During a recent Roco Combat Technical Rescue course onboard the USS Alabama, an elite group of Pararescuemen were called to the “real thing” when a ship worker took a fall and needed to be rescued. According to Roco Tactical Chief Instructor Alex Reckendorf, the PJ’s performed a flawless rope rescue and integrated well with the Mobile Fire Department. He added, “As trainers, we are obviously very proud of their performance during this unexpected event. They represented both Pararescue and Roco well and are a credit to their career field.” 

Eight local pararescue airmen from Hurlburt Field were in the middle of a training session aboard the USS Alabama on Tuesday when they found themselves in the right place at the right time.

On the second day of their confined space rescue training, the airmen from the 23rd Special Tactics Squadron were setting up for a rope rescue practice when a civilian painter, perched precariously on a ledge, fell 30 feet to one of the decks below.

The airmen jumped to action.

They gathered their gear, which included their medical equipment, and rushed to the scene of the accident.

The man landed on a deck about 50 feet above the main deck. He was experiencing severe back pain and feeling out of it from hitting his head.

The airmen secured his back and gave him the medical attention he needed while coming up with a game plan for how to use their ropes to get him down to the main deck and then off the ship.

“It was pretty exciting for most of the guys to be able to utilize the training we had been working on all day and the day prior,” said Tech Sgt. Jason Humes, one of the pararescuemen who helped with the rescue. “It was all very fresh in our minds.”

Once the Mobile County firefighters arrived, the special tactics team explained their plan and worked together to secure the man in a rescue basket and use ropes to leap-frog him down from the deck and to the waiting ambulance.

Humes said an official from the USS Alabama reported to him on Wednesday that the man had broken a vertebrae, but they expected he would be back on his feet in several weeks and have a full recovery.

“All of us feel good we were able to help out and get him off as quick as we could so he’ll be up and running again in a few weeks,” Humes said.

Air Force Special Tactics pararescuemen are special operators whose primary mission is personnel recovery. They provide emergency and life-saving services for some of the more dangerous U.S. military missions, including deploying with Army Special Forces and Navy SEALs.

Air Force Lt. Jesse Galt, a special tactics officer who supervises several of the pararescumen involved in the rescue, was proud to see his airmen put their training to use in their real lives.

“It is a testament to their training and their poise that they are able to deploy those skills regardless of the situation,” he said. “It was cool to see.”

The article was written By LAUREN SAGE REINLIE | Daily News

Photo credit: U.S. AIR FORCE | Special to the Daily News

In a recent article in ASSE’s Professional Safety magazine, we found some very important points to consider for rescuers. Whether you are preparing for stand-by rescue operations, getting ready to enter an “abandoned in place” vessel, or just found the “perfect” retired vessel to use for your upcoming rescue training…proceed with caution!

The article does a great job of reminding us that not so long ago the emphasis on safety was far less than it is today. This becomes very clear when we compare current safety practices, such as Management of Change (MOC), and how the absence of that particular management tool has left many retired confined spaces and other systems in a potentially dangerous state.

Because of the potential dangers posed to emergency responders, we wanted to share this article with our readers.

Click to download the full article

Here are some key points from the article “Retired and Dangerous, Out-of-Service Equipment Hazards” by Robert Wasileski.

• Management of Change is emphasized more during the design and operational phase of equipment life cycles, but receives little emphasis when it is time to retire the equipment. 

• Older facilities have a high potential to have retired equipment that haven’t had all hazards addressed and may pose serious risks.

• Equipment that has been out of service for an extended period of time often has very little data on record stating how it was prepared to be taken out of service.

• There are many instances of chemical reactions that can change the physical condition of the equipment over time.  

The author provides several case studies that are truly enlightening. It includes some excellent lessons for rescuers when dealing with out-of-service or “moth-balled” vessels. While a couple of the cases delve pretty deeply into chemical reactions, it serves as a critical reminder of how important it is to check with a qualified person. Remember…just because a vessel has been out of service for a long period of time does not mean there are no hazards present!

Being able to tie a knot in the classroom with a rope short vs. selecting the proper knot and tying it correctly in the field during an emergency requires experience. With a little imagination, you can provide your team members numerous scenarios to practice in just a short period of time while they are still within a controlled environment. This practice will help them to gain more experience that should pay off in the long run if needed during a real life emergency.

1.  Identify the knots your team uses, and where they are used in various systems.

2.  Lay out a series of applications where team members would need to tie a knot. Decide in advance what knots are acceptable in these applications since many times more than one knot may get the job done.

