Sioux Falls Public Safety Training Study by City of Sioux Falls

Sioux Falls Training Center MASTER PLAN STUDY

5-2-2018

Table of Contents Executive Summary......................................................................................................................................................................................................4 Existing Facility...............................................................................................................................................................................................................5 Site and Access.......................................................................................................................................................................................................5 Site Conditions.........................................................................................................................................................................................................6 Physical Facilities..................................................................................................................................................................................................... 7 Classroom.................................................................................................................................................................................................................. 7 Training Tower..........................................................................................................................................................................................................9 Specialty Props....................................................................................................................................................................................................... 13 Residential Props................................................................................................................................................................................................... 15 Range........................................................................................................................................................................................................................ 16 Facility Requirements................................................................................................................................................................................................. 18 Needs Analysis....................................................................................................................................................................................................... 18 Staffing and Course Data.................................................................................................................................................................................... 18 Focus Group Interviews...................................................................................................................................................................................... 18 Target Hazard Photo Study................................................................................................................................................................................ 19 Review of Existing Facilities.............................................................................................................................................................................. 26 Benchmarking........................................................................................................................................................................................................ 27 Facility Recommendations................................................................................................................................................................................. 27 Alternative Facilities.................................................................................................................................................................................................. 28 Interim Strategies for Maintaining Live Burn Requirements......................................................................................................................... 30 Cost Estimates and Phases..................................................................................................................................................................................... 31 Current Site............................................................................................................................................................................................................. 32 Final Recommenations............................................................................................................................................................................................. 33 Scenario 1................................................................................................................................................................................................................ 33 Potential Phasing.................................................................................................................................................................................................. 33 Scenario 2............................................................................................................................................................................................................... 34 Attachment 1 ................................................................................................................................................................................................................37 Attachment 2 ............................................................................................................................................................................................................... 49 Attachment 3 ............................................................................................................................................................................................................... 66

Executive Summary The V.L. Crusinberry Regional Training Center was constructed in 1978 and has been serving the City of Sioux Falls for 40 years. At the time of its construction, the facility represented state-of-theart training facilities that were the best in the region. Recognizing the need to update and or upgrade facilities at the training center, the City of Sioux Falls commissioned a master plan study

across the country and required changes to the way training is delivered. There is now a better understanding that current challenges require realistic training environments that reproduce the hazards encountered on the job. Critical to this understanding is the recognition that facilities should challenge the communication and coordination difficulties encountered in

to identify current training needs and evaluate the ability of the training facility to meet those needs moving forward. Early on it was anticipated that this would involve minor maintenance and repair of the existing facility with targeted new facilities that would respond to changes in training practices and requirements. Unfortunately 40 years of use and deferred maintenance have taken their toll on the facility and it was quickly discovered that the training center currently requires major renovations and repairs just to maintain the status quo. Live fire training structures are brutally under attack from the day they open and with the best of protective design features and engineering a 40-yearold facility would be nearing the end of its useful life expectancy. The primary training tower of the facility was built without these modern protective designs at a time when they were not widely available or understood. It is actually quite amazing that the structure performed as well and as long as it has. The lack of ongoing maintenance and repair, coupled with training use that included live fire conditions outside of the original design perimeters, has led to the current facility being a significant safety concern in continuing to utilize without costly repairs.

the most difficult and life threatening incidents. Fires are less frequent but more dangerous and a rapidly aging fire service leaves young firefighters in charge who will likely never get the hands on experience that came when fires were more prevalent. It is now widely recognized that realistic training is the critical piece of narrowing this gap and the current facilities do not rise to that standard.

The classroom building, built in 1977, also suffers from the need for costly repairs and the department has struggled for many years to maintain a facility that was outgrown a long time ago. Classrooms are used as fitness rooms, student gear is stored without proper separation from vehicle exhaust, and students are exposed to mold that has developed from water infiltration to the structure that is persistent and repetitive. Of greater concern is the lack of modernization of the training elements since it’s opening in 1978. New service challenges and types of construction have stressed fire departments

Additionally it was a goal of the master plan study to identify potential solutions to the ongoing access challenges faced by the department in utilizing a training facility inside the security perimeter of an active commercial passenger airport and Air National Guard facility. The study identifies the good faith efforts that were explored by all parties involved, but despite these efforts no economically viable solutions were discovered. There is a great deal of uncertainty in regards to what each party is obligated to do under the law and currently available documents raise more questions than answers. The following information details the findings of the Master Plan study and examines potential approaches to move the department forward. This includes the ability to provide quality training to the workforce now as well as into the future. None of the solutions are easy or without a significant investment, but they are not to be unexpected based on the age of the facility and the lack of facility investment that his been made over the years. Fire training is an expensive part of providing public safety, but the potential monetary and community impact of not providing quality training can be devastating to a community. A comprehensive examination of the existing training site and facilities was conducted to determine both condition and

Existing Facilities functionality. This included examining the capacity to address the current training challenges as well as understanding of best practices developed across the country. The overall goal of this effort was to determine if existing facilities adequately served the training needs and requirements of the Sioux Falls Fire Department, and if not determine the best path forward to

the designated entry point. The current situation implies that the Guard has assumed responsibility for airport security as it related to the training facility but no documentation of this was provided to the study team. This brings up legal questions that are beyond this study such as if the base is closed for security reasons how does the airport authority meet its requirement to

address identified needs, be it through repair and upgrade of existing facilities, or through identification of the need to begin new at an alternative site.

provide access to the training center?

