There are three generally accepted types of confined space rescue: self-rescue, non-entry retrieval, and entry rescue. Just as with the hierarchy of hazard mitigation, confined space rescue should be approached with an ascending hierarchy in mind. 

1. Self-rescue is typically the fastest type and eliminates or at least greatly reduces the chance that anyone else will be put at risk. For these reasons, it is the first choice, but it is unrealistic to think that an entrant would be able to rescue themselves in all situations.
2. Non-entry retrieval is the next choice. OSHA stipulates that non-entry retrieval must be considered as a means of rescue – more on that shortly.
3. Entry rescue is the last choice, largely because it exposes the rescuers to the same hazards that the original entrant faced.

OSHA recognizes the inherent danger of entry rescue, which is why the organization mandates “retrieval systems or methods shall be used whenever an authorized entrant enters a permit space.” However, OSHA goes on to qualify this statement with two very important exceptions. OSHA requires non-entry retrieval, “unless the retrieval equipment would increase the overall risk of entry or would not contribute to the rescue of the entrant.”  Let’s examine each of these two provisions more closely... 

1. Non-entry retrieval is required “…unless the retrieval equipment would increase the overall risk of entry.” For example, if the retrieval line would create an entanglement hazard that would impede the entrant’s ability to exit the space, then the retrieval system should not be used and entry rescue should be the choice.
2. And non-entry retrieval is required unless the equipment “…would not contribute to the rescue of the entrant.” The key here is that the non-entry method employed must be viable. It must work when called into action.

For non-entry retrieval systems, we are relying on that retrieval line to exert forces on the entrant to pull them out of the space without help from any other device or human intervention within the space. It must perform without someone inside the space maneuvering the victim or otherwise providing assistance to the retrieval system. It has to work independently of any other forces other than what is generated from outside the space. This extremely important point is often overlooked and has resulted in many fatalities. Sadly, many of those fatalities were the would-be rescuers that attempted entry rescue when the retrieval system failed to do its intended job.

Situations that may render the retrieval system useless would be any configuration or obstruction inside the space that would prevent the system from pulling the victim clear of the space in an unimpeded manner. This could be pipework or obstructions on the floor for a horizontal movement. Likewise, pulling an unconscious victim around corners may render a retrieval system ineffective. If the entrant moves over any edge and down into a lower area offset from an overhead portal even at moderate angles, the retrieval system will probably not be able to pull an inert victim up and over that edge, even if the drop were only a foot or so.

It must be clearly understood that retrieval systems may quite possibly be applying forces on a limp human body, which, as harsh as this sounds, becomes a sort of anchor. It requires a very thorough and honest evaluation of where the entrant will be moving in the space in order to perform their planned work, and what obstructions or structural configurations are in that path. If there is any possibility that the system will not be able to pull an unconscious, inert victim along that path, then the retrieval system is NOT viable.

Okay, so you have done a thorough and honest evaluation of the space, its configuration, and internal obstructions and determined that there is a clear path from the entrant’s “planned” work area, which is offset ten feet from the overhead portal eight feet above. Clearly, the retrieval system will be able to pull the victim out of the space should the need arise. Enter human nature, and with that comes bad decisions. Murphy’s Law has a very nasty way of changing things for the worse. 

What if, in the course of the planned work, our entrant drops his wrench down into a sump immediately adjacent to his work zone but further from the overhead portal? The fixed ladder down into the sump is only five feet and he can clearly see the wrench stuck in the sludge below. He asks for slack on the retrieval line, climbs down into the sump, bends down to grab his wrench and is nearly immediately rendered unconscious due to an undetected atmospheric hazard. 

The attendant/rescuer sees that the entrant’s head and shoulders do not reappear and within several seconds calls to ask if he is ok, only to hear no answer. He calls several more times, but still no answer. He begins to haul with the retrieval system, which consists of a wire rope winch mounted to a tripod.  The cable becomes tight and the tripod shudders and shifts slightly, then all progress stops. The would-be rescuer tries with all his might to pull the entrant’s limp body up and over the 90-degree concrete edge, but cannot. 