3.  Once you have established the acceptable knots, lay out a gauntlet of knot tying stations.

4.  Each team member will go through each station... first, deciding which knot to use, and then tying it as it would be used in the application (examples: end knot in a lower line, vertical bridle knot, lashing a backboard, adjustable anchor, self-equalizing anchor, etc.)

The goal is to have team members choose an appropriate knot, tie it correctly, and apply it properly based on the rescue system presented. Two examples for knot stations are: (1) Backboard lashing - have the lashing complete except for the knot at the end; and (2) Mainline rigged except for the knot attaching it to the anchor.

CHECK OUT OUR RESCUE KNOT VIDEO SERIES!

Download the Rescue Knots PDF

Next in this series: QUICK DRILL #5 - Building Complete Rescue Systems

On July 30 and 31, OSHA held an Emergency Response and Preparedness Stakeholders meeting in Washington, DC for the purpose of discussing the merits and potential content of an emergency response and preparedness standard.

Meeting participants were from a broad range of both public and private industry experts to include two Roco representatives, Jim Breen, Director of Operations, and Dennis O’Connell, Director of Training. Also participating were representatives from NFPA, IAFF, IAFC, USFA, Louisiana Fire Chiefs Association, Phillips 66, BASF Corporation, Chevron Pipeline Company, Chicago Fire Department, and the American Red Cross to name a few.

The discussion allowed participants to highlight their experiences, voice concerns, and provide input to OSHA administrators who are tasked to make a need and content recommendations to OSHA's senior leadership.

The meeting consisted of four main topics:

1.  Which phases of an emergency incident should be included in a standard?

2.  Should the standard be inclusive of all incident types or should it be focused on those types of incidents that have resulted in a line-of-duty deaths (LODDs)?

3.  What content should be included in the standard?

4.  How can OSHA construct a standard that is practical, relevant, and flexible enough to cover all organizations, regardless of size and complexity?

OSHA was particularly mindful of having participants identifying issues that would impede the practical application of an emergency response and preparedness standard. OSHA administrators were very receptive of the views of the participants and stressed that they were not interested in writing a tactical or tactics standard. Although OSHA did not elaborate on any specific course of direction, it is our impression and hope that OSHA will begin drafting an emergency response and preparedness standard that is performance based, with a strong strategic focus, that emphasizes a recognized incident management system, outlines preparation activities inclusive of pre-incident planning, and is structured around the basic functions of command that will apply to all emergency response organizations that are subject to OSHA oversight.  

Emergency response is one of the most hazardous occupations in America. Emergency responders include firefighters, emergency medical service personnel, hazardous material employees, and technical rescue specialists. Also, law enforcement officers usually are considered emergency responders because they often assist in emergency response incidents.
Source: OSHA.gov and NFPA/FEMA 2012 Reports on Firefighter Fatalities

Background Information from OSHA.gov:

OSHA notes that there are no standards issued by the Agency that specifically address occupational hazards uniquely related to law enforcement activities. Many emergency responders have cross training in these specialties, and may serve in multiple roles depending upon the type of emergency incident involved. Skilled support employees are not emergency responders, but nonetheless have specialized training that can be important to the safe and successful resolution of an emergency incident.
 
OSHA issued a Request for Information in September 2007 that solicited comments from the public to evaluate what action, if any, the Agency should take to further address emergency response and preparedness. Recent events, such as the 2013 tragedy in West, Texas, that killed several emergency responders, and an analysis of information provided make it clear that emergency responder health and safety continues to be an area of ongoing concern. For this reason, OSHA conducted the stakeholder meetings to gather additional information.

The following article was featured in the June 2014 issue of ISHN, and authored by Roco Chief Instructor Pat Furr.

As part of my safety consulting duties, I have seen many fall protection programs for a wide variety of industries. When I ask about an employer’s fall protection plan, it’s pretty scary to be told, “Well, I can show you our program in two minutes”— and then see no more than a locker with a rag-tag assortment of body belts, harnesses and a few six- foot energy-absorbing lanyards of questionable integrity.

Now, it is rare to come across such an inadequate program. But truth be told, the comprehensiveness, diligence and effectiveness of the programs I have assessed run a fairly wide spectrum from so-so to top notch.

Top-notch programs all had several common elements, but the one element that stands out the most as being consistently included in the best programs is the completion of fall hazard surveys.

