ALL FRS require DRA is carried out and by ALL staff. That 'many, if not all' was siad should be entirely disregarded. The importnace of the DRA in achieving the safe person is not something that any FRS would disregard. It is set as a crucial elemnt in allt he training and development we deliver, at every level. The modern CM is far more likley to apply the principles than his forebears, who, while doing basic RA that is common sense, was never trained in what it actually was. From the mid 90's onwards DRA has become core to what we do, indeed every single member of the FRS was sent a glossy A4 booklet and handy card on DRA, and we still issue these as partof every trainee course. The present day Ff knows what DRA is, applies it constantly and their managers get further training (such as IOSH) to aid supervisory decision making. That the FRS on scene are now far more likely to take a defensive role at soem incidents clearly demonstrates that DRA is now embedded within the service. Indeed such a move was unheard of in the not-too-distant past. Declaring the operational mode is the way that all FRS now ensure that they have a record of the DRA by the IC, and is a reminder to the IC that he/she must so declare, but is not DRA itself. DRA starts when you get up in the morning and select correct clothing, come to work and check equipment, when you then turn out, en route, don relevant PPE, on arrival and throughout every action that subsequently take splace - that is why it is DYNAMIC. (Not complete just examples).
Out of interest defensive does not mean outside suirting water in, no more than offensive means inside. You are operating in an offensive mode at any tiem where the RA has determined that additional control measures are required (we always wear fire kit so anything more than that) - so that you would be offensive if standing outside with a jet but having either a safety officer watching for building collapse (you are close enough you could eb affected) or wearing BA becasue thereis smoke present in your area - again examples. Defensive is water from monitors well back able to work without any additional controls.
Also there is no 'tick list' to do a DRA - it maybe includes awareness of hazards such as services supplies to a premises, but they are simply some of the hazards and subsequent risks that the person carrying out the DRA will consider. The Ff, in the building wearing BA in smoke and heat, has no tiem to use a checklist, or record the findings, they apply DRA by examining the situation using their skill, knowledge, training and experience to determine what controls they need apply - such as gas colling, door entry techniques, BA search pattern, withdrawal etc.
It is also a complete nonesense to suggest any FRS requires a DRA and there is therefore a connection with the RRO. The RRO does not include Ffs as relevant persons is that we are not going to be there while the premises are in normal use - it will already be on fire/other emergency event and normal risk reduction by the occupier could not be reasonable. It isn't our DRA, but the unfairness of placing the risk assessment upon the premises occupier that is the rationale for our exclusion from the RRO. We are covered when carrying out duties such as FS Act inspections (7 2 ds) and we would carry out DRA even then such is the meaning of DRA!
DRA is what any employee of any employer is requiured to do under HASAW and ours is more formalised through training, demonstration and some recording because of the very dynamic nature of our work. Other organisations have far more rigid working conditiosn so their RAs can be more readily written and the DRA is more a dra. If we didn't have our set DRA procedures, training na dbasic recording we would still be required, by law, to achieve safe working at any incident.
I conclude by saying that DRA is now widely understood, applied and embedded in everyting we do. The skills and knowledge of risk assessment of all staff are well above that of thos ein the past and development of managers has further H&S training at its core. Furthermore risk assessment is now a key performance criteria in every unit of every role within the FRS, sonot only is the individual intially trained they are constantly assessed against heir skill and knowledge. As a result the Ff of the 21st century is safer than his predecessors.
Sir the basic belief, on which your dissertation is based, is misheld.