SITE AND ACCESS One of the biggest complicating challenges to upgrading the training facility comes from the City’s lack of ownership of the property. Although the agreement executed by the City and the Airport Authority gives perpetual access to the site, it does very little to outline how all of the competing interest on the airport are managed and addressed. There is a complex web of regulations and requirements involving the Federal Aviation Administration and the Military that have the potential to limit the viability and usability of the facility in the future. Large investments in improvements could prove to be risky if access and usage becomes limited. Current agreements give no guarantee that the City will have the ability to maximize usage of any new improvements and the current situation indicates existing operating conditions are negatively impacted already. Early in the discussion of the current training facility, the site and site access was identified as an ongoing and major hurdle in operating, updating, and fully utilizing the existing training facility. The site is only accessible via the Air National Guard base located at the airport and visitors must process through security to get to the training facility. This adds layers to the scheduling and utilization process and limits the ability to schedule outside agencies for classes. The base is also subject to closure for security reasons and this is a decision that cannot be controlled locally or planned into operational schedules. As the deed to the land requires the airport authority to provide perpetual access to the training facility, it is unclear how the Guard base became

A second concern for the existing site is runway security for the commercial operation of the airport. Once through security students, staff and visitors have direct access to active runways and taxiways, which could potentially be a violation of TSA and FAA security rules for the airport. Although we believe the risk of intentional detrimental activity by training site users to be low based on the user group, the risk of unintentional runway incursions is always a risk at an operating commercial airport. This risk increases when those utilizing the roadways inside the security perimeter are unfamiliar with, or unaware of safe operating procedures inside the secure zone. The FAA consultant from the study team has looked into this concern and again the result is more questions than answers due to the lack of formal documentation provided to the team. The expectation is the operational agreement should outline all of the security operations, access, training, etc. but no documentation of this was identified. It appears the agreements were done very informally and at a time when airport security was of much lesser concern. As time went on the Agreement for Cooperative Action signed in 1986 appears to have gone without review and update and leads to the current situation where at the very least the operational procedures should be updated and formalized. The concern with site access is not new to this study and has been previously discussed with concerned parties in an attempt to improve access. As part of the master plan study effort the consultant team met with the base commander and the airport director to again explore opportunities to improve access and security. All parties agree that the current situation is not ideal and proposes challenges for each perspective

user. How to solve that issue is much more complicated and multiple options were discussed. They included: 1.

Adding a separate entry point that utilized the existing perimeter road to the training site but bypasses base security

2. Adding a second entry and road outside the airport perimeter gate 3. Adding new entry points and road along the levies 4. Building a bridge across the levy with access outside of airport property None of these options were determined to be logistically or economically feasible by the group. Adding a separate entry point that utilized the existing road but bypassed base security would require building a secondary fence inside of the current road. This would include the need to fence the existing training facility to separate it from the airport and base properties. The airport authority stated that they are at the limit of their requirements for setback of roads and fences and that there is not enough space to erect a fence inside the existing road. They and the guard also had concerns that they would be inconvenienced by the number of gates they would have to move through when conducting airport operations. Similarly the guard had concern with gates impeding munitions movement between their existing facilities. Adding a second entry point and road outside the airport perimeter that follows the existing road would require modification of the city owned golf course resulting in a loss of playable area. It was conveyed to the team that this was a non-starter. Similar objections were raised to establishing a new road along the levy, as it would also require modification of the golf course with a loss in playable area. This option would also be costly and

would require approval from the Army Corp of Engineers who have jurisdiction over the levy system. Preliminary estimates were over $1,000,000.00 to construct the new road and this is prior to any additional requirements that would be required due to the proximity to the levy. The Corp approval process was deemed to be lengthy with a high likelihood that it would be denied. Entering from the opposite end of the airport removed the golf course from concern but did not eliminate the cost of the road and concerns in regards to the levy system. The airport authority also believed that path would interfere with existing and future plans for the airport property in this area. Finally the high cost of acquiring land, getting Corp approval, and construction of a bridge over the waterway was determined to be prohibitive, especially considering it would serve a single occupancy and use. SITE CONDITIONS Although the site is difficult to access it does benefit from the existing site infrastructure, which includes large areas of existing concrete, roadways, and utilities. Maintenance issues exist and have been documented by others in regards to concrete and utility concerns that should be addressed if the current site is to continue to operate as the training site. One major concern is the collection and or containment of runoff from live fire burning. Currently runoff is allowed to discharge directly to the Big Sioux River adjoining the site. This was investigated by the civil engineer for the study and found to be in violation of current environmental laws in the State. It is also in violation of standard practices recommended by NFPA 1402 and NFPA 1403 which advises on the need to capture runoff from live fire training and remove containments prior to discharging to the public water way. The current condition of the facility has forced the department to cease live fire burning and thus no runoff is currently being discharged. If the facility is updated to resume Class A live fire burning, costly remediation plans and procedures will be required.

perspectives. The first was a facility assessment conducted by Midwest Engineering to determine building conditions (Attachments 1,2,3). This assessment was conducted purely from an engineering perspective that evaluated current facility conditions and identified required maintenance necessary to maintain structural and environmental usability. Complete findings from this effort are included in the reports attached to this document.

Driving Course Area/Big Sioux River There is also a concern for lead ground contamination and runoff from the adjacent police firing range as there is currently no way to clean lead from the range and no containment system to treat lead dust that enters the ground during rain events. Underground training areas are located near the range as well.

Range Near Drainage and Underground Training Areas PHYSICAL FACILITIES The physical facilities at the site were evaluated from two

The second evaluation conducted by Abercrombie Planning + Design looked at the functionality of the training facility including the ability of the existing facilities to support current training requirements as well as best practices in conducting fire and police training activities. CLASSROOM The physical assessment of the classroom structure by Midwest Engineering identified numerous structural deficiencies that impact the functionality and usability of the classroom as a learning environment. As a result of the building structural investigation, multiple areas of water damage and mold were documented and indicate concern for the indoor environmental air quality for students, staff, and visitors. Water intrusion appears to be a common problem with no clear identification for path or paths of entry. On a rainy day site visit by the design team significant area of water could be seen ponding on the roof. An environmental assessment was not completed as such was outside the scope of this study. Student protective clothing is kept adjacent to apparatus storage without adequate ventilation for vehicle exhaust. The surrounding area shows damage to paint and walls from water and exhaust that is most certainly impacting student gear as well. Based on the condition of the building it is also likely that vehicle exhaust is entering the occupied classroom and office areas. Lastly a facility condition assessment conducted by Alpha Facilities Solutions in 2016 found an estimated $954,958 in needed repairs including the following:

