Beyond the Rule of Thumb
Survival Tip 31
By Steven De Lisi
This edition of Hazardous Materials Survival Tips provides examples of how first responders tackled six separate incidents involving hazardous materials. In each, their training and their ingenuity paid big dividends; they remained part of the solution and did not become part of the problem. More importantly, their actions did not make the situation worse and everyone on scene returned home safely. The unfortunate reality is that incidents such as these all too often receive far less media attention than those with catastrophic results, yet it is these same events that set a fire service standard toward which all should strive.
1. First responders were on the scene of a hazardous materials incident that involved an overturned tractor trailer. There was a light rain at the time and the driver had lost control on a curve along a two-lane road. The vehicle had left the pavement, coming to rest in an open field; the force of the impact destroyed the trailer and spilled its contents. This material was in flames. Despite extensive damage to the trailer, first responders could still read the trailer placard indicating that the load was a “spontaneously combustible” material with the four-digit identification number, “1384.” With this information, they consulted the Emergency Response Guidebook and determined that with this particular material, the use of water was not recommended.
In this instance, first responders took the time to determine whether the material was a hazardous material, and on identifying it, the appropriate actions to take. They resisted the urge to “put the wet stuff on the red stuff,” which so often overcomes firefighters on arrival at any incident with visible fire. Had they instead immediately attempted to extinguish the fire, they would have learned the hard way that the material would react violently with water, likely resulting in serious injuries or worse.
2. First responders were on scene of a late-night incident involving a box trailer with a small but steady leak of a clear liquid at the rear doors. The shipping papers indicated that the material was not a regulated hazardous material and described its physical state as a “solid.” Obviously more information was needed about this incident, especially since there was concern that the driver may have been transporting a liquid hazardous material that was not documented on the shipping papers. However, because the shipment was not regulated, an emergency contact telephone number was not required on the shipping papers.
First responders obtained the shipper’s telephone number using directory assistance, but because of the time of day could not get a response. Contacting directory assistance again, they obtained a number for the emergency dispatch center where the shipper was located. Dispatchers there had a 24-hour emergency contact number for a representative from the business. They contacted this individual at his residence to request that he immediately call the incident commander on scene. The representative confirmed there was in fact a small liquid component to the shipment that was the most likely source of the leak. He then explained that the material was a water-based slurry mixture that was shipped in large fabric sacks, and that during transport, a small amount of water would settle out of the mixture and rise to the top. If a sack were to overturn, as was the case in this incident, the water would then leak out of the sack. During most Hazardous Material Awareness and Operations training classes, first responders are taught only how to contact shippers when their telephone numbers appear on the shipping papers. Since that did not work in this situation, first responders were forced to find an alternative means of contacting the shipper, and their ingenuity paid off.
They also verified the shipper’s explanation of the situation with someone else familiar with that type of shipment. Always remember that it is usually the responsible party (i.e., the shipper) who must pay the cleanup bill following a hazardous material spill, so it is always possible that this party may downplay the release’s severity. Don’t be surprised if some shippers prefer to sacrifice your safety for them to save a few dollars.
3. An EMS crew responded to an incident involving an adult male who had been contaminated with chloropicrin when a glass bottle containing the material was broken. Following emergency decontamination by first responders, the patient was transported to a local hospital. Although no material safety data sheet (MSDS) was available on scene, EMS personnel provided appropriate prehospital care based upon recommendations from a local poison control center.
Knowing that emergency department personnel would want additional definitive information regarding patient care, the first responders contacted CHEMTREC, which in turn faxed a copy of the chloropicrin MSDS to the hospital. The treating physician had MSDS in his hands on the patient’s arrival. A copy of the MSDS was also sent to the local police department, which prepared several additional copies of the document and transported them to the incident scene. During this incident, first responders were able to make informed decisions based upon their ability to promptly contact the poison control center and CHEMTREC. The patient received the best prehospital care possible and treating physicians had detailed information available before the arrival of the patient. First responders on scene had extra copies of the MSDS available for the incident commander, the responding hazardous materials team, the cleanup contractor, state environmental quality office officials, and additional EMS crews called to the scene to standby during remediation efforts.
4. First responders were faced with a leaking aboveground storage tank containing approximately 300,000 gallons of No. 2 fuel oil. The tank was surrounded by a concrete block dike that was quickly filling. However, first responders soon discovered that several of the mortar joints in the block wall had failed, allowing significant amounts of the product to escape and possibly contaminate nearby waterways. They decided that large retention basins needed to be dug in the area surrounding the dike, so backhoes and front-end loaders were brought to the scene. During another incident, first responders were on scene in the early morning hours for an overturned cargo tank containing diesel fuel. The vehicle had come to rest on its side on the road shoulder. The diesel would need to be transferred from the vehicle before it could be uprighted. First responders anticipated using grounding rods to reduce the risk of static electricity generated during the transfer process.
In both situations, first responders were suspicious of underground utilities in the surrounding areas. They therefore contacted the local utility locating service to request that representatives from utilities in the vicinity of each incident respond immediately to the scene. In first incident, utility representatives verified the presence of fiber optic cables near where retention basins were needed for the leaking storage tanks. In the second, they verified that a high-pressure natural gas pipeline that was located directly beneath the overturned cargo tank. Any effort to dig a retention basin using heavy equipment or to drive grounding rods in proximity of the cargo tank without prior knowledge of the location of underground utilities could have had catastrophic results. Too many first responders believe that utility locating services always require 48-hour advance notice, yet for emergency situations such as those described here, most will respond immediately. It is also important to remember that as in both incidents described here, not all underground utilities are marked with aboveground signs.
5. First responders were on scene for a report of a suspicious odor inside of an apartment at a housing complex. The occupant was severely agitated and demanded that first responders quickly determine the source and to make certain it was safe for him and his family to return home. Rather than succumb to the demands for an immediate solution, first responders resisted the urge to enter the building to “sniff around.” Instead, they asked the resident if he know of any activity that could have caused the odor; he did not. First responders then contacted building maintenance and learned that workers had earlier attempted to alleviate a clogged drain in a neighboring apartment by using large quantities of a caustic chemical. The likely source of the odor had been determined without first responders ever entering the building.
Click here for more info on Steven De Lisi’s book, Hazardous Materials Incidents: Surviving the Initial Response.
Steven M. De Lisi retired after a fire service career spanning 27 years that included serving as a regional training manager for the Virginia Department of Fire Programs (VDFP) and, most recently, as the deputy chief for the Virginia Air Guard Fire Rescue. De Lisi is a hazardous materials specialist and as an adjunct instructor for VDFP. He continues to conduct hazardous materials awareness and operations-level training programs for fire suppression and EMS personnel. De Lisi began his career in hazardous materials response in 1982 as a member of the hazmat team with the Newport News (VA) Fire Department. Since then, he has also served as a hazardous materials officer for the Virginia Department of Emergency Management; in that capacity, he provided on-scene assistance to first responders involved with hazardous materials incidents in an area that included more than 20 local jurisdictions.
