SUPPORTS ITEM NO. 2
P&E COMMITTEE AGENDA
APRIL 25, 1996
ADMINISTRATIVE REPORT
Date: April 11, 1996
TO: Standing Committee on Planning & Environment
FROM: General Manager of Fire and Rescue Services
SUBJECT: Better City Government Initiative - Review of the
Deployment of Fire and Rescue Services Emergency
Apparatus and Staff
RECOMMENDATIONS
A. THAT Council endorse, in principle, the Fire and Rescue
Services apparatus and staff re-deployment proposal as
outlined in the TriData Study (attached as Appendix A*),
Option 6, and this report.
B. THAT the General Manager of Fire and Rescue Services report
back with a detailed implementation plan for the proposed
re-deployment of fire apparatus and staff.
GENERAL MANAGER'S COMMENTS
The proposed re-deployment of apparatus and staff summarized in
this Council Report, and detailed in the attached consultant
report, emphasizes multi-purpose fire apparatus. The resulting
increases in effectiveness of current personnel will enable Fire
and Rescue Services to provide an adaptive multi-risk response
force as we move forward into the twenty-first century.
According to the fire apparatus manufacturing industry, the
number-two type of fire apparatus purchased today by North American
fire departments is the quint (combination apparatus) with a
75-foot ladder. More of these units are sold than all other aerial
apparatus combined. This proposal calls for the eventual purchase
of 19 quints. Five or six of these will be the 105 or 110-foot
variety that the City has already obtained as part of Vancouver's
Earthquake and Disaster Preparedness Program. The remainder of the
quints will carry 75-foot aerial ladders that are ideal for many
areas in Vancouver.
* Limited Distribution - On file in City Clerk's Office
In addition to increased overall effectiveness, there is a
potential for significant cost savings. The more effective use of
existing staff will enable us to fund several critical staff
positions previously identified by the Department.
I commend our joint Union/Citizen/Management Steering Team for
their participation and valuable input during this project.
CITY MANAGER'S COMMENTS
The City Manager's comments are contained in his accompanying
memorandum dated April 17, 1996.
VANCOUVER FIREFIGHTERS' UNION LOCAL 18 COMMENTS
Local 18 has participated as part of a Steering Committee for the
TriData Study. From May 1995 to April 9, 1996, there were a number of
meetings requiring our attendance. These sessions were attended in good
faith in order to facilitate the development of a document borne out of
consensus.
Vancouver Fire Fighters' Union Local 18 Committee Members, President Rod
MacDonald and Secretary/Treasurer Robert Hall, have after thorough
analysis, rejected the proposal going forward to the City Services and
Budgets Standing Committee. This action was taken after gaining
unanimous approval from the Union Floor.
It is the intent of Local 18 to present their opinion to the Committee
on the scheduled date, April 25, 1996. We believe that the Committee
after hearing our presentation will understand and come to embrace our
viewpoint.
CITIZENS ADVISORY COMMITTEE COMMENTS
The Citizens Advisory Committee highly commends Vancouver Fire and
Rescue Services and the City of Vancouver for their efforts in reducing
the number and risk of fires in the City. The committee also recognizes
that the Vancouver Fire and Rescue Services has accepted new
responsibilities in the last decade in an effort to improve public
safety. In addition to their traditional role of fire suppression, new
responsibilities include emergency medical services, technical rescues
and threats from hazardous materials. The TriData study outlines new
directions for Vancouver Fire and Rescue Services consistent with their
changing role over the last several years. The new personnel deployment
strategy combined with
the acquisition of more flexible apparatus should allow Vancouver Fire
and Rescue Services to meet both its traditional and newer roles in an
effective manner. Of particular interest to the Committee are the
recommendations related to emergency medical services and rescue. These
are new responsibilities for the front line firefighter, but
responsibilities which currently represent a significant workload.
The Citizens Advisory Committee recommends that the report be accepted.
The Citizens Advisory Committee would like to recognize the significant
contribution of the steering committee in seeing the review process to
completion.
COUNCIL POLICY
On April 14, 1994, Council approved a package of Fire and Rescue
Services budget reductions to meet the requirements of the 1994-96
Budget Management Program. The Fire Chief was directed to report back
in one year on whether to implement a proposed reduction of one piece of
fire apparatus (replace a ladder and pumper truck at #21 Fire Hall with
a combination piece of equipment), or to achieve the same or greater
savings through a comprehensive re-deployment of firefighters and
equipment.
