FIRE LOSS MANAGEMENT
Part 26: PREPLANNING AND RECOVERY
A Series by
Casual fire suppression means relying on fire extinguishers being provided for the employee or bystander to use. I served on the NFPA Committee on Portable Fire Extinguishers for about 15 years. This experience has led me to question the general costeffectiveness of providing fire extinguishers for casual use. Even when employees have been trained, the difficulty is that the training takes place outdoors, while most fires take place indoors. It can cost up to S2,500 to outfit a firefighter to get close to a fire with a hoseline; the extinguisher requires an unprotected amateur to approach within a few feet.
Space does not permit a full discussion of the pros and cons; suffice it to say that there have been many instances where the use of extinguishers has delayed the calling of the fire department. All extinguisher training sessions should place great emphasis on calling the fire department first or, at the very least, as soon as the first extinguisher has proven ineffective.
I like the signs in one Las Vegas hotel that indicate that removing the extinguisher automatically notifies security and they will come to assist you. The signs most likely are intended to discourage theft, but the concept of an alarm being transmitted when the extinguisher is taken from its bracket is most attractive.
Where a sprinkler system with central station water flow alarm is provided, the ideal extinguisher is a 1 ½-inch hoseline. The alarm feature means no secret fires and discourages use of the fire hose for routine washdown.
PREFIRE PLANNING
The one aspect of fire department operations pertinent to this series is prefire planning.
When I started my fire service career as a buff prior to World War II, there was no organized prefire planning—a few young officers made some informal efforts and chief officers relied on experience. (Many had much experience, having come up under the old continuous duty system.) I recall asking an older buff what he thought a deputy chief would do with a specific problem. His answer: “Young fellow, you never ask a deputy chief what he is going to do.” He felt supremely confident with his ability to deal with whatever came up.
My great interest in prefire planning came about by necessity. As a Naval officer I had responsibilities for lives and property for which I was totally unprepared. My first companies were kids I had trained myself. I decided that we had to work to minimize surprises on the fireground by learning everything possible about potential problems ahead of time. The first article in the fire service press on prefire planning was “Surveys Aid in Preparation for Handling Large Fires” {Fire Engineering, January 19-18). In it I described the prefire survey of a huge wooden Navy warehouse full of vital spare airplane propellers.
Many fire departments preplan today. This is not a treatise on the subject, but rather some concepts and suggestions that you might find useful as triggers for improvements in your own system.
The word “plan,” though commonly used, is a misnomer. What we really want is a prefire analysis. The use of the word “plan” sometimes leads to overemphasis on the planning of action in detail. It is probably better to use the plan or analysis to accumulate the necessary information on which sound judgments can be made at the time of the emergency, particularly if the emergency force is well-trained. If the emergency force isn’t welltrained, then probably more detailed planning against specific problems is necessary. If the plan is too specific, there is also the problem of failure to follow the plan, for whatever reason, which can be taken as evidence of negligence or incompetence in a lawsuit.
In “Fire Loss Management #25: Automatic Sprinklers” (April 1991), the statement on the California high-rise legislation was incomplete. Since 1974, California law has required that buildings over 75 feet in height be sprinklered. Los Angeles now requires retrofit of sprinklers in pre-1974 buildings. The state of California rejected such legislation for the rest of the state, reportedly because many state-owned buildings would be required to be sprinklered.
FRANCIS L. BRANNIGAN
The concept of preplanning at some locations is sadly lacking. At one government facility there are 20 to 30 places where the fire department is instructed to take no action until approval is obtained from the department head or his representative. The difficulty is that this rule can be enforced against the fire department, but it has no effect whatsoever on the fire. The fire does not recognize the authority of the client. The fire chief is not in charge of the fire but of the fire department’s effort to contain the fire. The fire sets its own agenda.
In another example, a school board “forbade” any “unannounced” inspections by the fire department. I didn’t see anyone point out that fire is an “unannounced” visitor.
