1. Size-up
2. Call for help
3. Rescue
4. Protect exposures
5. Locate and confine the fire
6. Extinguish the fire
7. Overhaul the fire

The seven fundamental strategies must occur sequentially while the strategies of salvage and ventilation are implemented anywhere those strategies are needed to support the other seven.

We've now arrived at a point — probably arrived a while ago, but didn't fully understand it — where we must add a third parallel strategy: illuminate the scene.

The American National Standards Institute and the Illuminating Engineering Society are a couple of the organizations that develop information and standards regarding lighting, and workplace lighting in particular.

ANSI is a federal agency, while IES is a collegial community dedicated to improving the lighted environment. 

The emergency scene is our workplace and it only makes sense that we should view it as such and make it more safe by improving the quality and consistency of our illumination efforts. This also will improve firefighter efficiency and effectiveness.

Delivery of the necessary useable light commensurate with the tactical requirements of the incident action plan is the scene illumination benchmark. ANSI and IES define useable light as the minimum level of light necessary to perform a task safely, effectively and efficiently.

By achieving the scene illumination benchmark early in the incident, we can have a more positive influence on tactical operations. Here are four areas where proper illumination will influence the scene.

• Improve ongoing assessment of the incident scene
• Reduce reflex time — the time between arrival of personnel and their engagement in assigned tasks
• Improve apparatus and equipment positioning
• Improve tactical operations' execution

A quick physics refresher is probably helpful before moving forward. Wattage is the measure of the rate of energy conversion or transfer, that is, the power required to operate a fixture or appliance. Lumen is the measure of the total amount of visible light emitted by a source.

According to R.O.M. Lighting Systems, there are two common myths regarding useable light: increase the wattage and you increase the useable light; and increase the lumen rating and you increase the useable light. 

Both are inaccurate according to the First Law of Thermodynamics. In its simplest form, the First Law of Thermodynamics states that neither matter nor energy can be created or destroyed. Since available wattage is converted to both light and heat during an operation, the only way to increase the amount of useable light from a given wattage is to improve the ability of the fixture or appliance to convert wattage into light rather than heat.

R.O.M. commissioned a third-party test using IES standards comparing its emergency scene lighting equipment to that of its competitors. Not surprisingly, the results reported favored the R.O.M. products.

According to those results, a 900-watt fixture can deliver more useable light than a 1,500-watt fixture. It does this by reducing the heat buildup in the fixture, using a lens that is 100% transparent and using a housing that maximizes the outward direction of light energy rather than allowing the housing to absorb that light as heat.

For the fire officer tasked with illuminating the incident scene, the necessary equipment includes — but is certainly not limited to — portable lights, support stands for those lights, electricity supplies, power cords and junction blocks. 

Scene illumination equipment manufacturers are responding to the requirements of today's emergency responders with products that go beyond lights using power cords running back to an apparatus-mounted generator. These products are light-weight, portable, and designed for quick deployment anywhere on the emergency scene and extended operating times. 

Some of these new free-standing technologies include:

• Pole light combinations powered by rechargeable, 12-volt sealed lead acid batteries using Light Emitting Diode (LED) technology. These units weigh 25 to 30 pounds, can deliver 2,000 lumens and have eight to 15 hours of burn time between charges.
• Tripod-mounted pole light combinations powered by rechargeable Li-ion batteries, weighing 20 to 30 pounds, and capable of delivering 4,000 lumens. Some of these units have both spot- and area-lighting capabilities.
• Generator and light and frame combinations that provide a stand-alone units that are still portable — weighing 50 to 70 pounds depending upon the weight of the generator — yet capable of delivering more than 20,000 lumens. These units are capable of powering one or two pole lights and have run times of more than 10 hours without refueling.

The inability to clearly see the incident scene, and properly evaluate that scene for potential risks, has to become one of the primary risks that we address early in the incident lifecycle rather than later.

Illuminating the incident scene should be the third "concurrent incident management strategy" taking its rightful place alongside salvage and ventilation. If we can't see the risk, we can't address the risk.

KITTERY, Maine — A fire on a nuclear-powered submarine at a Maine shipyard has injured seven people, including five firefighters, but did not affect the reactor, which was not active.

Crews responded at about 5:40 p.m. Wednesday to the USS Miami SSN 755 at the Portsmouth Naval Shipyard on an island in Kittery, a town near Portsmouth, N.H. It was not clear how many people were aboard the submarine at the time.

Rear Adm. Richard Breckenridge, commander of Submarine Group Two, said the fire was out Thursday morning and the shipyard was open as usual. He said the three shipyard firefighters, two civilian firefighters and two crew members received minor injuries and were in good shape.

Breckenridge called their efforts heroic, saying the extreme heat and smoke in the contained spaces made it very challenging for them. "Their efforts clearly minimized the severity of this event," he said at a brief news conference.

Breckenridge said the fire started in the four forward compartments, which include living and command and control spaces. The sub's reactor, isolated in another part of the sub, had been shut down for a few months at the time and was unaffected. Breckenridge said it "remains in a safe and stable condition."

No weapons were on board.

Breckenridge said the cause of the fire is under investigation.

The USS Miami has a crew of 13 and 120 enlisted personnel. It arrived at the shipyard on March 1 to undergo maintenance work. It was commissioned in 1990 and its home port is Groton, Conn.

Copyright 2012 Associated Press

"We truly do not appreciate the misleading news report broadcast last night by WSB-TV in Atlanta. The report suggests that our Self-Contained Breathing Apparatus (SCBA) used by firefighters and other first responders is faulty and is prone to breakdown and that we have been somehow insensitive to the safety of firefighters.

"Nothing could be further from the truth.

"We serve more than 1,500 fire departments in the United States and thousands more around the world. The safety of Draeger breathing equipment is demonstrated every day by first responders, mine rescue teams, U.S. Navy SEALS, U.S. Army and others, and we would not want anyone to use it if we believed it to be unsafe. We are deeply committed to each and every firefighter who relies on our SCBAs for their protection and safety. WSB's sensationalistic approach to its broadcast report last night could cause fear and anxiety among our users, and therefore impact their ability to do their jobs. We simply cannot allow that to go unchallenged.

