LETTERS TO THE EDITOR
DEPARTMENTS
Fire prevention and education—a new direction
Although fire prevention and education are used together quite frequently, they have not achieved the success that they should have. Fire deaths and damages still go on at an enormous and alarming rate.
It concerns not only myself, but most of my colleagues that we are not making a greater difference in this area. Millions of dollars and thousands of dedicated fire prevention personnel work on this baffling problem, and yet human life and property are lost every day to fire.
I know that our efforts to stop this loss are sincere, but just how well have we really accomplished our goals? Efforts to educate preschoolers and grade school children are having a positive impact on our future adults, and this training will hopefully net improved statistical results in years to come.
We see some of our young children taking their newly gained knowledge home and enlightening their parents, who are delighted in their child’s interest. All of this looks very promising, yet the statistics of death and destruction by fire go on, seemingly unchecked.
Could the problem be that we are only getting the message across to a small portion of the public? And are we getting this message across to the portion of the public that unfortunately has little or nothing to do with their circumstances?
How many children make policy at home?
How many laborers make policy at their work stations; clerks at their stores; teachers at their schools; and on and on?
I believe the real problem is not in the quality of education, although I’m sure there is always room for improvement. Nor is it with the people who we have historically taken the message of fire safety to. Most fire prevention education has failed to accomplish its basic goals of preventing loss of life and property because we fail to reach the right people, the people who are in decision and policy making positions.
I believe that when you make these people partners in getting across the fire prevention message, we may see accomplishments in fire prevention never seen before. By educating the decisionmakers to the terrible devastation of fire, both in terms of human resources and their own business or industry, we will gain the improved cooperation of all personnel working in these businesses. History shows where you have cooperation from the top, you have it in other areas as well.
I do believe that our educational programs need to expand in directions where they will do the most good, and I believe this means to the upper echelons all over the country.
A new direction in fire prevention education could not hurt. Our present one has not been that successful.
William D. Gay
Chief Fire Prevention/
Fire Investigation Officer
Naval Weapons Support Center
Crane, IN
Safety is enhanced with fire/industrial cooperation
I concur with your October 1985 editorial stating that the firefighter has a “right to know” about what is in that chemical plant or warehouse. He also has a “right to know” what is in the supermarket, the pharmacy, the dry cleaner, and the photo developing shop. These businesses have enough chemicals to incapacitate all of us.
To successfully combat these potential incidents, we must preplan. Our firefighters have to get out of the station and determine what hazards are in their first-due area. Then they must determine if they have the proper resources to handle the emergency.
The fire service and industrial firms must work together as partners, not adversaries. Both groups have too much to lose to do otherwise. The initial preplanning visit to the industrial firm should be made in a positive manner and not the “we’re going to get the b-” approach. We, the fire service, want to learn what is there so we can accomplish our objective in a safe and efficient manner. This not only protects the firefighter, it “protects” the businessman by minimizing his losses. During preplanning, we can point out to the business where there are deficiencies and make realistic recommendations for eliminating any problem areas. The industrial firm has to do its homework, but we must do ours.
Let’s first try the positive approach. In my fire protection area, the majority of businesses (around 900 firms) have been cooperative. Those that haven’t, have been brought in line with various tactics, the county fire marshal, the business’ insurance carriers, and the health department, to mention a few.
John P. O’Gorman
Assistant Chief
Ptmderosa Volunteer Fire Department and Emergency Response Coordinator Shell Oil Company. Houston, TX
Lower ISO ratings net taxpayer benefits
The Litchfield Volunteer Fire and Rescue Department had 10-inch dump valves on its tankers for several years; but at a water movement drill, we couldn’t move the minimum 250 gpm required by the Insurance Services Office (ISO).
By setting up automatic mutual aid with the neighboring Erhart and Chatam Fire Departments, we were able to better the results of our pump and hose tests—and lower our ISO rating from a Class 9 to a Class 7.
Some homeowners have reported around a $100/year savings on their fire insurance. The taxpayers can get a good return for all the fire equipment they have bought, even if they never have a fire. More fire departments need to go the ISO route.
John P. Kruggel Chief
Litchfield Volunteer Fire and Rescue Department Litchfield, OH
More truss troubles
A report in NEW SHELTER magazine (January 1986, Rodale Press Inc.) says that “There have been 700 documented cases of a new and unpredictable phenomenon known as ‘the rising truss.’ Metal-plate truss roofs are bowing upward, causing ceilings to separate from partitions and walls. The culprit, says the JOURNAL OF FORESTRY, is inferior lumber… (that) is more prone to shrinking and warpage. The result, in addition to rising trusses, can be uneven floors, buckled walls, doors and windows that don’t swing properly, and weakened joints.”
Will these bowing trusses break gas lines, pull apart electrical connections, separate sewer line joints, among other fire hazards? How will the weakened joints behave under snowloads? Will a fire speed up the shrinking and warping?
As I see it, the culprit is the industry that uses lumber to make trusses that will not perform as rated.
Unfortunately, we firefighters will either end up wearing these trusses or risking our lives in the collapsed building to search for victims.
I have read both editions of Francis L. Brannigan’s building construction texts as well as his magazine articles and have gleaned valuable information from them.