In a panic, the attendant/rescuer climbs down into the space and over to the sump where he sees the entrant pulled tightly against the wall of the sump but not off the floor. He climbs down into the sump to attempt to lift the entrant’s 200-pound limp body up and over the five-foot wall. As soon as he bends down to cradle him, the hazardous atmosphere overcomes him also. Two fatalities later, we wonder how our non-entry rescue retrieval system could have failed us. It would not have, had human nature not interfered and caused two people to make bad decisions. 

That story was intended to point out that things do not always go according to plan. Not only do we humans make bad decisions on occasion, but we also have accidents due to trips, slips, and falls that may send us to an area that the retrieval system may not work. Conditions inside the space may change in such a manner that it affects the retrieval system. 

For all these reasons I implore you to evaluate the capability of the retrieval system to work not only when things go according to plan, but also to evaluate the system based on the “what ifs.” For the “what ifs” that involve bad decisions, that is a matter of training and communicating to the entry team why they cannot deviate from the work plan, even to fetch that dropped wrench. For the “what ifs” that include trips, slips, falls, or equipment failures, it may be time to consider a back-up plan, which may include an entry rescue capability.

Pat Furr: Welcome to the second installment of Roco Chats With The Experts. I’m Pat Furr from Roco Rescue and this month we are pleased to welcome Michel Goulet and John Dorough of Petzl America. We are going to do a deep dive on some of Petzl’s most popular items, which is great because readers will get insights straight from the experts on the Petzl I’D and the JAG Syst
em, the Rescucender cam, the ASAP and ASAP Lock, the latest in helmets and more.

Michel and John, if you are ready, I would like to start out by asking you to introduce yurselves and tell us what got you started with Petzl and working with equipment to support folks in the vertical realm…

Michel Goulet: Well, I have always been active in the outdoors and in 1980 I started an outdoor rock-climbing school in Ottawa. I ran that for about 6-7 years and I quickly realized that most of our students were coming for professional reasons instead of for recreation. That gave me the idea to switch the focus from outdoor recreation to working with professionals at height, which made the wife happy as we didn’t have to work as many weekends. I met some of the Petzl folks, after I made a presentation at the North American Technical Rescue Symposium here in Kelowna, BC in 1996. A job opened up and I was hired in 2003.

John Dorough: My association with Petzl nearly mirrors Michel’s. I was in college getting my degree in Natural Resource Management, but on my off time I drank the juice of all things rock-climbing. My goal was to get out to Yosemite Valley and somehow write it off as school work. I was able to convince a couple of professors and my parents and ended up going out there to complete some practicals toward my degree. I got into big wall climbing where I met the Yosemite Search and Rescue team. I needed to do an internship for my degree and ended up finding one with Petzl, which was great because they paid me in climbing gear. Fast forward to now, I am one of the principle Petzl representatives along with my brother for the Mid-Atlantic, South East and South Central regions of North America on the professional side.

PF: Michel, you mentioned at your outdoor rock-climbing school that a lot of your students were there for their work instead of recreation. Was that a precursor to your involvement in rope access?

MG: That was the mid to late 90’s, pretty much when SPRAT got going. I think IRATA was about 10 years old but didn’t have much presence in Canada. This was a time when a lot of steel workers, bridge inspectors, and riggers were starting to use rock-climbing techniques as a way to safely access work at height.

PF: Rope access is such a safe and efficient option it seems it’s mostly just a matter of introducing industries and employers to it. I know Petzl and Petzl equipment is integral to rope access continuing to move forward. How do you come up with the ideas for new equipment?

MG: In the early days we got into the habit of deciding what the customers wanted and needed. Frankly, that has changed dramatically in the last ten years or so. We have opinion and thought leaders representing the 7 or 8 industries that we work with most. Some of the best ideas come from the practitioners who are always looking to find a more efficient and safer way to work at height. Once we decide to move forward on a product, we try to be as innovative as possible. For most products, we field test it for 2-3 years by turning it over to select practitioners to evaluate. They are experts at their jobs, while we are product experts, so it is a great partnership.

