It's hard not to notice that we are still killing many of our firefighters in VACANT structures, fire-resistive high-rises and buildings constructed with lightweight trusses.
Safety seems to be a word that is being used more and more. We need to ask ourselves whether we are really serious about doing this job safely or just using the word "safety" as another "cutting-edge" term?
The incident command system (ICS) includes the safety sector in the command post matrix for a reason. It's important! It's also a job that cannot be accomplished by one person on the fireground. Any department that tries to ensure safety by dispatching one person as safety officer is kidding itself or the people who work for it. We are all part of the safety formula.
Some in our profession would like to get away from our paramilitary system with its ranks, titles and such. They would rather align us with a business-like aura. I was recently referred to as a "manager" instead of a chief. It made it sound like I manage a shoe store or a widget factory. I take umbrage at this concept.
Actually what I - and all chiefs - do is lead people into armed combat (in this case, armed with water) against an enemy that is just as dangerous, cunning and powerful as any found on any battlefield. Unlike my military counterparts, I have only one responsibility and that is to protect the safety and welfare of the people under my command at all costs. I cannot, however, do this alone.
The role of the incident commander during an emergency is to anticipate conditions and therefore provide the resources and leadership to keep the scene manageable. The unit officers and firefighters must follow standard operating procedures (SOPs), guard against changing conditions in their immediate area and report such changes to command immediately.
This is not to say that these members are to be constantly on the radio, for this would only make the scene more unstable. Messages should be brief and verified. Remember, he who keys the mike of a radio owns the fireground. I don't know of too many systems that allow more than one transmission at a time.
Emergency messages such as the report of a downed or missing firefighter must be given the utmost priority as soon as this information is made known to anyone on the scene, regardless of rank. Anybody who has "gone down the hallway" knows that when a team of firefighters is fighting the beast, all of their senses and energies are focused. This is one of the most critical times. Too often, it's at this precise moment that we become the most myopic - and therefore enters the need for the safety sector. It's the safety sector's role to cover our backs and watch for conditions and changes that the attacking units don't see. It's also at this time that, by violating SOPs or breaking down one of our oldest tenets, the team concept, we kill many of our people.
Our mission is to protect life and property. We employ a risk-vs.-gain concept in accomplishing this mission. So I look at a VACANT building as having no worth, with certainly nothing to gain by entering this structure to fight a fire. We're not talking about a rubbish fire, but a volume of fire that is attacking the integrity of an already compromised building. There is absolutely no reason to commit our people to a most unnecessary risk in order to save something that has already been abandoned.
The potential loss of civilian life must be tempered against the loss to our people. The rescue of a known occupant is a danger in this job, but a search for a "maybe" is foolhardy, in my opinion. The only safe and effective operation for me is the use of heavy-duty devices and large-diameter hose streams.
We are steeped in a tradition that has worked since the first volunteers picked up a bucket - we operate as a team. We employ engine and truck operations together. This is especially important in fire-resistive high-rise structures. Any violation of this tenet leads to tragedy. How long does it really take to form up on the floor below and develop a plan between the companies, then attack the beast with charged handlines, self-contained breathing apparatus (SCBA), tools and all? I also believe that when companies are operating under these conditions, there should be a command presence in the immediate area.
The problems with lightweight truss construction start with identification. Unless we watched the building being constructed, we have very few, if any, clues to lightweight truss construction from the exterior. In fact, owners and architects are actually spending money to disguise the fact that buildings are lightweight.
Every member of the fire service must be exposed to building construction courses. It is my belief that you can't comprehend what is happening to a structure as it's coming apart unless you know how it was put together. There has been a drop across the country in the number of "jobs" that we face each year; therefore, this precludes the idea that experience is the best teacher. We do, however, have many resources at our disposal to educate ourselves.
Many community colleges offer such programs. We also have many people in the fire service who will bring this information to your doorstep for a nominal fee. Finally, we have the National Fire Academy, which is underutilized. The costs of injury and death to our people far outweigh the cost of educating our people so that they make prudent decisions.
Any incident, fire related or not, has the potential to hurt our people and to grow in scope, so we must be able to let the safety sector grow. We also need to involve everyone in the safety formula from the start of each shift until its completion. This can be as simple as paraphrasing an old TV saying - "Let's be safe out there."
Finally, we must realize as a group that the only true way to keep all of us safe is for all of us to realize that safety is not just a word but a reality.
I recently had the good fortune to attend some courses at the Philadelphia Fire Department's training academy. This came as a result of the academy's "Project Outreach" program. The courses were well taught and very well attended, and the best part was that they were free. All we had to do was to call up and register. Not only were the instructors giving valuable information to their own members, but also to members of other departments - volunteer as well as career.
This led me to wonder how many other departments have also risen to the challenge of providing training to the fire service by sharing resources and knowledge gained from experience. I don't know of many departments, large or small, that are not struggling every day with tough budget decisions. We are forced to ask more from our members than ever before.
Phoenix Fire Chief Alan Brunacini, a leader in fire service management concepts, sends his chiefs on exchange programs with other departments. The potential rewards from a program of this sort are limitless, in my opinion. Most battalion chiefs I've spoken with around the country are enthusiastic about such programs. Maybe the International Association of Fire Fighters (IAFF) and the Metro Section of the International Association of Fire Chiefs (IAFC) could get together and discuss the potentials for a program of this magnitude. It would be especially beneficial for chiefs in areas of the country that are not particularly busy. It would also help to send a chief to a city that has expertise in a certain field, such as high-rise firefighting or special operations.
I believe that with success the program could even be expanded to include line officers of lesser ranks. Upon completion the chief would be required to present the knowledge received to the other members of their department. The only financial outlay would be for transportation.
The point can be made that it is the responsibility of the National Fire Academy to provide such a program, but the NFA has budget concerns too. Dollar for dollar the staff at the NFA seems to work miracles to provide the programs that it does. I believe that the current funding for training for terrorism underscores the issue. The NFA received a very small amount to provide training to the people who will be the first on the scene, while others seemed to have gotten a blank check.
As I travel around the country on the speaking circuit, one issue that comes through loud and clear is that no matter what color our fire trucks or uniforms are, we all have the same responsibility. That is to keep the people under our command SAFE. If a program of resource sharing can help, then I think that we as a service should explore it vigorously.
Chief Concerns is a forum addressing issues of interest to chief fire officers. Opinions expressed are those of the writer. We invite all volunteer and career chief fire officers to share their concerns, experiences and views in this column. Please submit articles to Chief Concerns, Firehouse Magazine, 445 Broad Hollow Road, Melville, NY 11747.
Michael L. Smith, a Firehouse® contributing editor, is a battalion chief in District of Columbia Fire & Rescue.
