New policy may have kept 9 out of infernoTruss tactics 'very cautious,' city safety director says The Post and Courier
Saturday, September 22, 2007
Truss tactics 'very cautious,' city safety director says Charleston firefighters likely would not have entered the Sofa Super Store, where nine firefighters were killed June 18, if a new policy for battling blazes in buildings with truss roofs had been in effect that night. The new policy, signed by Charleston Mayor Joe Riley on Sept. 5 and announced this week, requires city firefighters to use a heat-sensing camera to detect hidden fire and prohibits firefighters from entering such structures if a truss roof or floor has been exposed to fire. Ted Austin, the city's safety management director, said the new policy is "very cautious, and certainly makes firefighters aware of the hazards." But he said he doesn't think it would have saved any of the nine men killed in the sofa store fire because the blaze spread so rapidly. 
Alan Hawes Firefighters maneuver under a steel truss to put out a small fire started by steel workers dismantling part of the roof June 21 at the scene of the Sofa Super Store fire, where nine firefighters were killed June 18. On Thursday, state workplace safety officials fined the city $900 for not having procedures covering the special hazards of the truss roof design. The city was fined an additional $8,425 for three other violations in what the state office of the Occupational Safety and Health Administration said was one of the largest fines ever imposed on a public agency in South Carolina. Video footage, photographs and firsthand accounts from of the sofa store fire indicate that the building's steel truss was exposed to heat and fire within minutes of the arrival of the first crews. Firefighters on the scene did not check for hidden fire inside the ceiling and commanders ordered crews to go inside to fight the blaze. Firefighters had at least one heat-sensing, thermal imaging camera available that night, but it sat unused in a fire truck parked outside the store. The truss design is widely reviled in the fire service because it can hide growing fires and has a propensity to weaken and collapse when exposed to heat, sometimes in as little as 10 minutes. Charleston firefighters were inside the sofa store for at least 30 minutes before the roof collapsed as flames consumed the building. The federal government issues special safety guidelines about the truss design and warns firefighters to get out if there is any indication that the trusses are exposed to fire. Mike Smith, one of nation's leading lecturers and authors on building construction and firefighting, said Friday he is often surprised by the number of firefighters who aren't aware the potential dangers posed by certain construction. Smith, retired deputy chief with the District of Columbia Fire Department, recently gave a seminar on the topic at a firefighters' convention in Myrtle Beach. "We all know what bad ju-ju trusses are," he told a class of firefighters from departments throughout the state. "Steel was born of fire. It dies of fire." Firefighter CoverageIn our special section with photos, videos, interactives, donation information and every story written about the tragedy.Policies detailing how firefighters should respond to fires in different types of buildings are great, Smith said. But they mean little if firefighters are not trained how to recognize different types of building construction and understand the unique hazards that each can pose to firefighters, he said. He said training on building construction is lacking in the fire service. Riley announced the new truss policy during a press conference called to dispute state findings that the city knowingly placed its firefighters at risk during the June 18 blaze. Riley said the initiative was one of several steps the city had taken to improve the fire department. He said he is unaware of any other fire department in the state that has a specific policy for battling blazes in buildings with truss construction. Austin was the primary author of the policy. He drew from existing truss roof policies used by fire departments in Phoenix, Maryland and Virginia, as well as federal firefighting guidelines. Austin said he also consulted with local structural engineers. He said the city's policy goes beyond what OSHA would require, to encompass not only metal trusses but those made of wood as well. As written, the new policy assumes that city firefighters already recognize metal truss construction. But one Charleston firefighter said he and others in the department are concerned that the city issued the new policy without providing the training to back it up. "It's a joke," said the city firefighter, who did not want his name published because he fears he would be reprimanded for speaking out. "How the heck am I going to know if it's a truss roof building? I have not had any training on building construction." Austin said the policy calls for additional training and the fire department is in the process of developing a curriculum for truss roof fire tactics. After the sofa store fire, message boards and blogs were filled with firefighters lamenting the challenges of fighting fires in buildings with steel trusses. Some talked about a saying in firefighting circles, "Never trust a truss." The Post and Courier first reported the dangers associated with fire and steel trusses June 23. For that story, the newspaper asked Charleston Fire Chief Rusty Thomas if firefighters at the scene of the sofa store fire were aware of the widely circulated reports and warning about this