Should Cbt Engr EOD, IEDD, and chemical IEDD pers have a domestic mandate?(Split From: Joint Engineer Support Regiment?)

[Jed]

A very interesting thread, but I have not seen a lot of input from Borden and the Ammo tech world. What are some of the thoughts and opinions from these folks especially when we discuss the need for possible domestic reponse in the new Canada Command context ?

 

[AmmoTech90]

A very interesting thread, but I have not seen a lot of input from Borden and the Ammo tech world. What are some of the thoughts and opinions from these folks especially when we discuss the need for possible domestic reponse in the new Canada Command context ?

Seeing as we've been invited into the thread I'll throw my two cents in.  Just to situate myself, everything I'm saying relates to EOD, not including CMD/BMD in a offensive type operation.  That should remain with the Engineers as part of their tasking to deal with obstacles.  I do include IED (low and high threat), mine strike clearances (not mine field breaching), and rendering safe of caches, and conventional EOD when more than a basic charge is called for.

I agree with Earl that if we are to deploy an EOD capability then we should deploy EOD techs who belong to EOD units under DCDS control (or whatever it is called now, I'm sortof out of the loop, Expeditionary Command I think).  There is currently very little convergence of doctrine and deliniation of responsibility (although the new DAODs did help a bit).  I sat at a briefing where a CWO said Canada would never deploy without EOD coverage again.  A year later I went to Haiti and the Engr WO and I had to thrash out how we would do what because things were a bit vague (I'll leave it at that).

As far as domestic coverage goes, I believe it is invaluable.  The EOD pers (Engr, Diver, AT, Taz) that actually work on EOD calls in Canada are the ones I want to work with overseas.  Don't take this as a slight, but the pers who do it Canada should be the ones who deploy for EOD.  Real experience is a definite asset in EOD just in the exposure to unfamiliar items and developing the thought process to rsp them.  Combine this with exercises that test aspects of the trade not normally practiced domestically and you should get someone who can be deployed with a high level of confidence.  Unfortunately, this currently excludes a lot of the Army based Combat Engineers because they are not actively involved with domestic EOD.  From talking to 4 ESR pers it was a decision on their CoC's part not to permit their pers on this duty.  Understandable to a certain degree because of the conflict duties can have with readiness.  Likewise there is a failing in AT side of things because EOD is secondary activity and a lot of pers in the trade slip into a very domestic mindset that can trip them up when deployed.

My solution to this would be to re-intergrate them back into Base level EOD activity with Ammo Sections and Range Control and set up a nation wide policy that an EOD section on each base be responsible for the on and off base response (ie Assistance to Civil Power and Duds).  Then they can get experience, conduct individual and collective training, and increase the profile and awareness of EOD.

Does this mean a seperate trade that can be fed from the current trades involved in EOD.  Sure, why not.  You can easily make the case for a couple of hundred people.  Theres less posties than that and they are their own trade.  One thing I would really stress though.  Have a dedicated officer corps.  Coming from a trade where you platoon commander may come from a Fin back ground, do four years or so as an ATO and go back to Fin, well its not good.  I believe the last ATO nomination message included Engineer Officers as being eligable.  I have to admit I view this with trepidation, mostly because I am not sure what the role of an ATO trained Engineer would be.  To be honest, I view this as a possible first step to consolidating EOD within the Engineer world, however I would love to have an ATO Engineer with me on deployment because then they would know what I need for storage facilities and why.  There is a EOD Staff course run in the UK that should be manditory not for TF Engineers (most are HA or more), but for someone in the J3 staff so that part of the HQ has an idea of what EOD does, what they need, and their limitations.

Oh, and Borden should stop thinking they can run a HB course to the same level as the States does.  It doesn't have the training aids, the exchange of ideas, or the facilities.

Thanks for listening.

D

 

[McG]

There is a EOD Staff course run in the UK that should be manditory not for TF Engineers (most are HA or more), but for someone in the J3 staff so that part of the HQ has an idea of what EOD does, what they need, and their limitations.

The Engr Offrs need this.  The branch will not trg them CMD nor send them on HA.  One of the first concerns raised by the newly formed EOD Sect for TF 1-06 was that without an officer qualified with EOD Staff O or an HB/HC offr, we would get little to no int cooperation from allied forces dealing with EOD & IEDD.