• In general, the facility needs to be renovated as many of the interior finishes are in poor condition • More energy efficient light fixtures and HVAC systems should be installed as many if not all these systems are expired and are reported as high maintenance items. • Water intrusion was observed and has damaged interior finishes. It was not known exactly were the leak was originating from. • Corrosion was observed on all exterior metal surfaces. A preservation maintenance program is recommended after replacement. Functionally the classroom space is too small to serve the basic programs of fire and police. The fire department frequently conducts classes of 30+ and the current classroom at the site does not meet that requirement. When housing large groups there is no ability to conduct secondary classes including those that support the firing range. As fire departments and health professionals started to understand the critical role of fitness to job survivability fitness equipment and training became a high priority element of both recruit and veteran training. Faced with a lack of space at the existing training center, half of the classroom was equipped with fitness equipment further limiting the availability of classroom space. This decision poses problems on two levels with one being the less than ideal environment of trying to conduct classes while also working around fitness equipment. The second is the use of a carpeted classroom for fitness activities being unsanitary increasing the risk of staph infections due to the inability to properly clean the area.

Classroom Used as Fitness Room Photos Courtesy Sioux Falls Fire Department Additionally the utilization of the classroom as the primary support facility for the police firing range is problematic and introduces safety concerns for all students and staff. Obviously the limited space makes it difficult to conduct simultaneous training sessions that require classroom support. Of greater concern is potential for cross contamination from lead introduced by officers moving from the range to the classroom building without adequate support structures to limit lead exposure. The risk of lead contamination from firing range operations are widely known and best practices have been identified that allow for safe operation and monitoring of the hazard. Lacking support structures in the range means those best practices are not followed and this enhances the chance

that lead is introduced into the main classroom building. The classroom building also lacks the ability to appropriately store student gear to avoid contamination from vehicle exhaust and hazardous chemicals associated with the shop environment. Gear is stored unprotected from vehicle exhaust and the vehicle exhaust is not properly ventilated. The breathing air compressor is also installed with direct exposure to vehicle apparatus, which increases risk of contamination while also increasing the service life and maintenance requirements for air filters. Exposure to cancer causing carcinogens via gear and vehicle exhaust are increasingly identified as one of the greatest risk to the long term health of a firefighter and great strides have been made in designing facilities to limit and mitigate exposure hazards. None of those safeguards exist in the current training center.

TRAINING TOWER The report by Midwest Engineering highlighted many concerning deficiencies in the training tower in regards to basic safe occupancy and utilization of the building for training. Live fire burn buildings take a tremendous amount of abuse under the best design and use conditions. Deterioration of this type of structure is expected with the repeated heating and rapid cooling of the structure accompanied by very little ability to control overall temperatures. This reality is magnified when the building is utilized in a manner for which it was not designed and maintenance of the facility is deferred over the years. In the best of cases a burn building the age of this one would be nearing the end of its useful life cycle, but this deterioration has been accelerated due to the above-mentioned compounding factors.

Geared/Apparatus/Storage Without Proper Ventilation and Separation Photo Courtesy Sioux Falls Fire Department Lastly support spaces such as office and break rooms are pressured beyond there limits and do not foster a productive work environment. The design team personally experienced an occasion when a recruit class had to discontinue use of the classroom space so a meeting could occur. There is no room for staff growth and support spaces such as meeting rooms are not available.

Based on the engineer’s report an analysis of the original plan indicates live fire burning was to be conducted in a designated room noted as a high temperature room. The rest of the building was to include smoke training only via a smoke distribution system on the first floor. The high temperature room was constructed with refractory concrete to allow it to

scenario. A recent example in the Las Vegas area training facility resulted in large chunks of concrete falling from the ceiling only a short number of days after being given the okay by building engineers. The failure occurred without warning and had the potential to inflict serious injury to trainees or instructors.

withstand the heat of burning and the rest of the structure was to be search and rescue under smoke conditions only. The engineer noted that despite the apparent design intent, the high temperature room was not used as a burn room by the department. Instead, live fire training was conducted in many other areas of the building originally not expected to see the conditions experienced during live fire training. The damage to the unprotected areas of the structure where frequent burning was conducted was noted and to be expected. Even if the high temperature room had been the only room utilized for burning, current engineering practices for the construction of live fire burn buildings would not indicate this approach as a suitable for live fire burning. Example of Concrete Ceiling Failure in Similar Facility

Original First Floor Plan The observed damage and that documented in the engineer’s report is troubling, as the team has seen examples of failures in similarly constructed and abused structures that could lead to serious injury or death if the failure occurs during a training

Results of Concrete Failure Current best practices recognize the inherent risk to a structure

when exposed to rapid and uncontrolled heating followed by rapid and repeated cooling. Thermal lining systems that protect critical structural elements are now considered standard design practice and dramatically enhance safety while also significantly extending the expected useful life of the structure.

staff member, or visitor operating around the structure.

Other significant operational safety concerns were identified in the report and have a direct impact on the student and instructional staff. The building was designed with many floor openings to provide training opportunities and they have been repeatedly exposed to heat and water and now are deteriorated and unsafe. Jagged metal represents a laceration exposure to students and staff working in a no-visibility environment and can be found throughout the building. Floor openings that cannot be properly secured are also common. Random pieces of metal can also be seen on the exterior where students conduct ladder operations and rappel from upper floors.

Scupper Damage Overhead

Access Point Damage Large concrete scuppers have been damaged and evidence of pieces coming off the building is evident. This poses a serious risk to students working on or near the exterior of the building. The concrete pieces are large enough to kill someone if they released and landed on the head of an unknowing student,

Lastly there was no evidence made available that the structure or the rappelling anchors on the tower meet current standards and safety margins for rope operations and, in fact, it is very unlikely that would be the case based on age of construction. There is visible damage to the parapet wall at upper levels of the structure and it is unlikely that the anchors and the current condition of both the wall and the anchors would be considered safe for rope operations based on current knowledge of the load impact of this type of training. Functionally the tower represents an approach to live fire training that has long since evolved to a current understanding that values the reproduction of real life challenges. Many structures of this time period were in essence a set of stairs surrounded by small rooms.

