Protection needed in smoke environment
I commend Mike Gagliano, Casey Phillips, Phil Jose, and Steve Bernocco on their excellent article (“The Breath from Hell,” March 2006) on the modern smoke environment. I will use many of their statistics and facts in future training.
I would, however, recommend that they follow up this article with one that speaks of the dangers >after the fire is extinguished. Too often I see firefighters taking off their masks as soon as the fire is out and they are about to begin overhaul. They exit the building with soot on their faces (and in their lungs) as some kind of badge of honor. With the high number of cancer diagnoses we currently are experiencing in my department, and nationwide, this type of macho behavior must stop. Thanks again for an insightful and thought-provoking article.
Frank T. Cardinale
Division Chief
San Francisco (CA) Fire Department
Teamwork vital in curtailing brush fires
Bravo and kudos for “East Coast Wildland/Urban Interface Fires: What Have We Accomplished?” (Brett M. Martinez and Edward C. Schneyer, March 2006). Such an article is long overdue, particularly on Long Island (New York). Teamwork plays a most vital role in reducing the number of fires and the number of acres destroyed. Police, prosecutors, and fire officials do their very best to keep ATV vehicles out of potentially hazardous areas.
Specially designed stump jumpers or GIs make a substantial difference in fighting such fires.
What is on the horizon for wildfires? If you have some compartment space to spare on a pumper or a ladder, adding more water extinguishers and pump packs; hand tools such as Pulaskis, brooms, and shovels; and portable backpacks of 1 3/4-inch forestry hose might go a long way in helping you battle large brush fires.
David Titus
Firefighter (Retired)
Marietta, Georgia
I have a question concerning photo 4 on page 136 in “East Coast Wildland/Urban Interface Fires: What Have We Accomplished?” by Brett M. Martinez and Edward C. Schneyer. Unless the angle of view creates a false impression, it looks to me as if the pipe roll cage would prevent raising the hood more than a foot or so. Keeping it open just that small amount also could create a problem.
Once, while admiring a newly completed brush truck at a state fire school away from my home district, I noticed that the auxiliary pump motor’s exhaust primer couldn’t be engaged; a home-built protective cage was blocking its movement. I asked the department member standing nearby about this and learned that the problem hadn’t been noticed.
Fire departments have adapted many of these federal excess vehicles to yeoman service in Oklahoma, and they have performed well. Congratulations to the authors for their excellent article.
Charlie Enlow
Rural Fire Defense Coordinator
Oklahoma Economic Development Authority
More rigorous scientific analysis needed for near misses on the fireground
Thanks to Tom Lubnau II for bringing the topic of situation awareness and how it relates to fireground safety to readers’ attention in the March 2006 issue (“Situational Awareness: Avoiding ‘The Charge of the Light Brigade’ ”). I firmly believe that if we are going to positively impact the rate of fireground injuries and fatalities, we need to look at the full spectrum of human factors.
Lubnau brings up some interesting points and makes some valuable recommendations. However, I have serious questions about his methodology. The National Fire Fighter Near-Miss Reporting System is an anonymous, voluntary reporting system. Any statistical analysis of the near-miss database can speak only to trends in voluntary reporting. Analysis of the near-miss database cannot logically be extrapolated to represent trends in the fire service as a whole. A better use of Heinrich’s error pyramid theory (for every fatality, there are 29 injuries and 300 near-miss incidents) would be to base our analysis on data that represent the fire service-namely, the injury and fatality data available from the United States Fire Administration and the National Fire Protection Association.
When we do that (in this example, I looked at the NFPA report “U.S. Fire Service Fatalities in Structure Fires, 1977-2000”), it is clear that smoke inhalation causes nearly two-thirds (63%) of the fatalities occurring on the fireground. Managing our air supply on the fireground and understanding the risks and dangers associated with the toxic smoke environment we work in today are clearly areas that need immediate attention (see “The Breath from Hell,” Fire Engineering, March 2006).
In reviewing dozens of structure fire reports from the near-miss database, I was surprised to see very few low-air emergency reports. The reports I read were better classified as “out of air” emergencies in an immediately dangerous to life and health (IDLH) atmosphere. Why are so few low-air emergency reports in the database when Heinrich’s error pyramid theory would lead us to believe that low-air emergency reports would be the most numerous? Perhaps the answer has more to do with what is perceived and what is not perceived to be an emergency. How many of us would classify our low-air alarm’s going off while we were still in an IDLH environment as a near-miss incident?
I also take exception to Lubnau’s analysis of the “data.” He says the best practice for analyzing the reports would be to interview the reporting parties. Since this was not possible, he took the liberty of interpreting the reports based on their wording. The purported tool used to do the analysis was a “Breakdown Analysis” developed by the U.S. Army. Breakdown Analysis, according to the article cited by Lubnau, permits the systematic observation of tool use in a natural setting. It requires trained observers to continually observe the subjects of the analysis. It cannot be logically applied to the interpretation of near-miss reports. Lubnau is attempting to fit a square peg into a round hole.