At one facility I saw a notice that read: “In the event of an alarm from Building 209, do not respond until called by Dr. Blank.” The notice was signed by the fire chief. The fire chief was ill-advised to take on this responsibility, and it is obvious he did not think up this procedure—Dr. Blank did. Dr. Blank should then have the responsibility. He should be sent a draft memo through the proper channels to sign and return, through a common superior. The memo should read something like this: “There is no possible way the fire department can be instructed to deal with a fire in facility XYZ. In the event of a fire in facility XYZ, I wish it be allowed to burn until I can arrive at the scene and direct the operations. I accept the full responsibility for the loss of property in the amount of SXXXX (here, insert the total value of the project).”
It would take a brave man or an idiot to sign such a document. If you send it through the proper channels, it is very likely that a better solution will be found.
Consider divorcing prefire planning from the inspection function. An inspection function is essentially a policing function. A client’s (the representative of the location being preplanned) activities are being examined to see whether he or she has complied with the applicable standards. If found at fault, he or she may be penalized. The inspector, therefore, is principally a police officer, and as Gilbert and Sullivan told us, “A policeman’s lot is not a happy one.” The reason is simple: The best you can get in an encounter with a police officer is a draw.
I don’t think it is wise to walk in on the client and announce that you are there to develop a prefire plan. You may have picked the worst possible day of the year, and it is quite possible the reply may be, “Fine; when can we get the fire going?”
I suggest a form letter from the fire chief indicating the mayor’s appreciation of the fact that the client’s establishment is making a valuable contribution to the economic life of the community. Since a large percentage of businesses that suffer a serious fire never reopen, it is to the mutual interest of the client and the city that such a fire not happen. Any pertinent local experience should be cited. The letter should go on to say that the mayor has directed the chief to make every effort to keep businesses in business, and in order to manage a fire effectively there are a number of things that the fire department should know and record ahead of time. It should conclude by stating that since such surveys require mutual cooperation, they should contact the chief to arrange a mutually satisfactory appointment.
Wow! The client never got such a letter in his life from any government agency. Most begin “You are hereby directed to….” Imagine the talk at the country club, the business association, the rotary club.
Don’t compel the client to do business with a firefighter or send a firefighter, no matter how gifted, to do the survey. If the firefighter is so very gifted, a temporary designation or promotion is in order. The client is an important person—at least to himself—so send an important person to deal with him. If the client is recalcitrant, then you can take whatever measures are legally available.
Career fire departments operate uniquely compared with any other organization operating around the clock, such as the police department, a prison, a hospital, a military base, or an industrial plant. In all such organizations the real decision makers operate from 9 to 5. Anything serious that happens on the night shift is referred to supervisors at home. In contrast, fire departments deliver immediately to the scene of an emergency a senior officer with the authority to make important decisions.
Many fire departments operating on a two-, three-, or four-platoon system operate almost as if each platoon were a separate fire department. A client who functions in a “normal” sort of organization cannot really understand an organization that has a chief “A,” a chief “B,” and a chief “C” — each of whom regards himself as being equal to and smarter than the other two put together. Since there are obviously many ways of handling a possible emergency situation (perhaps all equally effective), it is very likely that if each senior officer approaches an executive and attempts to develop an emergency plan, three widely different procedures will emerge. It is completely understandable that this will leave the client’s confidence in the ability of the fire department to handle the situation lacking.
All contact with the client should be through a single individual who has the lead responsibility for that particular risk. Differences on procedures should be ironed out within the fire department.
The accepted objective of prefire planning is to consider emergency situations that might occur and develop the best possible plan for coping with the emergency. I believe that preplanning also serves another valuable purpose: If a credible disaster scenario is developed and the best planning that can be done provides an inadequate solution, then management is faced with a clear-cut problem. The risk has been calculated and the answer is unsatisfactory. Either a solution must be found or those responsible must face up to the fact that an unwarranted risk is being taken. When the plan develops the conclusion that a disaster is credible, that conclusion should be shared with the client and appropriate political officials.
Let me offer some personal experience relating to the famous Texas City, Texas, ammonium nitrate explosion that killed 468 people and caused S67 million (1947 dollars) in property damage. Ammonium nitrate, which is both an explosive and a fertilizer, was being shipped by the U.S. Army to devastated Europe. Despite the disaster, a week later the Army made a similar shipment through Galveston, Texas. As was said of the Bourbon Kings of France, our military establishment “learns nothing and forgets nothing.”