On July 5, 1995, Council approved the award of a consulting contract to
TriData Corporation for a comprehensive review of fire hall locations,
the deployment of emergency apparatus and staff, and the City's
insurance rating for commercial fire protection. Fire and Rescue
Services also identified this initiative under the Better City
Government Program.
SUMMARY
This report summarizes the findings of a major review of the deployment
of Vancouver Fire and Rescue Service's (VF/RS) fire halls, apparatus,
and staff carried out by a fire service management consultant, TriData
Corporation.
The study was one of the priority areas identified under the Better City
Government Program and was originally initiated to provide a basis for
meeting outstanding Budget Management Program objectives. Approximately
$480,000 of additional Fire and Rescue Services budget reductions are
still required under the Budget Management Program.
The consultant recommends a major shift in the types of apparatus
currently deployed to support the wide range of protection services
provided by Vancouver Fire and Rescue. The proposed deployment will
result in a gradual transformation of the apparatus fleet. Ultimately,
the fleet will contain a higher component of flexible multi-purpose
"quints" and "rescue engines", with secondary emphasis on single purpose
apparatus such as engines and aerial ladders. The recommendations also
include Life Support Units (light duty rescue units), which will
primarily respond to emergency "first-responder" medical incidents.
This change will result in a more effective, efficient, and flexible
multi-hazard fire protection force to serve Vancouver's growing
population. This should not require additional staff or funding, and
will likely result in annual savings of approximately $420,000 to
$650,000 which could be used elsewhere.
Given the flexibility of the new deployment, any necessary savings
required to meet Budget Management Program objectives can be determined
on a more rational basis. As much as possible, expenditures for new
apparatus will be programmed to coincide with planned expenses for
replacement of current equipment as it reaches the end of its economic
life.
The recommendations will result in a reduction in minimum on-duty
suppression staffing of two positions. If the Province will fund an
additional position at U.B.C., the reduction would only be one position.
Since 4 to 5 staff are required to fill one suppression position due to
the four shift system, a portion of the staff savings will be
transferred to several key support positions in fire prevention,
training, recruitment, and public education.
A second component of this Better City Government Initiative was a
review of the Commercial Fire Insurance Rating of the City of Vancouver.
Approximately 90% of the insurance companies in Canada use this grading
system to evaluate their risk in fire insurance underwriting. Vancouver
was last officially surveyed between 1978 and 1980. Since the start of
this project, we have received notice from the Fire Underwriters Survey
that they wish to schedule another survey of Vancouver's municipal fire
protection during 1996 or 1997.
The consultant concluded that a current Fire Underwriters Survey would
likely result in a downgrade of Vancouver's current Class 1 rating (the
highest rating achievable) to a Class 2 rating for commercial fire
insurance. Although the economic results of such a downgrade may be
negligible, the report contains a number of recommendations that may
help us retain the Class 1 rating.
PURPOSE
This report recommends approval, in principle, of a resource deployment
strategy that will provide a flexible, efficient and effective system to
satisfy present and future fire protection, first-responder medical,
disaster, hazardous materials, and rescue needs. The main premise of
this proposal is the expanded use of multi-purpose fire apparatus.
Under the proposed new deployment, personnel that are currently less
than optimally utilized on aerial ladder trucks will be used to provide
4-person crews on all primary fire suppression vehicles and 2-person
Life Support Units for many medical responses.
This report requests approval in principle of this change in deployment
since significant existing staff resources will be required over the
next six months to develop a detailed implementation plan.
BACKGROUND
On February 3, 1994, Council approved a 1994 to 1996 Budget Management
Program.
As part of the Budget Management Program, Vancouver Fire and rescue
Services committed to providing target annual savings of $1,388,000
through a number of initiatives. It was expected that several of these
initiatives could involve changes to apparatus specifications, apparatus
mix, and apparatus staffing. Approximately $480,000 of Fire and Rescue
Services target budget reductions are currently outstanding and will be
addressed by this and other initiatives.
One of the budget adjustments initially proposed to meet VF/RS's budget
reduction objective was to combine a ladder and pumper truck at Fire
Hall #21. These two pieces of equipment could be replaced by a "Quint"
which is a combination type of fire apparatus. The General Manager,
VF/RS, expressed reservations about whether this was the best method of
meeting the target reductions while minimizing the system-wide impacts
on the level of risk. The General Manager was directed to report back
in one year on whether to implement this proposal or to achieve the same
or greater savings through a comprehensive re-deployment of firefighters
and equipment.
