1. #1
    Forum Member

    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Location
    Monroe, MI
    Posts
    292

    Cool Tier one computer dj question

    I was wondering if anybody else with a tier 1 critical infrastructure in their primary responce area get a computer dj as I did. If you have contacted AFG about it, what did they say?

  2. #2
    Forum Member

    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Location
    Monroe, MI
    Posts
    292

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by islandfire03 View Post
    I'm assuming your referring to the nukie plant as tier 1? There are others that are in the same shoes as you. While critical infrastructure does count for some points, it's not a guarantee of award.
    You are correct, but it should at least have a chance to make it to peer review as the pg states.

  3. #3
    Forum Member

    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Location
    Monroe, MI
    Posts
    292

    Default

    looks like the server is acting up again.

  4. #4
    Forum Member
    islandfire03's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Posts
    2,631

    Talking

    I'm assuming your referring to the nukie plant as tier 1? There are others that are in the same shoes as you. While critical infrastructure does count for some points, it's not a guarantee of award.

  5. #5
    Forum Member
    islandfire03's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Posts
    2,631

    Talking

    Rands: I agree with you that if your project meets the requirements of the PG it should at least get to peer.
    However how do they choose what critical infrastructure is more worthy than others? Does a steam kettle count higher than a refinery or an airport? How about a major seaport or a military base, or a major highway bridge? ?
    Many departments have critical places that they are first due on.

    So far this program has been run without outside intervention and been scored by an unknown computer program and members of the fire service. I would think that the fields where you enter critical inf. would count towards a higher score if the rest of the info meets the requirements to get by to peer.

  6. #6
    Forum Member

    Join Date
    Feb 2002
    Location
    Cypress, TX
    Posts
    1,726

    Default

    Sure they are, others just had more critical infrastructure which is why you probably didn't make it. As it says, they'll look at those that weren't computer scored high enough and see if the list of CI makes it worth including into Peer compared to those already on the recommended Peer list. Since the higher scoring apps are dealing with older fleets in most cases, or more runs which are both high points categories if they have the same number of CI designations the likelihood of them making a change is slim.

    With only 25% going to trucks and a 2 in 10 chance of even hitting Peer in the first place they probably took it out since it doesn't matter compared to the base priority of the program which is basic firefighting preparedness. CI does score points but incidents at most of these locations are regional responses with more technical resources than one department has. Especially on truck apps depending on the CI location it won't make much of a difference to have just one truck newer than others. Kind of like the argument where someone wanted CAFS for incidents at the nuke plant nearby. Unless that's lead-based foam, not seeing how that truck will make a dent in an incident there other than a car fire on property. Besides, they drop an incident like that over the pagers and I don't see many people using the lights and sirens to go towards the glow...

  7. #7
    Forum Member

    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Location
    Monroe, MI
    Posts
    292

    Default

    Acording to the pg,
    D. Critical Infrastructure and Key Resources
    DHS maintains a classified list of the Nation's critical infrastructure and key resources.
    Once the competitive range is established (please refer to the definition of this process in
    Section B. above), DHS will review the list of applicants who are not included in the
    competitive range to determine if any those applicants are responsible for protecting
    critical infrastructure or key resources on this classified list. If it is determined that an
    applicant has responsibility for protecting one or more critical infrastructure or key
    resources but is not included in the competitive range, DHS will determine whether it is
    appropriate to place that application before the peer review panel due to the importance
    of its mission to protect these critical resources. This action will not affect any other
    application or otherwise undermine the process used to determine the competitive range.
    Peer review panelists will not be aware of any applicantís protection of critical
    infrastructure/key resources and all applications will be peer reviewed against the criteria
    described in Part I. Section B. of this document.

    To me it seems like they are not following their own rules, I know that I am not the only one with this problem. With all of the questions and mistakes that have happen this year, I'm like alot of other people just trying to get some help for my departmetn. Kinda of strange though, they took this section out of the 2010 pg.