In his book Safety and Survival on the Fireground, retired Fire Department of New York Deputy Chief Vincent Dunn says, “In order to survive the dangers of the fireground, firefighters need to know how other firefighters have been killed or injured.” We can now include knowing how other firefighters have experienced near-miss incidents to Dunn’s recommendation. This is the real value of the National Fire Fighter Near-Miss Reporting System.
Lubnau ponders several times in his article how otherwise highly trained firefighters could lose situational awareness during these near-miss incidents. Having read dozens of the near-miss reports, it is hard for me to characterize the reporters as highly trained. The reports are fraught with strategic and tactical errors. Passing fire, failure to ventilate, searching above the fire without a hoseline in place, not checking for fire in void spaces, freelancing, ignoring the low-air alarm, and advancing residential hoselines into commercial structures are not the hallmarks of highly trained firefighters. Many of these incidents speak more to the lack of fireground experience than the loss of situation awareness.
The important subjects of situation awareness, critical decision making, and human error on the fireground deserve a more rigorous scientific analysis.
Ted Nee
Deputy Chief (Retired)
Albuquerque (NM) Fire Department
Local leaders must market the fire service
Bobby Halton’s “Stand Up for What You Believe” (Editor’s Opinion, April 2006) is right on target, once again. The needs of the fire service have been treated as a game at the federal and local levels in many communities for many years, and it is getting worse every day. The problem of disrespect for the fire service originates at the local level, and our federal representatives reflect those local attitudes. Every fire chief and fire service leader at every level needs to be a local instrument to educate, sell, and market the needs of the fire service to the public they serve. The failure of local leaders to do so produces the results we are experiencing.
I am currently finalizing arrangements for PennWell to publish my book, The Fire Chief’s Tool Box. In it, there is a chapter titled “Politics and Politicians.” Following is a section from that chapter:
Education, Salesmanship, and Marketing
“Just in case you have not gotten the message yet: Every Fire Chief must be a strong educator, salesperson, and marketer for the causes he or she believes in to get the public and the politicians elected by the public to take the actions necessary to fund what you know you need to properly serve the public. The education, sales, and marketing process you initiate at your local level of government for your department needs affects the fire service at every level of government. Programs such as The Assistance to Firefighters Grant program; SAFER, the federal program designed to provide financial support to hire and retain firefighters; the U.S. Forest Service Volunteer Fire Assistance Program; and other grant programs from a variety of sources are all the results of local needs being marketed by local fire chiefs and then supported by the International Association of Fire Chiefs, the International Association of Fire Fighters, and the National Volunteer Fire Council.
“The support for each program began at the local level with local leaders, like you, who understood that, we, the fire service, need and deserve the same level of federal support as do law enforcement agencies. Those local leaders were educated and sold on the absolute need for them to provide quality, cost effective, and efficient public safety service to their community. All federal elected officials have a local base that places them in office and can remove them from that office when they do not provide the services needed by their community. The Congressional Fire Caucus representatives each come from a community where they learned about the needs of the fire service from their local fire chief. When federal leadership reduces support for the fire service in any of these programs, it is not only a failure at the federal level. The problem began with a failure at your local level to educate, sell, and market all of your representatives and the public that elects them on the needs of your fire service.
“As Fire Chief, and as a proper politician, you must also always ensure that your elected officials receive proper public credit for their understanding of the needs of public safety and your department, specifically when they fund life-saving equipment and staffing.”
Ron Graner
Chief (Retired)
Bobby Halton responds: Thanks, Ron. We look forward to your book, and as Alexander the Great said, “Remember upon the conduct of each depends the fate of all.”
The responsibility for our future is in the hands of every firefighter. It is a weight we must carry well, for America’s security rests on our diligence, our readiness, and our courage. Our chiefs certainly are leading our charge; but, as soldiers, we must support them with all our hearts so that tomorrow, when we are called on, we will once again overwhelm the problem with our skill. Every one of us is the fire service.
Revisiting the cellulose insulation-related fire problems
I appreciated Jamie Morelock’s article “Overhauling When Cellulose Insulation Is Present” (March 2006). It is interesting that people are still “discovering” this problem. I wrote an article about this, entitled “Rekindle,” which was published in the December 1985 issue.
After that article, I was contacted by an insurance company that had been studying that problem. It brought up several interesting facts. In the southern heat, the fire retardant added to the shredded newspaper leached out (15 to 20 years), leaving a highly flammable loose surface in the attic. The company found that open flame on the surface would travel in excess of 100 ft./min. This was called “spread fire,” and the company felt that this accounted for several large building losses. The insidious part of this was that fire burning up from the bottom would start the insulation smoldering. This led to burrowing embers surrounded by insulation that traveled many feet until reaching a combustible object leading to the open air. If the ember was traveling parallel to a ceiling beam or truss, it could surface 10 or more feet from the original fire. This could take several hours. The combustible object was now being subjected to pyrolytic decomposition, lowering its ignition temperature. The insulating quality of the cellulose prevented our early-version thermal imaging cameras from seeing the embers.
