NFPA Technical Committee on Deployment and Organization of Fire Prevention Activities Austin, TX February 10-11, 2015 MEETING AGENDA 1. Chair Farr calls meeting to order on February 10, 2015 at 8:00 am. 2. Introduction of attendees. 3. Approval of the minutes of the September 16-17, 2014 Green Bay, WI meeting (Attachment A). 4. Review purpose of meeting. 5. Task Group work and drafting of CRR document (Attachment B). 6. Old business. 7. New business. 8. Date and location of next meeting. 9. Adjournment.
21
Embed
NFPA Technical Committee on Deployment and Organization … · NFPA Technical Committee on Deployment and Organization of Fire Prevention Activities Austin, TX February 10-11, 2015
This document is posted to help you gain knowledge. Please leave a comment to let me know what you think about it! Share it to your friends and learn new things together.
Transcript
NFPA Technical Committee on Deployment and Organization of Fire Prevention Activities
Austin, TX
February 10-11, 2015
MEETING AGENDA
1. Chair Farr calls meeting to order on February 10, 2015 at 8:00 am.
2. Introduction of attendees.
3. Approval of the minutes of the September 16-17, 2014 Green Bay, WI meeting
(Attachment A).
4. Review purpose of meeting.
5. Task Group work and drafting of CRR document (Attachment B).
6. Old business.
7. New business.
8. Date and location of next meeting.
9. Adjournment.
ATTACHMENT A
1
NFPA Technical Committee on Fire Prevention Activities
Green Bay, WI
September 16-17, 2014
MINUTES
The meeting was called to order by Chair Farr on September 16, 2014 at 8:00 am.
Introduction of Attendees
Members Present:
Ronald Farr, UL, MI, Chair
Steven Sawyer, NFPA Staff Liaison
Michael Bodnar, Sereca Fire Consulting LTD, Alberta
William Bowman, Louisville Fire & Rescue, KY
Lisa Cockerill, Region of Peel, Canada
James Dawson, Chesterfield County Fire & EMS, VA
Connie Forster, Voting Alternate, IAFC, MN
Hugh Gibson, ISO, NJ
Michael Larsen, Amway Inc., MI
David Lynam, WA State Association of Fire Marshals, WA
Laura Mueller, National League of Cities, TX
James Munger, James Munger & Associates, Inc., AL
Kelly Nicolello, Alaska Department of Public Safety, AK
Colleen Pennington, Inspection Reports on Line, MI
Eugene Pietzak, IAAI, NY
Guy Santelli, WI Fire Inspectors Association, WI
Derrick Sawyer, NFPA's Urban Fire Safety Task Force, PA
Lynn Schofield, NFPA Ed Section, UT
Art Shaw, NAT&T, MI
Larry Willhite, Palm Beach County Fire Rescue, FL
Morgana Yahnke, CA Fire Chiefs Association, CA
Robert James, Alternate, UL, FL
Jack Keays, Alternate Bodner
Timothy Kerbrat, Alternate, IAFC, CA
Tim Knisely, Alternate, Paul Martin, PA
Catherine Spain, Alternate, National League of Cities, DC
John Verbeek, Alternate, Urban Fire Safety Task Force, ON
Guests Present:
Curt Floyd, NFPA
2
Marty King, West Aus FD, WI
Marcina Sunderhaus, AZ Fire Marshals Association, AZ
Members not present:
Gregory Chesser, US Department of the Air Force, WY
David Jacobowitz, NVFC, NY
Brett Lacey, IFSTA, CO
Frank Lamie, Canadian Association of Fire Chiefs, ON
Paul Martin, NY State Office of Fire Prevention & Control, NY
Randy Minaker, Port Coquitlam, BC
Kellie Sawyers, Oklahoma City FD, OK
Anthony Valdez, Fire Marshals Association of Colorado, CO
George Apple, Alternate, CA Fire Chiefs Association, CA
Keith Chambers, Alternate, Dawson
Richard Jones, Alternate, IAAI, LA
Thomas Wieczorek, Alternate, ICMA, DC
Motion made, seconded and accepted to approve the minutes of November 19-20,
2013, San Antonio, TX meeting.
Chair Farr and Staff Liaison Sawyer make opening remarks and reviewed the
purpose of meeting.
Public comments were reviewed and second revisions developed, see second draft.
Old business.
None.
New business.
The committee starting drafting the newly approved CRR document.
Task Groups were formed.
Motion made, seconded and approved to draft the new document as a
standard.
The next meeting will be held on February 10-11, 2015 in Austin, TX.
The meeting adjourned on September 17, 2014 at 4:00 pm.