"Our major concerns with the WSB story are, firstly, how it lumps different categories of product care together to create the false impression that our equipment is not safe and, secondly, how the interview with one of our executives was edited to create the impression that he made an admission that he in fact did not make — because there was and is nothing to admit.

"Concerning the issues reported in DeKalb County (Georgia), we have attempted to replicate the alleged instances of product malfunction by DeKalb firefighters but could not. Technicians analyzed our equipment but could find nothing wrong with its engineering or design.

"The only conclusion we can draw is that the reports of product malfunction in DeKalb County stem from improper product maintenance and care.

"As with all manufacturers serving the Fire Safety market, we give our customers detailed instructions for the proper maintenance and care of our equipment. Fire departments using our breathing equipment must have procedures in place to insure that proper maintenance and care are carried out on a routine basis. In our investigation of the alleged incidents in DeKalb County, we have determined that the fire department did not follow proper maintenance and care policies. It seems that some in the fire department's leadership have chosen to blame the manufacturer for difficulties created by the failure to take proper care of the equipment provided to DeKalb firefighters.

"Concerning the allegations that fire departments in Phoenix (Arizona), Anchorage (Alaska) and Vancouver (British Columbia) also experienced potentially disastrous problems with our SCBAs, we believe that the problems experienced in those fire departments were noncritical, low-order issues that may happen with any product and are not in any way dangerous or life-threatening to firefighters, with two exceptions.

"The two exceptions we are aware of arose in Phoenix, where we did a thorough investigation of the incidents and found that the cause stemmed from improper field use of the equipment. Again, no design flaws were at issue.

"We don't question WSB's right or duty to cover newsworthy events potentially impacting firefighters in the Atlanta area. But we specifically refute the false impressions that WSB's story conveys.

"At Draeger, we take our responsibilities to the firefighters we protect with the utmost seriousness. We would never do anything to put firefighters and other first responders in harm's way.

"Indeed, we are compelled by our commitment to firefighters, in Georgia, across the country and around the world, to speak out unambiguously now. The report last night on WSB-TV was misleading and over-sensationalized. We stand by the integrity of our equipment. And we will mount a strong rebuttal initiative to counteract the false impressions created by the report."
 

PHILADELPHIA — The Philadelphia firefighters union said Tuesday that Commissioner Lloyd Ayers and his two top deputies should resign, blaming them for a lack of leadership and tactical errors that led to the deaths of two firefighters last month in Kensington.

The leaders of Local 22 said the incident commander failed to establish a "collapse zone" around the vacant, century-old mill that sparked into a spectacular five-alarm blaze April 9.

The two firefighters — Lt. Robert P. Neary, 59, and Firefighter Daniel Sweeney, 25 — were killed when one of the mill's five-story walls fell on an adjacent furniture store, where they and two others were doing a routine check.

Mike Bresnan, a firefighter and the union's recording secretary, said the men should have never been sent into the furniture store.

"If there's a homeless guy living in there, then we're paid to take risks," he said. "But this is a case of a furniture store. What are we worried about? Some furniture burning?"

At a brief news conference outside fire department headquarters, Michael Resnick, the city's director of public safety, said Ayers and his deputies "have our full support, 110 percent."

Resnick called the union's allegations "scandalous, scurrilous, bold-faced lies"

"We had collapse zones established," he said.

Union leaders showed blown-up photos at their afternoon news conference that they said showed firefighters within the collapse zone.

"It's unacceptable. It's one of the basic things of defensive operations," Bresnan said. "It wasn't done. There's no evidence of it."

Local 22 long has had a bitter relationship with departmental leaders and the Nutter administration over contract disputes and, particularly, policies that have deactivated and
"browned out" fire stations.

Union leaders said a lack of manpower hampered efforts to fight the Kensington fire.

Bresnan said seven or eight alarms should have been struck that night, especially as burning embers carried on high winds started igniting surrounding homes and buildings.

He said the fire was limited to five alarms because the department exhausted nearly all of its back-up.

"It's all the result of the cutbacks and the closings," Bresnan said. "They don't have the manpower and resources anymore to handle stuff like this."

Local 22 president Bill Gault criticized Ayers — referring to him as "Car One" — for not coming to the fire scene until after the collapse.

"Incident commander should have been Car One. It wasn't," he said. "It starts at the top. He's responsible for everybody."

Gault also called for the resignation of Deputy Commissioners John Devlin, who was the incident commander that night, and Ernest Hargett, who arrived on the scene after the third alarm but did not assume command.

Bresnan said Hargett, as the higher-ranking officer, should have taken control once he arrived.

Hargett, who joined Resnick at fire headquarters Tuesday, called the union's allegations a "travesty." Resnick said he could not respond in detail because of ongoing investigations by a local grand jury and the Fire Marshal's Office.

Neither responded to questions from reporters.

"This administration stands by the leadership of this fire department," Resnick said.

A federal occupational safety investigation also is ongoing. It's unclear if Ayers has ordered an internal query; Gault said he has not.

The cause of the fire also has not been determined.

Gault equally blamed Nutter, fire leadership, and the owners of the former Thomas W. Buck Hosiery mill for the deadly fire.

The owners — the primary one is Michael Lichtenstein of Brooklyn — did not respond after the city cited the building three times since November for code violations, following neighborhood complained about vagrants breaking in.

The city also had moved to take the building to sheriff's sale for unpaid back taxes.

"We probably have 600 more buildings just like that in the city and what they are is death traps to us," Gault said. "They've got to be taken care of. Firefighters are not expendable."

Contact Troy Graham at 215-854-2730 or tgraham@phillynews.com, or follow on Twitter @troyjgraham.

Copyright 2012 The Philadelphia Inquirer

Firefighters Warren Deavers, Ramon Hounshell and Charles A. Ryan III along with Lt. Robert Alvarado of D.C. Fire and Emergency Medical Services Department received the award April 26 for their response to a house fire last year, said a release from PBI.

"The PBI Golden Knights salutes firefighters who, when the alarm sounds, respond," the release said.

