LETTERS TO THE EDITOR
Quality of workmanship can be part of your specifications
This letter is in response to Gene Carlson’s article “Developing Apparatus Specifications” (FIRE ENGINEERING, Volunteers Corner, February 1985). One of the comments that Mr. Carlson made was “… quality of workmanship cannot be written into specifications.” I must disagree with this point.
My present position with the Chicago, IL, Fire Department deals with the accumulation and formation of information into comprehensive apparatus specifications. One of the latest changes to our specifications has been the addition of lifetime warranties. (In Chicago, lifetime is considered to be 15 years for new apparatus.) The warranties specifically relate to: impairments in performance as contracted or defects related to design, structural integrity, workmanship, or materials of the vehicle. This includes the frame and other major appurtenances such as aerial ladder, articulating boom, fire pump, water tank, etc. The warranties also include but are not limited to replacement of the vehicle as a whole or any part thereof.
Although apparatus manufacturers may balk at giving such an extended warranty, they usually will give them for an additional $3,000 to $5,000. However, if your order is large enough, they will give extended warranties at no additional cost. Whatever the case, having extended warranties will prove to be cost effective, especially when you consider the expense of replacing the apparatus frame or any major appurtenance that may prove faulty after a few years of service.
Some of the things to consider that are very important when accepting bids are:
- How long has the manufacturer been in business?
- What is the manufacturer’s financial situation?
- Will the manufacturer be in business during the life of the warranty?
- Are replacement parts available?
When writing warranties, it is best to consult an attorney, especially someone with a background in fire service and/ or apparatus specifications.
So, as you can see, quality of workmanship can be written into apparatus specifications.
Douglas T. Stolar
Commander
Chicago Fire Department
Chicago, IL
A vote of confidence
Although my article has been accepted for publication, this is not the reason that I’m writing to you. I just want to say that some time back I dropped my subscription to FIRE ENGINEERING because I found little information in the magazine. Today, I have no reluctance to recommend FIRE ENGINEERING to other firefighters.
I feel the work that you and your staff have done to bring the magazine around has been tremendous and right on target.
A couple of years back, I would not have submitted an article to FIRE ENGINEERING. Today, I’m most pleased to have had an article accepted. Thank you.
John A. Reardon
President
Industrial Fire Brigade Training, Inc.
Detroit, MI
Fire investigation—not always arson investigation
It is always a pleasure to see your own personal opinions expressed in print by an authority in the field. I refer to Charles G. King’s article “Ethics and Arson Investigation” (FIRE ENGINEERING, January 1985). Last year, the Tioga County, NY, Fire Investigation Team established the procedure of origin first, cause second, and our investigations improved considerably.
I have only one minor piece of constructive criticism of Mr. King’s excellent article. He stresses the established points of ” . . . being a truth seeker, not a case maker,” and that “Arson is proved when the fact of incendiarism has been established beyond question.” I agree with these statements entirely; however, he titles his article “Ethics and Arson Investigation.” Would it not be more ethical for all of us in the business to use the term “fire” investigation rather than “arson” investigation, and call ourselves fire investigators rather than arson investigators? I do not feel any of us are arson investigators until the act of arson has been proven, and this happens only in the courtroom, long after the investigative field work is over.
Calling ourselves “arson” investigators or doing an “arson” investigation is making an unfounded pre-determination of the crime of arson and mentally building a case prior to obtaining the facts. Although some may disagree, in my estimation, this more glamorous and exciting sounding terminology not only contaminates our thinking, but is definitely not ethical.
Bud Gordner
Deputy Coordinator
Tioga County Fire Investigation Team
Oswego, NY
A foam proportioner should take preference over premixing
I would like to comment on Deputy Chief Robert B. Gibson’s article “Control Flammable Liquid Fires by ‘Premixing’ ” (FIRE ENGINEERING, February 1985).
Premixing is an overly simplistic solution to a problem that could lead to dire consequences if it is relied on as the primary means of suppressing flammable liquid fires. The only possible use I see for premixing foam concentrate with water in an apparatus booster tank is as a last resort. Every pumper in fire protective service should have at least an in-line proportioner on board. If this proportioner is out of service or if the pumper has a built-in proportioning system that is out of service, I can see using the premix technique in an emergency. The cost of a proportioner is peanuts, and any fire department that can’t maintain one properly isn’t worth very much.
