"Scanner listener"mentioned in Canyon Fire 2 IRP report

[karldotcom]

ISSUE #1 Citizen Complaint

A citizen reported to City of Orange and Anaheim that he overheard scanner traffic
between an Anaheim Police helicopter and OCFA in which the Anaheim Police helicopter
reported flames outside the burn area of the initial Canyon Fire on October 8. The citizen
alleged that OCFA refused to respond, which contributed to the start of Canyon 2 Fire.

SUMMARY

A. A citizen heard the initial Anaheim Police helicopter (Angel 26) radio traffic with OCFA
ECC but was not aware of the succeeding inquiring/clarification communications and
phone calls between all the involved dispatch agencies. These subsequent inter-
agency communications determined the facts of the call and agency responsible for
fire control.

Angel 26 and OCFA ECC were in contact relative to the Angel 26 report of flames near Sierra Peak on October

Contrary to the citizens complaint, the Anaheim Police helicopter crew clearly stated that the observed fire was inside the burn area of the Canyon 1 Fire.

OCFA ECC processed the report and determined that the USFS was aware of the fire
and located in its jurisdictional area.

OCFA ECC offered to launch a helicopter and drop water on the fire. USFS did not
accept the offer.

F. The Duty Chief was not informed of the Angel 26 fire report during the handling of the
incident nor asked for direction on whether to launch an OCFA helicopter to the fire
scene.

G. The citizens accusation that the October 8, Angel 26 reported fire location (Appendix
F: Citizen Map) was the cause of the October 9, Canyon 2 Fire is unfounded as the
two fire origins were separate and distinct from each other according to Anaheim Fire's
multi-agency investigation report. (Appendix G: Canyon Fires Origins Map)


*snip*


While the citizen was correct in what he purportedly overheard via scanner radio traffic
from Angel 26; he was incorrect in concluding that OCFA did nothing and contributed to
the Canyon 2 Fire start on October 9th.

OCFA ECC did investigate the report and
contacted the Vista. The USFS assumed jurisdictional control over the
situation. In hindsight, OCFA could have directed Angel 26 to communicate directly with
the Vista due to jurisdictional responsibility. Also, OCFA could have
implemented its MTZ agreement with the USFS and honored the Angel 26 request for an
OCFA air recon.



A.

The citizen is an OCSD retiree and current civilian volunteer with OCSD helicopter
unit. (Citizen response to IRP questions and direct observation during meeting with
OCSD helicopter staff at WA)

The citizen overheard radio transmissions between APD and OCFA ECC on the
afternoon of Sunday, October 8, 2017 at approximately 4:40 to 4:55 pm. (Citizen
response to questions and citizen e-mail complaint to City of Orange on October
11)

On Sunday, October 8, 2017, an APD helicopter (Angel 26) contacted OCFA ECC to
report smoke and a small fire on the north side of Sierra Peak. Angel 26 reported that
it didn't have its bucket and asked if OCFA ECC could launch. (OCSD and OCFA
audio files and OCFA transcript)

The Angel 26 report placed the reported fire within an unburnedigreen area within the
Canyon 1 Fire burned area. This location is within the MTZ for the USFS, Cal Fire,
Corona FD and OCFA. Per MTZ agreements, each agency has a predesignated
response that their respective dispatch centers should implement. (MTZ agreements).
The Sierra Peak area is within the FRA and is within the jurisdiction of the USFS.
(OCFA Maps)

OCFA ECC asks Angel 26 to standby to let them check with Cleveland (USFS). OCFA
ECC states that USFS had some workers out there yesterday with lots of smoke
kicking up. OCFA ECC asks Angel 26 if they see any units up there. Angel 26
responds that they don't see any units but see flames. Angel 26 states that the fire is
in a ?small green area inside? the middle of the burn area. (OCSD and OCFA audio
files and OCFA transcript)

OCFA ECC calls CFD and asks if they see any smoke from their side. CFD reports
that they received quite a few calls in the morning but havent received any calls in the
last 2-3 hours. OCFA ECC advises CFD that it might be starting a launch. (OCFA
audio ?les and OCFA transcript)

OCFA ECC calls Monte Vista (USFS) to ask if they have anyone out in the Canyon 1

Fire area. Monte Vista responds that they think Engine 20 is up near Sierra Peak.
OCFA ECC informs Monte Vista of report from APD helicopter at a location one
hundred yards north of Sierra Peak.

Monte Vista indicates that they are aware of the
smoke and that they were out their earlier making contacts with residents to explain
what was going on. (OCFA audio files and OCFA transcript)

Angel 26 contacts OCFA ECC to request status update. OCFA ECC asks Angel 26
for incident location coordinates. Angel 26 states that it is a hundred yards north of





https://www.documentcloud.org/docum...-Cover-Letter-and-IRP-Report.html#document/p1

 

[bb911]

Karl, thanks for the post. I found the recommendations on pages 14, 17, 24, 30 and probably others, to be particularly interesting.

Just one example of the type of problems that OCFA has had with outside agencies, not just internal problems: For those of us who have monitored CAL FIRE, USFS, Chino Valley FPD and Corona FDs for decades (not OCFA for me), the report contains few surprises when it comes to multi-agency responses. During the initial attack of the Freeway Fire of 2008 (later the 'Freeway Complex Fire'), OCFD and RRU butted heads over the ordering point for additional resources.

The fire started within Riverside Co. (Santa Ana River bed, near the junction of the 71 and 91) and was rapidly spreading towards ORCO, pushed by Santa Ana Winds. At one point the RRU IC had to emphatically tell his dispatch that all additional resource orders for the fire would go through him, and him only. The fire was running between mobile homes at the time. As it turned out RRU 'won the battle' until the fire was under unified command. (The fire ended up burning well into San Bern. and LA Counties, also).

PS -- Poor radio communications due to topography, lack of interoperability, and agency squabbles in the area, led to the development of the SOLAR radio plan.

 

[radiochuck]

Someone is going to lose their life over this OCFA territorial peeing contest nonsense.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[APX7500X2]

They need to take all the comms Encrypted.

 

[MEDIC135]

They need to take all the comms Encrypted.

Why?
What’s that honestly gonna solve?

 

[PaulNDaOC]

They need to take all the comms Encrypted.

The problem here has nothing to co with Canyon2.

The transparency offered here allowed insight into the initial response by OCFA on the morning Canyon2 started, that CHP received a call about a fire that resources were not sent to about an hour before the fire broke out, that one engine was sent initially to the final report of fire, not smoke, and the terrible wind conditions.

I will agree the listener only knows part of the story, but I think if something troubling is heard it is appropriate to investigate further, and may uncover something further that could be invaluable. The public has the right to oversight and transparency. It's unfortunate that today you have to go to the media to have a problem looked into.Cities and counties would do better for their image to have a review policy in place to look into these type of incidents at taxpayer request without having to raise heck. The taxpayer foots the bills same as the employees.

Stating in response to the report coms should be encrypted is just a desire to not have persons outside the agency know when a mistake may have been made that affects taxpayers. This particular instance has nothing to do with confidential communications or something that public should not be hearing.