"Handled it like any other run we would go on," Lt. Alvarado told MyFoxDC. "The same way each time, we're very methodical with the procedures we go by and we follow them to the letter."

During the fire's knockdown, the four firefighters received burns and other injuries of varying degrees attempting to make it out alive. Three of the men made it out on their own, but the fourth was saved by a rapid rescue team.

"We knew where we were going," Firefighter Deavers told MyFoxDC. "We went in the right direction right off the bat and it's something that they train you to do. You don't lose your cool."

"This is a testament to how firefighters are trained and why PBI Matrix was designed — to guard against the unexpected," said PBI President Grant Reeves. "Let's hope that most firefighters never have an experience such as this."

It is more likely to be specified by a fire department than any one single requirement, yet do we really understand what thermal protective performance means and how it should be applied?

The TPP numbers that the fire service has become accustomed to may change, and not for any particular reason other than to switch the test method referenced for its measurement. Therefore, it is worth revisiting this subject and discussing why it is important to keep the measurement techniques where they are today.

On the origin of TPP
There are multiple roots for how thermal protective performance testing came about. Originally, a test method was devised to measure insulation materials in clothing and a variety of materials.

The first method involved a material sample positioned horizontally over a single Bunsen burner with a special sensor called a calorimeter to measure the rate of heat transfer through the material. The measured energy that passed through the material predicted whether a second-degree burn would occur. This test was first developed for protection of industrial workers or military personnel against flash fire.

Fire service interest in TPP testing arose during Project FIRES in the early 1980s, which was the Firefighter Integrated Response Ensemble System work led by the International Association of Fire Fighters. This project culminated in defining the modern day firefighter protective ensemble of coat and pants.

Part of this development included the evolution of a TPP test for firefighter clothing. The single-flame burner was replaced with two burners angled upward toward the center face of the sample clothing composite — a panel of super heated quartz tubes was added between the two burners to provide a combined convective and radiant heat exposure.

While the overall heat level remained the same as a fire ball (flash fire for industrial workers), the heat composition in the modified test was changed to better approximate the emergency conditions for firefighters.

TPP rating defined
IAFF worked to identify appropriate levels of heat insulation in clothing by investigating fireground conditions and determining needed escape time. This research led to the current TPP rating of 35 that has been the minimum standard for firefighter clothing since its introduction in 1986. Incidentally, prior to that time, firefighter clothing insulation was defined only on the basis of the overall thickness of the composite (combination of material layers) used in the clothing.

The test result is based on the predicted elapsed time that will occur before an average individual will sustain a second-degree burn. The actual TPP rating is this time multiplied by the energy level of the test exposure.

In this case, the exposure level is at 2.0 calories per square centimeter per second. This represents the amount of heat energy that a firefighter would face while being in the same room during a flashover or backdraft.

Thus, the minimum TPP rating of 35 is 2.0 cal/cm2-sec times 17.5 seconds. The 17.5 seconds is the time that a firefighter would have to escape from the environment under that exposure condition before sustaining second-degree burns.

What makes TPP important
For many years, the TPP rating was the sole measurement of firefighter protective clothing. It has been the benchmark for how the various material layers — outer shell, moisture barrier and thermal barrier — are combined to form the primary three-layer composite used in turnout gear construction.

The idea has been that clothing with a TPP rating of 35 or more will provide adequate protection for firefighters who find themselves in dire situations and permit escape with survival. This level of clothing performance does not mean that the firefighter will not be burned or that his or her clothing will remain undamaged.

On the contrary, this minimum rating is in essence the basis for protecting a firefighter during the infrequent emergency conditions that some firefighters experience. It comes with the expectation that in providing that protection, the clothing will be charred and show other forms of high heat damage.

Very few departments gauge the thermal insulation of their gear on the basis of the minimum TPP rating of 35. Instead, most organizations opt for a higher rating to provide a better level of protection.

The TPP rating is generally balanced with the stress-related features of structural firefighting protective clothing. Without this thinking, one natural response would be simply to specify an increasingly higher TPP rating for improved protection.

However, this comes with the penalty that the gear becomes more bulky and heavier that in turn creates physiological stress on the wearer. Since 2000, TPP ratings have been compared with a property called total heat loss that measures these stress related effects for the same three-layer composite.

Firefighters have become accustomed to their clothing constructed at a specific TPP level. Through training and actual use during structural fires, they learn how long they can be in a certain situation and what their respective TPP value is for the clothing they wear.

Limitations of TPP ratings
TPP is not the end all in thermal insulation. As the test is designed to mimic the high end of the fireground exposure conditions, it is only a snapshot of the total range of conditions that a firefighter can face.

Fireground conditions are dynamic, but the test is static using the exact same condition over the total time of the test. TPP testing does not account for the various factors that can affect insulation — clothing condition, levels of moisture, fit of the clothing on the individual, and any of the myriad ways that the heat exposure can occur.

To use the basis of the TPP rating of 17.5 seconds as a safe time for having protection is not only ill-fated assumption, but one that would result in a firefighters getting burned or worse.

The group responsible for writing the NFPA 1971 standard which includes the TPP test has labored for years to identify other tests that will provide improved protection to firefighters. Concepts such as compression of clothing in reinforced areas (knees and shoulder) and heat storage during prolonged exposures to moderate levels of radiant heat have been added to NFPA 1971 to supplement how thermal protection is provided.

Why change
In its attempt to modernize and improve some of the test methods applied throughout NFPA 1971, the committee has decided to replace the TPP method based with a newer method from ASTM International. While this change appears innocuous on the surface, it was recently learned that the new method will result in an average decrease in the TPP ratings of 2 to 3 for exact same materials.

This means that the current 35 becomes a 32 with a similar offset in any TPP rating. The committee never intended such a change and there is no plan to move the TPP requirement downward. This discovery comes as a surprise to those involved in the standard development process.

The argument supporting the change is that the ASTM test method is better defined and more precise. Yet, it is different because it causes already compliant material composites that meet the 35 TPP rating requirement to drop 2-3 point due only to a difference in how the measurement is made.

