review of land rescue arrangements in nsw · rescue services would improve service delivery in...

1

Capability Matrix Working Group

Review of Land Rescue Arrangements in NSW

2

Contents Acronyms and Glossary ....................................................................................................................... 3

Executive Summary ............................................................................................................................. 4

Introduction ........................................................................................................................................ 7

Purpose and Context ........................................................................................................................... 8

2016 NSW Rescue Operating Environment ...................................................................................... 11

The suitability of current Primary and Secondary rescue accreditation system and whether there are opportunities to simplify the process to accredit rescue units. ....................................................... 14

Acceptable response times across the State .................................................................................... 24

Identification of opportunities to improve service delivery and meet agreed response times particularly in regional areas. ........................................................................................................... 32

Identification of Emergency Services best placed to improve service delivery ................................ 38

Realistic cost implications associated with training and equipping services to cover identified opportunities .................................................................................................................................... 53

Real time Tracking of Land Rescue Appliances ................................................................................. 58

Land Rescue Dispatch ....................................................................................................................... 60

Alignment of Communications and Other Systems .......................................................................... 60

Conclusion ......................................................................................................................................... 61

3

Acronyms and Glossary

Acronym Definition

AOR Areas of responsibility

ARIA Accessibility Remoteness Index of Australia

AVL Automatic Vehicle Location

CAD Computer Aided Dispatch

CMWG Capability Matrix Working Group

DR Domestic Rescue

EMU NSWPF Emergency Management Unit

FRNSW Fire & Rescue NSW

GLR General Land Rescue

ICT Information and communications technology

IR Industrial Rescue

IRDR Industrial Rescue and Domestic Rescue

LRC Local Rescue Committee

LSAR Land Search and Rescue

NSW RFS NSW Rural Fire Service

NSW SES NSW State Emergency Service

NSW VRA NSW Volunteer Rescue Association

NSWA NSW Ambulance

NSWPF NSW Police Force

OEM Office of Emergency Management

RBDU NSWPF Rescue and Bomb Disposal

RCO Rescue Coordination Officer

RCR Road Crash Rescue

REMO Regional Emergency Management Officer

ROG Radio Operations Group RRC Regional Rescue Committee

RSDM Rescue Service Delivery Model

SMP Shared Mobility Platform

SRB State Rescue Board

USAR Urban Search and Rescue

VR Vertical Rescue

4

Executive Summary The Capability Matrix Working Group (CMWG) has undertaken a thorough review of the delivery of rescue services in NSW, according to the Terms of Reference approved by the State Rescue Board of NSW (SRB). The report outlines where there are existing opportunities to improve rescue service delivery across NSW and explores options on how to mitigate areas with extended response times. Deployment of rescue units should be governed by an overall guiding principle that the closest available unit with the most appropriate capability should be dispatched to an incident. Local business rules may be adopted for dispatching rescue units outside of this general principle where exceptional local or regional requirements for service delivery and rescue capability have been identified. The CMWG proposes consideration of the introduction of a new level of land accreditation beyond the existing General Land Rescue (GLR) and Vertical Rescue (VR). This new level of capability, referred to as Road Crash Rescue (RCR) would be intended to supplement the existing arrangements. Rescue units accredited to RCR could be deployed to improve service delivery timeframes as a stand-alone capability where the local risk profile indicates there is no need for a cost prohibitive and resource intensive GLR unit. Key Principles The report establishes the following key principles for the strategic delivery of rescue services in NSW: • local and regional decision making should be supported when determining required resources in a

given area of operation

• risk-based decision making should underpin all resource allocations so as to avoid over or under servicing

• the closest available unit with the most appropriate capability should be dispatched to an incident

• all rescue activities should be underpinned by consistent training, equipment standards and standard operating procedures

• where individual units cannot sustain rescue capabilities alone, Local and Regional Rescue Committees (LRC and RRC) should consider multi-agency arrangements which would allow resources and personnel to be shared

• all rescue activities should avoid the unnecessary duplication of resources and efforts.

Findings In response to its Terms of Reference, the CMWG has made the following findings for consideration by the SRB:

Suitability of current accreditation system

1. The current two staged pre-accreditation and accreditation process continues to work effectively across NSW.

5

2. The SRB should consider amending the definitions for the accreditation classifications of GLR (Primary and Secondary) and RCR to reflect a unit’s capability to perform a rescue function. The SRB consider endorsing the proposed GLR Capability Accreditation Definition Standards.

3. The SRB consider endorsing the proposed RCR Capability Accreditation Definition Standards.

4. LRC and RRC supported to make decisions regarding dispatch business rule beyond closest available if required.

5. Existing rescue resource dispatch (‘Primary and Secondary’) arrangements and areas of responsibility to remain until the full implementation of real time live Automatic Vehicle Location (AVL) and Computer Aided Dispatch (CAD) tracking systems to identify the closest most appropriate rescue resource.

6. GLR units should be considered the most appropriate accredited rescue resource and deployed to an incident within their areas of operation without delay.

7. Rescue units that do not currently maintain GLR skills (Industrial Rescue (IR), Domestic Rescue (DR) and Urban Search and Rescue (USAR) Category 1) capability should immediately inform Region Emergency Management Officers (REMO), LRC and RRC, SRB and the NSW Police Force Radio Operations Group (NSWPF ROG) for effective operational deployment coordination.

Acceptable response times across the State

8. LRC, RRC and the SRB to continue to use the Accessibility Remoteness Index of Australia (ARIA) as a baseline methodology to assist in determining the optimum number, location and type of units and to determine minimum acceptable response times as a rescue performance standard.

9. Generally speaking, the SRB response time principle of 20/40/60 minutes continues to serve the community well across metropolitan and partially in remote areas across NSW based only upon the abovementioned RCR data and mapped GLR unit response times.

10. The information suggests that the 20 minute response time provides a satisfactory level of rescue capability. The response arrangements for metropolitan Sydney, Newcastle, Central Coast and Wollongong meet this capability.

11. Generally speaking, regional response times have also continued to serve the community of NSW well. There will however, be a need to continually review response times across the regions and in particular high growth areas of the northern and southern coastal areas of NSW as towns and cities continue to grow and their status within the ARIA Code Index changes.

12. The SRB should consider the implementation of RCR capability in areas that have been identified in the 60+ zone capitalising on existing government resources.

Identification of opportunities to improve service delivery

13. Across rural remote and very remote NSW there are 11 clearly identifiable areas for improved service delivery of rescue across NSW:

1. Putty /St Albans 2. Ellerston/Nowendoc 3. Boggabilla/Boomi/Yetman 4. Bourke/Cobar/Nyngan 5. Cobar/Nyngan/Hillston/Condobolin 6. Broken Hill/Menindee/Balranald/Wentworth 7. Balranald/Hay/Deniliquin 8. Ivanhoe/Hay

6

9. Tibooburra/Wanaaring/Bourke 10. Wilcannia/Cobar 11. Tibooburra/Broken Hill.

Identification of the emergency and rescue services best placed to meet response times

15. LRC and RRC continue to determine the need for resources, evaluate their community’s risk profile and periodically review the need for future rescue resources within their area of responsibility.

16. The SRB should consider the implementation of RCR capability in areas where the need has been identified by LRC and RRC in remote and very remote areas of NSW.

17. In areas where the challenges faced by volunteer rescue services across recruitment, retention, availability are effecting the subsequent delivery of rescue services within the rural areas of NSW, multi-agency collaboration should be considered as an option for the delivery of RCR and GLR.

18. The SRB should consider tasking LRCs to undertake a routine process of reviewing any special dispatch rules for their areas (rather than everything being dictated from Sydney). The RRCs and the SRB should support and oversight this process.

Realistic cost implications associated with training and equipping services to cover identified opportunities

19. The minimum indicative cost of training six rescue operators to the proposed GLR and RCR standards are as follows:

Minimum cost of training six GLR Operators $8,480.00

Minimum cost of training six RCR Operators $6,925.00

Difference $1,555.00

Note: The costs may be significantly less for those agencies who are a Registered Training Organisation (RTO) or those agencies that have ready access to the necessary equipment.

20. Based on the cost estimates above, including training, equipment and vehicle costs, it is estimated to cost up to $1.07 million to establish an accredited volunteer unit in all of the identified opportunities listed above.

21. Taking into consideration the cost of road crash related fatalities which exceed $2.4 million per fatality, with hospitalisations for trauma injury treatment are in excess of $214,000 per injury, where the economic burden is borne by the community and the NSW Government, any reduction in the rate of fatalities through the provision of RCR would therefore result in a net economic benefit to the State.

