropriate risk management, I believe many individuals employ adverse behaviors that occur on a tactical level while ICs believe firefighters are completing their assigned tasks, thus compromising accountability.

These behaviors include:

• Tactical amusement: engaging in any practice or tactic during fire suppression, support tasks or operations that places personnel at risk for the sake of entertainment.

• Tactical diversion: diverting from an assignment while engaging in fire suppression, support tasks or operations in such a way that places personnel at risk.

• Tactical circumvention: deliberately “getting around” an assignment or disregarding risk assessment and incident action plans.

If we’re going to reduce firefighter injuries and deaths, we must be doing the right thing, at the right time, for the right reasons, and in the right place. We must stop the entertainment.

Fortunately, there is a strategy to help us overcome the limits of the traditional size-up: dynamic risk assessment, a continuous process of identifying hazards and taking action to eliminate them. The IC employing dynamic risk assessment doesn’t complete a size-up, form a plan and move on. They constantly monitor and review the fireground conditions, which are usually in a rapidly changing state, and they adjust their plan accordingly. The management of dynamic risk comes down to effective, informed and decisive action during all phases of an incident.

Within the dynamic risk assessment model, two concepts stand out: risk recognition and communication of risk. All command and supervisory personnel and their operating companies must be able to recognize and appreciate the risks present at an incident. At the same time, they must be able to communicate what they see. Unlike conventional size-up, dynamic risk management requires a fluid flow and integration of observations throughout the command structure up to the IC level.

The demands and requirements of modern firefighting will continue to require the placement of personnel within situations and buildings that carry risk, uncertainty and inherent danger. As a result, risk management must become fluid and integrate all personnel.

We must manage dynamic risks with a balanced approach of effective assessment, analysis and probability within command decision making that results in safety conscious strategies and tactics. Remember; Dynamic Risk and Command Management and the integration of BECOME SAFE concepts, ingredients for safer operations.

RESOURCES
Phoenix AZ, FD; Safety and Risk Management Profile SOP, HERE
IAFC; Rules of Engagement, HERE
Renton Fire and Emergency Services Department Risk Management Standard Operating Procedure, HERE
Firefigher Survival Resources, IAFC, HERE

REFERENCES
Identifying Leadership and Management Best Practices for Reducing Firefighter Deaths & Injuries Phase I Report. (2006) John Granito, Nancy J. Trench, Robert England, Christopher Neal Fire Protection Publications, Oklahoma State University

Mark W. Smitherman, “British Styles of Incident Safety: Command Decision making and Team Knowledge”

Dynamic Management of Risk at Operational Incidents Health and Safety; A Fire Service Guide. UK Home Office (1998)

Dynamic Management of Risk, Health Safety & Welfare, UK Fire Services Examination Board (2003)