 

[AmmoTech90]

The Engr Offrs need this.  The branch will not trg them CMD nor send them on HA.  One of the first concerns raised by the newly formed EOD Sect for TF 1-06 was that without an officer qualified with EOD Staff O or an HB/HC offr, we would get little to no int cooperation from allied forces dealing with EOD & IEDD.

Ok, guess I got lucky, there's been at least one H qualified officer where I've gone.  But yes, if the TF Engr is not H qual then they have priority for the staff course, with a back up in J3.

 

[TR23]

However, domestically we cannot hope to have a reasonable responce time if bombs start exploding in Toronto, Montreal, or Vancouver.   There needs to be a local capability.   That should be in the police forces (or maybe even the fire departments).

I have read of Fire Departments in the United States handling EOD, but does anyone have any knowledge of a Canadian Fire Department training in this role?  Or knowledge of a law or statute that would limit the response to these types of situations to the police or military?  Personally, adding domestic EOD to the FD makes as much sense to me as handing it to the police......Fire already deals with HazMat, and I would think many modern EOD situations would involve a chemical or biological attack, and I would think that Fire would have the capability to learn the new skill set given the training time and funds.  However I suppose the PD's already have the teams established.  Any thoughts?

 

[sdimock]

Fire Deptartments handle Haz Mat because in the past it has typically come as a spill. :skull:

In the new world we live in that may no longer be the case but I can't see Fire Departments rushing to take on EOD.

 

[geo]

Montreal Bomb squad is part of the Police effort..... they have the neat little robot that packs a shotgun / water canon, etc

at least that's the way they've organised it over here.

 

[Spr.Earl]

I have read of Fire Departments in the United States handling EOD, but does anyone have any knowledge of a Canadian Fire Department training in this role?   Or knowledge of a law or statute that would limit the response to these types of situations to the police or military?   Personally, adding domestic EOD to the FD makes as much sense to me as handing it to the police......Fire already deals with HazMat, and I would think many modern EOD situations would involve a chemical or biological attack, and I would think that Fire would have the capability to learn the new skill set given the training time and funds.   However I suppose the PD's already have the teams established.   Any thoughts?

The only Fire Departments that I know of who handle EOD are the Germans and no,Canadian Fire Departments only go as far as Haz Mat and in the U.S. as far as I know it's the local Constabulary that handles I.E.D. and E.O.D.,U.X.O. comes under the Dept. of Defence via the differant branchs.

Re;AmmoTech90's  comment about us running a equivalent H.B. is right on the money,we don't have the resourses or equipment to even start one so it's a moot point unless DND is willing to spend big $'s just to get it up and running and then keep spending and then get good enough to get STANAG recognition.

 

[old fart]

Yep.    
;D

Going back to the original post, we do have the mandate and since I have been in always have...

The policy both domestic and off shore was covered in CFAO 36-31, Explosive Ordnance Disposal and NDHQ Instruction DCDS 6/89, Operational Explosive Ordnance Disposal.

The policy currently is outlined in DAOD 8000.   I won't reproduce the document here but if you want to read up dig it out.

One things for sure, it's a pity we did away with all or most of the Base EOD Teams.   It sure would be handy to have that asset immediatley at hand these days, although it could certainly be re-constituted given the funding.

On that note a "big hug" to all ex members of EOD 24....

 

[Spr.Earl]

Going back to the original post, we do have the mandate and since I have been in always have...

The policy both domestic and off shore was covered in CFAO 36-31, Explosive Ordnance Disposal and NDHQ Instruction DCDS 6/89, Operational Explosive Ordnance Disposal.

The policy currently is outlined in DAOD 8000.   I won't reproduce the document here but if you want to read up dig it out.

One things for sure, it's a pity we did away with all or most of the Base EOD Teams.   It sure would be handy to have that asset immediatley at hand these days, although it could certainly be re-constituted given the funding.

On that note a "big hug" to all ex members of EOD 24....

"One things for sure, it's a pity we did away with all or most of the Base EOD Teams.  It sure would be handy to have that asset immediatley at hand these days, although it could certainly be re-constituted given the funding."

Yes Old fart I totaly agree but is the will there?As for EOD/IED I think should it be a seperate trade and have it's own Command so to speak reason being of the changes in both but more so in IED,it's unreal what they are using to initiate a IED and I doubt the Queens Cowboys or the local Bomb Tech's  are getting most of this info ergo our domestic tasking.