After staff discussion and subsequent consultation with the City Manager
and the Corporate Management Team, a detailed independent review of the
current capabilities of the Service was suggested. Such a broad review
was required before rational decisions could be made on how to most
effectively achieve required budget reductions with the fewest negative
impacts on the current level of service, safety, or risk.
On August 31, 1994, Council approved the distribution of a Request for
Proposals for a comprehensive review of Vancouver Fire and Rescue
Services deployment of emergency staff and equipment.
A Project Steering Team was formed which included the Deputy City
Manager, two Firefighters' Union Table Officers, the Chair of VF/RS
Citizens Advisory Committee, and four members of senior staff.
The Steering Team analyzed the responses to the Request for Proposal and
recommended TriData Corporation, an internationally recognized fire
service management consultant, for this study. On July 5, 1995, Council
authorized a contract with TriData for consulting services for a
comprehensive review of fire hall locations, the deployment of emergency
apparatus and staff, and the City's insurance rating for commercial fire
protection.
The Steering Team has met regularly during the course of the project to
provide guidance and information to the consultant.
DISCUSSION
The time frame for this review covers the projected demands for
emergency fire and rescue services and the resulting resource
requirements over a ten year period from 1995 to the year 2005. This
review of VF/RS addressed a wide range of operational issues covering
the total scope of emergency services provided.
The project was divided into three phases. The first phase was an
evaluation of VF/RS today, to determine how well it is deployed and
organized to meet the City's current needs. Phase Two was the
development of a deployment and staffing plan that will meet the City's
needs for at least the next ten years. The third phase was an analysis
of the Fire Underwriter's Survey classification as it would apply to
Vancouver today and with changes implemented as a result of this study.
In particular, the review includes a detailed discussion of the
requirements of maintaining a Class 1 insurance rating.
The consultant worked closely with a project Steering Committee to plan,
implement, analyze and evaluate each step of the study.
Major Findings of the Report:
The following are the major findings, observations, and conclusions
contained in the consultant report:
- Over time, Fire and Rescue Services has gradually evolved from
providing fire suppression and basic emergency medical services
only, to protecting residents, visitors, property and the
environment from a variety of risks and hazards that threaten
public safety. This includes emergency medical care, technical
rescue, hazardous materials response, code enforcement, and other
protective services. Fire and Rescue Services is now a "multi-risk
response force", however, it is still organized around the original
mission of fighting fires. Approximately 3.5% of incidents are
fires involving property loss, while approximately 70% of the
incident responses are medical in nature.
- Vancouver has a lean (based on comparable cities) but very capable
fire suppression force, however, our current varied mission could
be more efficiently carried out by a reconfigured organization with
different vehicles, equipment, staffing, and training. These
resources can be reconfigured to maintain a very adequate fire
suppression system while building a more efficient and effective
force for protecting the community from the wide variety of risks
present in our complex urban environment.
- Fortunately, the City had the foresight to adopt various codes,
policies, and target hazard reduction programs that will
effectively limit the level of fire risk in all new developments
(for example, all new buildings require automatic sprinklers).
These strategies were adopted with the deliberate objective of
accommodating significant growth without requiring additional fire
suppression resources. However, a priority must be to maintain and
continue the process of risk reduction through public education and
fire prevention inspections. Therefore, overall staff levels may
not change.
- Although the level of fire risk is decreasing, the role of Fire and - 2 -
Rescue Services has expanded to include primary responsibility for
response to hazardous materials releases, technical rescues (high
angle, confined space, trench, heavy urban search and rescue),
emergency preparedness, and a variety of other emergency
situations. VF/RS also responds to medical emergencies as a
"first-responder" and provides automatic external defibrillation to
cardiac arrest victims.
Currently, calls for medical assistance are routed from 911 to BC
Ambulance, adding an average of at least one minute to the dispatch
time for emergency medical incidents. With better coordination
with BC Ambulance or through a new combined dispatch and
communication system, Fire and Rescue Services could intervene more
quickly at most medical incidents, particularly if the delay in
call processing is eliminated. This is particularly important in
cases when breathing has stopped, such as in a cardiac arrest. In
addition, a comprehensive public education program is needed to
teach more citizens how to perform CPR.
- The City's fire insurance rating, assigned more than 15 years ago,
rated Vancouver as a "Class One" city, the highest rating
achievable. The current evaluation concluded that Vancouver would
likely be graded as a "Class Two" city. The evaluation identified
several areas where improvements could be made to possibly retain
the Class one rating.
