Battalion Chief and USAR Task Force TFL (Task Force Leader)
Years of public service:
31
Agency structure:
Paid fire department
Top issues in your department:
Broad spectrum emergency and disaster planning, training, procedures, and response; firefighter safety and accountability on the emergency scene.
Professional Qualifications:
Fire Captain
Topics you provide training for:
Technical Rescue and Disaster Planning and Response
Areas of expertise:
Assigned to the department's centrally located rescue/USAR company from 1992 to 2010; assigned the swiftwater rescue teams since 1992; assigned to FEMA US&R task force since 1990 ; assigned to FEMA US&R IST since 2000; swiftwater rescue instructor since 1983; urban search and rescue instruction since 1987; paramedic since 1982; involved in disaster planning, training and response, etc. Battalion Chief in south L.A. area.
Bio:
Battalion Chief in south L.A. area. Captain assigned to USAR-1 1992-2000; Captain assigned to USAR Task Force 103 Feb 2000 to February 2010. Author of Technical Rescue, Volume I and II (Pennwell); the Rescue chapter of the Fire Chiefs Handbook; and the Rescue chapter of Firefighter I and II (Pennwell); and dozens of articles since 1988; instructor at FDIC since 1994.
Please allow me to invite you to a site designed by responders for responders... the crew that is doing it is CISM multilevel trained and are there for the guys after the bad calls. It helps the responders that do not yet have a team or would be worried that they asking for help would be seen as weakness. Please join and share it when you can. As a chaplain with over 25 years of service to fire departments I am excited with it's potential to provide support.
I wonder if I may ask for your opinion on a "anchor" issue. I've been aware of your expertise for many years, own both of your volumes on technical rescue and have great respect for your skill and understanding of this part of our profession.
My department is evaluating a pre-plan for high angle rescue off of a satellite dish in our response area.
The area we expect to have to operate in is only 45 - 50' off the ground, but we have no anchors available on the 4' deep pad it sits on. The pad is 30' x 30' square. The place is ringed by a slope, a cyclone and barb wire fence and options for aerial use are limited and as we both know not the best plan. The chiefs want to eliminate the engine as our anchor for the 3:1 system we are training with for the rescue.
As a replacement, they have come up with a 34" x 8" x 3/8" steel plate, with 14" high, 1/4" steel brackets welded onto the plate as anchor points. Both brackets are welded to the plate, and re-enforced with eight 3/4" x 6" bolts. Roughly seven to eight of these things would be installed into the 4' deep concrete pad to support a rope system that is intended to lower a rescuer and victim.
My inquiries into whether it met the 15/1 ratio and whether it needed to meet any type of testing in order to keep us out of OSHA's clutches resulted in me being tasked with finding out.
I wonder if you have had to request similar anchors be made and what features have you employed? I'm accustomed to choosing anchors based on whats immediately available. I've never had to design or engineer one. What is your take, if I might ask?
With all due respect,
Ben Fleagle
Captain, University Fire
Fairbanks, Alaska fnbdf@uaf.edu/ (907) 460-0721
John O'Connell
Mar 14, 2008
David Ebel
Visit Emergency and Disaster Responders
Chaplain David Ebel
Apr 15, 2008
Ben Fleagle
I wonder if I may ask for your opinion on a "anchor" issue. I've been aware of your expertise for many years, own both of your volumes on technical rescue and have great respect for your skill and understanding of this part of our profession.
My department is evaluating a pre-plan for high angle rescue off of a satellite dish in our response area.
The area we expect to have to operate in is only 45 - 50' off the ground, but we have no anchors available on the 4' deep pad it sits on. The pad is 30' x 30' square. The place is ringed by a slope, a cyclone and barb wire fence and options for aerial use are limited and as we both know not the best plan. The chiefs want to eliminate the engine as our anchor for the 3:1 system we are training with for the rescue.
As a replacement, they have come up with a 34" x 8" x 3/8" steel plate, with 14" high, 1/4" steel brackets welded onto the plate as anchor points. Both brackets are welded to the plate, and re-enforced with eight 3/4" x 6" bolts. Roughly seven to eight of these things would be installed into the 4' deep concrete pad to support a rope system that is intended to lower a rescuer and victim.
My inquiries into whether it met the 15/1 ratio and whether it needed to meet any type of testing in order to keep us out of OSHA's clutches resulted in me being tasked with finding out.
I wonder if you have had to request similar anchors be made and what features have you employed? I'm accustomed to choosing anchors based on whats immediately available. I've never had to design or engineer one. What is your take, if I might ask?
With all due respect,
Ben Fleagle
Captain, University Fire
Fairbanks, Alaska fnbdf@uaf.edu/ (907) 460-0721
Aug 29, 2008