After our fire, we researched several different methods of overhauling. The most efficient proved to be using the same blower people used to install the insulation. In our area, a home improvement store rented these blowers with long hoses so that homeowners could rent the blowers and buy the insulation to apply themselves. We borrowed a blower and hose, attached the long hose to the suction side, and sent a member into the attic to vacuum up the insulation. We discharged into the yard where we could check for embers and package the insulation. A problem that kept us from implementing this departmentwide and advocating its use elsewhere was that the metal helix of the hose, which prevented kinking and collapsing, could conduct electricity. Our safety officer and the attorney felt that this was an unacceptable possible liability.
I would like to hear from anyone who has developed a method that does not require cutting up a roof that did not need venting during the fire, especially how you reach into the eaves. With all the new people in the fire service, it is important to revisit these problems.
George W. Odell
Training Captain
Master Instructor
Sandy Valley (NV) Volunteer Fire Department
A chaplain’s role in LODD notification
I commend Paul J. Antonellis Jr. for his article “Supporting Survivors During Line-of-Duty Deaths/Injuries” (March 2006). He truly captures all the important and essential points regarding one of the most difficult tasks of the fire service-the notification of families at the time of injury or death. This article ought to be required reading for all chief officers. I would, however, like to offer some additional comments.
Although Antonellis touches on the use of chaplains at the time of notification, I cannot stress enough what a valuable asset a chaplain can be. Most chaplains are trained in pastoral skills that make them the ideal person to tell the families what has occurred to their loved one. Moreover, a chaplain can attend to the emotional and spiritual needs of the family members, thus freeing chief officers to deal with the many administrative tasks that arise during the early stages of the notification process. (If your department does not have a chaplain, you can learn about developing a chaplaincy program through the Federation of Fire Chaplains, www.firechaplains.org, or at iaffchaplain@iaff.org/.) Lacking a chaplain, it is wise at times to summon a local member of the clergy to assist in the notification process.
There are many groups and organizations willing to provide assistance to the fire service community during the difficult time of serious injury or line-of-duty death. The International Association of Fire Fighters has many resources available on its Web site (www.iaff.org). The National Fallen Firefighters Foundation (www.firehero.org) also has many resources available to departments, including its “Taking Care of Our Own” and “Chief to Chief” programs. Both organizations are most helpful with the important task of doing the paperwork and securing Public Safety Officer Benefit funds for the families of our fallen firefighter.
Of great assistance in the notification process are trained civilians who are experienced in the dynamics of notification and grieving. Fifteen years ago, the Chicago Fire Department Gold Badge Society was founded as a support group for the families of our fallen brothers and sisters. A number of its members are trained in critical incident stress management and peer support techniques. Most times, trained members will be present during or shortly after the notification. They bring to that crucial time compassionate and understanding voices of experience and are most helpful in tending to the needs of family members.They are also there for the family in the days and weeks that will follow. For more information on how to begin a support group or how to identify a competent person to assist in notifications and follow-up, contact the group at CFDGoldBadge@aol.com/.
Paul Antonellis reminds us that there is no task more sacred than the care of our own and their family members. The more we can do for them at the crucial times of injury or death, the better.
Rev. Thomas A. Mulcrone
Chaplain
Chicago (IL) Fire Department
Chaplain
International Association of Fire Fighters
On flaring LPG tanks
Regarding “LPG Barbecue Leaks: A Primer,” by Carl Meyer (April 2006), the article is very informative, but I take exception to some of the author’s advice. NEVER turn a propane cylinder upside down! This voids the hydrostatic relief valve, making the tank unable to vent itself should the inside pressure become too great. This safety device operates by relieving vapor pressure. With the tank upside down, the relief valve is under liquid and cannot relieve vapor pressure, creating an opportunity for a BLEVE (boiling-liquid, expanding-vapor explosion).
In addition, Flame Engineering, Inc., has designed and markets flare-off tools such as the author described.
Jason Pivonka
Chief
Rush County Fire Dist. #4
Vice President
Flame Engineering, Inc.
LaCrosse, KS
Carl Meyer responds: My comments pertain only to the flaring of 20-lb. LPG cylinders. It should be noted that the PRV will vent either vapor or liquid if the internal pressure of the cylinder reaches 375 psi, regardless of its orientation. Responders must exercise some common sense in determining the strategy and tactics to be used. Cylinders that have been significantly compromised by corrosion, physical damage, or flame impingement should not be flared. While procedurally, flaring is not difficult, members conducting this type of operation (as with all aspects of firefighting and haz-mat responses) should be well-trained and well-equipped.