Many fire departments are using pumpers with 750-, 1,000-, and even 3,000-gallon booster tanks. Many more than two or three 5-gallon containers of foam concentrate would be needed to premix a 3,000-gallon booster tank, and if only a portion of the tank were needed, the waste would be enough to pay for a proportioner.
The biggest problem I see with the premix technique and the one that would produce the dire consequences is the inability to sustain a foam attack once the initial premixed tank is exhausted. It would be impossible to keep filling the booster tank with water and adding foam concentrate while the pumper is pumping, not to mention trying to maintain a proportion between the two in the 3% range.
For example, what would happen if the premixed booster tank runs out while the foam line is protecting a rescue operation at an accident scene involving an 8,000-gallon gasoline tanker and an auto? How do you maintain the foam attack? With a proportioner, you can maintain the foam attack as long as you have water and foam concentrate on the scene. The in-line proportioner should be a fire department’s initial foam operation unless, of course, the department has other special equipment. A proportioner is cheap, easy to operate,, faster to put into operation, requires little maintenance, and should be used in preference to premixing.
Ted Goldfarb
Battalion Chief
New York City Fire Department
New York, NY
Continued on page 17
Continued from page 15
Firefighter safety legislation—one jurisdiction’s regulations
I am responding to your request for information regarding safety legislation for firefighters, especially our volunteer firefighters (see Volunteers Corner, FIRE ENGINEERING, November 1984).
This area particularly concerns me, also. I am the regional fire chief for the Kootenay Boundary Regional Fire Services, Trail, B.C. Our jurisdiction has regionalized six fire departments into one fire service. Our forces are comprised of 107 volunteer firefighters and a career staff of 18 members.
Therefore, I am pleased to forward the following information on safety legislation presently in force within the Province of British Columbia. This information is correct as I interpret the Worker’s Compensation Act and the circumstances. I do not speak for any other government or fire service agency, only for this jurisdiction:
The safety of all workers is addressed in British Columbia by the Worker’s Compensation Act, in the regulations made pursuant hereto, called ”The Industrial Health and Safety Regulations.”
These regulations generally apply to all workers and each major category of work is addressed in separate sections. The section that deals with firefighting is Section 68.
- The act does not discriminate by definition between career and volunteer firefighters and specifically includes volunteers.
- It further stipulates that recommendations of the National Fire Protection Association and the International Fire Service Training Association in regard to equipment and operational procedures are acceptable to the Board (Worker’s Compensation Board).
- All workers (firefighters) are covered by Worker’s Compensation Board benefits. An injured firefighter receives 75% of his regular salary* if injured. Volunteers receive 75% of their regular salary* at their regular employment.
The regulations were revised on October 19, 1982, and, as you may note, are a great improvement over the July 1, 1980, regulations.
The establishment of this draft has greatly assisted many fire departments in obtaining the proper protective clothing. The main problem, however, is enforcement of these regulations. I personally have not seen a Worker’s Compensation Board inspector since at least July 1983. Fire stations and regulations concerning firefighters are particularly ignored because inspectors are relatively unknowledgeable about firefighting. A further problem is that many volunteer fire stations are not occupied during the day. Therefore, there are no inspections made, often in departments where enforcement is required most urgently.
In this jurisdiction, an Industrial Health and Safety Committee has been established under the direction of a chief officer. This committee represents all companies and both career and volunteer staff. Within fire companies, the assistant district chief is responsible to handle the enforcement of safety standard operating procedures.
I am pleased to be able to contribute to your excellent efforts regarding personal safety for firefighters as far too many of us have been required to pay too high a price in protecting ourselves while protecting the lives and property of others.
Douglas Orser
Regional Fire Chief
Kootenay Boundary Regional Fire Services
Trail, B.’C.
Thanks to you, our Letters to the Editor column is expanding with valuable comments and criticisms from which all of us can learn and benefit. This department is intended to serve as a type of fire forum for an exchange of ideas and information between fire service personnel—information that might make us all a little wiser, and a little safer.
Your letters also help us to shape FIRE ENGINEERING’S editorial direction by letting us know which articles and issues are most important to you, our reader. If we have neglected areas of concern to you, let us know that too. Your comments and input strengthen our commitment to a safer and more effective emergency service. Keep it up. Tom Brennan Editor
* There is a ceiling of maximum benefit salary of approximately $27,000 per year.