The benefits of fitting rescue appliances/vehicles with tracking devices to assist in real time closest to incident dispatch

22. There is a general consensus that there is not a “one size fits all” fix to this issue.

23. Real time tracking of resources in metropolitan areas, with higher rates of rescue dispatch provides significant benefit to the community. This is already a functioning capability for the NSW Ambulance (NSWA), NSWPF and Fire & Rescue NSW (FRNSW). The NSWPF and FRNSW combined, conduct the highest percentage of rescue operations in NSW (78 per cent in 2014-15). By and large the majority of these operations are in major cities and inner regional areas.

7

24. It should also be noted that in rural areas of NSW, the NSW Volunteer Rescue Association (NSW VRA) and the NSW State Emergency Service (NSW SES), both volunteer based rescue agencies, conduct the highest percentage of rescue operations.

The adequacy of the current NSWPF dispatch system / possible alignment of communications and other support systems between agencies

25. The rescue sector would benefit greatly by interoperable resource management systems that ultimately integrate into a common operating picture for state wide rescue. This could be an existing CAD system or third party solution.

26. The SRB should advocate for the issue of integrated resource allocation systems for rescue to be a core consideration of the NSW Government Operational Communications Strategy. The strategy should utilise the existing FRNSW CAD protocols as a fundamental premise to develop next generation technology.

Introduction On 26 November 2015, the Minister for Emergency Services announced a broad ranging examination of the existing land rescue arrangements to identify any areas of improvement that could enhance current service delivery across NSW. The SRB at its meeting on the 5 December 2015, agreed to task the CMWG to include these matters as part of their scope of works. CMWG Terms of Reference The CMWG shall conduct a strategic review of land based rescue services focusing on: • the suitability of current Primary and Secondary rescue accreditation system and whether there

are opportunities to simplify the process to accredit rescue units

• acceptable response times across the State

• identification of areas in need of service delivery improvement to meet agreed response times particularly in regional areas

• identification of the emergency and rescue services best placed to meet response times and specifically, whether the accreditation of agencies or units not currently accredited to provide rescue services would improve service delivery in areas of the state in which current rescue service providers are not located or unable to perform the function

• realistic cost implications associated with training and equipping services to cover identified opportunities

• the benefits of fitting rescue appliances/vehicles with tracking devices to assist in real time closest to incident dispatch

• the adequacy of the current NSWPF dispatch system and the nature and cost implications of any required improvements

• possible alignment of communications and other support systems between agencies to achieve consistent data capture and other deficiencies.

8

CMWG Membership The CMWG comprises of representatives from: • Chair - NSW Police Force Rescue and Bomb Disposal (NSWPF RBDU)

• NSWPF Emergency Management Unit (NSWPF EMU)

• NSWPF Radio Operations Group (NSWPF ROG)

• Fire & Rescue NSW (FRNSW)

• NSW State Emergency Service (NSW SES)

• NSW Ambulance (NSWA)

• Office of Emergency Management (OEM)

• NSW Volunteer Rescue Association (NSW VRA)

• NSW Rural Fire Service (NSW RFS)

Additional representatives from NSW Government agencies or subject matter experts may be co-opted from time to time as required.

Purpose and Context The SRB plays an integral role in developing policies to promote the provision of a comprehensive, well balanced and well coordinated rescue services, crucial to the enhancement of rescue capability and capacity across NSW. Capability is described in ordinary terms as the, ‘capacity to be or do something or the capacity to achieve an operational effect.’1 The CMWG has been tasked by the SRB to undertake a broad ranging examination of existing land rescue arrangements to identify any areas of improvement to enhance current service delivery across NSW2. It is noteworthy that there have been numerous strategic reviews into rescue service in NSW since 1988 consisting of: 1. Report on The Review of Rescue Policy in NSW (1988), commonly referred to as the Grey Report

2. Coordination of Rescue Services: State Rescue Board of NSW, Auditor General’s Report, Performance Audit 2005

3. State Rescue Board of NSW, Strategic Analysis Report 2007, commonly referred to as the Crosweller Report.

It is acknowledged that rescue arrangements have remained relatively stable for a significant period of time and the opportunity to conduct broad ranging examination of existing land rescue arrangements to identify any areas of improvement and enhancement to current service delivery review is both timely and necessary.

1 Defence Capability Handbook 2012 AUSGOV Department of Defence 2 Capability Matrix Working Group, Terms of Reference 2016

9

To assist the SRB with future challenges and complexities of the operating environment in NSW, it is essential that the most appropriate rescue resources and capabilities are specifically focused, strategically placed, and highly available across NSW to provide GLR services. Whilst it is difficult to accurately predict the future and uncertainty can be a characteristic of the rescue operating environment across NSW, evidence based trends and developments can provide sufficient clarity to drive and shape a whole-of-government multi-agency response to rescue capability opportunities. Data available from across NSW that can support evidence based decision making for future rescue capability identification, accreditation, training and interoperability includes: • major motor vehicle collision incident locations

• geospatial mapping and other data visualisation techniques

• ARIA codes

• response time mapping

• population growth and settlement

• regional changes in demographics

• SRB annual statistical data

• migration statistics

• population projection for NSW to 20313.

It is anticipated that overall, NSW is expected to grow from 7.2 million in 2011 to 9.2 million in 2031, with Sydney growing from 4.3 million to 5.8 million, and move from having 59 per cent of the nation’s population to having 63 per cent4. Other metropolitan areas to the north and south of Sydney are projected to grow from 1.1 million in 2011 to 1.4 million in 2031, with regional NSW projected to grow from 1.8 million in 2011 to 2.0 million in 20355. Inland area growth is continued to be driven by regional centres in NSW and in particular the Central West, Riverina, Oxley, Canabolos, Queanbeyan and Goulburn regions.6 It is also noted that some far western and remote areas within NSW will and are suffering population decline and an aging demographic placing further stressors and potential competition on the availability of human resources.

3 NSW Department of Planning and Environment 4 NSWPF Corporate Environmental Scanning External Trends and Developments 2015 5 Ibid 6 NSWPF Corporate Environmental Scanning External Trends and Developments 2015

10

Decline in many rural communities, particularly those inland, are many and varied. This is not a recent trend, but has been occurring over many decades. Regional centres are essentially growing as a direct result of the decline of the smaller towns within their region of influence.7 It is acknowledged that these pressures contribute and impact on the availability to recruit and retain scarce volunteer rescue operators. Where a subsequent decline in the delivery of rescue services in rural and remote areas become evident, a multi-agency approach towards consolidation of existing resources should be considered. This will ensure the local rescue resource remains within the community and any investment in rural and remote rescue resources should be considered an investment in the local community, not an investment in any one specific agency. To make NSW a more resilient state and adopt an innovative approach to emergency management that recognises a coordinated and cooperative effort to enhance the State’s capacity8, it is critical to assume a long term view of potential change and consolidation of rescue capabilities. This may be required into the future to ensure the sustainment of rescue capabilities in some rural and remote communities across NSW. A high-quality service delivery model of rescue capabilities across NSW must be focused on: • providing the closest most appropriate accredited rescue capability to enhance patient care

outcomes

• becoming agile and flexible to form consolidated partnerships in rural communities to share human resources and provide a localised rescue response capability where needed

• capitalising on the consolidation and sharing of government rescue resources (vehicles, equipment and buildings) in communities where volunteer memberships are identified as being in decline to an extent where the sustainability and creation of a rescue unit is not possible

• being responsive to changes in new technology (such as AVL) to assist in coordination of resources

• being responsive towards changing levels of rescue capability and techniques

• forming multi-agency training partnerships to provide regular skills enhancement, maintenance and audit review panels.

CMWG Statistical Information and Mapping High integrity data and official statistics are fundamental for making key decisions in an increasingly complex and fast paced environment. The CMWG undertook a collaborative approach to the collection of information both numerical and geo-spatial, to build a rich statistical picture and better inform the SRB’s decision making. The CMWG engaged with all SRB member agencies in the collection and production of information to better inform the review of land based rescue services. Information gathered from agencies includes: • acceptable response times across the state

7 SRB Strategic Report into Land Rescue Services, Draft 2007 8 NSW 2021’A Plan to Make NSW Number One’ NSWGOV

11

• identification of areas in need of service delivery improvement to meet agreed response times particularly in regional areas

• identification of the existing emergency and rescue services best placed to meet response times and specifically, whether the accreditation of agencies or units not currently accredited to provide rescue services would help meet the identified service delivery opportunities.