  8. #8
    Forum Member

    Join Date
    Feb 2002
    Location
    Cypress, TX
    Posts
    1,726

    Default

    Sure they are, others just had more critical infrastructure which is why you probably didn't make it. As it says, they'll look at those that weren't computer scored high enough and see if the list of CI makes it worth including into Peer compared to those already on the recommended Peer list. Since the higher scoring apps are dealing with older fleets in most cases, or more runs which are both high points categories if they have the same number of CI designations the likelihood of them making a change is slim.

    With only 25% going to trucks and a 2 in 10 chance of even hitting Peer in the first place they probably took it out since it doesn't matter compared to the base priority of the program which is basic firefighting preparedness. CI does score points but incidents at most of these locations are regional responses with more technical resources than one department has. Especially on truck apps depending on the CI location it won't make much of a difference to have just one truck newer than others. Kind of like the argument where someone wanted CAFS for incidents at the nuke plant nearby. Unless that's lead-based foam, not seeing how that truck will make a dent in an incident there other than a car fire on property. Besides, they drop an incident like that over the pagers and I don't see many people using the lights and sirens to go towards the glow...

  9. #9
    MembersZone Subscriber
    dfd701's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2004
    Location
    Alabama USofA
    Posts
    321

    Default

    Islandfire; Pardon me for changing the subject but the best I can remember you got the Tait radios on your communication grant did you not? I was wondering if you can tell me what the model # of the repeater and handhelds. Was it a trunking system? How many repeaters did it take to cover you area and how much did you paid for it? I am assuming they were P-25. I would really appreciate it if you could tell me a little about how it was set up. Mainly the cost of it is what I am after. LVFD if you are in here, tell me what you think of the Quantar and have you heard of RF Technology Eclipse 2 repeaters? It is made in Sydney Australia and is sold by ICOM. I guess I am going to have to put you all on a retainer for consulting fees. If you donít mind email me so you can speak a little more freely about a companyís equipment.
    Thanks: dfd701@bellsouth.net

  10. #10
    MembersZone Subscriber
    ktb9780's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2004
    Location
    Auburndale, FL
    Posts
    6,113

    Default

    [QUOTE=rands1;1170220] "DHS will determine whether it is
    appropriate to place that application before the peer review panel due to the importance
    of its mission to protect these critical resources" and then " all applications will be peer reviewed against the criteria
    described in Part I. Section B. of this document."

    QUOTE]

    Key language here quoted above. The underlying question then becomes:
    " Did DHS consider it? Was it enough to send to peer review? . In your case it would appear that perhaps they did not, as your rejection notice indicates that it "did not make competitive range". If it did go to peer then I would have thought that a generic " peer rejection" notice should have been sent, not a standard form computer rejection notice indicating you had not gone to peer.

    Very curious that the language was removed form 2010 AFG PG.
    Last edited by ktb9780; 04-25-2010 at 10:48 AM.
    Kurt Bradley
    Fire/EMS/EMA Grant Consultant
    " Never Trade Skill for Luck"

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Similar Threads

  1. Getting hired already...geez
    By redepidermis345 in forum Hiring & Employment Discussion
    Replies: 2
    Last Post: 01-18-2010, 11:34 AM
  2. Multi Part Rescue-Pumper question
    By mohican in forum Apparatus Innovation
    Replies: 29
    Last Post: 08-22-2007, 03:47 PM
  3. This is Sort of a Serious, Sort of Not Quite So Serious Question
    By MalahatTwo7 in forum Firefighters Forum
    Replies: 20
    Last Post: 06-20-2007, 11:39 PM
  4. 2007 New York Fire Exam Prep
    By dmfireschool in forum Hiring & Employment Discussion
    Replies: 6
    Last Post: 12-28-2006, 09:27 PM
  5. Computer question, please help.
    By CALFFBOU in forum Firefighters Forum
    Replies: 5
    Last Post: 08-27-2003, 01:05 AM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts

Log in

Click here to log in or register