- Vancouver has 20 existing fire halls (including U.B.C.) that are
well distributed across the City to provide adequate response to
most areas. Response times in some areas are longer than desirable
(please see response maps in the attached report), and closing any
of the current fire halls would simply create larger gaps in
coverage. It was determined that slightly better coverage could be
achieved by relocating halls 3, 13 and 18. These halls would have
been the next three halls to be scheduled for replacement in future
Capital Plans.
The addition of three new single apparatus fire halls would result
in marginally better coverage, but due to the high capital and
operating costs, this has not been recommended. Some of the
opportunities to improve our response time, without building any
new fire halls are: a city-wide traffic signal preemption system,
joint location projects with other City Services, and automatic
mutual aid with adjacent fire departments.
- The number of ladder companies can be reduced if the supporting
changes in deployment are implemented. It is cost effective to
shift some of the less utilized human resources that are currently
assigned to ladder companies to perform more rescue, emergency
medical, support, and technical functions (cross-training).
Remaining ladder companies can be staffed with 4 personnel and
provided with quint apparatus and function as either engine or
ladder companies depending on needs.
Description of Quint Apparatus:
Quints are multi-function fire apparatus that essentially combine many
of the features of current engine trucks and aerial ladder trucks. They
provide space for personnel to ride safely on the unit along with all of
their protective equipment, carry all the engine/pumper equipment needed
(such as pump, hose, nozzles and fittings), all the aerial ladder truck
equipment (for ventilation, forced entry, salvage and overhaul), ground
ladders and aerial ladders, rescue equipment, and emergency medical
equipment. Since the majority of these quint units will only require a
75' aerial ladder, as opposed to the current standard 105' ladder, they
can be smaller, lighter, and less expensive. The overall wheel-base,
weight, turning radius and acceleration of these vehicles falls between
our current engine trucks and 105' quints, making them almost as fast
and maneuverable as an engine.
A major advantage of these apparatus is in their flexible, multi-purpose
response. If personnel are trained to perform proficiently in all the
basic fireground emergency operations, each quint apparatus can be
operated as an engine or an aerial ladder (or even sometimes both
simultaneously), depending on the operations required at each specific
emergency scene.
Description of Life Support Units
The consultant also recommends a number of Life Support Units (LSUs),
which will be staffed with two member crews, and which will primarily
respond to medical incidents. An LSU would be somewhat similar in
appearance to a modular ambulance and could carry a limited amount of
equipment and should be designed primarily for medical responses. Staff
will be cross-trained so that Life Support Crews can be used to
supplement crews on fire suppression companies as necessary. Rather
than using large, slower, expensive and less maneuverable apparatus to
respond to medical incidents (approx. 70% of the current call volume)
with 3 or 4 person crews, two member crews on small, relatively
inexpensive trucks will be used for many medical incidents.
Deployment Options
A number of alternative deployment options were analyzed in detail. Each
of the alternative plans were based on a different deployment strategy,
using 20 fire hall locations, with the proposed re-locations of fire
halls 3, 13 and 18 in effect, and approximately 130 personnel on duty.
Each plan has advantages and disadvantages and the option chosen for
implementation was developed through analysis of the other options
examined. This option provides the most flexibility with the fewest
numbers of fire suppression companies. The Life Support Units can
accommodate a significant number of medical calls without impacting on
fire suppression capabilities and can also be integrated with fire
suppression companies on fire calls. However, this option also requires
the most upgrading of the current fleet.
The two tables contained in Appendix B summarize the current deployment
and the proposed deployment. Please note that the consultant
recommended 8 staff at Fire Hall #10 (U.B.C.). However, the current
contract with the Province specifies that we will provide 7 personnel.
We would approach the Province to negotiate funding of an additional
position to maintain conformity with the City standard. The consultant
option also lists one member on Tower 4. We will cross staff Tower 4
with personnel from the LSU. The following table provides an interesting
comparison of the additional capabilities of the new deployment due to
the use of multi-purpose vehicles.