JD: Petzl is really good with innovation, but equally as good about product evolution. For instance, the I’D is on its 3rdgeneration, and the ASAP has also evolved to its current 2ndgeneration. We have the ability to talk with the practitioners in the various industries and from different regions. The tower workers in Texas may have different needs and use different techniques than those in Europe. In this way we are able to identify gaps as well as common needs, region to region. We really listen to all the markets and the practitioners’ needs.

PF: Is it challenging to design products that not only meet the needs of the users, but also conform to the various legislated or consensus standards requirements?

MG: That is a gigantic challenge for any global manufacturing company with a market that includes over 60 different countries. Our rope access harness has 5 different certifications. It would be great if there were an ISO standard for our types of products so we could meet just the one standard.

PF: I have my favorite pieces of kit, and you are probably not surprised to hear that the Petzl I’D is absolutely one of my favorites. It is so much more than a mere Industrial Descender (I’D). How and when did you realize that it has so many capabilities beyond its name? 

 

(photo courtesy of Petzl)

MG: I made a presentation at a symposium when the I’D first came out in the mid-90s. I saw how it could be used as a progress capture device and back pulley on a haul system. Arborists are using it as a releasable anchor for emergency lowers. We are launching an updated version of the I’D this April. And we are adding the I’D Evac to the line. The updated I’D will automatically lock when you release the handle, so it is no longer a point of failure on rope access evaluations if you do not manually lock the device. It also has some added features that prevent the rope from twisting on long descents and has more durable steel materials on the rolled edge and the capstan. On the I’D Large, we reintroduced the safety clicker (quick release side plate) - since NFPA changed the strength requirements for descent devices.

PF: I must say I was disappointed when the I’D Large came out without the quick release side plate. So I am very glad to see its return.

JD: Hey, don’t blame us though, that was driven by an outside organization.

PF: Oh I know, it was that dang NFPA 1983 tech committee. Note: that was tongue in cheek as the author is a member of the NFPA 1006 tech committee.

MG:Unfortunately we had to work with a finite minimum breaking strength and couldn’t include the fact that the I’D as well as most of our products are designed to slip under a load of about 4-5 kn, and the chances of bringing the I’D to failure are reduced tremendously provided there is not a stopper knot tied behind the device. The new I’D has a means of attaching an auxiliary piece to it’s moving side plate that becomes a redirect which adds friction and control of heavier loads.

PF:That redirect will also make it easier for technicians to operate the device on a lower when the I’D is mounted at shoulder height or higher as they will no longer have to hold the standing section of rope high over the device while operating it.

MG:Precisely, and that’s why we have added the I’D Evac to our JAG rescue kit. The I’D Evac operating lever opens the device to allow travel 90 degrees out from the regular I’D. This is a much more intuitive and comfortable position for high mounted friction control devices

JD:Pat, to your earlier point that the I’D may be thought of as only a descender. But what I would say is it can perform the four major food groups of rescue and rope access. Those being; ascent, descent, haul, and lower. When the I’D first came out and for a year or so after, we would go out to visit the users and they were only using it for personal descent, but now when we visit, they are using it for all four of those types uses.

PF:Michel mentioned it being used as a releasable anchor. We have many clients who work as a two-person team using basic rope access techniques. We teach them to use the I’D as a dynamic anchor on both the main and safety line. This way it can be used as an immediate emergency lower, or it can be quickly built into a Z-rig for a 3:1 or 5:1 emergency haul on either of the ropes.

MG:It is a great device to use as an anchor for high lines as you are essentially introducing a slip gear to the system, so you are less likely to overload your anchors. But ropes from various manufacturers will slip and perform slightly differently so it is important to practice & test and see what the difference is in performance.

PF:The I’D only gets better when the user learns some of the subtleties regarding its use. For instance, when you need to remove slack through the device, I have seen users fumble trying to push and pull rope through and it generally gets hung up on the anti-error catch. Once they learn to keep a bit of tension on the working section of rope and pull harder away from the anchor on the standing section all of a sudden, things are much easier. Or if you need to feed rope to the working section, just turning the device 90 degrees to the anchor will allow rope to feed through easily. It is great to see users who have been practicing with the I’D performing these skills as if it were second nature.