In fact, even the individuals at the test laboratories routinely involved in this testing are still scratching their heads trying to figure out why this is so. The bigger problem is that the fire service has a long history in the current test and what these TPP values means in terms of their expectations for thermal performance.

This history and fire service understanding of TPP is about to become undermined.

Potential improvements should be investigated. But changes in a standard should never be implemented until the changes are fully validated through extensive inter-laboratory testing and the changes are determined to have the intended effect or benefit to the fire service. Modifications to a standard, which have not been vetted should always be postponed until the fundamentals of the test or change are fully understood.

In this case, the TPP test and the associated rating work as intended.

Regardless of my response two facts remained.

The first is that she asked the question. I mean really? Do you think a lot of business owners even give this consideration? And since she had considered it, and she had decided that the value of the property and its contents didn't warrant our entry, who were we do decide differently?

This building had a nice-sized parking lot and plenty of room between the B and D exposures. It had a metal truss roof and, due to the narcotics, had some very serious locks and security devices that would have slowed horizontal vent or entry.

Quite frankly even a low heat but smoky fire would have destroyed the contents, and any fire generating high heat would have likely destroyed or at least damaged the trusses. The building would be torn down with any significant fire.

Plan beyond the building
I'm not suggesting we write off all pharmacies. I am suggesting putting some forethought into the pre-incident plan that involves not just the buildings, but the intent and desire of the community.

What is your community willing to loose? How far are you willing to push? Are the two thoughts in sync? If not, you have some discussions that need to occur.

Too many departments collectively strut around stating that they can arrive with a certain amount of staffing and perform a certain amount of fireground duties. And quite frankly they are lying to themselves and their community.

And, that's not OK. They aren't going to show up with the right staffing or training to carry out what they suggested to the public, and themselves, they can do.

Knowing who we are
There are departments in my state that simply don't do interior attack. If you have a fire, they will attack it from the outside untill it's flooded, then ask a mutual aid department to head in and mop it up. Some departments do this intentionally, some simply don’t make the push.

For those departments that intentionally choose this path of attack, there are many who would chastise them, but there's something to be said for their honesty. They don't march around claiming to be something they are not

They are good honest members of the community doing the best they can with what they have. And interestingly, because they are honest about what they do, their training plans, equipment and activities reflect it. They are good at it and they meet they safety requirements for what they do.

We run into trouble when we are not honest, when we claim to be something where not or trained to be. When we are no longer doing this for the community we swore to protect, that's when we ask, who are we doing this for?
 

In general, liquid protection means that the protective clothing prevents the penetration of liquids through the clothing limiting contact of the liquid with the wearer’s skin or underclothing. Liquids can include water, particularly hot water, water with contaminants, liquid chemicals, blood, or body fluids.

All forms of barrier clothing are generally designed to keep at least one type of liquid from getting through the clothing. For example, clothing that is designed for blood borne pathogen protection, is intended to prevent wearer exposure to the pathogens associated with infected blood or body fluids.

The performance of garments and other types of clothing against liquids is based both on the product materials and its design. Both aspects of product performance are equally important for showing whether clothing holds out liquids.

Material performance
Material performance is the demonstration that the material system or layers prevent any visible penetration of liquids. This is normally ascertained through putting a sample of the material in a test cell, which holds the material in place while liquid is put in contact with the normal external side of the material.

Most often, pressure is applied behind the liquid for a set duration and intensity, while the other material side (representing the interior of the clothing) is observed for signs of penetration. The pressure applied and the time of exposure varies with the different forms of liquid tests, but the general principal of testing remains the same — liquid is either seen to come through the material or not.

Consequently, many test results are reported as either pass or fail. In some cases, the pressure or time of failure may also be reported. Materials showing passing results are those that do not let any liquid come through the material.

It is not a foregone conclusion that any continuous material will pass penetration testing. For the most part, materials must have some type of film or coating to show acceptable barrier performance.

Textiles and leather are porous and while they may be coated or treated with special finishes to retard different liquids, with enough pressure or time, liquids will generally penetrate these materials. There are also certain types of plastic films that are designed to be micro-porous, meaning that the holes or pathways through these materials are microscopic in size.

Moreover, the pathways themselves may be very small and indirect, twisting and turning in different directions. In order for liquids to find these pathways, very high levels of pressure must be applied and some liquids may or may not penetrate depending on the characteristics of the liquid.

Surface tension
The controlling factor is the liquid's surface tension — a measure of the energy between a liquid and surface. Liquids with a high surface tension, like water and water-based liquids, require more pressure to facilitate penetration.

The higher the surface tension, the less ability there is for the liquid to spread out over the surface. It is illustrated by water beading on a waxed surface, like the finish on a car hood.

Yet, add some detergent (a surfactant) to the water and the water will no longer bead. Liquids with low surface tension tend to be better penetrating liquids. Many chemicals, like alcohol and petrochemical solvents, have low surface tensions as do blood and some body fluids.

Breaching material
The only other ways for a liquid to get through a material is by either degrading the material or by permeation. Degradation occurs when the chemical causes deterioration of the film, which in turn, creates small holes and penetration pathways.

The ability for the liquid to cause degradation depends on the nature of both the chemical and the material. Some chemicals can be harsh and will soften and cause other changes that lessen the material's barrier characteristics. It simply depends on how the chemical interacts with the material.

Fortunately, most industry materials are designed to withstand the effects of multiple chemicals, but since there are so many possible chemicals that can be encountered, all materials are susceptible to at least some chemicals.

Permeation is the other way that a chemical or liquid can get through a material, but this process occurs on a sub-microscopic level. Here chemical molecules pass through the material and come out the other side as a vapor.

This is the same process that happens for material that is breathable, only in that case, the chemical that is passing through is water or water vapor. Needless to say, the amounts of liquid that pass through in this manner are generally very small and cannot be perceived.

However, permeation does become significant if the liquid is highly hazardous and is toxic by skin contact and absorption. Also, permeation can be at high enough rates to show visible liquid on the interior garment surface.

Protecting seams
The most obvious pathways for penetration are seams. The holes made by needles in sewing pieces of material together are easily penetrated by most liquids if those seams are not taped or sealed.

