“Challenging auto extrication” story
Thanks to Chief Sydney Henry Jr., Elmsford (NY) Fire Department, for his article “Challenging Auto Extrication” (November 2007). However, I strongly disagree with the statement that the engine company was ordered to “scan the vehicle and immediate area with a high-sensitivity voltage detector to determine if anything was energized as a result of the utility pole involvement. This scan indicated the scene was not energized.”
This is an extremely dangerous task to be teaching firefighters. At my fire department, I recently implemented a standard operating guideline banning the use of voltage detectors on auto accidents involving wires, etc. Voltage detectors provide warning of exposed high-voltage alternating current (AC) from a safe distance. AC current reverses direction periodically, usually many times per second. Examples would be high-voltage wires and residential and commercial wiring. After research, we found that power lines may reenergize following a ground fault because of automatic recloser circuit breakers. This means that seconds after the wires appear to be “dead,” they can reenergize without your knowing it.
We now consider all high-voltage electrical lines energized until the power company arrives on-scene and notifies Command that all wires have been deenergized. While on-scene, keep a far distance from all downed wires. Electricity can arc across open space and travel underground. When encountering a downed power line, you should establish a danger zone one power pole span in either direction.
Jonathan Riffe
Chief
Huntingtown (MD) Fire Department
Fire training simulations on the Fire Engineering Web site
Thanks to Fire Engineering for making this level of training available to every fire department in our country. It is an outstanding training tool we can all use.
The first time I saw this type of simulation was when I was back at the National Fire Academy for the “Fire Command Operations” class (1991), and I thought it would be great if every firefighter could experience this. Since that time, some fire departments have been able to include this type of simulation into their training program (though not with this level of sophistication); most have not. Many of the firefighters I have worked with (over the past 30 years in four different states) were “visual” learners; this training allows the instructor to visually display the effect of proper or improper tactics to reinforce critical learning goals and objectives.
Firefighters, volunteer and career, who may not be experiencing as many fires need these types of training simulations to learn/maintain essential fireground strategies and tactics.
Thanks to Fire Engineering for producing these excellent simulations. Please keep them coming.
Stephen Keegan
Assistant Chief
State Certified Instructor
Whispering Pines Volunteer Fire Department
Rapid City, South Dakota
Editor in Chief Bobby Halton responds: All of us here at FireEngineering.com are very proud of the quality and sophistication of our simulations. Our greatest asset in this process is that we were able to engage the best tactical mind in our business, Chief Frank Montagna of the Fire Department of New York, as our chief developer. His wisdom and insight are largely responsible for the dynamic capabilities of these simulations to be 10 lessons in one. Chief Montagna and our simulation company Command Sim constitute the most innovative and resourceful simulation team in the fire service today. All of the praise is truly theirs.
Please be on the lookout for our first video of Chief Montagna running a simulation explaining the nuances of instructional facilitation slated for production soon. Let us know how your department is using these simulations, and send any suggestions for future fires or emergencies.
Always keep a safe distance from IEDs
This refers to “Strategies for Surviving the IED Response” by August Vernon in the June 2007 issue. I think that the author was on the money with the article. However, I have one area of concern, which is under the scene management section, specifically the use of the “5 Cs.”
I have just returned from Iraq, where I served as the commanding officer of the Al Kasik Regional Support Unit. Needless to say, IEDs catch my attention quickly. Under the old “5 Cs,” the first step was confirm. This is a challenge for us in the military; as a consequence, service members who may or may not have the requisite skill set to make the confirmation of an IED took needless risks (i.e., approaching the device to confirm). We have since revised this. Now, Explosive Ordnance Disposal units confirm once they arrive on the scene.
I would hate to have some well-intentioned firefighters (I am also a volunteer with Fairfax City) approach a device and become victims. We know the devices are either command detonated (i.e., a guy with a triggering device), victim detonated (i.e., pressure plate/trip wire), or on a timer device. Based on this information and the increased possibility of additional casualties, it is imperative to clear and cordon off the area.
This is not meant as a criticism but rather as a concern for our fire service. As the secretary for Homeland Security recently stated, we are entering into a heightened period, and we need to be ready. In view of the events in England, the author’s article was timely.
CDR William F. Hesse
U.S. Navy
Chief Technical Officer
Fire Fighting/Damage Control/ Chemical & Bio Defense
August Vernon responds: Cdr. Hesse brought up a good point with reference to the “5 Cs.” This has always been somewhat confusing. During classes and briefings, it is important to explain “confirm” as meaning that the responder is to gather information on the device/event. This will include making contact with those who called 911, bystanders, other responders, etc. The term “confirm” is somewhat confusing and does make it sound as if the responder/soldier actually needs to approach the device or suspicious item, which obviously is not a safe strategy.
Now our use and understanding of the term in theater means to confirm from a distance using the following Combined Explosives Exploitation Cell (CEXC) definition: “Maximum use should be made of hard cover and spotting equipment such as binoculars or scopes.”
I think the 4 Cs rule of Clear, Cordon, Control, and Check is the way to go. I close with the following statement from my article: “Do not attempt to move, handle, or disarm a confirmed or suspected IED; this is a job for specifically trained personnel.
