The Camas-Washougal Fire Department (CWFD) has been locked in a legal battle with the Department of Labor and Industries in 2018 that most departments across the state have heard about. After fighting for a citation reversal for the better part of 10 months, our legal counsel is finally recommending we throw in the towel. That decision will have to be made by our governing body later, but assuming we do give up our appeal fight, there are going to be significant and very expensive repercussions for small fire departments across Washington. We estimate the costs of adhering to L&I’s staffing directive will be in the millions of dollars statewide.
Our situation started innocuously enough back on Valentine’s Day of 2018. We were dispatched to a reported residential fire alarm activation, with no other calls. Since we’ve never had one of these activations actually turn out to be anything, our policy at the time (and what is a common policy for many departments) was to send one engine to investigate. Our engine company had two people that day. On arrival they found a small ranch home with smoke and flames showing. They immediately called for backup and the captain started a 360. During his 360, he heard a victim yelling for “help” from behind the garage door. Knowing that backup was still 8 minutes away, the crew of two decided to make a “V” cut in the garage door. They crawled in a short distance and pulled the victim to safety. Our congratulations to the crew for making a great save was short lived. Shortly after the fire, our IAFF leadership decided to file a complaint with L&I over a violation of WAC 296-305-05002(4), the so-called “2 in/2 out” rule. L&I came in to investigate and ultimately issued a citation against us for the violation of this WAC. While we had some other findings as well related to the incident, this part of the citation was the only part we chose to appeal.
While we had some strong disagreements with the state over the meaning and intent of this WAC (particularly after speaking to some of the people who helped write it), the only thing that’s relevant at this point is how L&I has determined they’re going to enforce it in the future. It’s important to note that this citation does NOT mean that all fire agencies in the state must immediately ensure 3-person minimum staffing on all engines. What it DOES do, however, is prohibit you from effecting a rescue if you do not have a minimum of 3 people on scene. L&I has further directed us that we must ensure we have at least 3 or more people responding to (could be from multiple apparatus) any situation that could possibly result in a real fire and/or rescue, and that includes residential fire alarms.
So, what are the effects and why might they be so expensive to Washington fire agencies? This isn’t going to be something that will be an issue for our larger fire departments. But for the hundreds of smaller rural agencies in the state (particularly east of the Cascades), the impacts are profound. There are many small agencies (like CWFD) that can only deploy two-person engine companies. We’re lucky in that we can simply dispatch multiple engines to all fire calls (terribly inefficient use of resources, but L&I is giving us no choice). There are many other agencies out there who only have one engine on duty every day, with perhaps one or two people. This doesn’t even consider the staffing challenges of our all-volunteer departments. This ruling by L&I creates some stark and difficult choices for such agencies. L&I now expects that you will have 3 or more people responding to every fire call your agency receives, even a residential fire alarm (or even, I guess, burnt toast). Their rationale behind this is they don’t ever want personnel put in a position where they might have to make a rescue without at least 3 people on scene. This is a staffing requirement from the state, and it will require many small agencies to hire a lot of new personnel to stay compliant. If your personnel do somehow find themselves on the scene of a fire where a rescue is imminent, and they find they have less than 3 people, L&I has dictated they have to wait for more personnel. They are not allowed to effect a rescue, no matter how safely it may be done. If they do, the department may cite your agency if a complaint is filed. If you have responded to that fire with any less than 3 personnel, the citation will be almost assured. Every fire chief across the state is going to need to evaluate their operations and see what it will take for them to become/remain compliant with this L&I directive.
We have very much appreciated the support of our colleagues around the state (many who offered to testify for us) and the support of the Washington Fire Chiefs and Wayne Senter. I know this has been spun in some circles to imply that CWFD or the WFC are somehow against 2 in/2 out. Nothing could be further from the truth. We will always support the concept of 2 in/2 out. In a perfect world where money was no object, we’d all love to have 3 and 4-person engine companies as well. The reality for most of our small and rural agencies is they’re not anywhere close to being able to deploy with such numbers, and they may never be without untold increases in revenue. What we were fighting against was a state agency punishing our firefighters for making a split-second decision that saved a human life and resulted in no injuries to fire department personnel. We were fighting against a state agency telling our personnel that they are not allowed to save a human life.
Please contact me if you’d like a copy of our L&I citation or if you’d like any more details about our situation.
Nick Swinhart, EFO, CFO, MIFireE
Fire Chief
Camas-Washougal Fire Department
Washington Fire Chiefs Board of Directors, Position 6
nswinhart@cityofcamas.us