Len Parkin
Lieutenant
Summit Fire Department
Summit, NJ
Continued on page 16
Continued from page 12
Clarification of penetration
It was with great interest that we read the article “Chemical Protective Clothing” written by Kenneth York and Gerald Grey, which appeared in the February 1986 issue of FIRE ENGINEERING.
With more and more fire departments creating hazardous materials units, it is extremely important that articles such as this one appear in fire service publications. However, there was one statement that we feel deserves clarification in the interest of firefighter safety.
In defining the problem of hazardous substances penetrating protective clothing, the authors state “… penetration can be likened to a sharp or pointed object penetrating a garment.” While this statement is correct, it may be misleading to members of a newly formed hazardous material unit. The quoted statement implies that penetration will occur when an object in fact pierces the protective clothing. While the feature of durability is an important consideration in the proper selection of protective clothing, it must also be remembered that penetration can and does occur when the substance passes through such things as zippers, stitched seams, pores, and the like.
With hazardous materials being in the forefront of the fire service these days, we see more and more manufacturers of protective clothing appearing on the market. Only by realizing that penetration can oftentimes be avoided by proper research into the manufacturing techniques and methods of garment construction will we be able to protect our nation’s firefighters.
In the interest of firefighter safety, therefore, we would like to see a change in the definition or description of penetration to read, “Penetration is the flow of a liquid substance through zippers, stitched seams, pores, or other imperfections in the clothing’s material, such as tears and rips.”
We congratulate FIRE ENGINEERING on an otherwise fine article which continues to address this serious problem of hazardous materials.
Joseph P. Gallager
Captain
Hazardous Materials Company No. J New York City Fire Department New York, NY
John M. Malool
Coordinator
Mid-Bergen Hazardous Materials Unit Bergen County, NJ
Continued on page 18
Continued from page 16
Safety—a matter of supervision, attitude, and training
The editorial on safety in the April 1986 issue of FIRE ENGINEERING was timely and appropriate. Although the New York City Fire Department has experienced a reduction in workload in recent years, it has not seen the expected commensurate reduction in firefighter injuries. (Of course, this is a complex situation with many variables to consider when attempting to analyze why this is so.)
The department maintains an active Safety Division that responds to all major fires and emergencies. Their purpose is to bring about as safe an operating atmosphere on the fireground as is humanly possible.
The theory is that the incident commander is preoccupied with the strategy and tactics of the emergency situation and has little time to observe the condition of protective equipment or the operational methods of the firefighters. Therefore, the “safety chief” is the incident commander’s eyes and ears to guard against unsafe, preventable situations that can cause injuries and deaths. Much to their credit, the Safety Division has prevented numerous deaths and countless injuries. Yet, in spite of this, we still see many preventable injuries occurring at serious fires.
Keeping firefighters warm in winter should also be a concern
A few comments are in order stemming from the overall excellent article “Winterize Your Pumper Engineering Operations” (December 1985).
Our department carries a gasoline powered portable ice auger (designed for use by ice fishermen) to cut holes through the frozen surfaces of ponds, rivers, etc., saving much chopping with axes and pry bars. It has proven its worth on several occasions.
To expand a bit on the theme of the article, it is my opinion that the manufacturers of turnout gear, especially gloves and mittens, have not fully considered the problem of keeping firefighters warm under winter conditions. For years, our department has used buckskin mittens with removable wool liners. Nothing else even comes close to keeping one’s hands and fingers warm under sub-zero conditions. Only recently, and with great reluctance, have I furnished our firefighters with more “state of the art” (NFPA/ OSHA) gloves.
Wallace H. Day Fire Chief
South Plattsburgh Fire Department Plattsburgh, NY
In my view, the reasons seem to be associated with supervision, attitude, and training. The well-drilled, aggressively supervised firefighter with the proper safety attitude is less prone to painful injuries or death. It is the responsibility of management to provide the training and the supervision, but it is the responsibility of the individual member to maintain a good safety attitude. Unless all three elements are in place, there is little chance for meaningful reduction in injurry statistics.
To establish good safety attitudes, we must convince our members that it is not cowardly to wear properly designed, well-maintained equipment. It is not less heroic to protect oneself from a hostile fire environment; it is, in fact, more professional and a damned sight less painful.
Congratulations on the improvements in your own personal attitude toward safety.
John J. O’Rourke Chief of Department New York City Fire Department New York, NY
NFPA, chairman hold different views on automatic sprinklers?
Regarding the comments made by former Fire Chief Salvador J. Madama of the Laconia, NH, Fire Department as quoted on page 15 of the February 1986 issue of FIRE ENGINEERING, I concur.
It is inconceivable to me that any member of the National Fire Protection Association (NFPA) would, in any way, shape, or form, dispute the value of automatic sprinklers and smoke alarms. Not only the NFPA, but nearly all insurance companies and state fire codes have, for years, stressed the need of both sprinklers as well as fire and smoke alarms.
Chester Schirmer’s resignation from the chairmanship of the NFPA should be demanded at once. It took years of study to compile the NFPA’s FIRE PROTECTION HANDBOOK; let’s not so easily dismiss it as a bunch of foolishness.
If indeed Mr. Schirmer was accurately quoted as saying that overhead sprinklers and fire alarms are of no use and are contrary to the rules of the NFPA, most state fire codes, as well as the demands of most insurance companies, then there is no room for him in the fire service.
Alvin H. Sherwood Assistant Chief, retired Round Lake Fire Department Round Lake, IL