2016 NSW Rescue Operating Environment NSW has a heterogeneous rescue capability delivery model where six agencies provide rescue services. These agencies are FRNSW, NSWA, NSWPF, NSW SES, NSW VRA and NSW RFS. NSW is unique in its provision of rescue services as generally in other jurisdictions there are significantly less rescue providers and usually one metropolitan provider with volunteer agencies providing capability in country regions. FRNSW can be seen as major contributor of rescue services across metropolitan and regional NSW with permanent full time and retained (part time) operators located across NSW and undertakes around 61 per cent of the total rescue call out workload state wide. FRNSW is described as one of the world’s largest fire services with the responsibility to protect 90 per cent of the NSW population by responding to fire emergencies in the State’s growing cities, expanding metropolitan areas and regional and rural towns.9 FRNSW also provides response capabilities for hazardous materials (HAZMAT) incidents, USAR, community medical assistance, bushfire support and support to other agencies including terrorism consequence management. The NSWPF RBDU contributes to 17 per cent of the total rescue call out workload and delivers rescue services to strategic locations across metropolitan and regional NSW. The NSWPF RBDU also provides coordination and deployment of Land Search and Rescue (LANDSAR) teams across NSW. In addition to rescue services NWPF RBDU provides Bomb and Chemical, Biological, and Radiological Explosive (CBRE) Response capability and provides specialist high risk operational support to the NSWPF. The NSWPF RBDU have the capability and capacity to carry out all forms of rescue operations in both hazardous and hostile environments. The NSW SES provides 9 per cent of the total rescue workload and is the combat agency for flood (including flood rescue), storm and tsunami. In addition, the NSW SES has capability and capacity in GLR and VR. As a legislated combat agency the NSW SES is responsible for planning and conducting the emergency response for flood (including flood rescue), storm and tsunami within NSW. However, it frequently assists the NSWPF with searches for evidence and missing people, supports the NSWA with community first responder volunteers in rural locations around the state and provides logistics support to the NSW RFS. The NSW VRA provide a rescue response capability to 9 per cent of NSW total call outs and provide specialist assistance to other NSW emergency services. The NSW VRA also provides a community first responder capability to regional and rural communities across NSW.

9 FRNSW Annual Report 2013-2014

12

The NSWA make up the remaining 3 per cent of total rescue workload and operate six Primary rescue units in rural NSW. Rescue paramedics are trained for all types of rescue including, RCR, VR, confined space, trench and industrial.10 NSWA are located across metropolitan, regional, rural and remote NSW. The NSW RFS currently has Secondary rescue accreditation at Mungindi in north western NSW. The NSW RFS has an extensive volunteer capacity with some 74,516 members providing significant coverage to across NSW inclusive of metropolitan, regional, rural and remote areas. The NSW RFS provides fire protection and firefighting capabilities for bush, grass, house and structural fires along with providing operational support assistance for: • storm and tempest • LANDSAR • community first responder • bushfire mitigation11. 2011-2015 Average GLR Call Out

The number of rescue providers across NSW has provided a flexible and agile state wide rescue capability. In times of disaster and emergencies it allows for agencies to provide surge capacity to core business (such as fires, bushfires, flood) and capability to form multi-agency rescue teams. This provides a layered approach to rescue and core business continuity planning across NSW. NSW has a rescue workforce that possess skills which are readily transferrable12 across agencies within the rescue capability community.

10 http://www.ambulance.nsw.gov.au/about-us/Emergency-Operations.html 11 http://www.rfs.nsw.gov.au/about-us/fast-facts 12 Report into The Review of Rescue Policy in NSW 1988 NSW Government –Grey Report

Police 17%

FRNSW 62%

Ambulance 3%

SES 9%

VRA 9% Police

FRNSW

Ambulance

SES

VRA

13

The 2014-2015 SRB Annual Report outlines that NSW has 3,408 GLR operators, which equates to one GLR operator per 2,251 NSW residents. GLR Operators by Agency 2014-2015 SRB Annual Report

Rescue Agency GLR Operators

NSWA 94

FRNSW 2089

NSWPF 156

NSW SES 589

NSW VRA 476

NSW RFS* 4

Total 3408 *NSW RFS seeking Secondary Accreditation

The categories of rescue incidents across NSW have remained relatively stable over the last five years. RCR consistently dominates the environment followed by Domestic Rescue (DR). The combination of Lift and Industrial Rescue (IR) accounts for 10 per cent of the total incident numbers. Rescue Incident Category 5 year average 2011-2015

Road Crash Rescue48%

Domestic29%

Lift9%

Animal7%

Building2%

Natural Disaster

2%

Cliff2%

Industrial1%

Road Crash Rescue

Domestic

Lift

Animal

Building

Natural Disaster

Cliff

Industrial

14

The suitability of current Primary and Secondary rescue accreditation system and whether there are opportunities to simplify the process to accredit rescue units. NSW has a network of rescue services that are oversighted and recommended for accreditation by the SRB. The intent and purpose of accreditation is to establish and provide continuity of service delivery across NSW. This has been achieved through the development of standardised levels of training and maintenance of skills, by ensuring resources are located appropriately with the ability to respond within acceptable timeframes and ensuring local communities across NSW have appropriate rescue vehicles and equipment available. The SRB accreditation process and the rescue tasking business rules in place have significantly reduced incidents of excessive responses with multiple resources attending rescue scenes13 and abolished the unnecessary proliferation and duplication of rescue resources.14 Finding: The current two staged pre-accreditation and accreditation process continues to work effectively across NSW The identification of rescue needs and services across NSW by the LRC and RRC engaging in an all hazards approach15 continues to ensure an appropriate consideration of local priorities based upon identifiable risks. Using a risk based all hazards methodology, the Rescue Service Delivery Model (RSDM), assists communities in deciding the optimum number, location and type of rescue units needed within their respective area of responsibility16. Finding: LRC and RRC continue to determine the need for resources, evaluate their community’s risk profile and periodically review the need for future rescue resources within their area of responsibility. The CMWG has examined and supports the current NSW State Rescue Policy and guiding principles relating to accreditation and acknowledges this process has served the community well since its inception. There are however, significant opportunities to enhance, harmonise and simplify definitions surrounding the accreditation standards for GLR and the Primary and Secondary Rescue response system. ‘

13 Coordination of Rescue Services: State Rescue Board of NSW, Auditor General’s Report, Performance Audit 2005 14 Report on the Review of Rescue Policy in NSW, NSW Government 1988. 15 NSW State Rescue Policy 2012 16 Coordination of Rescue Services: State Rescue Board of NSW, Auditor General’s Report, Performance Audit 2005

15

A breakdown and analysis from 2010 to 2015 shows a relatively steady five-year trend across GLR callouts and stable trend across IR and DR across NSW17.

5-year trend major category breakdown

17 NSWPF RCO

88788779

8226

8394

7932

7400

7600

7800

8000

8200

8400

8600

8800

9000

2010/2011 2011/2012 2012/2013 2013/2014 2014/2015

5-Year Rescue Trend

GLR

Linear (GLR)

4349 41663814 3826 3761

2351 2422 2351 2462 2347

893 774 819 847 749

0

500

1000

1500

2000

2500

3000

3500

4000

4500

5000

2010/2011 2011/2012 2012/2013 2013/2014 2014/2015

Road Crash Rescue

Domestic

Industrial

Linear (Road Crash Rescue)

Linear (Domestic)

Linear (Industrial )

16

Primary and Secondary Units

Currently the NSW State Rescue Policy defines both Primary and Secondary rescue units: 1. A Primary rescue unit is a unit with trained crew, rescue vehicle and rescue equipment which has

been accredited to respond first to rescue situations, on a 24 hour, seven days a week basis. A Primary rescue unit can be considered a GLR unit with the capability and capacity to respond to all forms of GLR inclusive of agricultural, animal, road crash, domestic, or industrial rescue.

2. A Secondary rescue unit is a unit which has the capability to respond to rescue situations when the Primary unit is already committed to a rescue incident, is otherwise unavailable to attend or when a Primary rescue unit requests assistance. These units are accredited for Secondary response, on a 24 hour, seven days a week basis. This unit may or may not possess the capability to carry out agricultural, animal, domestic, or industrial rescue.

Many Secondary units across NSW that are trained, equipped and accredited to provide a capability to respond to rescue situations with equivalent capability as a Primary GLR unit. This provides benefit to the community when the Primary unit is already committed to a rescue incident or otherwise unavailable and the hazard profile of the area drives a need for this level of capability. In many locations however this level of capability is not required. The original intention of defining ‘Primary’ and ‘Secondary’ rescue capability was as a dispatch mechanism to ensure a clear hierarchy of deployment. Additionally, the accreditation ‘class’ has had impacts determining the required equipment, training and maintenance of IR and DR competencies. Currently there are 197 Primary GLR units that are accredited, equipped, and maintained to full GLR status. There are 119 Secondary rescue units across NSW that may or may not train to or maintain the full suite of GLR skills and competencies inclusive of the IR and DR and USAR Category 1. The current ‘Primary and Secondary’ accreditation by Rescue Agency across NSW is outlined in the table below.