Some barrier material may be joined without sewing by heat-sealing the surfaces of the material together. In either approach, the seam may take on the same performance as the base material.

The exception is that some liquids may affect the tape different than the film. Some tapes rely on glue or adhesive, which can be attacked or dissolved by the chemical making this construction less effective for holding out certain liquids.

Clothing design
By their very nature, all clothing has openings. Of particular significance is the interface between clothing items. The design of these areas is important in affecting whether liquids will enter or not.

For example, it may seem obvious that liquids could enter a glove through the gauntlet or wristlet area, but if the end of the glove is covered up by interface with a coat sleeve, then the ability of liquid to penetrate that portion of the clothing is affected.

Similarly, how coats and pants close and the manner in which clothing items overlap all make the garments that much more resistant to liquid penetration. These openings are actually the more likely penetration pathways for liquid into the garment than are the material or its seams.

NFPA 1992 was developed specifically to address liquid splash protection for first responders and applies the test principles of both material and seam resistance to liquid penetration in addition to assessments of overall garment integrity, including the interfaces, when complete clothing ensembles are certified.

Where it differs with other standards is that the battery of chemicals is more general. The current list of test chemicals includes acetone, dimethylformamide, ethyl acetate, sodium hydroxide, sulfuric acid, and toluene.

This list includes chemicals that do not easily evaporate or are not skin toxic or carcinogenic in their vapor form. They are chemicals that would be concerns for liquid contact in industrial situations.

Generally, materials that do well against these chemicals will also perform well against other chemicals, yet there are many exceptions.

NFPA 1992 does not involve washing garments prior to testing as may occur for most fire service clothing; however, the testing involves repeated flexing and some abrasion on the material to simulate wear and tear on the product as might be experienced in use. Nevertheless, the ability of these preconditions to represent actual use has not been established.

NFPA 1992 also involves the evaluation of seams for liquid penetration using two chemicals — isopropanol (a very good penetrant) and concentrated sulfuric acid. In addition, whole garments or clothing items are evaluated for overall liquid integrity through a shower-type test.

Garment and clothing items that pass NFPA 1992 demonstrate a high level of liquid hold performance, but this does not mean that liquid contact will not occur. There are many chemicals that can cause degradation of the materials or seams, or permeation at very high levels.

Moreover, there are many circumstances in which garment closures and interface areas may permit the penetration of liquids given the orientation and activity of the wearer combined with the respective volume and characteristics of the liquid.

Certainly, where possible, first responders are trained to avoid unknown liquid pools or sources.

The added benefit of NFPA 1992 is that clothing that may demonstrate protection to ordinary fireground liquids or infectious liquids, provides protection against a broader range of liquid chemicals.

To suggest that strategic decisions (those 50,000-foot views) can be boiled down so that decisions are really made by the incident commander is naive at best.

At the end of the day, it's about protecting life and property. Luckily, in most communities — through public education and smoke detection systems — we are seeing fewer occupants in the building on arrival than we did in the past.

However this still leaves preservation of property. In some communities our homes don't sit on multi-acre lots. If one home burns unchecked it will transmit into the adjoining exposures. An aggressive action (interior or exterior) must be done to address this fire.

Curbside service
Most firehouses are made up of similar groups of people. As the saying goes: "The name on the circus tent changes, but the clowns are the same."

Most departments have that guy whose been there, done that and is more than happy to tell you (especially if you're a new member). What they tend to forget to mention is that they participated from the curb. They would have gone in but they loss a glove, their bottle malfunctioned, they forgot their tool(s), they heard their mom calling or any other excuse.

Now chances are there are other roles this person can play without jamming up your fire ground. It doesn't take long for even the new members to recognize these guys for what they are. Most of us are able to shake our head all the while recognizing that if we could take what this person is saying and get it in our vegetable gardens we’d have a bumper crop of tomatoes this year.

Unfortunately these sidewalk dwellers tend to speak in absolute terms. Their lack of training, education and experience all combine to create an incredible lack of knowledge.

But their stories are compelling and their use of neverisms make it difficult to respond. Because we don't want to appear as if we are not cognizant of firefighter safety, we often won't disagree with their statements.

But stories play an incredibly vital role in the fire service. Sometimes the stories are structured, like a good post incident critique; sometimes they are less organized, like around the coffee table. Regardless a good story and story teller allows others to gain knowledge.

But sometime the stories are wrong.

The operating process of a fire department should go like this: We have an experience, we create or modify a standard operating procedure to address the experience, we train to that SOP, we have another experience where we use the SOP and the cycle starts again.

Probability over possibility
To that end we need to focus on the probable outcomes, not all the possible outcomes. If we look at all the possible dangers we couldn't ever leave the station as it turns out the world is a pretty dangerous place.

We need to speak up when the Joey Sidewalks start to talk in absolute terms. When they use the latest catch phrases in an attempt to cover up the fact that they are too lazy to learn, we need to stop them.

It can be done politely, but must be done. There are impressionable ears listening and some of those ears belong to people wearing fancy collar brass.

Out stories tend to turn into the unwritten values of our departments. Those values tend to turn into strategy on the fireground.

Strategy based on life safety is outstanding; in fact it's a must. But strategy based on a neverism is dangerous.

It creates a disconnect between what we say we do and what happens. It is a disconnect between our SOPs, training and fireground actions.

At the end of the day, if we decide not to take actions based on definable, defendable policy, we can make that work. But if our strategy doesn't match up, trouble is brewing for all involved.

A good friend, Chief Walter Bell was the career chief of the New Rochelle (N.Y.) Fire Department starting in 1959. I truly enjoy talking to him about the good old days of his fire service career.

I find it very hard to believe that back in the late 50s new members who came in were greeted with, "Wow, you guys are perfect, just what we are looking for!" And I don't doubt that when many of those who complain now about new members had quite a few senior members rolling their eyes when they first walked in the station.

I still remember Capt. Kennedy jumping on me when he thought I was questioning an order while flaking out a hose line for an interior attack. Although I wasn't questioning him, let's just say that the organizational structure of the fire department was crystal clear at the conclusion of the conversation.