MG:Just a word of caution if you are turning the I’D 90 degrees to the travel of the rope, you are defeating the camming effect, and if you have a load or are using it to belay, you must have a very light grip on the device so it will pull itself inline and stop the load should the need be.

PF:One issue our end users are constantly fighting is having enough time to practice their skills and maintaining proficiency. When it comes to mechanical advantage systems, sometimes they get a little befuddled building an MA up from scratch. Or if they rely on pre-built MAs, if they are not careful how they stow or pull the pre-built MA out of the bag, the bottom set of pulleys may flip through and between the lines and create a tangled mess. But Petzl has the JAG systemwhich is a pre-built 4:1 or 5:1 MA that has a mesh sock around it which prevents the system from becoming entangled. Have you considered building the JAG into longer lengths to add additional throw to the system? Or even with larger diameter pulley sheaves?

JD:When we consider innovative products, we try not to limit it to the high-end proficient user that is looking for the little bit of advantage in efficiency or safety. Often times there are opportunities to make products that are most helpful to the less proficient user, and the JAG is one product that certainly helps the user that struggles to build MAs or struggles to keep their MAs from tangling. We see that situation all the time where a rescue team will pull their pre-built MA out and it is so tangled that they end up taking it apart and rebuilding it from scratch. So the innovation of placing the mesh sock over the system really helps the less proficient user especially when confronted with the stress of an actual rescue, knowing that when they pull the JAG out of its bag it will be straight and ready for use.

 

(photo courtesy of Petzl)

MG:I will add that the JAG is now sold in three different lengths: 1, 2, and 5 meter lengths. We are really starting to encourage the use of twin tensioned line rescue systems for hauls and lowers. And we like to use the 5 meter JAG piggybacked onto the haul lines. Depending on how you orient the system, you end up with an 8:1 or 10:1 MA with the travel distance of a 4:1 or 5:1 since both systems are in play.

PF:That is really an advantage if you are short of manpower and end up with an 8:1 MA that may be enough for only two haul team members, one on each system with the benefit of having a belay function with the two tensioned system.

JD:The JAG System sock, as we like to call it, may cause concern for users regarding inspecting the system, but it is very easy to remove so they can inspect, or if they need to replace it should it be damaged.

PF:One of my pet peeves is seeing folks walking about with a two-piece mechanical cam hanging from their harness and the shell is not pinned to the shoe. This usually results in the two pieces breaking apart from each other and the shell is dropped to who knows where. Your current generation of the Rescucendercam has fixed that issue.

 

(photo courtesy of Petzl)

MG:When we first started to design that we were looking for an alternative to the Shunt possibly recommending it as a back-up device. We even had a small hole drilled into the body for the attachment of a light cord to tow the device on descent. But while talking with the practitioners, we decided we were going about this in the wrong way.  And about 8 years ago now, we decided the best backup device for self belay is the ASAP, so we shifted the intent for the new Rescucender for both a cam and a backup device to strictly a cam. For those of you not familiar with the new Rescucender, we replaced the wire that connects the shell and the cam with a steel flange. That wire would sometimes cause entanglement if the rope got wrapped into or behind it when assembling the cam. And if you needed to be fast with the device, lining up the holes with the safety pin could really be a bit of an aggravation. Now you can keep your pulley connected to the Rescucender and attach it to the rope which really speeds things up and reduces the potential for dropping the device. It has dual safety catches one on each side of the shell body. On fat, unloaded 12.8-13 mm rope, the device is a little tight when you are mounting it on the rope, but once it is mounted it works just fine.

JD:And as an instructor at the end of a long hot day, we have all been victims of demonstrating how to place the older two piece cams on a rope and with the sweat in our eyes fumbling with the pin trying to line things up, then dropping the cam, and having to start all over again, the new Rescucender makes it that much less likely we embarrass ourselves.

PF:Yup, been there done that…

JD:A byproduct of the new Rescucender is it makes all us instructor types look that much cooler. It is very intuitive to place and strike off the rope.

PF:We were talking about using the Shunt as a tended self belay, but now we have the ASAP and the ASAP Lock, which are both much better mousetraps than the Shunt for self belay. So not only do we have 100% arrest assurance with the ASAP versus having to remember to release the tow string on the Shunt, but the ASAPs are true automatic rolling belays that follow you up on ascent and lead you down on descent untended.