Comparison of Current Deployment versus Recommended Deployment
Capability 1996 End of %
Implementation Change
Pumping Capacity 37,475 igpm 43,500 igpm + 16%
Aerial capability (high risk) 3 6 +100%
on first alarm (low risk area) 2 4 +100%
Pumper capability (high risk) 3 6 +100%
on first alarm (low risk) 2 4 +100%
Companies capable of engine 20 29 + 45%
(pump) work
Companies Capable of aerial 14 20 + 43%
ladder work
Companies Capable of Rescue 2 6 +300%
squad work
Companies Capable of 36 37 + 3%
First-Responder Medical
operations
Minimum On-Duty Firefighters 131 129 1. - 1.5%
Approx. Replacement Value of $22,650,000 $21,400,000 - 5.5%
apparatus 2
1. It will be recommended that the Province fund one additional staff
member, bringing minimum on-duty strength to 130.
2. Not including non-emergency response vehicles and vehicles which
would be maintained under both scenarios.
If it is necessary to reduce the budget, this can be accomplished
by reducing staffing or units from the least essential end of the
deployment, recognizing that some capability will be sacrificed.
Analysis of Costs and Benefits
There are (at least) two possible scenarios regarding the numbers
of officers required under Option 6 (Appendix B) as compared to
the present situation. The current costs of 22 Captains and 14
lieutenants is approximately $11,186,000. If Captains are
assigned to all first-line quints, rescue engines and engines,
the costs of these officers would be approximately $11,149,000.
If one Captain is assigned per fire hall, and Lieutenants are
assigned to the second fire suppression apparatus in the fire
hall (non LSU), the costs would be approximately $10,913,000.
The potential savings therefore range from approximately $37,000
per year to approximately $273,000 per year.
Since the four shift system requires four paid staff per
position, the reduction in minimum staffing levels from 131 to
129 would result in approximate savings of $500,000 per year.
However, some of these savings would be applied to the additional
support positions identified and would likely result in
approximate annual savings of $300,000. The Province will be
asked to fund one additional position at U.B.C. ultimately
bringing on-duty minimum strength to 130.
There may be a reduction in apparatus maintenance costs since
large apparatus will be used much less frequently for medical
responses which form the bulk of our responses. At this time,
possible savings cannot be quantified.
Annual replacement costs of apparatus will be reduced on average
by approximately $80,000 per year.
Therefore, the total annual savings possible to be used on this
and previously identified initiatives are approximately $420,000
to $650,000.
SOCIAL IMPLICATIONS
The full implementation of the recommended re-deployment plan,
including the use of multi-purpose vehicles, more effective
vehicles for medical responses, and increased number of rescue
vehicles and technical rescue support, will provide a much more
effective "multi-hazard" emergency response force. Vancouver
Fire and Rescue's increased capability to respond effectively to
the wide variety of potential risks present in Vancouver today,
including major disasters such as an earthquake, will reduce the
severity of the impacts on Vancouver's residents.
IMPLEMENTATION AND COMMUNICATIONS PLAN
If Council endorses this vision of the deployment of VF/RS staff
and equipment, with the emphasis on multi-purpose quints, rescue
engines, and Life Support Units, a detailed implementation plan
will be developed for report back to Council during the last
quarter of 1996. A great deal of preparation is required to
develop appropriate training plans, writing operating guidelines,
writing equipment specifications, and so on.
A wide cross-section of department staff from all levels will be
assigned to teams to work on specific aspects of the
implementation plan. The Corporate Management Team will be
briefed regularly on progress.
PERSONNEL IMPLICATIONS
This is a significant change in the deployment of Vancouver Fire
and Rescue Services and how fire protection and first-responder
medical services are delivered in Vancouver. A limited number of
quint apparatus are already being used in the Department as a
result of an ongoing initiative to provide increased pumping
capacity to provide water supply during an earthquake or other
major water supply disruption. Even under the present
deployment, eventually all current aerial ladder trucks would be
converted to quints when they are replaced under the earthquake
preparedness plan. However, under the present deployment, these
quints would only be staffed with three members, a crew size
which is ineffective for interior fire attack. Therefore they
could not safely function as an engine company. Increasing the
crew size to four and using the quints as multi-purpose apparatus
is an important change in philosophy.
Another important new concept for Vancouver is the use of two
person life support units. These changes may be a source of
concern to some staff who have become accustomed to the
Department's current traditional deployment.
Concerns of staff will be dealt with fully and carefully during
the detailed implementation planning phase. Staff at all levels
will be asked for input and participation. Also, any lessons
learned by other jurisdictions that have already implemented
variations of this concept will be considered. The safety of
staff and the public will be the foremost consideration before
any changes are implemented.
The use of multi-function emergency response apparatus has minor
implications on the level of training required, since most
personnel are already proficient in all fireground operations.