Burning was limited to one room and the rest of the building was utilized for search and rescue under smoke conditions. The tower was basically designed to focus on individual elements such as laddering, search, rappelling, SCBA familiarity etc. Very little effort was put forth in providing a realistic context and there was even less understanding and effort put into developing the critical

Frequently encountered environments such a long center hallways with multiple rooms on each side, enclosed stairways at each end of a floor, large area search etc. are examples of commonly facilitated training environments that were just not considered when the existing facility was built.

thinking skills and coordination required to function at real life emergencies. Fires were frequent and prevalent and firefighters learned to put everything together via on the job training. Fast-forward to current times and fires have become less frequent but more hazardous due to new building and content materials combined with lightweight construction techniques. Fires burn hotter and buildings fail faster. Firefighters have fewer opportunities for hands on training and less margin for error when they do not perform well due to lack of contextual experience. This reality has been magnified as a large number of firefighters begin to retire across the country and fewer of the remaining population have the same quantity of real time experience. Younger firefighters who have been trained in facilities designed for individual skill acquisition are not afforded the same opportunities to learn how to put it all together in a realistic context creating difficulty in the ability to critically execute all of the coordination requirements when faced with the chaos of a complex fire and or emergency situation. Based on research, and our modern understanding of the importance of realism in training, the existing tower is not representative of a high quality training structure even if all other maintenance issues discussed were not in play. Successful modern training structures attempt to duplicate the challenges and building types found in the service area. They focus on teaching critical thinking and decision-making skills and provide opportunities to practice in an environment that closely replicates the built environment in the community. Individual skills are still important, but students need the opportunity to put it all together in a safe but challenging environment that serves to make up for the reduction in real life hands-on opportunities.

Example of Modern Live Fire Training Tower Simulating High-Rise

Realistic Fire Challenges in Controlled Environment

proposes a real event will occur in isolation. This is unlikely to be the case however, and does not adequately prepare the troupes for the challenges they are likely to encounter.

Example of Modern Class A Residential Burn Building with Runoff Control and Structure Protection SPECIALTY PROPS The specialty prop area that includes outdoor gas fired industrial props, hazardous materials training props, confined space areas, and rubble pile for search and rescue, are similar to many that can be found across the country. They represent a combination of designed and ad-lib training elements that have been added over time as new training requirements were identified. The one common theme for this area is a general lack of context for the individual training elements and this deficiency eliminates the ability to train on coordinated skills that pose the most difficulty and risk when encountered on the job. There is also increasing understanding of the risk associated with props and training areas that lack the benefit of professional engineering design and safeguards. The current gas props do not conform to current gas-safety standards and best practices for gas-fired training props and are a collection of individual training elements. This makes it difficult to run a full-scale training scenario that would require coordination, structure protection, evacuation etc. and instead

Gas Prop Area The confined space training area of underground piping represents an actual hazard situation where each training scenario constitutes an actual emergency. Although many advanced scenarios evolve as student’s progress, best practices involve developing training props that are constructed above ground and include adequate and repetitive access points for extrication of students in emergency situations.

Underground Confined Space

Example of Safe Above Ground Training Prop The rubble pile that has accumulated over time is a common example of how departments have pieced together training environments to address the growing demand for Urban Search and Rescue (USAR) training. It is basically a collection of donated and found concrete, wood, steel, etc. and is a common approach to providing this type of training. We have only recently begun to understand the risk associated with this approach. As the need to put live victims in the training to allow for the utilization of high tech equipment and dogs, we realized that we were exposing personnel to an unstable and unregulated environment that could fail at any time. Without structural safety elements and weight monitoring it becomes impossible to know when the pile might fail with potentially tragic results. It might be the next one-ton slab added or moved, or nothing more than a baseball sized piece of concrete that could lead to collapse. Although the utilization of found or acquired rubble is still a valuable asset in cost effective training, current practices include engineered structures and safeguards that allow for informed transformation and utilization of the pile.

Existing Collected Rubble Pile

Example of Modern Engineered USAR Structure Lastly the Hazardous material training props at the site are still of great value but are in need of simple upgrades and maintenance that could dramatically improve realism. This would include locating near or creating new surrounding context that would allow for full-scale operational exercises and scenarios.

members of the training staff have done an outstanding job of creating props and scenarios that are focused on teaching life saving techniques for removing trapped occupants as well as firefighters. The residential structure represents the strong desire department personnel have to find ways to conduct realistic and applicable training even in the face of limited funding and facilities.

Rail Props

Residential Prop

Example of Contextual Rail Scenario RESIDENTIAL PROP The residential prop simulates a typical three-bedroom house with a basement and is used for multiple search and rescue scenarios. The police department also utilizes the residential prop to conduct building search and room clearing training. This structure represents the most significant recent addition to the training center since it actually allows the department to conduct training that directly relates to their community. Although it is limited in that it is not designed for burning or flowing water, it does represent a realistic floor plan and the

Search Maze Built by Department Members Photo Courtesy Sioux Falls Fire Department

RANGE As with the previously discussed facilities, Midwest Engineering evaluated the range facility for structural integrity and suggested maintenance activities required to maintain operational safety. The report also discusses the viability and structural requirements for adding ballistic safety baffling to the existing

impact of this hazard. Currently the range has a rock floor that is impossible to clean. The uneven rock surface is more susceptible to fragmentation injuries, is difficult to walk on for tactical shooting scenarios, and impossible to clean allowing lead dust to settle and eventually wash out into the ground below. Having a concrete floor throughout the range would

structure. The entire report accompanies this document.

allow for proper cleaning of the range on a regular basis and improve student safety by eliminating the hazards associated with the rock. This would also make it easier for officers to recycle brass at the end of training sessions.