Respectfully Submitted,
Steven F. Sawyer
Staff Liaison
ATTACHMENT B
NFPA 1300 Standard on Community Risk Assessment and Community Risk
Reduction Plan Development
Chapter 1 Administration
Scope. The document shall have primary responsibility for documents on the
process to conduct a Community Risk Assessment and develop, implement and
evaluate a Community Risk Reduction Plan.
1.1.3 This standard contains minimum requirements of a community risk
assessment (CRA), adequate program selection, managing resources, records
management, training, communications, and health and safety.
1.1.4 This standard addresses the strategic and policy issues involving the
organization and deployment of a fire prevention programs and does not address
methods for carrying out specific fire prevention services, activities and programs.
1.2 Purpose
1.2.1 The purpose of this standard is to specify the minimum criteria addressing the
??.
1.2.2 Nothing herein is intended to restrict any jurisdiction from exceeding these
minimum requirements.
1.3 Conflicts. The provisions of this standard shall not be deemed to nullify any
provisions of local, state, provincial, tribal or federal law.
1.4 Equivalency. Nothing in this standard is intended to prohibit the use of
systems, methods, or approaches of equivalent or superior performance to those
prescribed by this standard. Technical documentation shall be submitted to the
authority having jurisdiction to demonstrate equivalency.
Chapter 2 Referenced Publications
2.1 General. The documents or portions thereof listed in this chapter are referenced
within this standard and shall be considered part of the requirements of this
document.
2.2 NFPA Publications.
National Fire Protection Association, 1 Batterymarch Park, Quincy, MA 02169-
7471.
2.3 Other Publications.
Chapter 3 Definitions
3.1 General. The definitions contained in this chapter shall apply to the terms used
in this standard. Where terms are not included, common usage of the terms shall
apply.
3.2 NFPA Official Definitions.
3.2.1* Approved. Acceptable to the authority having jurisdiction.
3.2.2* Authority Having Jurisdiction (AHJ). An organization, office, or individual
responsible for enforcing the requirements of a code or standard, or for approving
equipment, materials, an installation, or a procedure.
3.2.3 Shall. Indicates a mandatory requirement.
3.2.4 Should. Indicates a recommendation or that which is advised but not required.
3.2.5 Standard. A document, the main text of which contains only mandatory
provisions using the word “shall” to indicate requirements and which is in a form
generally suitable for mandatory reference by another standard or code or for
adoption into law. Nonmandatory provisions shall be located in an appendix or
annex, footnote, or fine-print note and are not to be considered a part of the
requirements of a standard.
3.3 General Definitions.
Chapter 4 General
4.6 Community Risk Assessment (CRA)
4.6.1 The FPO shall conduct a CRA. (see Chapter 5)
4.6.2 The CRA shall be reviewed at a minimum of once every 5 years or more
frequently when changes take place that affect the original assessment.
4.6.3 The CRA shall be distributed to agencies, departments, and employees having
responsibilities designated in the plan.
4.6.4 A record shall be kept of all holders of the CRA.
4.6.5 A system shall be implemented for issuing all changes or revisions of the CRA
to all holders.
Chapter 5 Community Risk Assessment
5.1 Scope: This chapter shall establish a process to identify and analyze
community risks that impact the services outlined by in section 4.
5.2 Purpose. The purpose of a CRA is to assist in the development and
implementation of a Community Risk Reduction (CRR) Plan and programs to
reduce, mitigate or eliminate the community’s risks.
5.3 A Community Risk Assessment (CRA) shall be conducted to identify the needs
and the circumstances of the community and to establish the level of community
risk reduction activities.
5.3.1 The Community Risk Assessment shall be conducted every five (5) years or
more frequently based on community need. An annual review of CRA shall be
conducted to identify emerging trends, which may impact the current CRR Plan and
risk reduction programs.
5.3.2 The Community Risk Assessment shall include the following profiles to
describe the community:
(1) Demographic
(2) Geographic
(3) Building stock
(4) Emergency services response
(5) Non-emergency organizations and agencies
(6) Hazards
(7) Economic
5.3.3 Data collected as a result of incident investigations shall be incorporated into
the CRA.
5.3.4 Stakeholders shall be identified and an inclusive process shall be employed to
solicit input on the risks facing the community.
5.3.5 The identified risks shall be categorized on their probability and impact.
5.3.6 A needs analysis on the risks and identified strategies shall be conducted and
be included in a Community Risk Reduction (CRR) Plan.
5.4 A CRR Plan shall be developed that:
(1) Identifies programs and resources priorities that will reduce a community’s
risks.
(2) Is approved by AHJ.
High Impact
(3) Allocates resources for risk reduction programs.
5.5 The performance of the risk reduction programs shall be assessed on an ongoing
basis to evaluate efficiency and effectiveness and modify programs accordingly.