A year later similar shipments were being made through the Army Base at Norfolk where we (Naval base fire department) provided protection but not inspection. The boss was away, so. the problem was mine. Comparison with Texas City showed that a similar explosion would cause total devastation over a wide area, including the fashionable Larchmont area of the city of Norfolk.
I prepared a prefire plan that called for towing the ship away from the pier if the fire wasn’t out immediately. Of the choices, the best place to beach it was at Craney Island, the Navy’s East Coast gasoline reserve. In addition to the tanks, there were 75,000 55-gallon drums of gasoline. I realized that the ship might not explode but simply burn out. The second-guessers all would be able to tell how they would have handled it better than “that 29year-old kid.” I called even’ possible potential “expert” on a recording telephone and solicited advice. I hit pay dirt with the director of public safety in Norfolk, Calvin Dalby. He had been Coast Guard port commander during the war and had a low opinion of military munitions safety procedures. He got the political wires working, and in 48 hours the ammonium nitrate was moved out of the congested residential area to the special ammunition piers at Naval Ammunition Depot in Earle, New Jersey. (Don’t write and complain that I didn’t solve the problem, only unloaded it. I was paid to worry about the Fifth Naval District —if you can’t solve the problems of the world, do your own job!)
RECOVERY
“What the fire doesn’t destroy, the firefighters will” is a too-well-known saying. In fact, many fire departments do valuable salvage work. This is the best-kept secret in the United States. In my radiation lectures I presented a beautifully detailed drawing of a fire scene by my associate George Miles. He showed two firefighters throwing a cover over a table. When I used this slide outside fire department classes, the question was always, “What are those firefighters doing?” I have never seen a picture of a good salvage job but have seen many pictures of the year’s biggest foul-up, used in an annual report. Many times the TV reporter arrives after the action is over, so why not suggest some pictures of a good salvage job? The news editor would be almost certain to run such a “man bites dog” story. Where sprinklers have operated, good salvage is good public relations for sprinkler protection.
Make every effort to restore toys, dolls, and teddy bears to children. The trauma of losing a home to fire is bad enough without the loss of a favorite toy. If you find scorched paper money, like a roll of bills in a coffee can, do not disturb it. The owner should send it to the Treasury Department in Washington, D.C., and all recognizable money will be replaced. The staff has special techniques for doing the job.
One of the most easily preventable tragic losses due to fire is the loss of records. Start with the fire department—are your personnel, inspection, and preplanning records on computers adequately backed up? An ordinary fire-resistive safe or cabinet is not adequate storage for computer disks. The standards permit an interior temperature rise to more than 300°F—safe for paper, but totally destructive to the magnetic material in disks. There are special safes, but duplication and separation are the best solutions for long-term storage.
You may make a friend of a small businessperson if you point out that the sheet metal file in which the records are stored is not fire-safe. If the accounts receivable records are lost, it will be difficult for that businessperson to collect money owed. This is often a fatal blow.
Medical records are stored in paper files on open metal shelves. Ask your doctor for a copy so you can have a duplicate. Who actually owns the medical records is a tangled legal point. However, doctors will make a copy for another doctor, and personally I would not be too enthusiastic about a doctor who refuses to provide me with a copy.
One of the best arguments for fire protection with industrial management is continuity of operation. Planned recovery is essential. Other types of operations are not necessarily receptive.
When Montgomery College first computerized its records, 1 pointed out to the manager a number of serious fire protection deficiencies. His reply: “The fire inspector had no problem.” I said, “The fire inspector’s chief function is to see that your people can get out alive in case of fire. You, not the fire department, are responsible for the integrity of these records.” He was not impressed. I advised my students to save every scrap of paper they received from the college.
The records of thousands of veterans were lost in the Military Records Center fire near St. Louis in 1973. One man was dragged from a wedding by MPs as a deserter. In fact, he was honorably discharged.
With this column we bring to a close the series started in April 1989We have examined the subject of fire loss management as compared to a slot machine with three independent wheels—cause, extension, and management.
In addition to the specific factual material presented, I offer the position that fire prevention by itself is not the answer to the fire loss problem, and it is possible that the term may be self-defeating. Despite the best efforts, fires occur, and the outcome then depends on the other two wheels of the fire slot machine— extension and management *