(photo courtesy of Petzl)

MG:That being said, I do want to say that no piece of equipment is foolproof, but the ASAPs are better devices for belay than the Shunt.

PF:Agreed Michel, and as we use the ASAPs both in training and operationally we realize there are certain considerations that require attention. You have a second generation ASAP called the ASAP Lock. Can you tell us how the device is different from the original?

MG:We have seen a huge growth in the wind industry and more bridge inspections are being performed using rope access techniques. These happen to be areas where there is a lot of wind, right? When you are working 150’ down from the hub, on the tip of a wind turbine blade, you have a lot of wind pushing against the rope between your anchor and the ASAP. Because the wheel of the original ASAP is freewheeling, it tends to let the wind push a loop of rope above the ASAP creating a significant fall potential, unless you remember to set the ASAP.  On the ASAP Lock, once you engage the lock, the rope will not pull up through the device creating that big loop. But the device will still move up the rope if you were to reposition. I think what people really like about the Lock version is you can keep the device connected to your harness when you are bypassing a knot or a redirect anchor. The ASAP 1 and 2 have to be disconnected from your rope by unclipping them from your lanyard and we see a lot of folks adding a light keeper loop to the body of the device to hook a lanyard to so as not to drop it. There exists a chance to wrongly reconnect the body of the ASAP to the rope without connecting the ASAP to your full strength lanyard and that could lead to disastrous results in the event of a fall. The new ASAP Lock can stay attached to your harness via the shock absorber and has 2 independent spring loaded catches to allow easy mounting and dismounting to your rope.

JD:Also on the original ASAP, to load the device onto the rope, you had to manually open the wheel with your hand to allow the rope to fit, and that was sometimes cumbersome. With the ASAP Lock, there are two spring loaded catches reminiscent of what you have seen on handled ascenders. These will hold the wheel away from the body of the device as you load the rope and you only need to bump the catches slightly and they lock the wheel onto the rope. One thing to note is that the ASAP and ASAP Lock are now compliant with ANSI standards when used in a vertical lifeline configuration with our ANSI compliant rope, shock absorbers and connectors.

MG:During rescue operation, the belay device needs to essentially be defeated to allow the rope to move through the mechanism when the load is moving away from the anchor point. Several field tests have been conducted over the past few years showing that the belay person needs to be very attentive and act swiftly when there is a mainline failure, disconnect or over-speed and they need to respond accordingly, allowing the belay device to capture and hold the load. Successful rescue load catches are not always possible when you add in a human factor.  With the ASAP you really take that guesswork away because the ASAP includes a brake that relies on centrifugal force, which is always present, and is a much surer way to eliminate a faulty belay activation method. Several fire departments have started using an anchored ASAP for their belay and have eliminated their miss-catches that they sometimes experienced in training and testing.  Petzl now allows the use of the ASAP LOCK in this fashion as long as an ASAP’SORBER AXESS  is used with two person rescue loads.

PF:I would like to think that most of us who build rescue systems or rope systems to support vertical work, need to use not only our physical attributes, but also our brainpower too. So it makes sense to protect our noggins. You have some interesting helmets that have some unique and specific features. Please tell us about some of your Petzl helmets.

JD:This is an exciting time because in 2019, we are launching our next generation Vertex helmet and introducing a new line called the Strato. We now have a flip and fit system for our suspension system which allows you to flip the entire suspension system up into your helmet where it is protected by the helmet shell. This prevents it from becoming maladjusted during transport or while jammed in your rescue bag. All our helmets for the professional market are type 1, top impact rated and meet ANSI standards as well. If you look in detail at the ANSI standards, you will see there are two types, one for work on the ground and one for work at height. So now we have a dual chinstrap that can convert to meet the ANSI standard for both work situations. We have been adding more and more accessories to our helmets through the years. We have had our VIZEN and VIZIR face shields. We’ve added a full face mesh. We have also added a means to protect these face shields by adding a garage for them where they just push the shield up into the garage when not in use. We have a disposable clear cover that fits onto the helmet shells to protect it from paint and any other staining products. We now have the EZ Clip for mounting accessories which eliminates the need to bolt on accessories using tools and time. Attaching and removing accessories now take seconds instead of minutes.

