LESSONS LEARNED/
LESSONS REINFORCED:

The 45-year-old male subject had been installing wiring and an antenna on the structure when his partner discovered he could no longer reach him on the radio. Rescuers arrived to find the victim trapped approximately 500 feet up the tower.

Indiana Departments Perform Extreme Tower Rescue

The deceptively simple 911 call first went to the Vigo County Sheriff's Office (VCSD) dispatch at 1303 hrs as "an unconscious person at a tower." The call was then relayed to fire dispatch, but at 1304 hrs, while the Sugar Creek Fire Department's (SCFD's) Engine 42 crew was en route, the VCSD notified them that the subject actually was on the communications tower, so they requested Service 41 to respond with rope equipment.

Engine 42 arrived on scene at 1307 hrs and found a man with a serious medical condition trapped approximately 200 feet up a tower. Engine 41 was then dispatched from the SCFD's south station, as well as a TransCare Ambulance ALS medical unit and a second stand-by TransCare unit for responders affected by the 19-degree F temperature and chilling winds. Engine 41, along with Sugar Creek 1 (a chief), arrived on scene at 1311 hrs; Sugar Creek 1 established command. At that time, rescuers reported that the subject was actually some 500 feet up the tower.

The 45-year-old male subject had been installing wiring and an antenna on the structure when his partner discovered he could no longer reach him on the radio. The partner started climbing to reach him and was about 3?4 of the way up the tower when rescuers arrived. The structure, an older tower equipped with guys and a triangular cross section, stood about 625 feet high and had no ladder. Originally, it had been used as a broadcast tower, but is now used for communications.

Responders first used binoculars to try to determine the worker's condition. They noticed some movement, indicating he was still alive, but could not determine his exact condition from the ground. To climb the tower quickly, one firefighter, designated Rescue 1, would travel as light as possible, carrying only his personal equipment. A battalion chief (Rescue 2) and deputy chief (Rescue 3) would then follow with rescue equipment, including rope and a brake-bar rack for lowering. Because they didn't have a ladder, the rescuers would climb onto the cross members and use a webbing loop clipped to their harnesses with a large locking carabiner at the end as their safety. As they climbed, they would clip the large carabiner onto the tower.

At 1338 hrs, command requested Ladder 91 from the nearby Honey Creek Fire Department. Its tower would only extend about 95 feet, but it would decrease the descent by 1?4, thereby decreasing the time taken to lower the worker to the ground. At 1341 hrs, Ladder 91 was en route.

One problem: Due to the distance and the angle, Rescue 1 had trouble with depth perception, so he repeatedly called command to ask how far he had left to go. At 1404 hrs, after approximately 35 minutes of climbing, Rescue 1 reached the worker, made verbal contact with him and observed he was leaning backward wearing a lanyard attached to the back of his Class III harness while his feet rested on the tower. The rescuer then reported that the subject appeared conscious, but was unable to carry on a conversation and had a serious medical condition that required immediate evacuation.

Originally, rescuers planned to rig a lowering system using the department's equipment brought up by Rescue 2 and Rescue 3. But because of the urgency of the situation, Rescue 1 suggested they use the workers' rope system to haul equipment up to the tower.

At 1411 hrs, Rescue 1 radioed to command that he asked one of the victim's co-workers about using the system already in place. The co-worker believed the rescuers could use the workers' system, which employed a 1?2" static kernmantle rope. At 1412 hrs, Rescue 1 radioed to command that he didn't need Rescue 2 and Rescue 3 to bring equipment up to him; instead, he told them to hold their position on the tower. Rescue 1 decided to stay with the victim so he could take the victim off the extra safety when ground crews were ready to lower. Rescue 1 then ran the rope through a high directional above the worker and back down to the ground. At the bottom, rescuers ran the rope through a brake-bar rack anchored to a vehicle.

At 1419 hrs, Rescue 3 asked if Rescue 1 could be lowered down with the victim on the rope, but Rescue 1 replied that two people on the rope would exceed its safety factor. At 1420 hrs, Rescue 2 and Rescue 3 climbed back down; 10 minutes later, Rescue 1 informed command that the victim was ready for lowering, but at 1432 hrs, Rescue 1 reported that the victim was confused, tried to hang onto the tower and even tried to climb back up. As a result, Rescue 1 had to physically loosen the man's grip on the structure and push him away from the tower.

At 1506 hrs, Rescue 3 informed command that Rescue 1 was struggling to bring the victim down. Every time the lowering operation slowed, the worker tried to reattach his safety tether, but by 1531 hrs, everyone reached the ground safely, and Mulberry Command terminated the incident.

Rescue 2 and Rescue 3 reached the ground before Rescue 1, so they were able to warm up inside an awaiting ambulance. TransCare transported the victim to Union Hospital in Terre Haute, where he was stabilized. He was then taken to Methodist Hospital by Lifeline helicopter where he underwent neurosurgery for a cerebral aneurysm and treatment for a frostbitten hand. He is now recovering at home.

By the end of the rescue operation, Rescue 1 was chilled and dehydrated, so TransCare transported him to Regional Hospital, where he was treated for wind chill and given fluids, and was kept for several hours before he was released.

Sources: Chief James Holbert and firefighter Hidekatsu Kajitami (Rescue 1) of the SCFD provided information for this report. Additional details were taken from the Terre Haute Tribune Star.

LESSONS LEARNED/LESSONS REINFORCED:
Towers present a number of serious hazards for rescuers. Other than the issue of height, rescuers can encounter electromagnetic energy (EME) and radio frequency (RF) radiation exposure, along with wind chill.

Sugar Creek Deputy Chief Paul Watson says that when planning for such incidents, mutual-aid agreements are a must for smaller departments because they usually don't have the resources available to sufficiently respond to every possible emergency.

Since 1997, the SCFD has trained members and purchased needed equipment for high- and low-angle rescues. During 2005, the department will send an additional 12-16 members to be trained at or above that level. In 2006, the department will start the next phase of the plan, sending those 16 members to swiftwater rescue training. Due to its limited budget, the SCFD believes technical rescuers should use the TEAM approach (i.e., one department excels in one area of technical rescue and another department excels in another).

Rescue Editor Tom Vines is the co-author of High Angle Rescue Techniques and Confined Space and Structural Rope Rescue. He's also the coordinator/training officer for Carbon County Sheriff's Search and Rescue, Red Lodge, Mont.