I bring these items up because even if you grew up in a fire service family, none of us came into the fire service worth the sweat on the brow of the senior members of the firehouse. But, if you kept your eyes, ears and mind open, you could progress.

Learning how to do things the right way until they are instinctual is a big part of what we do. As recruits, the basics are (or should be) slowly ingrained into natural actions.

But sometimes we develop bad habits, habits that last much longer than they should and can be, at best awkward and at worst unsafe or deadly.

Our officers often talk about unteaching a habit or, worse yet, a viewed action. We can discuss safety issues all day long, but if our recruits see an unsafe action (particularly by a officer or senior member) how do we unteach that action?

As instructors, we know how strong visuals are at getting messages across; after all, a picture is worth a 1,000 words.

When I was a recruit we had a great instructor, Chief Tom Maloney. Tom had a way of getting into your head (even if he had to go through it).

And God help you if you showed up at the burn room door without your helmet strap fastened. Your helmet was going for a ride and you would have to leave the line (worse yet, the coveted nozzle) to retrieve it while someone else took your place.

But I didn't learn my real lesson until my first interior attack as the nozzle firefighter. I was at the front door, awaiting the forcible entry team.

The nozzles bale had been knocked to the open position and when the line charged it started to move so I jumped on it. But, I didn’t have the strap on and lost my helmet.

And while I got my helmet, some very kind fellow firefighter took the nozzle and headed on in. I wear my chinstrap.

We want enthusiastic recruits; it's good to have enthusiasm for the trade. But sometimes that enthusiasm turns into bad habits that need to be addressed quickly.

We all have bad habits and they can lead down much worse roads than just loosing the nozzle.

As leaders (official and unofficial), we need to help break these habits early on — both ours and other's. Rather than complaining about the kids these days, make sure they have the safety habits that will turn them into wise veterans.
 

• Place the ladder at an angle less than 75 degrees to allow for greater control and prevent slipping
• Place the tip of the ladder just below the window sill so the exit area is kept open and the firefighter can keep low
• Exterior teams should position ladders on upper floor windows to provide alternate exit for interior companies in the event of an emergency
• Have a crew or member available to heel ladders or reposition ladders in the event the firefighter is in a window over from the ladder
• Communicate and listen; know where crews are operating and adjust accordingly
• Be proactive
• When training, make sure you use rated safety line and a rated safety harness assembly on the firefighter and inspect all ropes and harnesses in use prior to training

We responded to a fire January 5 and discovered that the electricity at the house had been "jumped" with a metal plate, energizing the entire household as the ground was not hooked up.

We had the local power company respond but they were not able to disconnect the power at the pole due to heavy smoke at the power source.

One hour and 15 minutes into the fire we had the fire suppressed enough that the electrical crew could clip the power, killing the electricity.

When we released the scene they took the house off the grid completely.

This kind of incident is just a heads up as to the state of our economy, in which people might resort to this type of theft that would potentially injure fire crews.

With PPE, there is a reason we are given turnout gear — to protect us. But it cannot protect us if we do not wear it and wear it properly.

Let's take our hoods for example. They should not be used as an option but as a standard. Having them around our neck or in our pocket is not doing us any good.

In addition, know your ladders. Know which way to carry them to the scene and raise them properly and safely.

With Fire/EMS Safety, Health and Survival Week under way, many fire and EMS agencies are taking a time-out from regular training activities to have a department safety stand-down. My own department is substituting our monthly training meeting with a review of the International Seat Belt Pledge and a cook-out.

As you know, safety should not be isolated to a single training meeting, evening, day, or week. Safety is an integral component of all response and training activities. As you review safety procedures and practices this week, consider how EMS — like other health-care providers — can more regularly add a "Time-out for Safety" to EMS calls and fire incident response.

My running and cycling partner is a general surgeon. At the start of every procedure, he leads his surgical team in a time-out for safety to confirm these important details:

• Correct patient identity 
• Correct side and site 
• Agreement on the procedure to be done 
• Correct patient position 
• Availability of correct implants and any special equipment or special requirements

A time-out for safety would be appropriate in many EMS calls and fire incidents. Checklists or confirmation criteria would make sense for:

1) Patient extrication from motor vehicles, collapsed structures, and unstable surface

2) Rapid sequence intubation to secure a patient airway

3) Application of pharmacological restraint to excited delirium patients

4) Transferring patient care to an air or ground ALS intercept crew

I would like to see a checklist like this before initiating code 3 — red lights and sirens — patient transport:

1) Patient condition meets protocol indications for code 3 transport

2) Patient secured to cot with lap, leg, and shoulder restraints

3) All patient care providers wearing seat belts

4) Equipment — like cardiac monitor — secured with brackets, netting, buckles, or belts

5) Experienced driver trained and authorized for code 3 transport

6) Receiving hospital notified of code 3 transport and prepared to promptly receive patient

7) Weather, road conditions, and other vehicle traffic suitable for code 3 transport

Greg Friese is an e-learning specialist, author, presenter and paramedic. He specializes in the design, production, and distribution of e-learning for emergency responders. You may submit tip ideas and discuss online EMS education with Greg by e-mailing him at greg.friese@ems1.com or by visiting EverydayEmsTips.com.

• Determine the occupant survival profile
• Maintain continuous awareness of your air supply, situation, location and fire conditions
• Ensure accurate accountability of every firefighter’s location and status

Health:

• Take steps towards meeting NFPA health standards, such as NFPA 1500
• Set S.M.A.R.T. goals for you health action plan – Specific, Measurable, Attainable, Realistic, and Timely
• Rehab after all physical activity – stay hydrated

These videos will serve as a resource to the fire service that NFPA will share with fire departments to assist them in reducing fireground injuries as part of local training efforts. NFPA, IAFC and NVFC will select finalists based on the best safety and health video content, as well as the creativity and enthusiasm they show in making the video.

The deadline for video submissions is May 11, 2012. NFPA, IAFC, and NVFA will choose four finalists and voting will be open to the public.  The contest winner will be announced on June 12, 2012 during the Fire Service Section Reception at the 2012 NFPA Conference & Expo in Las Vegas.