MG:We have also been able to reduce the price of the Vertex by about 20%. And the chinstraps are now interchangeable and come in two lengths. The face shield protector also allows the use of the headlamp to still fit into its slotted receiver. 

PF:Michel and John, I wish we had more time to go on to talk some more but I am afraid we will have to wrap things up for now. I hope we can revisit and talk about more of your products and even some techniques that are now available because of your products. Thank you so much for your time and I am sure we will see each other around soon.

Welcome readers to the first installment of “Roco Chats with the Experts”. My name is Pat Furr and today we are honored to have Lieutenant Frank Brennan of the Seattle Fire Department share his thoughts on the importance of technical rescuers being physically fit.

In this article, you’ll learn about a new physical fitness training program implemented by the technical rescue company at the Seattle Fire Department, and ideas that may help you start a fitness program with your own team – whether you’re a municipal firefighter or a member of an emergency response or firefighting team at an industrial facility.

Frank has been with the fire department in Seattle, Washington for 27 years and has spent all but a few years of that time on the rescue company. The rescue company is trained and equipped to provide public safety dive, tunnel and rebreather, tower, rope rescue, structural collapse, trench, confined space, commercial and machinery entrapment rescue. The company cadre also delivers structural collapse training to the three-county area. Frank sits on the National Fire Protection Association (NFPA) Technical Committees (1006 and 1670), the bodies that set standards for firefighter training and safety, and he was directly involved with the recent revisions to these standards. He is also a Rescue Team Manager on WATF-1 USAR Task Force and is a member of the Seattle FD Aviation Team.

When I asked Frank if he would consider contributing to our inaugural “Chat with the Experts” he enthusiastically agreed but with one point of clarification, and that is, he doesn’t consider himself an expert. So, I will attest to the fact that Frank is a lifelong student of his trade and is a true craftsman.

Pat Furr: Welcome Frank, and thank you for taking the time to discuss this topic with us. In my 38 years of being involved with various types of technical rescue, it is obvious to me that there are several elements that make a great rescuer and rescue team. First and foremost is quality training, both initial and continuing training specific to the type of rescue that may be required. Then there is equipment selection, and we both know that there are numerous tools available to today’s rescuers.

But one thing that I am afraid gets overlooked is the overall physical fitness of our rescuers. I’ve always had the philosophy that when we show up to the scene of a rescue, we are assets. I do not want to have any deficiencies that would cause my value as an asset to become a liability. That applies to training, leadership, and equipment, but in several cases, it may be due to a lack of physical fitness. Do you see any signs that some rescuers may not be as fit perhaps as they should be?

Frank Brennan: Pat, it’s hard to speak for anyone else, but I know that I personally have come up against the hard realities of the expectation/performance gap. I think task-specific physical, psychological and emotional conditioning may be the most challenging components of our job. In some way every manipulative training session should provide some insight to where you are in the scale of personal preparation, so ideally every session would require the humility to stare into that gap. So yes, I would say sometimes I see a wider gap than I am comfortable with, both in myself and others.

PF: One thing that we sometimes forget is that technical rescues can be quite taxing physically. Not just the strength and endurance that may be required, but also our tolerance to heat and other physical and emotional stressors. I think this is proven by the high rate of fatalities due to cardiac events amongst our firefighters and rescuers, both during actual responses and also during training.

FB: You have touched on a core issue of firefighter/rescuer health and safety. While I am most familiar with the information associated with the fire service based rescue model, I think the findings would extend to the entire community of rescuers serving the public.

The combination of chemical responses to the multiple external stressors places demands on the inner workings of our physiology that we don't always appreciate. Our training should extend beyond our ability to simply master a skill; it should help us master the delivery of the skill in the predicted environment. Just as we provide tools to rescuers in training to perform a task, we should leverage the training to give rescuers tools to measure and build their ability to master their emotional, psychological and physiological response to performing the skill in a demanding, but controlled environment.