Rescue Agency GLR

Primary Secondary

NSWA 6 0

FRNSW 79 109

NSWPF 8 0

NSW VRA 39 1

NSW SES 68 8

NSW RFS 0 1

Total 197 119

17

A move away from the existing process of what constitutes a Primary and Secondary rescue unit, (both having full GLR capability including USAR Category 1, IR and DR), the rescue sector across NSW needs to incorporate involving both the LRC and RRC in determining the local requirements based upon on the real hazards, identifiable risk and what consequences may occur within these communities if the capability of IR and DR are not required for ‘Secondary’ units. In order to deliver comprehensive, balanced and coordinated rescue capability across NSW based on local and regional risk profiles, identification of which ‘Secondary’ units do not have full GLR capability should be a high priority to inform future decisions on resourcing and dispatch. Finding: Rescue units that do not currently maintain GLR skills (IR, DR and USAR Category 1) capability should immediately inform REMO, LRC and RRC, SRB and NSWPF ROG for effective operational deployment coordination. Location of Primary GLR Units across NSW

18

Location of Secondary Units across NSW

Location of Metropolitan Primary GLR

19

Metropolitan Secondary Units

Opportunities to simplify NSW Rescue Accreditation process

In simple terms ‘Primary’ and ‘Secondary’ defines which rescue unit is responded in the first instance, with the ‘Secondary’ unit able to be responded in the event the Primary rescue unit is unavailable or when a Primary rescue unit requests assistance. This is purely a dispatch and redundancy mechanism and does not outline rescue capability. There is no requirement for the Minister to determine how rescue units are dispatched to incidents. The LRC and RRC should be supported to make determinations of capability level requirements in their area of responsibility. The NSWPF RCO will continue to maintain responsibility for the call out, coordination and priorities of action of resource across NSW18. This embeds flexibility within the arrangements for resourcing to be adapted to suit the needs of a community based on the risk profile of a given area. At the present time an opportunity exists to synthesize and integrate rescue unit capability definitions with a clear and consistent response policy by updating and reviewing the NSW State Rescue Policy to reflect the proposed two tiered land rescue capability levels described below. In order to simplify and provide the community with a standardised process for the delivery of rescue services, the CMWG identified the need to define GLR and RCR which will provide a roadmap and foundation to inform required training, equipment and deployment across NSW.

18 NSW State Rescue Policy, Version 3.5, 2015.

20

The CMWG decided it was best to take definitions from the NSW State Rescue Policy and Public Safety Training Packages to provide commonly accepted definitions for: 1. GLR

2. IR and DR

3. USAR Category 1

4. Confined Space Rescue

5. RCR.

The below definitions for GLR and RCR are intended to be a pathway to a capability framework to be included within the NSW State Rescue Policy: 1. GLR capability accreditation definition and standards GLR unit – has the capability and capacity to undertake all rescue activities involving the safe removal of persons or domestic animals from actual or threatened danger of physical harm. A GLR unit has the skills and equipment required to undertake RCR, agricultural, animal, domestic and industrial rescues19 and is trained in USAR Category 1 and Confined Space Rescue. Undertake IR and DR – has the capability required to gain access to and extricate entrapped casualty/s from a range of industrial and/or domestic incidents while minimising the potential for further injury and preserving the integrity of evidence20. IR - involves the safe removal of persons who have had an accident in the workplace such as factories, warehouses and building sites. It involves disentanglement from machinery, and extrication from heavy machinery such as cranes. Rescue of occupants trapped in elevators and escalators is also included21. DR - involves the rescue of occupants trapped in household settings. This includes such things as children with fingers in drain plugs, removal of rings, and persons who are physically incapable of removing themselves from their houses due to ill health22 USAR Category 1 – has the capability required to provide safe and effective rescue support to an USAR incident as a member of a first responder rescue team. It involves assisting with the rescue and removing surface (lightly trapped) casualties or deceased victims, applying basic search techniques such as carrying out limited debris removal and following safe work practices23

19 NSW State Rescue Policy, Version 3.5, 2015. 20 Ibid 21 PUASAR026A Undertake industrial and domestic rescue ISC AusGov 22 Ibid 23 PUASAR023A Participate in an urban search and rescue Category 1 ISC AusGov

21

Confined Space Rescue – undertake rescue in confined spaces as defined in AS2865 as a member of a single agency or multi-disciplinary team24 Finding: The SRB should consider endorsing the proposed GLR Capability Accreditation Definition Standards 2. RCR Capability Accreditation Definition Standards Road Crash Rescue (RCR) – the capability

required to gain access to and extricate entrapped casualty/s from vehicles travelling on the road such as cars, motorcycles, buses, trucks and semi-trailers while minimising the potential for further injury and preserving the integrity of evidence. Rescue operators are required to access entrapped casualty/s using a range of techniques and to operate specialist equipment to undertake the rescue.

Finding: The SRB should consider endorsing the proposed RCR Capability Accreditation Definition Standards The intent is not to create further hardship, red tape or an onerous training or reporting regime but be flexible, agile and responsive to changing environments. The fundamental premise and guiding principles on accreditation based upon local and regional all hazards approach must be maintained in determining the levels of rescue capability across NSW. The CMWG proposes the introduction of a two tiered system of land rescue capability in NSW: 1. GLR – meeting current SRB accreditation standards for a Primary rescue unit – RCR, IR/DR and

USAR Category 1 capability

2. RCR – a rescue unit meeting necessary equipment, training and SRB accreditation standards to carry out the road crash function in rural, regional and remote areas of NSW.

The CMWG proposal indicates a two tiered level of land rescue capability. This would result in the rescue footprint across regional, rural and remote NSW changing into a combination of service delivery models based on the local/regional risk profiles. For example an area may be serviced by: • multiple GLR units (local risk profile requires high levels of GLR capability with high levels of

redundancy)

• GLR and RCR (local risk profile does not require high levels of IR and DR capability redundancy)

• RCR only (currently no rescue capability exists at all in an area where there is a requirement for RCR capabilities).

24 https://training.gov.au/Training/Details/PUASAR005B

22

Whilst the optimum model of rescue response coordination across NSW would be the implementation of a combined AVL and CAD system allowing real time tracking of vehicles to better enable state wide rescue vehicles to provide more precise, closer to real time location allowing NSWPF to activate the “nearest possible” rescue accredited vehicle there are still some significant considerations and limitations that need to be addressed. The further advancement of AVL and CAD integration into the coordination of rescue capability will be addressed further in this paper. Rescue resources, particularly in rural and remote NSW are primarily static in nature and are required to service the community through respective geographical areas and by coordination of the NSWPF ROG. In order to ensure the effectiveness of rescue response with the elimination of potential excessive responses existing activation arrangements, area of responsibility and deployment rules are required to ensure operational stability across NSW. Any change should be based upon locally or regionally identified service delivery and rescue capability needs which should be resolved through the LRC and RRC. Existing rescue resource dispatch (‘Primary and Secondary’) arrangements and areas of responsibility to remain until the full implementation of real time live AVL and CAD tracking systems to identify the closest most appropriate rescue resource. A GLR unit should be considered the most appropriate rescue resource as it is equipped to a standard to carry out all forms of GLR and in some cases has the capability and capacity to undertake other specialist rescue (VR and Swift Water) reducing potential delays in extrication. The guiding principle34

is that the most appropriate accredited rescue unit with the shortest response time to the incident should be responded. Finding: GLR units should be considered the most appropriate accredited rescue resource and deployed to an incident within their areas of operation without delay. The overall guiding principle25 of rescue capability deployment should be that of the closest available unit with the appropriate capability. RCR Accreditation – It is suggested that current arrangements in relation to areas of responsibility stand and if an area is serviced within 60 minutes by a GLR unit then this remains. Units that are currently classified as ‘Secondary’ GLR but do not have the full GLR capabilities may need to be re-classified as RCR. RCR accreditation of additional units should be considered for areas currently outside of the 60 minutes response times of any existing unit, or as a secondary option to support a GLR unit where there is a risk based requirement for this level of capability.

25 NSW State Rescue Policy, 3rd Edition, Version 3.5, 2015.

23

RCR callout – RCR units identified across rural and remote areas should be backed up automatically by the nearest GLR. The purpose of this concept is avoiding any delay in patient care and extrication outcomes in the event a GLR capability is required to perform complex extrications. Communication between deployed units and dispatchers should be promoted to ensure appropriate call-off if and when it is determined the lower level of capability is sufficient to undertake all tasks required. 1. Rescue units that do not currently maintain GLR skills (IR, DR and USAR Category 1) capability

should immediately inform REMO, LRC and RRC, SRB and NSWPF ROG for effective operational deployment coordination.