5.6 Process Method. The process used to conduct a CRA shall follow the
systematic approach of the scientific method, as applicable to the task.
5.6.1 Recognize the Need. Recognizing the need to conduct a CRA and develop a
risk reduction plan based on the CRA.
5.6.2 Define the Problem. The potential risks must be identified and programs
must be developed that are appropriate to mitigate the identified risks that fall
within the available resources.
5.6.3 Collect Data. Data must be collected regarding the community’s
demographics, building stock profile, geography, past loss history, and potential
likelihood or anticipated future events. This is empirical data because it is capable
of being verified or known to be true.
5.6.4 Analyze the Data. All data collected must be analyzed. This is an essential
step that must take place before the development of the CRA.
5.6.5 Develop a CRA . Based on the data analysis, an initial CRA shall be
developed. This process is referred to as inductive reasoning and must be based
solely on the empirical data that has been collected through a statistical analysis.
.
5.6.6 Validating the CRA. The validation of the CRA is done by the principle of
deductive reasoning, which means that a comparison of the findings of the CRA
shall be completed to ensure that they are consistent with the community’s level of
acceptable risk, capabilities and resources and the acknowledgement that not all
risks may not be covered under the CRA.
ANNEX A information to be edited
A.5.1.1 Conducting a risk assessment is a practical data gathering and analyzing
exercise.
A.5.2.1 There are numerous methodologies and approaches for identifying
community risks. See Appendix B for guidance on conducting a Community Risk
Assessment.
A.5.2.2 The assessment is a critical piece of FESO management. This process is
necessary to properly identify targets of opportunity for program development and
overall community risk reduction.
A.5.2.3 A Demographic Profile describes the composition of the community’s
population using various categories such as age, gender, cultural backgrounds,
language barriers, educational attainment, socioeconomic makeup, transient
populations and other considerations specific to a local community.
A Geographic Profile describes the physical features of the community. Consider
the nature and placement of features such as waterways, highways, canyons,
railroads, wild-land interface, landforms, and bridges.
A Building Stock Profile describes the various occupancy classification types and
numbers of buildings including mixed occupancies in the community to classify
their hazard risk category.
A Fire Profile describes the community’s past fire experience and trends and how
the community’s experience compares to statewide and national trends. Data on fire
deaths, injuries, cause and dollar loss are important components of a fire profile.
State and national statistics may assist in providing data.
A Response Profile describes the types of emergencies to which the organization
responds.
A Hazard Profile describes the natural, human-caused, and technological hazards.
An Economic Profile describes the economic sectors affecting the community that
are critical to its financial sustainability.
A.5.2.6 A risk assessment matrix classifies a community’s risks based on
probability and impact. This is a tool that can be used to create a visual
representation of the risks in the community.
A.5.2.7.1 The needs analysis consists of: (1) characteristic factors (such as existing
resources, competencies, performance levels) of the present FESO programs, (2) a
list of factors required to reduce, eliminate or mitigate the identified risks and (3)
identification of the gaps that exist and need to be filled.
Chapter 6 Community Risk Plan Development
6.1 Scope. This chapter establishes the process for developing a Community Risk
Reduction Plan based on the risks identified in the community risk assessment.
6.2 Purpose. The purpose of this chapter is to identify root causes for risk, define
goals and objectives, coordinate with strategic partners, and develop programs that
address the risks identified in the community risk assessment.
6.3 Community Risk Reduction Plan. Each community risk reduction plan shall
be reviewed regularly and revised to reflect a community’s current risks. A
community risk reduction plan shall include strategies for mitigation of identified
risks and the prevention of potential risks, as well as timeframes for implementation
of the plan.
6.4 Prioritize Risks. Evaluate risks based on their probability and impact.
6.4.1 Categorize the risks based on the evaluation.
6.4.2 Prioritize the risks.
High Impact
6.4.3 Identify which risks to include in the root cause analysis based on priority.
A6.4.1
A risk assessment matrix can be used to prioritize a community’s risks based on
probability and impact. This is a tool that can be used to create a visual
representation of the community’s risks. Scores can be assigned based on a
combination of the probability and impact level of each risk. Consider past events
as well as information from experts, future demographic and environmental
modeling, and other information and factors that could affect future risks.
A6. Prioritization can also include other factors including resources, overall impact
to the community regardless of severity, political issues, and other legal
requirements.
Example for Matrix:
6.4 Identify Root Causes for Risk. Determine the root causes of the selected
risks.
6.4.1 Conduct a root cause analysis.
6.4.2 Use root causes to develop the goals and objectives of the risk reduction plan.
A6.4 Identify causal factors contributing to the risks: physical, economic,