This SAFENET supports SAFENET 7HARW2SAFE regarding circumstances on Division C where two IHC Superintendents legitimately refused ("turned down") an assignment due to safety concerns. First off, the TRAINEE Night OPS has a family relationship with a member of upper management on the IMT. There was no mentor Night OPS as oversight, supervision, and direction. Night Shift's Firing Operation during the prior Operational period (on or about 7/28/08) exceeded what Day Shift requested, which by itself was not a totally negative thing. However, due to the unexpected, additional Firing Operation results, (on or about) the 7/29/08 Day Shift had to hold line all day and was unable to continue to prep the steep handline down into a drainage and up the other side. (Division C was bisected by a deep drainage with roads on each side). On or about 7/29/08, the two IHC's were specially requested and reassigned from another Division to fire along paved FR 16 and down the handline "into the hole," somewhat like a split shift since it was late in the shift, at or about transition time. The two Supts. assessed the situation, successfully completed some of the FR firing, and turned down firing the handline portion based on several factors:
1) Semi-strong adverse, down canyon winds,
2) Handline was not sufficiently prepped with limbing, etc.,
3) Handline was not plumbed with hose,
4) Handline was only partly snagged,
5) Marginal Escape Routes and Safety Zones.
These Supts. refused the assignment based on Order No. 3 "Base all actions on current and expected behavior of the fire." They stated that they could not accomplish the mission based on "currrent" fire behavior and weather conditions, however, they felt that Night Shift would be able to take advantage of the "expected" conditions to safely complete the handline and other firing after additional line prep. I had also notified a Night shift IHC and a FIRB (T) on the south side of the Division that they had .6 miles to fire yet, with half of it needing prep, and I cautioned them not to fire because of the adverse, strong down canyon winds. The Night Safety Officer notified Night OPS by radio that the IHC's were refusing the assignment based on safety concerns. Night OPS immediately responded, "WHY ... I'LL BE DOWN TO TALK TO YOU LATER." Based on the next day's briefing (7/30/08), Night OPS safely and successfully completed the Firing Operations. Did the Night OPS(T) notify the Night Shift resources that two IHC's had refused the assignment per the IRPG, turndown protocol? During the briefing, OPS pulled me aside and stated he heard I was privy to the two IHC Supts. refusing the assignment discussed above. I told him I was, and that I supported their decision based on fire behavior and adverse winds. He said they were going to meet with the IHC Supts after the briefing. This post-briefing meeting included OPS, Night OPS, the two IHC Supts., and Div. C SOF2. The Night OPS started the meeting very abruptly by pointing to one of the Supt. and accusing him of being "a complainer, a whiner," and something else, at least twice. She also accused them of "stirring up" her Night Shift and also accused them of stating that the assignment was a "death trap." She said she had to spend "three hours calming everyone down" before they could get any work that night because of the "death trap" issue. The Supt. explained his rationale; he stated that he "turned down the assignment" due to "current fire behavior" with an option for Night Shift to accomplish it later that night, based on "expected fire behavior." The Night OPS(T) blurted out - " it wasn't a turn down." The SOF2 said, "excuse me, they refused the assignment as proposed to them, therefore, it was a 'turn down' according to the IRPG." Night OPS(T) again accused the two Supts., focusing more on one Supt., of "complaining and whining and ..." while they were on the fire, a couple more times during the post-briefing discussion. The two IHC Supts. assured both OPS and Night OPS(T) that they never used the term "death trap" in briefings, debriefings, or on the radio related to this assignment. The SOF2 later determined that the other Night IHC and FIRB(T) used that term on their own. Prior to the close of the meeting, the Night OPS(T) somewhat conceded that she needed to talk to her Night Shift personnel regarding this issue. Night OPS(T) also stated "I hate it when people tell me something can't be done" at some point during the discussion. |