New Standard Operating Guidelines must be developed that do not
lay out fireground assignments based on the type of apparatus
that arrives. Rather, assignments must be based on what
operations must be performed at the fire in order to bring it
under control as quickly as possible.
This re-deployment would result in a reduction in the number of
promotable officer positions. This deployment will also result
in a reduction in minimum staffing from 131 to 129 (possibly only
to 130 if the Province will fund an additional contract position
for the U.B.C. firehall). Since approximately 4 staff are
required to cover each position due to the four shifts, there
will be a reduction of 8 suppression staff. Three or four
support position previously identified will be created. Any
staff reductions would be achieved through attrition.
FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS
Approval of the recommendations in this report does not commit
Council to any additional expenditures for fire apparatus beyond
those now required for normal replacement.
Given the increased level of flexibility of the recommended
deployment option due to multi-purpose equipment, there are
opportunities to reduce both apparatus costs (within the Plant
Account) and to reduce the operating budget through minimal staff
savings.
Maintenance costs should also be reduced since large, expensive
and ill-suited apparatus will not respond as frequently to
medical incidents which form the bulk of our calls. The study
identifies several areas where performance and productivity could
be improved. Existing resources can be used to provide a higher
level of service or expenditures can be trimmed to provide the
existing level of service at a lower cost. This approach
provides the opportunity to decide if each marginal cost dollar
could be better spent to produce improved service or if it should
be used for other purposes or cut from the budget. VF/RS has
identified and justified several new positions over the past
several years that have been dependent on providing funding from
within our current Operating Budget. It is expected that these
positions can be funded from savings which will be identified. A
detailed implementation plan, including phase-in of Quints,
Rescue Engines and Life support Units will be developed over the
next several months in cooperation with Financial Services.
CONCLUSION
While there is no "one best system" to protect Vancouver,
particularly since one of the variables is the acceptable level
of risk, this new deployment strategy will substantially improve
our current ability to respond to multiple hazards. The
recommended deployment also rationalizes apparatus use so that
more suitable equipment will be used for medical calls. Most
medical incidents will be responded to by smaller, faster, and
less expensive equipment with 2-person crews.
The potential savings available through this re-deployment are
approximately $420,000 to $650,000 per year. These savings may
be used to meet previously identified initiatives. - 3 -
* * * * *
APPENDIX B
PAGE 1 OF 2
CURRENT DEPLOYMENT
FIRE Engine Personnel Ladder Personnel Rescue Personnel TOTAL
HALL Personnel
1 E1 4 L1 3 7
2 E2 4 R2 3 7
3 E3 4 L3 3 R3 3 10
4 E4 4 Tw4 3 7
5 E5 4 L5 3 7
6 E6 5 L6 4 9
7 E7 4 L7 4 8
8 E8 4 4
9 E9 4 L9 3 7
10 E10 4 L10 3 7
12 E12 4 L12 3 7
13 E13 4 4
14 E14 4 4
15 E15 4 L15 3 7
17 E17 4 L17 3 7
18 E18 4 L18 3 7
19 E19 4 4
20 E20 4 4
21 E21 4 L21 3 7
22 E22 4 L22 3 7
TOTAL 20 81 14 44 2 6 131
APPENDIX B
PAGE 2 OF 2
RECOMMENDED DEPLOYMENT (OPTION 6 - TRIDATA REPORT)
19 Quints (Q), 6 Rescue Engines (R/E), 4 Engines (E),
8 Life Support Units (LS), 1 Tower (Tw)
FIRE 1st Personnel 2nd Personnel 3rd Personnel TOTAL
HALL (Quint) Personnel
1 Q1 4 4
2 Q2 4 LS2 2 6
3 Q3 4 E3 4 LS3 2 10
4 E4 4 Tw4 -* LS4 2 6*
5 Q5 4 LS5 2 6
6 Q6 4 E6 4 8
7 Q7 4 R/E7 4 8
8 Q8 4 LS8 2 6
9 Q9 4 R/E9 4 8
10 E10 4 Q10 3* LS10 21 7*
12 Q12 4 R/E12 4 8
13 Q13 4 4
14 Q14 4 LS14 2 6
15 Q15 4 R/E15 4 8
17 Q17 4 R/E17 4 8
18 Q18 4 4
19 Q19 4 4
20 Q20 4 4
21 Q21 4 R/E21 4 8
22 Q22 4 LS22 2 6
TOTAL 20 80 10 37 8 14 129
1. Cross-manned from quint