Finding: The SRB should consider the implementation of RCR capability in areas where the need has been identified by the LRC and RRC in remote and very remote areas of NSW A further opportunity to simplify the accreditation process across remote and very remote NSW in respect of providing both GLR and RCR rescue services should be a focus on a flexible and collaborative approach to a consolidated multi-agency rescue deployment model in identified areas rather than primacy of response being invested within one specific agency. It is acknowledged that some of the issues faced by volunteer rescue services include recruitment, retention and availability of rescue operators which can subsequently affect the delivery and capacity of rescue services in rural remote and very remote areas of NSW26. It is also acknowledged and understood anecdotally that some volunteers may also be members of more than one rescue or emergency service agency within the area placing further stressors on a relatively small finite human resource. CMWG engagement in western NSW has identified a need for a flexible and simple mechanism within the accreditation process where the consolidation of rescue capability into a single multi-agency rescue resource (for example rescue vehicles, equipment and infrastructure, sheds) and current rescue services personnel (NSW VRA, NSW RFS and NSW SES) will provide significant executable, deliverable and sustainable outcomes by: • creating effective economies of scale in training, equipment purchasing and fleet management

• avoiding duplication, proliferation and waste of resources

• providing a collaborative joint whole-of-government response

• capitalising and maximising with existing human resources within the local community

• ensuring the security and sustainability of human and capital resources.

26 SRB Strategic Report into Land Rescue Services, Draft 2007

24

The intention would be to establish multi-agency rescue arrangements in identified areas where the existing retained or volunteer units individually do not have the resources or personnel required for accreditation, but combined would be able to meet the capability requirements. This would provide Government with an affordable option in areas where the existing emergency service organisations are suitably resourced to continue core business functions whilst coming together with personnel to deliver a rescue service they would not individually be capable of achieving. The concept of a consolidated multi-agency rescue model or one shed policy in identified rural, remote and very remote NSW significantly augments a broader rescue capability providing value for money where consolidation of resources will provide for the significant targeted use of capital and standardisation of rescue vehicle fleets, training and equipment. At the tactical level this model affords an opportunity to capitalise on an all-agency approach to deployment of increasingly finite volunteer resources, by developing a cadre of suitable trained rescue operators across agencies to be deployed operationally through the normal on call response mechanisms which are already in existence. The actual operation of multi-agency rescue arrangements should be an arrangement determined by the LRC and RRC and the agencies participating. The value of organisational branding should not be underestimated in this process and units should consider multi-agency arrangements being highly visible (for example NSW RFS and NSW VRA operators in an NSW RFS vehicle, dual NSW RFS and NSW SES branding on vehicles, implementation of a common ‘rescue operator’ patch for uniforms). Finding: In areas where the challenges faced by volunteer rescue services across recruitment, retention, availability are effecting the subsequent delivery of rescue services within the rural areas of NSW, multi-agency collaboration should be considered as an option for the delivery of RCR and GLR.

Acceptable response times across the State In June 2007, the SRB considered a draft interim report into the strategic analysis of land rescue in NSW, commonly referred to the ‘Crosweller Report,’ which was initiated in response to 2005 Auditor General’s Report, Performance Audit into the ‘Coordination of Rescue Services.’ As a result of this review the SRB adopted the ARIA Code Index as a guide to categorise NSW. The ARIA Code Index consists of five levels of remoteness, these being; Very Remote, Remote, Outer Regional, Inner Regional and Major Cities. The SRB adopted Metropolitan, Regional and Remote classification categories and subsequently determined the minimum road accident rescue response times for each category.

25

SRB Response Times

ARIA Code Definition SRB GLR Definition SRB Response Times

Major Cities Metropolitan 20 mins

Inner Regional Outer Regional

Regional 40 mins

Remote Very Remote

Remote 60 mins

Jurisdictions such as Victoria, Queensland and South Australia have adopted a comparable approach to determine RCR acceptable response times.27 Another commonly accepted concept is that RCR times are critically aligned to the, ‘Golden Hour’. The accepted time for the Golden Hour is from time injury to arrival at hospital. 28 It should also be noted that the intention of introducing the ARIA Code Index and road accident rescue response times was to provide a quantifiable framework that the SRB and rescue committees could use to assess the suitability or otherwise of road accident rescue performance across NSW. Since the creation of the ARIA Code Index in 1998 and introduction of the combination of ARIA principles into the SRB response time in 2007, there have been quantifiable changes in demographics and population spread across NSW. There have also been changes to the categories of the ARIA definitions moving to:

SRB Response ARIA 2011

Metropolitan Highly accessible

Regional Accessible/moderately accessible

Remote Remote/very Remote

27 SRB Response Time Planning Standards Briefing ‘Strategic Directions.’2007 28 NSW Trauma Services, NSW Health 2009

26

The ARIA Code Index provides a remoteness, or accessibility, value for every location in Australia. It is an essential tool for any organisation interested in the ease or difficulty people face accessing services and locations in non-metropolitan locations.29 Furthermore it provides a clear definition and methodology to describe to represent remoteness is based on road distance measurements to the nearest service centres based on population size30. Coordination among all services, medical and non-medical, is essential to ensure that there is effective linkage between acute medical care, family support and ongoing rehabilitation and return to community life. Trauma care is especially difficult in rural areas as generally: • rural crashes involve higher speed and are therefore more severe

• the time taken for emergency services to be notified and to reach the site is greater.

Rural hospitals are less equipped to provide appropriate care to severe trauma cases (Australian Transport Council, 2001). It therefore becomes essential for RCR agencies to ensure that their performance is of a quality commensurate with the expectations of the community and the Government in reducing the impact of road crash trauma and the utilisation of the ARIA Code Index can assist greatly in achieving this outcome. Furthermore the CMWG agreed that mobilisation times of rescue resources as a general rule to be focused on three minutes (183 seconds) for permanent rescue operators and 7 minutes 53 seconds (9 minutes was agreed) for retained / volunteer rescue operators. Finding: LRC, RRC and the SRB to continue to use the ARIA Code Index as a baseline methodology to assist in determining the optimum number, location and type of units and to determine minimum acceptable response times as a rescue performance standard.

29 https://www.adelaide.edu.au/apmrc/research/projects/category/about_aria.html 30 http://www.ausstats.abs.gov.au/ausstats/free.nsf/0/FCC8158C85424727CA256C0F00003575/$File/12440_2001.pdf

27

NSW ARIA Index Map

NSW major road crash data from 2011 to 2015 has been collated, geospatially overlayed with the ARIA Code Index and incorporated against accredited rescue unit locations and response times (20/40/60) across NSW. Greater ARIA and Response Time mapping NSW

Finding: Generally speaking, the SRB response time principle of 20/40/60 minutes continues to serve the community well across metropolitan and partially in remote areas across NSW based only upon the abovementioned RCR data and mapped GLR unit response times.

28

Given that the concept of the ‘golden hour’, where the victim of a traumatic injury is at definitive health care within one hour from the time of injury is widely accepted as the benchmark for trauma care31 coupled with the abovementioned data and geospatial analysis opportunities exist to reduce patient extraction times in the areas across NSW in the 60+ zone. Finding: It may be possible to reduce response timeframes outside of the 60+ to more likely acceptable times of 40-60 minutes or even less depending on the location of the incident from the closest resource by having an RCR capability on scene providing initial patient care and extrication. It is generally accepted that it is not possible to provide a rescue capability that can effectively cover the whole of NSW, however it may be possible to provide a targeted, intelligence based strategic resourcing process to remote and very remote communities where RCR may be considered by assessing the local risk profile, particularly in respect to: • historical road crash data

• local land use patterns, specific hazards etc. (e.g. increasing tourism across major remote arterial highways and national parks)

• local population demographics

• changes in environmental factors contributing to hazards such as specific industries (e.g. mining)

• data on response times of rescue unit’s turnaround times and availability32.

