By HAL BRUNO

A bill to provide $5 billion in federal aid for the fire-rescue service and the need to rehabilitate the U.S. Fire Administration (USFA) were the main topics of concern at a special meeting held at Firehouse Emergenc y Services Expo '98 in Baltimore. What came through loud and clear was anger and frustration over the failure to obtain help from Washington, along with a new determination to save and expand what's left of the federal fire programs.

The unique session was open to everyone and attracted a cross section of approximately 45 fire officers from large and small departments, representing both the career and volunteer services. Everyone who wanted to speak had a chance to be heard and there was a lively discussion on every issue, with some sharply different opinions being expresses. But there was one thing everyone agreed on: the nation's firefighters have been treated like second-class citizens when compared to the support police department s are receiving from the federal government.

It was pointed out that local law enforcement annually receives $7.62 billion in federal funds. In contrast, USFA and the National Fire Academy have a combined budget of only $28.5 million for the current fiscal year. Even though police and fire protectio n are local and state responsibilities, Washington has provided the money for President Clinton's plan to put 100,000 additional police officers on the streets of American cities. But nothing has been done to help the fire departments that are underfunded and understaffed after years of drastic budget cutting.

There was intense discussion of a bill introduced in the House by Rep. William J. Pascrell Jr. that calls for $5 billion in federal grants to local fire departments over a period of five years. Known as the "21st Century Fire & Public Safety Act," it woul d award the grants on a competitive basis, with a sliding scale for fire departments to qualify by putting up matching funds that would be determined by their size and the amount of federal money requested. The grants could be used for a wide range of pur poses, including the purchase of apparatus and equipment, training, emergency medical services, fire prevention and anti-arson programs, and to hire more firefighters.

Pascrell is a first-term Democratic congressman from New Jersey and a former mayor. Inside the fire service, there has been mixed reaction to his bill, ranging from enthusiastic support to skepticism and concern that it is an unrealistic "pie-in-the-sky" with no chance of passage –especially in a Republican-controlled Congress where the top priorities are to reduce spending and cut taxes. A major worry is that Pascrell's bill would divert attention and weaken support for urgently needed legislation t hat has a more realistic chance of being passed.

Proponents of the bill argued that it is time for the fire service to "think big" and aggressively go after all the money it can get. However, a letter from seven national fire organizations warned of the need to salvage existing fire programs that never have been properly funded. But fire legislative leaders have offered to work with Pascrell's staff to modify the bill in ways that might give it a somewhat better chance of passage when the new Congress convenes next year. (For now, it's buried in committ ee with no hope for action in the final weeks of this congressional session.)

The money proposed in the Pascrell bill would be administered by the USFA, which sparked a round of bitter criticism of the Fire Administration for its failure to lead and fight for the federal fire programs. Many expressed concern that the National Fire Academy has suffered because of USFA's problems. And, there was unanimous support for the idea that, in the future, only experienced fire chiefs should be considered for the post of USFA administrator.

Several speakers also expressed distrust of USFA's parent organization, the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA), where the emphasis is on response to natural disasters and there is only grudging recognition of the role played by firefighters as first responders. They made the point that more people die in fires in one week than are killed in natural disasters in an entire year, yet there is no one with fire experience to represent the fire-rescue service at FEMA he adquarters.

The meeting also heard a detailed explanation from a fire service leader involved in the FEMA director's "blue ribbon" panels to investigate the long list of complaints against the Fire Administration and the damage done to the Fire Academy. He outlined h ow the investigation is gathering information for a report to be delivered next month.

Other issues and topics covered in the 90-minute meeting included poor reporting of fire statistics by too many departments –which makes it more difficult to justify the case for federal funds; the need for improved officer's training; better use of computers and electronic technology; the problems of urban-wildland interface and the fires it produces; and the inexcusable, slow pace in preparing fire departments for their response to acts of terrorism.

But everything was overshadowed by the desperate need for federal aid to help the fire-rescue service meet its constantly expanding responsibilities. There is a genuine resolve to straighten out the U.S. Fire Administration, create strong federal programs that help reduce the loss of life and property to fire, and match the kind of support that has been given to the police.

The fire-rescue service knows what it needs. The big question is how to get it from a tightfisted Congress, an indifferent White House, and an embattled President who has his.

WORTH NOTING: When the urban search and rescue team from the Fairfax County, VA, Fire & Rescue Service got orders to respond to the embassy bombing in Nairobi, it mobilized in just four h ours –with personnel and equipment ready to go. Then it waited 13 hours for the first military air transport to load and take off, and 21 hours for a second plane. This is the same Department of Defense that has proposed airlifting National Guard uni ts for a "fast" response to domestic terrorist attacks.

Update On Hazmat Transport Legislation
Here's an example of what can go wrong as legislation winds its way through the maze of Congress:

Last month, we reported how the fire service had finally succeeded in getting a rule that would require all shipments of certain hazardous materials to be labeled, even when hauled on trucks that travel only within a state.

Opposition came from agriculture-business interests who object to the cost ($12.58 for a placard and frame) and the "red tape" that would require them to carry shipping papers. They want an exemption for loads of up to eight tons of ammonium nitrate, 21Ú2 tons of pesticides and tankers with anhydrous ammonia. Twice they tried to attach the exemption to appropriation bills, but were defeated by effective lobbying and teamwork between fire organizations and citizens groups.

But Sen. Conrad Burns (R-MT) made a third try and tacked it on to the Department of Transportation appropriation bill. He claimed it would grant "regulatory relief" to farmers and businesses who use and sell the products. A coalition of farm-state senator s rounded up enough votes to pass the amendment when it was added on the Senate floor. However, a House version of the bill does not include the exemption and now it's up to a House-Senate conference committee to resolve that and other differences.

Ammonium nitrate is used for fertilizer and to make bombs like the type that blew up the federal building in Oklahoma City. If you want to prevent eight tons of it from moving through your district in a truck with no warning label, quickly write, phone, f ax or e-mail your members of Congress to kill the agri-business hazmat exemption.

In the meantime, continue using extreme caution when approaching any unmarked truck that may be carrying agricultural chemicals. All that's at stake is your life –which is worth more than a $12.58 placard.