Our training should extend beyond our ability to simply master a skill; it should help us master the delivery of the skill in the predicted environment.

As it stands now we are frequently guilty of leaving our people on their own to sort this out, often with the risk of stigma from identifying gaps in their performance they want to close. We are prone to overlook the obvious and make assumptions that are unhealthy or are not data-driven. As an example, we recently had a discussion revolving around the need for rescuing firefighters from burning buildings. Our training scenarios often focus on out-of-air emergencies or entrapment, which are of course important considerations, but we tend to overlook the leading cause which is a cardiac event. We realized that we hadn't really closely considered it as a component of the risk/reward profile of our actions. What are the needs? How do our predicted actions fill the need?

In this case, it has resulted in including drills to initiate CPR as early as possible and sustain it through the entire process of disrobing the downed firefighter after removal from the building. Which turns out is harder than you might think unless you are practiced in it. This discussion has also contributed to a heightened awareness of cardiac events and prevention efforts.

PF: I understand that your department has instituted a new program to encourage better overall physical fitness. Would you care to share a little about that program, what seems to work best and the successes you may have already seen?

FB: Well it’s just inside the rescue company right now, although we have a department and a union that places a strong emphasis on health and wellness, so it’s fertile ground.

I personally had to start with managing expectations. I have come to realize that a physical conditioning program built around long, grueling workouts at the firehouse would not be successful in the long term. There simply is not enough free time during the shift and the scheduling of the shifts is not frequent enough to really improve or condition anyone.
There are additional complications of having to perform at an emergency, and real conditioning while on duty would take people to a place that might undermine their ability to perform at an incident during the shift. Not to mention that the fitness plan is subject to the competing and ever-changing schedule of the day. So, the thought was to move towards shifting culture and awareness. I wanted the members of the crew to have an opportunity to examine their own capabilities and use this examination as a gauge for their personal plan away from the station. I was lucky enough to have Chris Stone as a new member of my crew who was experienced as an athlete, peer fitness trainer and had developed and implemented corporate training plans in his prior career. His insight and experience allowed us to implement a plan that met my criteria:

PF: I am a big believer in positive reinforcement and peer encouragement. I know through personal experience that it is difficult to get into the habit of exercising regularly, and it is just as tough to eat the right things. Do you feel there is value in a program that gradually builds better habits versus one that jumps in full throttle right from the start? And do you have any advice to help encourage our peers to stick with it?

FB: You have hit the nail on the head. What is often seen as an obstacle can be leveraged as an asset. Every crew is different, so it’s hard to have a set formula. The key is to let the work drive the workout. If you drill regularly on the functional elements of the job, it’s easy for people to draw the line between the preparation and the performance. With a few exceptions, solo programs are much more fragile. Whether it’s an individual relying on themselves for motivation and direction for a workout routine or framing physical fitness without the context of how it impacts the work, there is little redundancy or depth.

PF: Thank you so much, Frank. You have made several valuable points and I think a couple of the most valuable ones are to make the connection between physical preparation and the performance requirements of the job. That point alone holds a lot of value. Also, I really like the idea of a program that revolves around timed stations where each individual does as many reps as they feel comfortable with. This isn’t a competition but will give each individual a gauge as to where their personal fitness is currently and will give them a goal to aim for. All great stuff, Frank.

Make the connection between physical preparation and the performance requirements of the job.

Well, that wraps up our first installment of “Roco Rescue Chats with the Experts,” and what a start having someone like Lieutenant Frank Brennan as our inaugural guest. Thanks once again, Frank, and I hope you can come back and speak with us again in the future.

In Part I of this article, you heard my point of view on a rescuer’s obligation to be physically fit. In this follow-up piece, I outline concrete ideas to help you reach your fitness goals, broken into three components of wellness: exercise, diet, and lifestyle.

In January of last year, I wrote a piece called The Fit Rescuer & Why It's Important, and it was one of my most widely-read articles, so I thought I would tackle the topic again this year. The information in this article applies to all rescuers; whether you're a member of an emergency response team at your plant, a paramedic or a firefighter, you can benefit from learning more about fitness.