Charleston Listens to Preliminary Panel Recommendations

[Nine3Probie]

So what you guys are saying is that if someone had been in charge, they would have directed Engine 11 to lay in thus providing water. I guess if you have one conductor you will have a well organized and orchestrated attack that provides a safe working environment. But then again, who wants that?

I suspect the NIOSH report will be an interesting read for some of us, and FFFRed will find fault with it. He won't be able to accept it.

Devildog, hang in there. Ignore the BS name calling and mud slinging, try to maintain a professional posture.

cdevoe, I don't think you've been paying attention.

No one here has said that the recommendations are "wrong". All I've seen is people asking "How do we know they are right?" WE have no frame of reference, yet some have said they are 100% accurate. How do THEY know for certain?

Between this thread and the Boston thread, forum members have been asking for the complete "official" report before passing their own judgement. Is that really too much to ask for?

[FFFRED]

So what you guys are saying is that if someone had been in charge, they would have directed Engine 11 to lay in thus providing water. I guess if you have one conductor you will have a well organized and orchestrated attack that provides a safe working environment. But then again, who wants that?

No, according to that argument it sounds more like their SOPs weren't followed...which would be the source of the problem not the size of the hose as some maintain...but I guess it takes more than 4 days of investigating to find this out.

I suspect the NIOSH report will be an interesting read for some of us, and FFFRed will find fault with it. He won't be able to accept it.

Other than the timeline of events I put no weight or trust in any recomendations from NIOSH after seeing a complete abortion of a report regarding one of our LODDs that all of us on this job agree came from inexpereinced (only one of two has any fire expereince and it is severely limited at that) people who didn't even bother to reasearch operating procedures or listen to the members who were at the fire.

NIOSH fatal fire investigators are a joke until they can prove otherwise...11,000 firemen around here agree on this I can assure you.

Devildog, hang in there. Ignore the BS name calling and mud slinging, try to maintain a professional posture.

He never had one from his first post to his most recent...why should he change is ways now?

FTM-PTB

[FFFRED]

[QUOTE=Batt18;873258]

Note: There is confirmation on the audio tapes that a Chief on scene was calling the second due (and possibly the first due) around the back of the store to deal with the 'trash'. There were at least two chiefs on scene as the initial response arrived. Who was in command? They were both giving directions to the initial response and secondary response and yet they were clearly not 'face to face' with each other, so contact between them had to be via radio. Under an ICS that was followed according to SOP, or a pre-assigned response, you would know who is/should be in command!

Just because a senior rank is on-scene is not a reason to presume he/she is in command!

• This is why ICS is critical

• You don't need ICS to set up rules on who is in command when and where at a fire.
  
  Furthermore all one needs is a system where the box assignment is respected and followed except under unusual circumstances. 1st due is first due...2nd due is 2nd due. What are CFD procedures on this topic?
  
  

• DevilDog..Yes I agree they are throwing abuse at you - stick with it dude!

[Batt18]

Quote:
Originally Posted by HotTrotter View Post
So what you guys are saying is that if someone had been in charge, they would have directed Engine 11 to lay in thus providing water. I guess if you have one conductor you will have a well organized and orchestrated attack that provides a safe working environment. But then again, who wants that?

FFFred - No, according to that argument it sounds more like their SOPs weren't followed...which would be the source of the problem not the size of the hose as some maintain...but I guess it takes more than 4 days of investigating to find this out.

No ... this issue here is were there orders given by an on-scene chief, who may or may not have been officially in command, that conflicted with the SOPs?

[QUOTE=FFFRED;873296]

You don't need ICS to set up rules on who is in command when and where at a fire.

Fred that sounds funny don't you think? You don't need ICS ... you need rules! I thought that's what the ICS was ... a set of structured rules.

Furthermore all one needs is a system where the box assignment is respected and followed except under unusual circumstances. 1st due is first due...2nd due is 2nd due. What are CFD procedures on this topic?