From a functional and safety perspective there are several areas of concern in regards to the range. First of all the lack of a protective baffle system is a concern for the rapidly developing surrounding area. It has often been said that it is not if, but when, in regards to a bullet leaving an open air firing range and across the country we are seeing existing ranges forced to add safety features to address the concerns of neighboring developments. It is quite likely that rounds have, and do, exit the firing range and travel to neighboring vacant land. This is commonly not discovered until neighboring properties begin development and some one finds evidence of escaped projectiles during construction. It only takes one projectile finding for there to be significant concern and if you occupy the surrounding area it is natural and logical for you to be concerned. To date known examples of this type of situation point to the surrounding properties winning when it comes to the demand for increased safety protection from the range. This has been the case even when the range has been in operation for many years prior to development. The expectation should be that in the near future a baffle system will be required if the range is to continue being utilized. Additionally ballistic protection should be provided immediately for joints between concrete wall structures if tactical cross-range shooting is being conducted or is planned in the future. One of the most critical functional and safety concerns with the existing range facility is the lack of adequate support facilities to mitigate potential lead exposure to users and other buildings and vehicles. Lead contamination from firing range operation is well known and documented and has resulted in key design recommendations that help limit the

Although the range is open air, the design still limits airflow during days with little or unfavorable wind conditions. Inhalation of lead dust is a commonly known risk that requires a positive flow of air away from the shooters respiratory zone to safely mitigate. It is most likely a regular occurrence where this positive airflow is inadequate based on current design. If a protective ceiling as described above is added the problem will be exacerbated. Future upgrades to the range should include testing and recommendations for installing an air movement system that meets existing safety standards.

Close End Limits Airflow

gun cleaning area to safely clean and reload their gun. This area would also allow for students and instructor to wash their hands and face to remove the by-products of shooting. This area also serves as a dirty/clean dividing point with tacky mats to remove lead dust from footwear followed by additional mats for secondary removal prior to leaving for other learning areas or an officer’s vehicle.

Blue Sky Range Hazard to Surrounding Area

Example of Outdoor Range with Full Ballistic and Acoustic Protection

As was discussed earlier the range utilizes classroom and restroom facilities in the fire training center classroom. This serves to limit available scheduling and increases the chance the contamination from the range will be introduced to the building. Best practice would dictate classroom and restroom facilities would be adjacent to the range and serve to separate the students and potential contamination from non-related areas to the extent possible. Again these are basic design principles that are proven to limit exposure and currently do not exist.

Example of Gun Cleaning Support Area

The lack of dedicated range classroom space, restrooms, and gun cleaning areas is also limiting from both a functional and safety perspective. Industry standards call for limiting lead, noise, and respiratory hazards exposure to students and staff while mitigating exposure where it is inevitable. Preferred design practice has students exiting a range into a

Facility Requirements The following discussion outlines the process, findings, and recommendations for upgraded or new facilities based on identified need in the department as well as the current facility limitations discussed previously. The focus of this effort was to identify training challenges and requirements that currently exist in the department without bias to existing conditions or

FOCUS GROUP INTERVIEWS Multiple days of departmental interviews were conducted to obtain an understanding of current and future training requirements and challenges. It became evident very early on that the single greatest need across the board was the ability to conduct realistic contextual live fire training. The condition of

facilities. Secondly that information was utilized as the basis for recommended facilities that would best address those challenges.

the existing training tower has forced the department to modify training procedures with emphasis currently placed on being able to check the box that live fire training has been conducted. This approach increases risk to responders and decreases the ability to deliver consistent and reliable training as needed. Classroom space is limited and outdated with scheduling becoming increasingly problematic. There is evidence in recent course schedules that this is leading to a corresponding reduction in the number of classes being offered in the last few years with focus on simply meeting mandatory training requirements. Training staff members described logistical inefficiencies that represent as much time obligated to accommodating training as is spent in conducting training. The lack of facilities also makes it difficult, if not impossible, for different agencies to train together regularly, greatly decreasing the chance that large-scale multiagency events will have positive outcomes. The information discovered is not unique to Sioux Falls, but the area is particularly limited in the availability of high quality facilities. Many areas, especially fast growing metropolitan areas such as Miami-Dade Florida, Dallas/Fort Worth, Texas and Phoenix, Arizona have faced similar circumstances in recent years and have seen dramatic improvements in their response capabilities through the development of purpose-built training facilities that replaced aging and deteriorating facilities. The police department is also challenged and lacks adequate support facilities to operate the range and must utilize scarce facilities at the fire training facility increasing pressure on both agencies.

NEEDS ANALYSIS In an effort to discover and validate training needs, a series of research efforts were completed. The goal of these efforts was to make a realistic determination of need based on historical evidence and an evaluation of current and future requirements. The Research included: • Review of Current and Anticipated Departmental Staffing • Review of Historical Course Data • Focus Group Interviews • Photo Survey of Target Hazards • Analysis of Collected Data • Review of Existing Facilities • Benchmarking of modern training facilities STAFFING AND COURSE DATA The review of staffing and course data identified a growing department and service area. This growth was not accompanied by a corresponding growth and modernization of training facilities. The existing facilities have not been maintained or modernized and have in many ways become obsolete. As they are currently, they fail to provide a realistic replication of the challenges now faced in the service environment. If not addressed, the lack of realistic training facilities can quickly create training deficiencies that have an impact on community and responder safety as well as increasing liability for the local government.

There appears to be growing frustration among the user groups in regards to the lack of ability to maintain and grow the facility to better represent current training requirements. The facility is basically unchanged from its original capacity and continues

to deteriorate. The department has a strong motivation for excellence and training is a big part of meeting that goal. Department personnel interviewed expressed concern that the condition of the facility has led to diminished capability to conduct training and that the growing need to update and upgrade facilities has been deferred for many years. Employees

living and event spaces are clearly of concern to the boots on the ground and were consistently highlighted. Multifamily residential apartments were also identified frequently with the mixed-use occupancy with commercial and residential combined commonly identified as a point of concern. Industrial facilities and facilities that contain hazardous materials

of the department have made exceptional efforts over the years to make training effective through scrounging, patching, and begging but there are limits to this approach.

were also frequently identified and although areas with concentrations of industrial were not as prevalent, they were certainly of concern for the responders that cover industrial areas of the community.