“The Bad Apples”
Editor in Chief Bobby Halton was right on target about the criminal aspect of firefighter violations in his Editor’s Opinion “The Bad Apples” (November 2007). I have had the same argument with many people over the years because they think putting them in jail for the malfeasance or misfeasance will change everything.
Does the threat of going to jail stop a person from being a drunk driver? Not in most cases. I think Halton has hit the nail on the head when he writes about needing to learn from the mistakes of the past and DO SOMETHING DIFFERENT in the future.
I recently made a presentation in which I said there is nothing new to learn about why firefighters die. I know that may be a little strong, but the reasons firefighters die are because the officers don’t lead, the firefighters drive too fast, the firefighters are out of shape, and the firefighters don’t look around and observe the hazards that are in place. It does not take a rocket scientist to determine that firefighters die or are injured 98 percent of the time for one of the above reasons.
John M. Buckman III, CFOD
Section Chief
Indiana Firefighter Training System
Indianapolis, Indiana
Preparing dogs for a school “visit”
This is in reference to Dayna Hilton’s “Pros and Cons of Props,” (Fire Prevention Bureau, October 2007). I applaud her suggestion in using dogs to help educate children. I agree with all of her “Tips for Using Dogs in Presentations.” As a certified dog trainer on my days off, I would like to offer some additional points for consideration.
Taking a dog into a school requires not only that the dog is comfortable around children but also that it is well socialized to all people, places, and things. A dog that is nervous on a tile floor, tries to run when a chair is overturned, or barks at a janitor rolling a mop bucket is not ready for a school. Likewise, telling children not to tug on a dog’s ears or tail is fine, but do children always do what they’re told? The dog must be prepared so it never growls, snaps, bites, or jumps.
Any department planning to use a dog in public is giving that dog a “job” for which it should be thoroughly evaluated and trained. Individualized work with a certified dog trainer can best meet the dog’s needs and decrease the likelihood of any problems for the department. Fire Engineering readers can find local trainers and other resources through the International Association of Canine Professionals’ Web site (dogpro.org). I’m sure many trainers would be willing to work with a fire department at no cost.
Guy Kantak
Battalion Chief/Operations
Worthington (OH)
Division of Fire & EMS
LNG: risk assessment vs. hazard assessment
As a deputy chief of the Boston (MA) Fire Department, I have had to deal with the transport of LNG through a congested harbor and a land-based LNG storage facility. I was pleased to read Craig Shelley’s excellent article “Liquefied Natural Gas: A New Urban Legend” (November 2007). It provided a good introduction to the topic. I would like to add a couple of thoughts based on my experiences.
Although the article correctly points out that no serious breach of an LNG vessel has occurred, it fails to describe the consequences if it were to occur. In Boston, Federal Risk Assessments have estimated 2,500 to 3,000 fatalities, similar in scale to 9/11, if an LNG vessel were to be breached, and this assessment did not even take into account cascading failure of adjacent tanks (“1976 Environmental Impact Statement for Everett, Massachusetts LNG Facility”). An excellent graphical description of the impact zones in Boston Harbor, based on the Sandia Labs report, is contained in a Boston Globe article. It shows the zones where buildings will ignite because of radiant heat extending several hundred feet from the shoreline (“Study spells out high toll on city in LNG attack,” Savage, C. 12/21/2004).
The article also suggests using “high-expansion foam, dry chemical, and exposure protection as recommended tactics for burning pool fires.” This is theoretically correct but difficult in reality. For the land-based facility in my division, if there were to be a catastrophic failure (an event that I admit is highly unlikely), the fire size would be several hundred feet in diameter and several hundred feet high. Because of the estimated radiant heat levels, no firefighter would be able to approach within 500 feet or more, and a nearby yacht club would be in danger of burning, but the radiant heat would prevent evacuation.
I agree that the risk to the public posed by LNG is small. But many in the fire service and the public do not understand the difference between risk assessment (which takes into account probability) and hazard assessment (which assumes that the event occurs). They assume when someone says the risk is small that what he means is that the hazard is small.
Whenever people say the risk is small, ask the following:
- Do they mean that the probability of an event is small and the hazardous consequences are small?
- Do they mean that the probability of an event is small but the hazardous consequences are big?
- Do they mean that the probability of an event is high but the hazardous consequences are small?
These three different scenarios could all produce a small risk, but they mean very different things to the public. In any case, how does one calculate the probability of a terrorist attack? And, if you cannot, then how can one say the risk from a terrorist attack is small? Fire officials should always ask that a hazard/consequence assessment, not just a risk assessment, be produced and that the potential resources needed by the local emergency responders are evaluated. I would also suggest that any industry or federal report be peer-reviewed by an independent third party chosen by the fire department.
In addition to the excellent references provided at the end of the article, I would suggest that readers go to the “SAFELNG?” Web site, http://pstrust.org/lng/library/index.htm. It has links to many excellent reports that will help local officials ask the tough but fair questions that need to be asked. It is obvious that LNG will be an increasingly important component of any national energy policy. The fire service must make sure that the public need for this commodity is properly balanced with safety issues.
Joseph M. Fleming
Deputy Chief
Boston (MA) Fire Department