Exactly .... but the box assignment must also be respected by commanders and there are protocols within a well structured ICS that ensures wherever command is transferred, it should be made clear. Just being on-scene and giving commands is not the same as 'assuming command'. This may well be a case for discussion because as I stated, on tape there appear two commanders giving what may have been conflicting orders during the initial stages.

Abuse? He is a condending coward who speeks down to others and claims supperiority of his sh*thole state but won't tell us what great dept he works for...don't defend the indefensible.

Fred .... what is it with California? Did you have a bad experience there or something!

FTM-PTB

[devildog4]

From FireChief Magazine
Asleep at the Switch

By Linstrom at 11:31 am, 10/09/2007

Wow! We are still talking about and mourning the nine firefighters killed in a South Carolina building collapse. There is truly nothing new under the sun.

Here’s what we already knew from 200 years of firefighters dying unnecessarily in America:

Certain construction is prone to earlier collapse.

Truss roofs kill.

Fire load contributes to failing structural members.



After approximately 20 minutes, if firefighters haven’t darkened the fire down significantly, officers should consider pulling all personnel out from the interior of the building and have them fight the fire defensively from outside the collapse zone. If your assessment at the 20-minute mark indicates a high probability that the structural integrity will remain, then continue with firefighting operations, as required. There are certain construction types should have officers thinking, “we are going to wash this one down the street in six hours, but we should still be committed to taking everyone of our firefighters home at the end of this thing.”



Remember that the term for fuel (the structure) in the fire tetrahedron is “reducing agent.” If structural members are being reduced (consumed), why are we surprised when the building falls down? The media and really poor fire officers always say tragedies were “without warning.” We’ve been warned for the past 200 years, only some of us aren’t listening.



A primary search in an unsprinklered, high-piled rack storage furniture store can’t last an hour in any community on the planet. I fear that an entire system of fire response was asleep at the switch!



I will refuse to add the words “brave” or “hero” to the nine killed in Charleston. They were innocent victims. This was fratricide — brother killing brother — in another death by friendly fire. When are we going to stop the madness and senselessness of these preventable deaths? This is a public health emergency. The occupational death of one worker every three days is unacceptable in every profession but ours. The rest of the world gets it. They value their firefighters and any firefighter death is a national tragedy.


We just yawn and call them “brave heros.” Then we add insult to injury by putting stick-on letters on the back window of pick-up trucks in commemoration. Where is the outrage from the fire service? I know. Let’s add a bullet to next year’s safety standdown. That ought to help.

From me. FFFRED and ChicagoFF and others. Your misplaced anger at me for the frustration and sadness at the loss of our CFD Brothers should be directed towards the Chief and City officials who allowed this FD to operate twenty years in the past.

[Bones42]

Thanks for your opinion.

[ChicagoFF]

From FireChief Magazine
Asleep at the Switch

By Linstrom at 11:31 am, 10/09/2007

Wow! We are still talking about and mourning the nine firefighters killed in a South Carolina building collapse. There is truly nothing new under the sun.

Here’s what we already knew from 200 years of firefighters dying unnecessarily in America:

Certain construction is prone to earlier collapse.

Truss roofs kill.

Fire load contributes to failing structural members.

Were the SC9 killed by the collapse?

[devildog4]

Fire panel wants big change
By Ron Menchaca (Contact)
The Post and Courier
Wednesday, October 10, 2007

Report to cite need for improvements from hoses to training to staffing

An independent panel hired to study the Charleston Fire Department in the wake of the Sofa Super Store tragedy will recommend a sweeping overhaul of the department's practices, procedures and equipment in its forthcoming report, The Post and Courier learned Tuesday.

The report, expected to be released this week or next, will recommend changes in virtually every aspect of the department, including the purchase of larger fire hoses and supply lines, more training at all levels and improved communication between department leaders and rank-and-file firefighters.