TARGET HAZARD PHOTO STUDY In an effort to understand the operational problems encountered by SFFR line staff, a photo survey of target hazards was completed. Each station and shift was asked to identify and photograph target hazards and operational difficulties found in their response area. Photos and associated listings of hazards were received and over 280 hazards and hazard types were categorized. The effort included 100% participation from operational personnel, which is practically unheard of when conducting surveys. The police department also participated in the study and there was consistent overlap in the types of occupancies and challenges that caused concern. The resulting data was analyzed to identify trends and frequencies that could be used to indicate training priorities and facility needs. The survey also provides a resource to guide the look and feel for future designed training structures and environments to insure they are realistic and contextual. The findings from this process indicate current training facilities contribute very little in preparing department members for the challenges and hazard types faced in the field. The most frequently identified problems and building types are currently not addressed. Often it is impossible to realistically duplicate the real world environment in a manner that will facilitate teaching the required skills. This has been compounded by the current condition of the burn tower and surrounding props. The overwhelming number of responses involved occupancies with high occupancy and high-risk occupancies. The large number of at-risk inhabitants in medical, educational, assisted

Common challenges that were identified that are associated with the hazards include: • Difficult access to the structure • Forcible entry concerns • Heavily divided structures • Residential over commercial • Evacuation requirements • Below grade parking • Large area search Selected examples of the photos provided are below.

Retirement Facility/Large Population/Vulnerable Occupants

Senior Apartments/Vulnerable Population

Industrial/Hazardous Materials/Access Issues

Historic Structures with Mix of Residential over Commercial

Hospital/Vulnerable Population

Older Multi-Level Residential That Has Been Divided Into Multiple Units/Access Issues

High-Rise/High Risk Population/Evacuation Challenge

Historic Structure with Difficult Access/Fire Spread Risk Residential Over Commercial/Divided Structure

Educational Facility/Vulnerable Population/Evacuation Risk

Educational Facility/High Occupancy

Multi-Family Residential/Commercial

Older Multi-Family

High Occupancy/Search Challenge/Evacuation Challenge

High-Rise/High Occupancy/Evacuation Challenge/Search Challenge

Industrial/Hazardous Materials

Multi-Family Residential

Access Issues/Vulnerable Population/High Risk Population

Large Area Search Challenge

Multi-Family Residential

Mid-Rise/Large Area Search

Multi-Family/Access Challenges Difficult Access

Multi-Story/High Occupancy/Evacuation Challenge

High Occupancy/Evacuation Challenge/Search Challenge

Industrial/ Hazardous Materials

Access Challenges/Historic Structure/Industrial

Multi-Family/High Occupancy

REVIEW OF EXISTING FACILITIES Existing training facilities can only be described as substandard, and outdated. Live-fire training facilities are crumbling, outdated, unrealistic and in need of major repair or abandonment. It is currently impossible for the department to create realistic training that replicates the hazards and demands of the job. The facilities in their current condition do very little to contribute to a well-trained force. Again the review revealed that department members have done an admirable job of working to overcome the deficit, but the reality is there is a limit to how effective they can be working with the current facilities. This problem will only grow as the service area

expands and the department experiences a large turnover. The lack of designated classroom space located in direct association with the hands-on training environments has made efficiently scheduling programs a logistical nightmare. It is also difficult to schedule the growing number of courses

FACILITY RECOMMENDATIONS Based on the findings from the completed needs analysis, the following facility requirements were identified: 1. Adequate classroom support space allowing for more than one course to be held at the same time

that should blend didactic teaching with experiential learning, as current classrooms are not designed to meet the hands-on requirements of the modern evolutions of training programs. All too often it is said that a classroom is a classroom and this is simply not true for emergency response training. Classroom space that responds to the demonstration requirements of the modern curriculum can have a dramatic impact on improving learning outcomes. Current spaces are undersized and do not meet this requirement.

2. Growth space for additional training officers

BENCHMARKING The study group reviewed multiple modern training facilities and approaches in an effort to benchmark best practices. Highlights of that effort include the following:

7. 2-Story Mixed Use Commercial/Residential Class A or Propane Burn Building

• Hands-on, realistic, situational based training must be a priority in all future planning and budgeting efforts. This was, by far, the greatest identified need and should be considered imperative to providing quality service to the citizens. Developing realistic contextual training environments that include the challenges encountered in the community are the best venue to improve safety and performance and counteract the reduced opportunities for on the job training.

3. Storage for training apparatus and equipment with appropriate ventilation and separation for trainee protective clothing 4. Fully Baffled Range with separate classroom and support facilities 5. 6-Story propane fired burn building to simulate high-rise/ high risk structure 6. 2-Story Residential Class A Burn Building

8. Contextual Industrial/Haz-Mat Area 9. Emergency Vehicle Driver Training Course for Fire and Police 10. Engineered USAR environment 11. Contextual and safe outdoor live fire props

• Although hands-on training is a priority, effective courses that address this fact inevitably require classroom space to operate efficiently. This space should be convenient and support experiential learning. • Providing adequate and centralized support facilities for the both basic academy and in-service training will greatly improve SFFR’s ability to conduct efficient and safe training.

Alternative Facilities A market analysis was conducted to determine available alternative facilities to conduct elements of required training as well as to identify potential opportunities for revenue generation or savings through partnering and or outside fee based usage. Across the country there is little evidence indicating that public safety facilities will generate a direct

• South Dakota Office of Emergency Management Renner Volunteer Fire Department

financial return on the required capital investment, and in South Dakota there is none. The standard for a successful training center is one that can generate enough revenue to provide for ongoing maintenance of facilities while at the same time reducing the overall cost to conduct training. Again in South Dakota we could not locate any facilities that met this level of success. The customer for fire training in South Dakota, as in many parts of the country, typically operates on a shoestring budget and cannot afford to pay the true value of the training that can be offered at a state-of-the-art facility. Across the country, successful training facilities attempt to deliver training to a wide range of agencies to eliminate the cost of duplication that occurs when each agency try’s to go it alone. Often partnerships are formed with colleges and universities to share resources and access their experience in delivering educational programs. Forming partnerships regionally, as well statewide has frequently allowed for greater usage at a reduced cost. This ultimately improves the longterm sustainability of the facility.

