RESPONSE FORCED ENTRY


Dusty Kitzmiller sizes up the dangers in launching tactical assault on industrial facilities


In the past two decades, tactical responses have changed due to the evolving threats of terrorism, clandestine drug labs, use of chlorine and other improvised chemical devices (ICDs), increased hostage taking, and mass killings. While training programmes have evolved to deal with these threats, there are still many units that are not properly trained or equipped.


D


uring January 2012 two major incidents occurred, which although very diff erent, in combination they point to the desperate need to better


equip and better train our Operational and Tactical level leaders and units. These two incidents included the taking of hostages by Islamic terrorists at the remote BP joint-operated gas plant at In Amenas, Algeria, and the explosion at the headquarters of Mexico’s national oil company, PEMEX. The fi rst of these led to an armed incursion executed by the Algerian military killing many of the hostage takers, possibly killing some of the hostages, and led to the detonation of a bomb aimed at and succeeding in the killing of multiple hostages inside the gas plant.


The second incident in Mexico was


originally suspected to be the product of possible sabotage or anti-government terrorism, which was ultimately determined to be caused by a long recurring gas leak over time, with the


66 CBNW 2013/02


gas building up in a tunnel under the plant – and fi nally detonated by the use of improvised and unsafe lighting fi xtures by maintenance personnel.


Sizing up chemical hazards While both of these incidents were caused by very diff erent mechanisms – one most defi nitely intentional, the other accidental – some very basic lessons for tactical entry teams, whether military or law enforcement, should be learned. First – any time a team is ordered


to enter an industrial plant, especially when known or suspected chemicals are used, produced, or stored there, additional Size-Up and Planning factors must be taken into account. During the Size-Up, Assessment,


or Intelligence gathering phase of the incident, all potential, known and suspected chemical hazards must be assessed for their potential for health eff ects, their physical and chemical characteristics, and certainly, their potential to ignite. By understanding the basic physical and chemical characteris-


tics it should be determined where those chemicals, if released or leaking, will likely migrate – and where they will potentially collect, leading to a dangerous concentration. Along with this basic information, the


proper Personal Protective Equipment (PPE) needed to protect responders from exposure to those chemicals needs to be identifi ed, the unit trained to use it if it is not part of its regularly used equipment, and donned. Decontamination capabilities, even if only at the emergency level, must also be established prior to entry. Another part of the Size-Up is identifying what lines, tanks, and areas through which the chemicals are likely fl owing or being stored. This leads to eff ective planning and briefi ng. All this information, such as the


proper PPE to be worn, locations and procedures for decontamination, and the locations and descriptions of hazard areas to avoid must be briefed. Tactical teams should also consider the employment of environmental monitoring capabilities, which many


©Cambridge PD


Page 1  |  Page 2  |  Page 3  |  Page 4  |  Page 5  |  Page 6  |  Page 7  |  Page 8  |  Page 9  |  Page 10  |  Page 11  |  Page 12  |  Page 13  |  Page 14  |  Page 15  |  Page 16  |  Page 17  |  Page 18  |  Page 19  |  Page 20  |  Page 21  |  Page 22  |  Page 23  |  Page 24  |  Page 25  |  Page 26  |  Page 27  |  Page 28  |  Page 29  |  Page 30  |  Page 31  |  Page 32  |  Page 33  |  Page 34  |  Page 35  |  Page 36  |  Page 37  |  Page 38  |  Page 39  |  Page 40  |  Page 41  |  Page 42  |  Page 43  |  Page 44  |  Page 45  |  Page 46  |  Page 47  |  Page 48  |  Page 49  |  Page 50  |  Page 51  |  Page 52  |  Page 53  |  Page 54  |  Page 55  |  Page 56  |  Page 57  |  Page 58  |  Page 59  |  Page 60  |  Page 61  |  Page 62  |  Page 63  |  Page 64  |  Page 65  |  Page 66  |  Page 67  |  Page 68  |  Page 69  |  Page 70  |  Page 71  |  Page 72  |  Page 73  |  Page 74  |  Page 75  |  Page 76  |  Page 77  |  Page 78  |  Page 79  |  Page 80  |  Page 81  |  Page 82  |  Page 83  |  Page 84  |  Page 85  |  Page 86  |  Page 87  |  Page 88  |  Page 89  |  Page 90  |  Page 91  |  Page 92  |  Page 93  |  Page 94  |  Page 95  |  Page 96  |  Page 97  |  Page 98  |  Page 99  |  Page 100