A Comprehensive Survey

The fall hazard survey, or what I like to call the fall hazard “walk-about,” is a critical early step in the process of assembling a comprehensive managed fall protection program. And a survey should be conducted again when certain changes occur including, but not limited to, changes in the facility configuration, changes to work processes, changes to legislated requirements, and the emergence of modern fall protection equipment solutions.

Outlined in ANSI Z359.2, the fall hazard survey is an effective means to identify areas where work is performed at height, identify ways to eliminate or control fall hazards, and help determine which hazards require the highest priority when it comes to allocating sometimes limited resources. A comprehensive fall hazard survey is the best way to identify and understand the types of fall hazards that need to be addressed to provide the best protection to your workers at height.

This requires that the Qualified or Competent Person do a top to bottom, left to right, tour of the facility to identify known areas where work at height is currently being performed, and any areas where future work at height may take place.

It may be helpful to have an area foreman or even an Authorized Person with thorough knowledge of the specific work areas available to ask questions regarding the work process and their needs and concerns.

The goal of this survey is to not only identify areas of work at height, but to determine the most protective means of abating the fall hazards.

 
The goal of this survey is to not only identify areas of work at height, but to determine the most protective means of abating fall hazards.

The Qualified/Competent Person must have the “Hierarchy of Fall Protection” in mind at all times. By having the goal of eliminating the fall hazard first and foremost, any opportunities to bring the work to the ground or to perform the work from the ground should present themselves during this survey. This may require a change in the configuration of certain structures, or the retrofitting of systems that allow the work to be performed from the ground. This may incur some significant costs, but in the long run the changes will be more than offset by avoiding a fall from height and the direct and indirect costs of such an accident.

Continuing the survey while still adhering to the Hierarchy of Fall Protection, the Qualified/ Competent Person may have to consider the use of fall restraint measures, either passive measures in the form of guardrails or parapets, or active measures in the form of body belts or harnesses with lanyards anchored in a way that the system prevents the Authorized Worker from reaching the leading edge of a fall hazard. Once active measures are employed, it is critically important to work with the Authorized Persons to understand what their work activities entail to come to a solution that provides the needed protection but also considers their need for mobility.

If the lower echelons of the Hierarchy of Fall Protection cannot be employed, a fall arrest system may be the only feasible solution.
 

A Fall Arrest Solution

If the lower echelons of the Hierarchy of Fall Protection cannot be employed, a fall arrest system may be the only feasible solution. This is where the Qualified/Competent Person’s knowledge of current fall arrest systems and components really shows its value. Lightweight, breathable, multi-function fall protection equipment available today protects workers while also providing the ease of use and freedom of movement that has been missing for many years. This is an important tool that the Competent Person can use to their advantage when faced with any resistance from certain Authorized Persons.

During the fall hazard survey, consider the presence of any environmental factors that may affect the performance of the fall protection equipment or systems as well as an alternate solution, specialized materials, or even a reconfiguration of the structure/process. Environmental factors can include hot objects, sharp edges, slowly engulfing materials, chemicals, weather factors, or any other environmental factor that may render the fall protection equipment ineffective.

Document Findings

Once the entire facility has been surveyed, it’s time to document in writing the findings and the means to abate the identified fall hazards. The Fall Hazard Survey Report becomes a part of the written fall protection program. It should be reviewed periodically and whenever there is a change to legislated requirements or a change in the facility or fall protection equipment.

Plan for Rescue

If any identified areas require the use of fall arrest systems, then that triggers the need to complete a written rescue pre-plan. It is my opinion that rescue

If any identified areas require the use of fall arrest systems, then that triggers the need to complete a written rescue pre-plan.

 
pre-plans should also include anywhere workers are performing work at height, such as elevated platforms that have been accessed by means other than elevators or stairs, with the goal that the rescue plan provides a capability to get the injured or suddenly ill worker to the ground promptly.

Time to Train

Once the Fall Hazard Survey is completed and documented, it is time for the Qualified Competent Person to provide training to the Authorized Persons on the types of equipment, systems, selection of anchor points, clearance requirements, swing fall hazards, and pre-use inspections of their equipment. Training may vary depending on the areas that Authorized Persons are assigned duties, but in all cases the type of training, any required re-training, and the criteria that would trigger the need for retraining must be documented.

A Valuable Tool

The fall hazard survey is a valuable tool that provides a thorough assessment of the entire facility to honestly identify fall hazards and determine the most effective means to protect workers from falls. Look at it as an expanded JHA that focuses specifically on areas of work at height.