• Dell Rapids Volunteer Fire Department

The Sioux Falls Fire Department training facility is currently utilized by many different agencies including: • Minnehaha County Sheriff Officer personnel • South Dakota State Penitentiary personnel • United States Department of the Interior’s Bureau of Indian Affairs South Dakota Drug Enforcement Agency

• Baltic Volunteer Fire Department • Hartford Volunteer Fire Department • Tea Volunteer Fire Department

• Lennox Volunteer Fire Department • Canton Volunteer Fire Department • Crooks Volunteer Fire Department • Harrisburg Volunteer Fire Department • Parker Volunteer Fire Department • Sioux Falls Risk Management personnel • Rapid City Fire Department • Watertown Fire Department • Aberdeen Fire Department • Brookings Fire Department • Pierre Fire Department • South Dakota State Fire Inspection / Code Enforcement Division Valley Springs Volunteer Fire Department • Split Rock Volunteer Fire Department

Although these efforts maximize utilization of the facility and increase training capabilities for and with these agencies, the cost of this utilization is not captured and reinvested in the facility. Again this is a market that has very little ability to fund quality training, but the usage expedites the deterioration of the facility with no established means to reinvest in the facility to offset usage.

• Joe Foss Field /Airport Fire Department • South Dakota Air National Guard; 114th Fighter Wing personnel • South Dakota Army National Guard

The facility was host to the State Fire School in 2016 and this could be a long-term strategy that may assist in sustaining more training opportunities for the department. Training facilities in

South Dakota are few and generally of low quality. If not for the current state of disrepair the Sioux Falls facility would be the cream of the crop. If training opportunities are to be improved for both the department as well as the State it will be imperative that Sioux Falls take a lead in that endeavor. Seeking to permanently become the State Fire Training Center with an

As is the case currently, the operation of a training facility is very much like the building and operation of a fire station. It is simply the cost of doing business to serve the public safety needs of the community. It is often easier or considered more critical to build the fire station because the average citizen can see the immediate impact to the community. Building and

associated funding mechanism from the State could provide training opportunities currently unavailable. By marketing the facility to a broad audience there would be the potential for a reduction in overall training cost with the added benefit of improved statewide response capabilities and coordination.

maintaining training facilities is typically much more difficult, as the community does not see the direct impact to them until someone is seriously injured or killed and the lack of training proves to be instrumental in the tragedy. As appears to be the case with the current training center, it is easy to build it once and forget it. Everyone assumes all is well because the department goes along everyday doing their job without incident. Suddenly you are 40 years down the road and very little investment has been made in maintaining or modernizing facilities and you have a greatly diminished product. It is very unlikely that the facility as it is now would hold up very well in the glaring light that would come with a serious injury, loss of life, or significant failure in delivery of fire protection.

Even if the department were to be successful in establishing designation as the State Fire School, the best long-term outcome that should be expected is to offset cost of operations. The density of the market in South Dakota is not there and thus the potential training dollars currently seen do not support offsetting the cost of the capital to build the required facilities. This obviously could change if the State added capital funds to build facility elements that would draw from a wide region but as of now there is no indication this would happen.

Interim Strategies for Maintaining Live Burn Requirements Based on the findings presented by Midwest Engineering the department has discontinued utilizing the tower for training and live fire burning. This poses an immediate challenge to the department in conducting annual live fire training as

by the change in schedule. This inconvenience is particularly hard on the training staff that would be required to take this on 10 or more times each year in addition to any academy class requirements that would require them to travel as well.

required. One option considered was to find the necessary funds to make the required repairs to the existing tower. Though this could be done it is a very costly approach as it invest a great deal of money on a building that has exceeded its expected useful lifespan and which does not represent modern training practices or the challenges currently faced in the community. Even with required repairs, it is expected that ongoing maintenance of the facility would be high. Based on the other downsides associated with the site and the condition of the building it is prudent to strongly consider replacement as a more permanent and sustainable approach. Designed correctly with proper structure protection, modern fire training buildings require much less maintenance and have a much greater useful life expectancy than those built during the time period of the current tower.

This route also makes it impossible for crews to train on their regular apparatus, as it is unreasonable to take the required number of apparatus out of service for this length of time.

A short-term option identified by the department is to travel to Watertown to conduct live fire training. Estimates by the department including facility cost, travel and back fill to maintain coverage are close to $300,000.00 per year. This option requires sending personnel 110 miles round trip and include 8 hours of training and 4 hours of travel time. The facility utilized although functional, does not serve to improve training capabilities, but rather represents a usable method to check the box on live fire training. We have seen in other organizations a reduction in moral when this approach is required. Training is diminished due to fatigue and family members are impacted

A third short term option to conduct required live fire training is to bring in a modular or mobile live fire-training unit until a permanent solution is established. This should only be done with the full understanding that the department will only be checking the box for conducting live fire training and will be doing very little to provide quality training. These units do not represent anything remotely like what personnel will encounter on the job and do nothing to improve the ability to do the hardest and most dangerous parts of the job. The lack of adequate floor space and accessibility challenges means that in essence we are getting a chance to see fire without all of the integration and coordination required in the real world experience. Does it check a box? Yes. Should anyone believe it is making your employees any more prepared to do their job? The answer is no. These types of options represent the most basic premise of the fire problem and do not prepare firefighters for the complexities of the real world. There are a great number of these types of training props around the country and they exist for one reason, low cost of acquisition. They certainly have not proliferated due to the ability to provide realistic training.