Mapping conducted across NSW outlining crash data from 2011-2015 and agency response time have provided a footprint of areas where the 60+ response time intersect with areas featuring motor vehicle accidents. Metropolitan (highly accessible) 20 minutes

31 Churchill Fellowship - To study rapid extrication techniques and moving vehicles with patient’s in- situ – Kirwan, P 32 Coordination of Rescue Services: State Rescue Board of NSW, Auditor General’s Report, Performance Audit 2005

29

Finding: The information suggests that the 20-minute response time provides a satisfactory level of rescue capability. The response arrangements for metropolitan Sydney, Newcastle, Central Coast and Wollongong meet this capability. As previous suggested these areas should be continually reassessed for changing demographics and increased population numbers using the ARIA Code Index as a base for increased rescue capability as determined by the LRC and RRC. Greater Sydney and Regional

30

Finding: Generally speaking, regional response times have also continued to serve the community of NSW well. There will however, be a need to continually review response times across the regions and in particular high growth areas of the northern and southern coastal areas of NSW as towns and cities continue to grow and their status within the ARIA Code Index changes. The CMWG has mapped response times, incident crash data and overlayed ARIA Code Index along the eastern seaboard of NSW from Queensland to Victoria in response to the increasing changes in demographics and population change. As the ARIA Code Index of Accessibility changes, becoming highly accessible then the optimal response time should also decrease. The below mapping provides response time modelling across regional and remote NSW. Similar patterns emerge in respect to opportunities in the greater than 60+ minute response zone which was highlighted previously.

31

Overlays of ARIA Code Index reveal that the areas outside of the response time of 60 minutes are located in the remote and very remote area having generally lower levels of accessibility to services. The appropriate management of road casualties following the impact is a crucial determinant of the chance and quality of survival and early intervention by rescuers is considered essential33. CMWG mapping and overlay of response and crash data identifies areas where there is no rescue response capability able to deliver a capability within 60 minutes of notification and activation. It therefore may become an option for SRB and NSW Government to accept this capability gap as a performance standard. Adopting of a proactive approach in the identification of existing emergency service resources located in these communities to deliver rescue services will ensure that their performance is of a quality commensurate with the expectations of the community and the Government in reducing the impact of road crash trauma.34 A far less attractive alternative would be to extend the acceptable SRB Response Time Framework to greater than 60 minutes or 60+ as a standard of response capability in these communities relying on resources coming from further afield from other towns and areas as is the case a present. Finding: The SRB should consider the implementation of RCR capability in areas that have been identified in the 60+ zone capitalising on existing government resources.

33 Reducing the severity of road injuries through post impact care 1999 European Transport Safety Council. 34 SRB Strategic Report into Land Rescue Services, Draft 2007

32

Identification of opportunities to improve service delivery and meet agreed response times particularly in regional areas. The principle aim of rescue is to minimise the consequences of injuries arising from an incident and it is obvious that rescue providers must be able to respond in a timely manner, have appropriately trained operators and the necessary equipment to undertake the rescue. 35 Trauma care is especially difficult in rural areas as generally: • rural crashes involve higher speed and are therefore more severe • the time taken for emergency services to be notified and to reach the site is greater. The CMWG conducted geo-spatial data analysis across NSW with motor vehicle accident data obtained from 2011-2015. This has been visualised with current SRB/ARIA response times from existing rescue unit base locations. As a result of this methodology a number of remote and very remote areas of NSW indicated potential opportunities to improve service delivery. This is indicated in the above map relating to motor vehicle accidents (points) where no resource was available to provide a service (hashed areas). The following maps display this data in greater resolution to demonstrate areas with high densities of motor vehicle accident and response times greater than 60 minutes.

35 Coordination of Rescue Services: State Rescue Board of NSW, Auditor General’s Report, Performance Audit 2005

33

Putty/St Albans Nowendoc/Ellerston

Boomi/Boggabilla/Yetman Bourke/Cobar/Nyngan

34

Cobar/Nyngan/Hillston/Condobolin Broken Hill/Mendiee/Balranald/Wenworth

Balranald/Hay/Deniliquin Tibooburra/Broken Hill

35

Tibooburra/Wanaaring/Bourke

Wilcannia/Cobar

Regional Response Times (Accessible/Moderately accessible) In 2007, SRB response time protocols were adopted which provided a stable and measurable performance standard for the delivery of rescue services across NSW. Since this time there has been significant demographic and population changes across NSW with growth predicted to continue across the majority of regions in NSW until at least 2036.

36

NSW TOTAL PROJECTED POPULATION

2011 2016 2021 2026 2031 2036

New South Wales 7,218,550 7,748,000 8,297,500 8,844,700 9,386,850 9,925,550

Central Coast 322,650 339,550 357,250 374,900 391,050 415,050

Central West and Orana 276,850 285,500 293,100 299,550 304,800 308,950

Far West 48,150 47,500 46,700 45,600 44,300 42,850

Hunter 693,400 732,400 769,750 805,250 839,350 862,250

Illawarra-Shoalhaven 385,300 404,650 423,150 440,600 456,800 471,700

Metropolitan Sydney 4,286,200 4,681,950 5,106,300 5,537,850 5,975,550 6,421,850

New England-North West 182,600 188,350 193,150 197,000 200,000 202,150

North Coast 495,300 519,300 541,350 561,700 579,850 595,450

Riverina-Murray 266,350 273,150 278,350 281,750 283,650 284,300

South East and Tablelands 261,750 275,650 288,450 300,500 311,450 321,050

Source: http://www.planning.nsw.gov.au/Research-and-Demography/Demography/Population-projections

Continual and predicted growth across the state may also cause change in existing ARIA Code Index which form the basis for rescue response in NSW. Some major rural towns will become highly accessible on the Index whilst others will become accessible and moderately accessible which impacts upon response time planning and future allocation of resources. The CMWG has mapped the eastern seaboard of NSW from north to south based upon SRB Response Time framework, in anticipation of changing ARIA Code Index and growing populations. In some regional areas (accessible/moderately accessible) in NSW the adopted 40-minute response time may not be realised.

SRB Response ARIA 2007 ARIA 2011 Response Time

Metropolitan Major Cities Highly accessible 20

Regional Inner and Outer Accessible/moderately accessible 40

Remote Remote/Very Remote Remote/very Remote 60

37

Grafton/Kempsey Port Stephens/Newcastle/Sydney

Sydney/Ulladulla Bega/Bombala

The accepted regional rescue response time in NSW is 40 minutes from the point of activation. The CMWG’s analysis has indicated potential areas for service delivery improvement in respect to response timing. There should be consideration by the LRC and RRC to implement and use an RCR capability across these areas.

38

The purpose of enabling an RCR only capability in rural and remote areas is to provide a capability to reduce response times significantly under the 60 minutes where possible, and improving patient outcomes by assisting paramedical responders in the extrication and pre-hospital management of trauma cycle. As motor vehicle accidents are the most common incident requiring rescue response across the state, adding this as a capability will provide a significant enhancement to the rescue sector is rural and remote areas.

Identification of Emergency Services best placed to improve service delivery The CMWG has mapped emergency services locations and response times according to the 20/40/60 response times across NSW. NSWPF NSWA

Activation

Response

Extrication

Pre-hospital managemt of major trauma transportation

Major Trauma or T1 Hosptial

39

FRNSW NSW SES

NSW RFS NSW VRA

40

Opportunities to improve service delivery outside of the 60-minute response time generally occur in remote or very remote NSW where no trained and equipped resource are readily available to respond. The CMWG has identified where existing government resources are located which may provide a resource to fill the opportunities rather than the creation of new units to fulfil this requirement. With the recent entry of the NSW RFS into the rescue sector as a specified organisation performing rescue, this vastly increases the number of resources available in remote and very remote NSW that could be utilised to conduct rescue in these areas. Analysis carried out by the CMWG indicate that in the majority of locations, existing NSW RFS and NSW SES units may be in a position to reduce critical rescue response timeframes which would significantly improve patient outcomes. Currently there seems to be no impetus and or capability in these areas that requires or enables the accreditation of GLR units. This could be overcome through the introduction of an RCR only capability across these areas. Across rural remote and very remote NSW there are 11 areas with opportunities to improve the delivery of rescue capability. There is no doubt that many more areas across NSW cannot feasibly be serviced within 60 minutes due to accessibility issues such as extreme and difficult terrain, isolation and remoteness. The areas identified by the CMWG are relatively accessible and consist of the national road network, major highways and roads36. The identified areas for improved service delivery across NSW are: 1. Putty/St Albans

2. Ellerston/ Nowendoc

3. Boggabilla/Boomi/ Yetman

4. Bourke/Cobar/Nyngan

5. Cobar/Nyngan/Hillston/Condobolin

6. Broken Hill/Menindee/Balranald/Wentworth

7. Balranald/Hay/Deniliquin

8. Ivanhoe/Hay

9. Tibooburra/Wanaaring/Bourke

10. Wilcannia/Cobar

11. Tibooburra/Broken Hill.

The aim of CMWG is to identify, develop and the most operationally effective and cost-efficient capability required to harness the Governments strategic objective of increasing service delivery whilst remaining robust, simple and manageable.

