(fireengineering.com)

By John F. “Skip” Coleman, Technical Editor

PHOTO OF THE DAY

Fire ripped through a three-story wood-frame structure on Homestead Avenue in Baltimore in March of this year. (Photo by Nick Eid-FirstOnScenePhotos.) Send your submissions for Photo of the Day to peterp@pennwell.com.

Things change—sometimes, for the better; sometimes, not so much! In Toledo, we created a mandatory mask policy in 1988. I wrote the policy! We were sure that by enacting this safety procedure [which stated, and I paraphrase, “SCBAs shall be worn and in-service (on and operating) in any building or atmosphere that contains or could eventually contain smoke”] we would add years to the life of new firefighters. At that time, the average life expectancy for a firefighter was 57 years. Soon, the policy became the norm and was followed to the letter the vast majority of the time.

However, we learned in the mid to late 1990s that even after visible smoke was removed from the building there were still invisible dangers lurking inside. Not only were CO levels still very high, other toxins and carcinogens remained for a long time after the fire was darkened and the smoke cleared.

This presented a problem for the task of overhaul. Many injuries occur to firefighters while they conduct overhaul. As you know, overhaul is a process where we in essence break things. We rip things open/apart to ensure all hidden fire is extinguished. We push heavy objects out of windows and down stairs to remove them from the fire area. We do this in normally extremely warm and humid conditions after we have exerted ourselves in the initial extinguishment process.

To ensure the safest atmosphere possible, Toledo enacted another safety policy (affectionately referred to as “All MASK-All the time!”). SCBAs were required to be worn and in service anytime a firefighter was inside the fire structure, including the overhaul, pickup, and investigation phases. Some believed that this was an unnecessary and, in some ways, unsafe requirement—having already fatigued firefighters wear additional equipment that limits visibility during the overhaul phase.

This month’s Roundtable question is, Do you conduct atmospheric monitoring at fires, and what additional steps, if any, do you take to protect firefighters during the overhaul phase of a fire? To learn how to comment on our Roundtable question and read others’ replies, go to http://emberly.fireengineering.com/index/roundtable.html.

FIRE LIFE

Go to www.firelife.com today for everything off duty for firefighters and their families. Spouses can read the latest advice from Anne Gagliano on making relationships/marriages with a firefighter work. Kids can download the latest Sparkles the Fire Safety Dog coloring page with an important safety message. And all fire service members and their families can get the latest tips on hunting, fishing, sports, cooking, fitness, health, finances, and more. Have you visited this unique site yet? See what you are missing.

FEATURED ARTICLES

In “False Alarms: Tolerance or Action? You Decide,” Ed Ruckriegel describes the national problem of false alarms and the steps his department is taking to reduce the numbers. He writes: “False alarms are a menace to every fire department, a menace that seems to be acceptable. When a department has a tolerance for false calls, the number and frequency of such responses will continue to increase. Conversely, a department with a focus on managing and reducing false alarms can reap rewards. The cost of false alarms is staggering. At 10-15 percent of the total call volume, false alarms require considerable resources, may take companies out of their response areas, tie up companies for unnecessary reasons, and may increase response times to real calls. This negative impact does not necessarily need to continue.”

John J. McNeil writes in “The Organizational Value of Leadership and Management”: “To those of us who were present in the fire service during the 1980s, it was a period of management insecurity. Managers were seeking the truth about good leadership and management through consultant ‘gurus’ and their panaceas. The results of these fads rarely produced the desired or promised results. The truth of the matter is that there is not a simple template of good leadership or management practices that will be effective in all environments.” He instead looks at several new concepts to help today’s fire service leaders.

David DeStefano writes on LCAN reports. Several departments now use a CAN (Conditions, Actions, Needs) report as a tool to keep the incident commander aware of conditions in the fire building. The author adds “L” or “Location” to this report, which helps with crew accountability.

COMMUNITY MEMBER OF THE MONTH

Name: Ken Lang. Residence: New Jersey. Department: Green Township. Title/rank: Lieutenant. Years of public service:21. Agency structure: Volunteer department. Top issue in your department: Staffing. Professional Qualifications: FF1 & FF2; Basic & Advanced Pump Operator Courses; Incident Management Level 2 Certification; ICS 100, 200, 300; Hazardous Materials Awareness; Chemical Safety (HAZCOM) 2007; CBRNE Awareness.

To join chat groups, post photos or videos, or share training ideas with other progressive firefighters from around the world, join the Fire Engineering Training Community today.