Cost Estimates and Phases Based on the site challenges identified and conditions of the existing facility, the team was asked to examine the merits of constructing a new training facility at an alternative site. A preliminary program was created based on the needs analysis findings discussed previously. The following represents estimates of size and cost based on today’s dollars without

escalation, as there is currently no time frame or budget identified to complete the work. For budgeting planning purposes the city should consider applying standard city cost escalation percentages and consider market trends in the area to provide greater clarity to budgeting considerations. The cost of land, if any, is not included in the following estimates.

New Site

DESCRIPTION ESTIMATED CORE COST

ADMINISTRATION/CLASSROOMS

1. MAIN CLASSROOM/OFFICE BUILDING

15,000 SF

$5,000,000 - $6,000,000

TRAINING FIELD/LIVE-FIRE TRAINING CITYSCAPE 2. HIGH RISE HOTEL/OFFICE SIX-STORY TRAINING TOWER $3,000,000 - $3,500,000 3. TWO-STORY RESIDENCE TRAINING/CLASS A BURN BUILDING

$1,000,000 - $1,500,000

4. 2 STORY MIXED-USE COMMERCIAL/RESIDENTIAL CLASS A BURN BUILDING

$1,500,000 - $2,000,000

5. USAR TECHNICAL RESCUE AREA $800,000 - $1,500,000 6. HAZMAT/RAIL PROPS $200,000 - $300,000 7. APPARATUS/STORAGE

$1,000,000 - $1,500,000

8. OUTDOOR LIVE FIRE PROPS

$80,000 - $150,000

9. PROPANE FUEL FARM - 10,000 GALLONS

$80,000 - $150,000

10. POLICE/FIRE EMERGENCY VEHICLE DRIVING COURSE

$2,500,000 - $3,500,000

11. OUTDOOR CLASSROOMS

$80,000 - $120,000

12. CIVIL/SITE WORK

$2,000,000 - $3,000,000

13. NEW 15 LANE FULLY BAFFLED OUTDOOR FIRING RANGE WITH SUPPORT

$3,000,000 - 5,000,000

GRAND TOTAL

$20,240,000 - $28,220,000

CURRENT SITE If the decision is made to stay on the existing site, the identified training elements still apply with a few minor modifications. This would include the repair and or replacement of existing facility elements outlined in the facility assessment discussed previously. Additional classroom and support space would be

the firing range. The decision would then revolve around remodeling and expanding the current classroom and adding separate facilities at the range, or constructing a new dual use classroom and support building. Consideration should be given to remodeling the current building to house apparatus, fitness, and upgraded storage of gear and training materials,

required to address both the needs for the fire department as well as for those of the police department in relation to

while building a new classroom and office space that would serve the fire department as well supporting the firing range.

Final Recommendations The study team has analyzed the available data and examined multiple potential scenarios in an effort to provide the best possible options for the Sioux Falls Fire Rescue and Police Departments to provide required and beneficial training. Based on the findings and the professional experience of the study team, the following recommendations are provided: SCENARIO 1 Begin planning and budgeting for a new training facility to be constructed on land owned or acquired by the city. Based on the totality of the issues surrounding the current facility, this is easily the scenario recommended by the study team. The seemingly unsolvable issues with access to the site, concerns about airport security, and the deteriorating condition of the facility make it difficult to find value in investing large amounts of capital in the existing site. Land availability and prices in the city appear to be favorable and moving off site seems to be the only way to remove the continuing challenges and insecurity of operating within the secure perimeter of an operating commercial airport. Construction of a new facility would allow a clean slate to develop modern training facilities that enhance training realism and efficiency without the continued high maintenance of an aging facility that does not reflect the current service challenges or training best practices.

approximately 15 acres, additional land could facilitate a joint emergency vehicle-driving course that would benefit both police and fire. POTENTIAL PHASING Although there is significant long term cost savings in building as much of a new facility as possible in the beginning, capital availability may require the facility be phased. Potential phasing recommendations include the following: Phase 1 • Administration/Classroom Facility • 2 Story Mixed Use Commercial/Residential Class A Burn Building • Apparatus/Storage • Supporting Site and Civil Infrastructure • Firing Range Baffle System • Firing Range Support Facilities Phase 2 • High Rise Hotel/Office Six-Story Training Tower • Hazmat/Rail Props • Propane Fuel Farm • Outdoor Live Fire Props • Outdoor Classroom

Strong consideration should be given to relocating the firing range if police and fire build a new facility to allow for combined usage. The training elements outlined in this program represent structures that are challenges for both agencies and the ability for police to use the fire structures for tactical training would maximize utilization of the facility and greatly enhance police training capabilities. Efficiencies could be realized in sharing of lecture and storage space as well.

• Supporting Site and Civil Infrastructure Phase 3 • Two-Story Residence/Class A Burn Building • USAR Technical Rescue Area • Driving Skills Pad • Supporting Site and Civil Infrastructure

Although the requirements for the outlined fire program are

SCENARIO 2 Make necessary repairs to the existing site and begin planning and budgeting to add identified training elements. Although this is not the recommended scenario it is certainly an option. In addition to the repairs and maintenance items identified in this study, the elements of need do not change. If this path is chosen, consideration should be given to the impact of trying to maintain the aging burn tower. Again it is difficult to recommend that money be invested in this structure, but if retained it should be repaired and maintained to a level that would eliminate potentially dangerous conditions. The classroom structure should be repaired and consideration should be given to repurposing the facility for storage and fitness with adequate ventilation and separation for apparatus,

gear, and working spaces. Additional classroom, office and range support spaces as identified should be added. There is, at this time, no viable opportunity with this option to remove the negative aspects of operating on this site, which include access issues, airport security concerns, and ownership rights to the property. Regardless of which path is chosen by the City it is obvious that a substantial investment is required to reverse the impact of years of neglect and a failure to maintain and upgrade facilities. Although this may take time and sacrifices in other areas, it is imperative that training maintains pace with the challenges encountered by first responders tasked with protecting the community.

Attachment 1

Attachment 2

Attachment 3