36 http://investment.infrastructure.gov.au/whatis/network/images/NSW_National_Land_Transport_Network_Road_Corridors_update_2014.pdf

41

The NSW RFS and the NSW SES provide a capability delivery option that is executable and deliverable across NSW while being able to potentially provide the RCR capability within existing volunteer workforce allocations. It is acknowledged that there may some challenges to the security and supply of the existing volunteer workforces such as declining availability or readily available resources, time, increased training requirements, costs to the volunteer resource, and recognition.37 It should also be noted that these challenges may be overcome by joint and whole-of-government capitalisation on resources where relationships must be established and built between agencies to provide a broader based rescue capability structure option where appropriate. Areas across NSW predominantly based along the national road network and major highways where it has been identified as potential gap should also be further analysed, evaluated, treated and monitored by the LRC and RRC ensuring that evidenced based decision making process has occurred to the allocation of resources.

Putty/St Albans

37 Report on The Attraction, Support and Retention of Emergency Management Volunteers 2009 EMA

42

NSW RFS NSW SESNSW

Ellerston/Nowendoc

43

NSW RFS NSW SES

Boomi/Bogabilla/Yetman

44

NSW RFS NSW SES

Bourke/Cobar/Nyngan

45

NSW RFS NSW SES

Cobar/Nyngan/Hillston/Condobolin

46

NSW RFS NSW SES

Broken Hill/Menindee/Balranald/Wentworth

47

NSW RFS NSW SES

Balranald/Hay/Deniliquin

48

NSW RFS NSW SES

Ivanhoe/Hay

49

NSW RFS NSW SES

Tibooburra/Wanaaring/Bourke

50

NSW RFS

NSW SES

Wilcannia/Cobar

51

NSW RFS

NSW SES

52

Tibooburra/Broken Hill

NSW RFS NSW SES

53

Realistic cost implications associated with training and equipping services to cover identified opportunities The CMWG has identified potential areas for service delivery improvement across NSW in what could be considered remote or very remote communities. These communities are generally outside of the accepted 60-minute response timeframe with the majority of these towns having relative small populations, limited services and a volunteer base providing fire and emergency services inclusive of medical first responder (NSW RFS and NSW SES) services. Improved rescue service delivery in rural, remote and very remote communities across NSW, by the provision of a RCR service would significantly reduce and minimising the consequence of injuries arising from an incident38. This could be delivered as a stand-alone capability in areas currently outside of the accepted 60-minute response time where the LRC and RRC have not deemed there to be a requirement for a full GLR resource. The adoption and implementation of this rescue capability can be seen as an important link in the existing operational response arrangements. Stand-alone RCR units could fill in a substantial gap in rescue service deliver across NSW from highly accessible communities to the very remote locales essentially forming a suite of capability based on risk. The cost to expand service delivery using the existing process would be costly and time consuming, resulting in the long term maintenance of a capability that may not be required based on the risk profile of the area.

Volunteer services are the most cost effective provider of rescue capability across NSW due to low operational expenditure. The Government contributes towards the administrative and capital costs (infrastructure, systems, support personnel etc.) for the NSW SES and NSW RFS as well as providing large annual grants to the NSW VRA. The most significant cost (employee related expenditure) for the actual service delivery of the rescue services undertaken by these organisations is zero39. It is not feasible that the Government could deliver the required services without the dedication of volunteers. The employee related cost of deployment to a rescue incident may be zero however, there are still expenses related to training, equipment, vehicles and ongoing costs to maintain a capability. A large component of training costs within volunteer based agencies that service the rural and remote

38 Coordination of Rescue Services: State Rescue Board of NSW, Auditor General’s Report, Performance Audit 2005 39 SRB Strategic Report into Land Rescue Services, Draft 2007

highly accessible

GLR

accessible GLR

moderately accessible GLR/RCR

remote RCR

very remote RCR

54

areas is the “travel cost” and availability of “volunteer and paid trainers and assessors”. The establishment of a regional based multi-agency rescue training facility(s) would enhance rescue training delivery and provide a greater opportunity for multi-agency training and cross agency training. This could be an essential step for the future service delivery of rescue (and emergency services) in rural and remote areas into the future. The RCR capability and respective training competencies outlined below using already adopted, delivered and well-practiced competency units from the Public Safety Training packages provide a significant platform by improving efficiency and have significant economic pay offs with the reduction in training time and required equipment.

NSW SES 2016 Training Costs Estimates

Minimum cost of training six GLR Operators $8,480.00

Minimum of training six RCR Operators $6,925.00

Difference $1,555.00 The below table establishes the agreed minimum standards for RCR training competencies for accreditation in NSW in comparison to what is currently required for GLR. This provides the baseline of skills and performance standards that providers must meet and maintain in order to be accredited for RCR in NSW. RCR Training Competencies

Competency Current GLR Minimum

Proposed RCR

PUACOM001C Communicate in the Workplace

PUACOM002B Provide services to clients

PUALAW001B - Protect and preserve incident scene

PUAOHS001C Follow defined occupational health and safety policies and procedures

PUAOHS001B Maintain safety at an incident scene

PUAOPE002B Operate communication systems and equipment

PUASAR024A Undertake road crash rescue

PUASAR022A Participate in a rescue operation

PUASAR023A Participate in an urban search and rescue Category 1

PUASAR026A Undertake industrial and domestic rescue

PUATEA001B Work in a team

PUATEA004D Work effectively in a public safety organization

HLTAID003 Provide First Aid

55

In order to improve efficiency of services, avoid unnecessary duplication and waste, it is essential that organisations increase interagency collaboration and sharing of rescue training packages, assessment tools, and Standard Operating Procedures in an effort to ensure a standardised rescue capability across NSW. This approach would decrease training costs associated with the development of RCR operator skills and ongoing training regimes that would be required to maintain SRB RCR accreditation. An effective rescue capability consists of appropriately trained and skilled operators as well as the necessary equipment to undertake the challenging activities involved in rescue. The CMWG has developed a generic RCR equipment guidance list for RCR. The equipment list provides a baseline of essential equipment that is required for a unit to be accredited. The actual detail of what equipment is required can be determined using a combination of this list, agencies’ standard equipment lists, and local/regional determination of require equipment based on the local/regional risk profile.

Proposed Minimum RCR Equipment

LIFTING KIT

A Lifting Kit should contain sufficient equipment in, support of hydraulic rescue equipment, to: • raise (lift) • separate (spread) • support (shore), and • lower in a controlled manner, motor vehicles or other objects involved in collision or other rescue scenarios, to enable the extrication of all trapped persons or animals, and may be of mechanical, hydraulic or compressed air type.

CONSUMABLES

Sufficient consumable materials such as cordage, fuels, etc., as determined necessary by the agency to support their rescue equipment in facilitating the safe and efficient extrication of trapped persons or animals from a road crash rescue.

FIRE PROTECTION

Sufficient fire mitigation or retardants to cover the risks associated with vehicle fires which may be presented whilst conducting a road crash rescue.

FIRST AID KIT

Sufficient materials to provide immediate first aid by first responder and includes an Automatic External Defibrillator.

GLASS MANAGEMENT KIT

Equipment providing protection to rescuers and trapped persons from glass that may be at risk of or require breaking during a rescue operation, and may include sharps protection blankets, adhesive wraps, windscreen removal tools and hard cased materials.

HAND TOOLS

56


Sufficient non-powered/hand held tools to effect manual on-scene tasks in support of a road crash rescue, such as dismantling vehicle parts, cut electrical leads, etc., and may include spanners, screwdrivers, tin snips, side cutter, stilsons, saws, etc.

HEIGHT SAFETY KIT/SYSTEM

A (respective agency) approved and standards compliant method for safely working at heights on a domestic or commercial structure, that controls person/s movements by physically preventing them reaching a position at which there is a risk of a fall. The fall arrest capability of the system will safely stop a person from falling an uncontrolled distance of greater than 600mm and reduce the impact of the fall to less than 0.6 KN. Kit or system will contain sufficient cordage, carabineers, slings, harnesses, rope grab/friction control devices to effectively work from heights in an RCR scenario.

HYDRAULIC RESCUE EQUIPMENT

Conventional hydraulic rescue equipment including pumps, hoses, couplings and tools capable of cutting, pulling, squeezing, separating or spreading a range of materials including ferrous and non-ferrous metals, metal alloys, composite materials and plastics as found in modern motor vehicles and other objects a vehicle may be in impact with as a result of a motor vehicle collision. This may include Conventional hydraulic rescue equipment including pumps, hoses, couplings etc. and/or Cordless battery powered hydraulic rescue equipment capable of performing the same functions as conventional hydraulic equipment

EDRAULIC RESCUE TOOLS

Cordless battery powered hydraulic rescue equipment capable of performing the same functions as conventional Hydraulic Rescue Equipment (listed).