Among the recommendations the panel is considering for its report are:

-- Increase the water supply at fire scenes. The Post and Courier reported Sunday that firefighters at the sofa store blaze that killed nine men lacked an adequate water supply because their hydrant supply hoses and attack lines are outdated and smaller than those used by most departments around the country.

-- Improve firefighter training and education at all levels of the department.

-- Hire more firefighters to adequately respond to blazes.

-- Revise pre-planning policies for structures with known hazards and ensure that those plans are updated and used in the event of a fire.

--Work cooperatively with other area fire departments to conduct joint training, share resources and provide mutual aid.

-- Adopt administrative changes aimed at spreading authority and oversight among more leaders and form committees to rereview and make suggestions on key issues, such as promotions and discipline.

-- Ensure that Chief Rusty Thomas and other department leaders include firefighters in decisions and encourage them to express disagreement.

Many of the panel's recommendations dealing with equipment and staffing were part of an earlier list of findings the panel issued Aug. 17. Some of the panel's recommendations dealing with incident command procedures also were identified as deficiencies in a recent state workplace safety report.

The state office of Occupational Safety and Health Administration cited the city last month for four violations stemming from the sofa store fire.

On Tuesday, attorneys representing the city formally protested those citations and requested a hearing with agency's review board. The Associated Press reported that OSHA also received a protest from the Sofa Super Store and that a hearing would be scheduled. No date has been set.

The review panel's forthcoming report had been expected last month, but panel members have said that was only a ballpark estimate.

City spokeswoman Barbara Vaughn said the city has not been provided a copy of the report, though "parts and pieces have been shared" with city officials.

The six-member team of firefighting professionals began its examination in August. Team leader Gordon Routley, a former fire chief in Shreveport, La., pledged that the panel would work autonomously and pursue the facts wherever they may lead.

Since then, panel members have pored over hundreds of city and department documents and interviewed dozens of firefighters. On Aug. 17, after less than a week of work, the panel announced an initial list of findings, saying that the department's outmoded tactics and dated equipment must undergo significant change in order to catch up with basic fire service standards followed throughout the country.

The forthcoming report is the first part of a three-step process. Next, the panel will compile the various investigative reports into the fatal June 18 blaze, and later it will draft a long-range strategic plan for the department.

In addition to Routley, other team members are: Kevin Roche, assistant fire marshal and assistant to the fire chief in Phoenix; Tim Sendelbach, former chief of training for Savannah Fire and Emergency Services; Brian Crawford, assistant to the fire chief in Shreveport and resident instructor at the National Fire Academy; Mike Chiramonte, a fire inspector and former fire chief in Lynbrook, N.Y.; and Pete Piringer, spokesman for the review panel.

Reach Ron Menchaca at rmenchaca@postandcourier.com or 937-5724

And I am wrong for previously bringing most of this up before, at least according to a few on here.

[HotTrotter]

Thanks for your opinion.

That wasn't the devildogs opinion, it was the opinion of linstrom, whoever he is???

[HotTrotter]

Were the SC9 killed by the collapse?

NOPE!!! They died from burns and smoke inhalation. And that is from the coroners report, which makes it fact.

[Bones42]

And I am wrong for previously bringing most of this up before, at least according to a few on here.

THAT is DevilDogs opinion.

[devildog4]

in a South Carolina building collapse not by a South Carolina building collapse.

Bones42, I didn't expect much else of a response from you. An article from Fire Chief magazine and the Charleston newspaper that agreed with me (or I agreed with them), and it is still me who is at fault.

[HotTrotter]

THAT is DevilDogs opinion.

Ahhh.. Give him some credit. He was able to see what is being said by putting all of the information together. He didn't need to be hit over the head with some final comprehensive report. Some people are in complete denial that there were any problems in CFD. It's been reported in the press. It's been documented by a panel. It's been documented by SC OSHA. Even the Chief has admitted things were not quite right, simply by commuting to change.

Of course those same people are in denial about the alcohol and drug problems in the emergency services.