About the International Association of Fire Chiefs
The IAFC represents the leadership of firefighters and emergency responders worldwide. IAFC members are the world's leading experts in firefighting, emergency medical services, terrorism response, hazardous materials spills, natural disasters, search and rescue, and public safety legislation. Since 1873, the IAFC has provided a forum for its members to exchange ideas, develop professionally and uncover the latest products and services available to first responders.

About the National Volunteer Fire Council
The NVFC is the leading nonprofit membership association representing the interests of the volunteer fire, EMS, and rescue services. The NVFC serves as the voice of the volunteer in the national arena and provides invaluable tools, resources, programs, and advocacy for first responders across the nation.

About the National Fire Protection Association (NFPA)
NFPA is a worldwide leader in fire, electrical, building, and life safety. The mission of the international nonprofit organization founded in 1896 is to reduce the worldwide burden of fire and other hazards on the quality of life by providing and advocating consensus codes and standards, research, training, and education. Visit NFPA’s website at www.nfpa.org for more information.

The IAFC Board of Directors has adopted a position statement on U.S.-wide trends of fire departments and EMS agencies experiencing critical shortages of drugs that are used to save the lives of patients that may be suffering from trauma or a medical emergency. The IAFC Position Statement on the National Drug Shortage (.pdf) calls on the American fire service to make addressing the national drug shortage a top priority.

The position was brought forward to the IAFC leadership by the IAFC EMS Section following extensive research and discussions with local and national stakeholders.

"A solution must be found; paramedics must have the crucial and necessary drugs to save the lives of their patients," said Chief Gary Ludwig, chair of the IAFC EMS Section. "The ability to administer the appropriate pharmaceutical products to patients in the field can be the difference between life and death. We all know that rapid intervention is essential in these situations; waiting to administer life-saving drugs until the victim reaches an emergency room—at least 10 to 15 minutes after we have begun care—creates a serious and unnecessary risk."

The position statement draws on federal government and medical industry research, which illustrates the growing problem. The number of drug shortages have tripled in just 5-years time and shortages are becoming more severe and more frequent. Currently, there is no comprehensive data on the specific impact caused by drug shortages on fire-based EMS; however, much of the risks identified in the research (e.g. delay in care, human error, prohibitive expense, etc.) are easily extrapolated to the EMS-environment.

The position statement includes three components:

• an educational component on the national drug shortage including associated risks, identification of factors contributing to the national drug shortage and fire department impact,
• an outline of the IAFC positions on issues relating to federal investment and processes, national laws and regulations,
• and improved interagency collaborations, and suggested actions for fire and emergency service leaders.

"The national drug shortage is having a major impact on fire-based EMS, but it is also a larger public safety issue," said IAFC President Al Gillespie. "Even if your department does not provide EMS, the repercussions of shortages in your community can negatively impact your ability to successfully save lives and the ability of others to help responders in need of emergency care. I encourage every fire service leader to educate themselves on this issue and become a part of the solution."

About the International Association of Fire Chiefs (IAFC)

The IAFC represents the leadership of firefighters and emergency responders worldwide. IAFC members are the world's leading experts in firefighting, emergency medical services, terrorism response, hazardous materials spills, natural disasters, search and rescue, and public safety legislation. Since 1873, the IAFC has provided a forum for its members to exchange ideas, develop professionally and uncover the latest products and services available to first responders.

About the IAFC Emergency Medical Services Section

The IAFC EMS Section is a forum that addresses EMS issues for the leadership of America’s fire and emergency service, provides guidance and direction to the IAFC board and membership and represents fire-based EMS issues to the federal government and other EMS partners.

QUINCY, Mass. — The National Fire Protection Association (http://www.nfpa.org/) (NFPA) and Chevrolet (http://www.chevrolet.com/) and OnStar (http://www.onstar.com/web/portal/home) are pleased to announce that more than 10,000 firefighters and first responders have completed virtual electric vehicle safety training (http://www.evsafetytraining.org/Training). The online training, hosted by NFPA, became available in April 2011 and features an inside look at the newest technology and safety systems on the all-electric 2011 Chevrolet Volt.

The collaboration with Chevrolet and OnStar is part of NFPA's Electric Vehicle Safety Training project. In addition to the online training, the nationwide project began the classroom-style, train-the-trainer sessions at fire academies across the country this summer.

"Through our work with Chevrolet and OnStar, we have been able to reach 10,000 firefighters and first responders with important information in a very short time period," said Andrew Klock, NFPA's senior project manager for the program. "The number of hybrid and electric vehicles on the road continues to increase. Whether firefighters and first responders take the online training or participate in our classroom-based electric vehicle training, we want to ensure they all are equipped with necessary information about this new vehicle technology."

"The launch of the Chevrolet Volt virtual training has continued the momentum generated by the live Chevrolet OnStar First Responder Training conducted in the classroom," said Leslie Kilgore, program manager, Chevrolet OnStar First Responder Training Tour. "In working with NFPA to create the virtual equivalent of the live training sessions, we aimed to provide technical information that was relevant, timely and met the same core learning needs of first responders in dealing with the advanced technologies present on the Chevrolet Volt. The fact that over 10,000 first responders have taken the training to date, and the numbers continue to grow daily, encourages our training team that first responders have unlimited access to the Volt information at their convenience and pace. We're proud to have led the pack advanced technology training with the Chevrolet Volt."

To date, state-level trainings have taken place in Connecticut, Georgia, Maryland, Massachusetts, Montana, New Hampshire, New Jersey, New York, North Carolina, North Dakota, Oregon and Wisconsin, and several additional trainings are on the calendar for the remainder of this year. The goal is for all 50 states to take part in the training by the end of 2012.

Months of research and development between Chevrolet and OnStar training specialists, engineers, firefighters and subject matter experts associated with NFPA went into the creation of the virtual training. Firefighters and first responders who use the online training will have access to an interactive training session, including videos, virtual trainers and a variety of downloadable resources about the technology and inner workings of the Chevrolet Volt.

To take part in the Chevrolet/OnStar online training, visit www.evsafetytraining.org/Training. For more information and resources about NFPA's Electric Vehicle Safety Training, and to sign up for upcoming trainings, visit www.evsafetytraining.org.