LADDERS

Ladder - Fibreglass, Extension, Short, Industrial (3.3m - 5.1m) 160Kg

LIFTING AND STABILASATION

Sufficient equipment to safely and securely stabilise a motor vehicle in any position it is found (on side, roof, etc.) and deemed necessary to effect the extrication of the occupants as a result of a road crash. Equipment may include plastic, wooden or rubber chocks, step chocks, wheel chocks, blocks and/or specific stabilisation systems.

PATIENT / CASUALTY HANDLING

Minimum two patient spine/rescue boards, one long and one short, with the necessary associated straps, slings and thermal protection blankets to enable the safe extrication, handling, and from-scene transport of RCR patients.

57


POWER AND LIGHT

Generator - Portable, capable of powering rescue vehicles equipment to effect requirements of a road crash rescue. Light - Portable Flood or scene Power - Distribution Board, Dual Outlet Vehicle mounted lighting Light - portable scene lights tripod x LED worklight kit 1000lm

POWER TOOLS

Drill - Cordless, Variable Speed, Keyless, 13mm Saw - Reciprocating, Cordless, Variable Speed, Keyless (24V/DC)

SAFETY / PROTECTIVE EQUIPMENT

Suitable vehicle SRS Airbag anti-deployment or restraint device or system Edge management device/system that protect cordage from jagged edges, etc. Voltage testing pole Burn/Electrical Gloves Patient Sharps kit

WINCHING EQUIPMENT - PORTABLE

Manual or power winch capable of hauling, holding and stabilisation and may include hand winch, levers, shackles, slings and cables of varying lengths.

A key consideration in the development an RCR capability is estimating the cost of building up an existing emergency services unit to the minimum RCR accreditation standard. The CMWG centred upon providing ‘cost-conscious’ options for implementation of this proposed lower level recuse capability. In areas where existing emergency services units have been identified, opportunities exist to retrofit current vehicles and equipment stores to elevate these units to RCR standards.

Agency RCR equipment RCR Fleet

NSW RFS $>60K Retrofit Existing Cat 1 4WD Tankers to carry RCR Equipment $20-30K Example vehicle only

58

The development and introduction of RCR capability across NSW in regional and remote areas coupled with the sharing of training packages, Standard Operating Procedures, conducting multi-agency rescue training and exercises in the regions, standardised RCR equipment lists and retrofitting existing vehicle fleets would result in a positive financial impact. This is taking into consideration the cost of road crash related fatalities which exceed $2.4 million per fatality, with hospitalisations for trauma injury treatment in excess of $214, 000 per injury where the economic burden is borne by the community and NSW Government40. Based on the cost estimates above, including training, equipment and vehicle costs, it is estimated to cost up to $1.07 million to establish an accredited volunteer unit in each of the identified areas. Any reduction in the rate of fatalities would therefore result in a net financial benefit to the State.

Real time Tracking of Land Rescue Appliances The CMWG established an Information and Communication Technology Sub Committee (CMWG ICT) to investigate the real time data, geo-spatial data, dispatch and communications issues identified in the CMWG Terms of Reference. The group composed of subject matter experts from the relevant agencies was convened to progress these issues culminating in comprehensive analysis and issues paper, ’CMWG ICT Automatic Vehicle Location (AVL) In NSW Rescue Vehicles: Analysis.’ The ICT Group assessed the benefits of fitting rescue vehicles with AVL devices to assist in the dispatch of resources according to the principle of the nearest capable resource. The group defined the following data types required from an AVL capability: • Location of the resource

• Capability of the resource

• Current status of the resource

• Real time availability of the resource.

The ICT Group developed three scaled models of AVL solutions for land rescue: • Tier 1 - Basic AVL in each rescue vehicle. This would provide a location and identifier for each

rescue vehicle, linking to a central database which provides the recorded capabilities of the resource.

40 Cost of Road Crashes in Australia 2006 Department of Infrastructure and Regional Development AusGov

59

• Tier 2 – AVL with status reporting in each rescue vehicle. This would provide the location and locally recorded status information to allow for greater state wide status reporting and more efficient dispatch processes.

• Tier 3 – AVL with status and real time availability reporting. This would provide all the capability of Tier 2 with the enhance capability of real time resource availability. Not only would this solution provide enhanced and more efficient dispatch processes, but would provide response modelling capabilities based on real world data to support risk modelling and capability gap analysis.

The AVL project has a specific focus upon providing the ability to easily identify where the NSW rescue vehicles are located at any given point in time; to provide multi-agency awareness and to enable the fastest possible response to the communities of NSW upon activation by the relevant agency Real time tracking of resources in metropolitan areas, with higher rates of rescue dispatch provides significant benefit to the community. This is already a functioning capability for the NSWA, NSWPF and FRNSW who combined, conduct the highest percentage of rescue operations in NSW (78 per cent in 2014-15). By and large the majority of these operations are in major cities and inner regional areas. It should also be noted that in rural areas of NSW, the NSW VRA and NSW SES (both volunteer based rescue agencies) conduct the highest percentage of rescue operations. Real time availability enables rescue coordinators to accurately predict and make dispatch decisions based on the real-world activates being undertaken by moving resources. The benefits of AVL become less apparent in regional and remote NSW. In areas where there are generally fewer rescue operations, and longer accepted response times rescue vehicles are generally static. AVL would provide enhanced capabilities and vital modelling data however the practical benefits are less than in metropolitan areas. Due to the reliance on volunteer and retained operators, the location of a vehicle does not necessarily relate to real response times. Modelling data can be applied to give good approximations of volunteer and retained unit response times. Considering work currently being undertaken as part of the NSW Operational Communications Strategy it would be appropriate for the SRB to advocate the issue of integrated resource allocation systems for rescue becoming a core consideration of the Strategy.

60

Land Rescue Dispatch The NSWPF is responsible for coordinating rescue operations and for the determining the priorities of action during rescue operations. NSWPF current dispatch process involves notification to the NSWPF RCO who polls their database to determine the appropriate unit to respond. If not the NSWPF, the RCO will then provide the details to the appropriate agency that coordinate dispatch of their accredited resources. Agencies coordinate dispatch of their resources using a combination of CAD manual resource allocation processes. Generally, there is no interoperability between the various systems being used to coordinate rescue dispatch and agencies are required to communicate resource allocation. The rescue sector would benefit greatly by interoperable resource management systems that ultimately integrate into a common operating picture for state wide rescue. This could be an existing CAD system or third party solution. Considering work currently being undertaken as part of the NSW Government Operational Communications Strategy, it would be appropriate for the SRB to advocate for the issue of integrated resource allocation systems for rescue be a core consideration of the Strategy utilising the existing FRNSW CAD protocols as a fundamental premise to develop the next generation technology.

Alignment of Communications and Other Systems An underpinning program of work that will impact the geo-spatial location tracking, dispatch processes and information sharing aspects of land rescue in NSW is the NSW Operational Communications Strategy. This is a whole-of-government reform of communications capabilities which particularly impacts on public safety agencies, including those in the rescue sector. Phase 1 of the Strategy, currently in the early stages of program development, is the Shared Mobility Platform (SMP). The SMP will provide common ICT platforms and applications to allow public safety agencies to increase interoperability and information sharing in real time. It is essential that the agencies participating in the development of the SMP and future phases of the Operational Communications Strategy, consider and advocate for the rescue services provided by their organisation. This should include making recommendations that will promote inclusion of the affiliated non-government organisations conducting rescue.

61

Conclusion All rescue agencies within NSW have a highly trained, equipped and resourced rescue capability delivering essential services to the community of NSW. All agencies are committed to ensuring constant improvement and remaining relevant for the needs and future challenges of the NSW rescue environment. The elimination of the Primary and Secondary accreditation process will require a significant amount of work to be undertaken at the local and regional levels to ensure that the determination of required capability is reflective of the area’s risk profile and any specialised dispatch requirements are based of genuine need. The SRB will need to provide support and oversight to ensure this occurs without significant overburdening of the local and regional rescue committees. The accreditation processes for GLR and any new capability such as a stand-alone RCR capability must be designed to complement existing frameworks (such as RSDM) and assist in the development of a strategic whole-of-government, multi-agency response to the delivery of rescue services across NSW. It is essential that the rescue sector in NSW, under the leadership of the SRB continues to be able to: • respond to quickly to changes in the strategic environment

• meet the demands in mobilisation and developments in technology and

• develop policies to promote the provision of comprehensive, balanced and coordinated rescue services throughout the State41.

41 Section 48(a) of the State Emergency and Rescue Management Act 1989

review of land rescue arrangements in nsw · rescue services would improve service delivery in...

Documents