[Bones42]

I think you will find very very few people who "are in complete denial that there were any problems in CFD". I think you will see many people who are still trying to get the basic facts and standard procedures before calling for a major overhaul.

Do the procedures exist?
Do the procedures make sense for CFD? (if they exist)
Were the procedures followed?
Did the procedures fail or the guys following the procedures fail?

I'm sure you will not find anyone who will say the CFD SSS fire went well.

[ChicagoFF]

From FireChief Magazine
Asleep at the Switch

By Linstrom at 11:31 am, 10/09/2007

Wow! We are still talking about and mourning the nine firefighters killed in a South Carolina building collapse. There is truly nothing new under the sun.

Here’s what we already knew from 200 years of firefighters dying unnecessarily in America:

Certain construction is prone to earlier collapse.

Truss roofs kill.

Fire load contributes to failing structural members.
[/I]

devildog4 - in a South Carolina building collapse not by a South Carolina building collapse.


So what was the point of this post, actually what was the point of the article?

[Steamer]

I think he was responding to your question if they were killed by the collapse. He's saying their deaths were in a collapse rather that killed by the collapse.

Personally, I don't see a difference, at least not at this point. Burns and smoke inhalation or crushed to death, if the roof collapse led to the injuries that killed them, they were killed by the collapse.

[HotTrotter]

I think he was responding to your question if they were killed by the collapse. He's saying their deaths were in a collapse rather that killed by the collapse.

Personally, I don't see a difference, at least not at this point. Burns and smoke inhalation or crushed to death, if the roof collapse led to the injuries that killed them, they were killed by the collapse.

There in lies the issue. They weren't killed by the roof collapse.

[devildog4]

Retired Captain Talks About Changes Needed in Fire Department
Wednesday October 10, 2007 6:29pm Reporter: Sarah DeMarco Posted By: Katie Newingham
More Talk of Change

Charleston, SC - A retired Charleston fire captain and friend of Chief Rusty Thomas, says one of the fire department's greatest problems is staffing. Chief Thomas says the Charleston Fire Department is just as safe as it was before the Sofa Superstore Fire.** The problem though, the concerns the retired captain brought forward, were concerns a long time before June 18.

He visits the grave site of Melvin Champaign a couple times a week. Retired Capt. Richard Koger brushes away the dirt, but can't wipe away reasons why he believes nine lives were lost.

"The incident command system. The basic incident command system has never been in place in the City of Charleston," said Koger.

Koger says he trusts Chief Thomas cares about his men, but lacks the technical knowledge of the fire service.

"We fight an aggressive attack which has worked wonderfully. It saved Charleston. But the issues are changing as far as what's in those structures. They burn quicker, they burn hotter," said Koger.

Topping his list of frustrations: staffing. Just last Friday, ladder 5 was taken out of service for half the day because there weren't enough men to man the truck. Chief Thomas says he's had to to make sure at least three men are on every truck.

"We never ride a pumper, even before the fire with less than three. A ladder truck, in West Ashley and Daniel Island, if we're short a person, we'd always ride it with 2 people," said Chief Thomas.

Retired Captain Koger says the best way to fix short staffing is to pay overtime. Right now, firemen are paid what they call half-time or are given a comp day if they work extra. Years ago, the City established the firefighters pay plan. But a lawsuit in the late nineties, filed by firemen and agreed to by firemen, established a new system and the current rate of pay. Any changes would have to go through another legal process.[/[/COLOR]COLOR]

**I'll bet the families of the 9 FF's who perished at the SS fire feel good about that statement.

BTW ChicagoFF, if you can't understand the point of the article it would be to difficult for me to explain it to you

[Bones42]

one of the fire department's greatest problems is staffing.

One of the MOST overlooked of the recommendations.

[ChiefKN]

One of the MOST overlooked of the recommendations.

Yes. Agreed, and we've been so caught up in the intangibles and speculation that we overlooked what should be a no brainer.