Western Mass Emergency
Medical Services Committee, Inc.
Meeting:
Communications Committee
Date: April 4, 2002
Place: McCallum Building Living Room, CDH,
Northampton
Presiding: Brian Andrews, Chairperson
Called
to Order: 8:43 am
Adjourned: 10:06 am
Attendance:
Present
– Rick
Anderson, Brian Andrews, Anthony Cerini, Stephen Cote, Tom Coulombe, Bernie
Forgea, Dan Harrington, Jim Kupernik and Jeff Rawson
Minutes: A motion was made to accept minutes as written. Mr. Cerini wanted the minutes to reflect that the discussion last month regarding the Mass. Turnpike Authority site would be for a potential project in the future. We could use this site as a link to help with our communications in this area. Again, this would be a long-range plan. All present agreed and the minutes were accepted with the above changes notes and approved unanimously.
Update
on Resource Manual:
Discussion –
Mr.
Andrews reports that he is not sure there is an update. There are a few
different resource collections going on.
Also, we need to give a list of services with unreturned surveys to the
county reps. so they can pursue them.
Regarding the LEPC Committee: Mr. Cote attended their program role out.
Mr. Cote is very impressed with all that they have accomplished. Lengthy
discussion followed with Mr. Forgea providing the background of their project,
along with what they hope to accomplish. It is believed that UMASS OIT (the
creators of this system) would be able to hold the license for this data
collection system and it could be sold to numerous organizations for similar
data projects.
Action – Continue to work on manual.
Update
on Diversion Website:
Discussion –
Mr.
Cote distributed the Regional Diversion statistics to the group. He reports
that the website is operating fairly well.
Also, Mr. Cote met with the four communication stations to clear up any
questions/misconceptions regarding diversion.
Mr.
Cote informed the group that he met with Ms. Goyette and the definitions of
diversion still stand. If there are patients that fit the definitions that are
defined in the diversion policy, they will be allowed to go into hospitals that
are on diversion as the policy states.
Mr. Coulombe expressed concern that there still seems to be an issue of
hospitals not being taken off of diversion after their allotted time. Also, he
has been called before by CMED and told that a hospital was on “Total
Diversion”. What does this mean? Mr. Cote responded that a hospital is either
open, on diversion, or closed. Mr. Andrews feels that there needs to be some
education at the hospital levels and then CMEDS regarding the diversion policy.
Mr. Cote also believes that with services now having to notify OEMS if it takes
longer than 30 minutes to turn over care to the hospital, this will increase
diversions. Mr. Anderson asked the committee who oversees the hospitals to make
sure they aren’t abusing diversion. Mr. Cote stated that Springfield CMED looks
at this first. If there is a problem, they call Mr. Cote or Mr. Controvitch.
From here, Ms. Moriarty deals with the hospitals. All of the diversion figures
go to OEMS through the website, and they could look at any of the hospitals
also. Mr. Andrews responded that ultimately, Ms. Goyette needs to be notified
and then she will take this issue where it needs to go. Mr. Harrington feels
that including diversion in the newsletter would be a beneficial educational
piece.
Mr.
Andrews is very upset that Springfield CMED does not have internet access when
they are getting $4.00 a patch and there are services that are getting no
funding that still have to have internet access.
Action – Continue to monitor diversion website.
Hampden
East Project Update:
Discussion –
Mr.
Cote reports that he renewed the tower agreement with the National Grid. He
also reports that he has gotten approval from legal council. Currently, the VHF
portion of this project will be up first and the UHF part will follow. Mr.
Andrews stated that it has been over a year since we began this project. Mr.
Coulombe feels that there should be some type of performance clause in the next
project bid so we are able to eliminate poor service. Mr. Coulombe asked if
anyone had contacted Mary Lane Hospital about this project. Mr. Cote has and
they are in agreement with the project. Mr. Coulombe also asked if Worcester
CMED and Springfield CMED were the same frequencies. Mr. Cote stated that they
were. Mr. Cerini also added that MED channels 1-10 are all the same frequencies
across the state. Mr. Coulombe asked if
due to the fact that it has taken so long for this project: are we going to
have to spend additional money because the prices for parts have gone up? Mr.
Andrews doesn’t think that we will. Mr. Cote added that we will need to push
out 100 watts instead of 40 watts at the CMEDs, therefore this is going to cost
more, but he is not sure how much. We may start out with 2 UHF instead of 3,
but this will be set up so the third can be added at a later date. Mr. Coulombe
asked if this was a new issue, or was this in the original proposal? Mr.
Andrews responded that this was something that was discovered due to equipment
problems and then added. Mr. Coulombe would request that we take a close look
if expenses keep getting added to a project. All agreed with this. As a final
note, Mr. Cote reported that Mr. Marcus will be attending next months meeting.
Action: Mr. Cote to continue to update the
committee on project.
Update
on Shelburne Mountain:
Discussion –
Mr.
Cote reports that the radio has been fixed and will be installed and tested by
the end of this week. Channel 340 will be ready to use by the middle of the
month. Mr. Forgea asked if any additional lightening security has been added?
Mr. Cote responded that he isn’t aware of any that has been added.
Action – None.
Update
on Springfield CMED Procedure Book:
Discussion –
Mr.
Cote brought a copy to hand around. He feels that this is very wordy though.
Mr. Andrews asked Mr. Cote to e-mail a copy of this to all of the members for
their review. Mr. Andrews has talked to Mr. Controvitch about this, but it
needs to go to a higher commission. Also, Mr. Andrews feels that the committee
needs to finish this book as soon as possible.
Action – Mr. Cote to e-mail copy of book prior to
next months meeting.
Becket
Project:
Discussion-
Mr. Kupernik reports that a construction date has not been set. He is cautious about where this project is going to go. Mr. Andrews asked if Mr. Kupernik could get something in writing. Mr. Kupernik will try. Also, Mr. Andrews reports that there is some money that is going to be coming in and there is some earmarked for communications. Mr. Andrews feels that we should follow up on the Turnpike so we have a second project in mind in case we need it.
Action- Mr. Kupernik to continue to inform the committee on the Becket project.
Next
Meeting:
The
next meeting will be held on Thursday, May 2, 2002, at 8:45 a.m.
Adjourn: A motion was made to adjourn at 10:06 am. This motion was
seconded and approved unanimously.
Lisa
Herringshaw, Recorder