About NFPA's Electric Vehicle Safety Training Project
NFPA's Electric Vehicle Safety Training project (http://www.evsafetytraining.org/) is a nationwide progrm to help firefighters and other first responders prepare for the growing number of electric vehicles on the road in the United States. The NFPA project, funded by a $4.4 million grant from the U.S. Department of Energy, provides first responders with information they need to most effectively deal with potential emergency situations involving electric vehicles.

About Chevrolet
Founded in Detroit in 1911, Chevrolet (http://www.chevrolet.com/) celebrates its centennial as a global automotive brand with annual sales of about 4.25 million vehicles in more than 120 countries. Chevrolet provides consumers with fuel-efficient, safe and reliable vehicles that deliver high-quality, expressive design, spirited performance and value. The Chevrolet portfolio includes iconic performance cars, such as Corvette and Camaro; dependable, long-lasting pickups and SUVs, such as Silverado and Suburban; and award-winning passenger cars and crossovers, such as Spark, Cruze, Malibu, Equinox and Traverse. Chevrolet also offers gas-friendly to gas-free solutions, including Cruze Eco and Volt. Cruze Eco offers 42 mpg highway while Volt offers 35 miles of electric, gasoline-free driving and an additional 344 miles of extended range. Most new Chevrolet models offer OnStar safety, security and convenience technologies, including OnStar Hands-Free Calling, Automatic Crash Response and Stolen Vehicle Slowdown.

IAFF General President Harold Schaitberger will deliver remarks during the opening session on Monday, August 15, and President Bill Clinton, founder of the William J. Clinton Foundation and 42nd President of the United States, will follow with a keynote address. Among the many initiatives he supported, President Clinton signed the FIRE Act, providing fire departments with much-needed funding for equipment and other resources, and signed an executive order mandating federal investigations of all line-of-duty deaths.

“We are truly honored to welcome President Clinton, who did so much for fire fighters during his presidency,” Schaitberger said.

The Redmond Symposium and Barbera EMS Conference will provide IAFF leadership with vital training and educational opportunities, including the IAFF’s Fire Ground Survival course, designed to train fire fighters how to get out of a “Mayday” situation alive. Fire fighters from Toronto Local 3888 will discuss how the Fire Ground Survival course helped them avoid severe injury and death during a six-alarm fire in January. The conference also includes a workshop to teach fire fighters to safely disable electric cars and a discussion by the IAFF members who responded to the January shooting in Tucson, Arizona, that injured U.S. Rep. Gabrielle Giffords.

On Thursday, August 18, the conference will conclude with a somber tribute to the 343 members of the FDNY who died in the 9/11 terror attacks nearly a decade ago. A conference agenda is here: http://www.iaff.org/Events/2011Redmond/index.htm

The International Association of Fire Fighters, headquartered in Washington, DC, represents more than 300,000 full-time professional fire fighters and paramedics and is the leading advocate for the health and safety of first responders. Members of the IAFF protect 85 percent of the nation’s population.

More information is available at www.iaff.org

###

The new STOP campaign reinforces that Safety Tops Our Priorities. The first training in the program – STOP: Seatbelts Top Our Priorities – is now available online at http://training.mcneilandcompany.com (access code 6832). The free 30-minute training module focuses on vehicle safety with an emphasis on seatbelt use. With Fire/EMS Safety, Health, and Survival Week in progress and proper seatbelt use one of the NVFC's Health and Safety Priorities for the Fire Service, now is the perfect time to implement this training in your department.

"Seatbelt use may be the easiest thing first responders can do to protect themselves from harm," said NVFC Chairman Philip C. Stittleburg. "We are pleased to partner with McNeil & Company to launch this new training program to instill and reinforce safe vehicle practices on first responders across the country. All first responders should take the free STOP training, and we highly encourage department leaders to incorporate STOP: Seatbelts Top Our Priorities into your regularly-scheduled department training activities."

Taking simple precautions like clicking a seatbelt and watching your speed significantly reduces the risk that a first responder will be killed or injured in a vehicle accident. Yet the need for increased awareness and training is evident. Every year, 25 percent of on-duty firefighter fatalities are caused by vehicle crashes. According to the National Fire Protection Association, nearly 1,000 firefighters were injured in vehicle accidents in 2009 either in department apparatus or in personal vehicles responding to or returning from incidents.

STOP: Seatbelts Top Our Priorities is a training module delivered through an online platform hosted by McNeil and Company's Emergency Services Insurance Program (ESIP) and presented by Chief David Denniston, Client Education and Training Manager. Departments can incorporate the STOP program as part of their training activities to educate their members about vehicle safety and reduce the risk of firefighter death and injury from vehicle accidents. STOP contains completion tracking capabilities so departments can ensure their members have completed the course, and certificates of successful completion can be printed once individuals have finished the training. Training officers may contact the NVFC for a report of all their members who have completed the training.

In addition to the STOP training, the NVFC strongly encourages departments to have all their members sign the International First Responder Seat Belt Pledge. The pledge was created in 2006 in memory of firefighter Brian Hutton, who died after falling from his fire truck on the way to a call. Over 850 departments and 150,000 firefighters – including the full NVFC Board of Directors – have signed the Seatbelt Pledge, making the commitment that they will improve their safety by wearing their seatbelts.

Join with the NVFC in ensuring that Safety Tops Our Priorities in the emergency services. Register today to take the STOP: Seatbelts Top Our Priorities training at http://training.mcneilandcompany.com. To register, follow these steps:

• Select "Not Already Registered? Click Here." 
• You will register as a student using access code 6832. 
• Enter your email address and confirm. 
• Enter a password and confirm. 
• Enter your first and last name, and then enter the department you are affiliated with. 
• Check off the Terms and Condition box and select Register.

If you experience any difficulties accessing the training, please contact Heather Fredenburg at hfredenburg@mcneilandcompany.com or 800-822-3747 Ext. 524.

Stay tuned to the NVFC for information about additional STOP training modules. Together we can create a culture where vehicle safety is accepted and expected in the fire and emergency services.