type of building construction in a fire and if he thought the truss might have played a role in the fire. Thomas answered that his department has fought plenty of fires in buildings with steel trusses. "As far as if they knew it was steel truss construction and stuff like that, I don't know if my guys knew or not," Thomas said at the time. Smith did not comment specifically on the Charleston fire, the fire department or the new policy. He said the only time a fire commander can justify sending his people inside such a building is if they have reliable information that someone is trapped inside. Even then, commanders need to ensure they have enough water ready to douse the blaze and that the rescue operation won't unnecessarily endanger the lives of firefighters. "If I can't guarantee 100 percent that I can bring you out, I don't put you in. It's about being responsible for the lives of the people that work for you. As a chief, I took that seriously," Smith said. Columbia Fire Chief Bradley Anderson said Charleston's broad new policy is commendable, but its effectiveness will depend on the training that supports it and how well the men on the street understand it. "In this business, you don't have the luxury of looking up a policy when you respond," he said. "You have to know it and be able to recall it at a moment's notice when you are responding somewhere at two in the morning." Reach Glenn Smith at gsmith@postandcourier.com or 937-5556. Reach Ron Menchaca at rmenchaca@postandcourier.com or 937-5724. |
Article toolsSponsored Links |
|
Notice about comments: Charleston.net is pleased to offer readers the ability to comment on stories. We expect our readers to engage in lively, yet civil discourse. Charleston.net does not edit user submitted statements and we cannot promise that readers will not occasionally find offensive or inaccurate comments posted in the comments area. Responsibility for the statements posted lies with the person submitting the comment, not charleston.net. If you find a comment that is objectionable, please click "suggest removal" and we will review it for possible removal. Please be reminded, however, that in accordance with our Terms of Use and federal law, we are under no obligation to remove any third party comments posted on our website. Full terms and conditions can be read here. |
Comments
This article has 188 comment(s)
Posted by Harpo on September 22, 2007 at 12:45 a.m. (Suggest removal)
Better late than never. Has the fire chief backed away
from his aggressive fire fighting policy that specifies
people still enter buildings to fight the fire, then,
or does this only concern steel truss roofs?
Posted by Local on September 22, 2007 at 12:59 a.m. (Suggest removal)
Good point, Harpo. As always I will look forward to the firefighters' posts about how these new policies are being trained and implemented.
The Mayor was on Live 5 Talkback tonight and was NOT happy that his authority was being questioned. Once again he defended the Chief, asking why replace someone with such great experience and leadership? If he was a regular reader of these posts he would know why!
Posted by Local on September 22, 2007 at 1:05 a.m. (Suggest removal)
Interesting that today's Letters to the Editor contains two pro-chief letters and none of the opposite viewpoint.
http://www.charleston.net/news/2007/sep/...
Posted by huntress87 on September 22, 2007 at 1:47 a.m. (Suggest removal)
if you go to YOUTUBE.com and search for CCFD, all of the remembrances.. KEEP my mind fresh of why we are speaking out, adn wanting the change.. WE can't afford to loose another MAN due to chaos @ the scene and not having the ability to realize what is at stake....
Posted by Neponset on September 22, 2007 at 2:25 a.m. (Suggest removal)
Local
Lets see what surfaces on the Ed. page in the next few days. It is unfortunate that current ff with CFD can not speak out for fear of retribution/professional suicide.
Posted by mmeemz on September 22, 2007 at 2:33 a.m. (Suggest removal)
Ted Austin,
<<Ted Austin, the city's safety management director, said the new policy is "very cautious, and certainly makes firefighters aware of the hazards." But he said he doesn't think it would have saved any of the nine men killed in the sofa store fire because the blaze spread so rapidly.<<
Hello? The rapid spreading of the blaze was IN SYNC with Garvin having opened a door b/t the showroom and the warehouse! Perhaps if he'd stayed outside where it appears he should have been at that time, the blaze might not have spread so rapidly. OR, if he had had the TIC, that was left on a seat in a truck, and used it while inside, he wouldn't have opened the door.
<<The new policy, signed by Charleston Mayor Joe Riley on Sept. 5 and announced this week, requires city firefighters to use a heat-sensing camera to detect hidden fire and prohibits firefighters from entering such structures if a truss roof or floor has been exposed to fire.<<
I'm not making the connection about how you can say you don't think having had this policy in place prior to the tragic fire would have saved any of the nine men killed - unless you're assuming it would have been "rt's business as usual" at CFD and the men would not have received the training they need (and want)? "As written, the new policy assumes that city firefighters already recognize metal truss construction."
Posted by BillyTheKid32 on September 22, 2007 at 2:37 a.m. (Suggest removal)
Wow, it is almost like they are starting to care.
They had the equipment, they didn't have the management.
Posted by surfdawg121 on September 22, 2007 at 3:03 a.m. (Suggest removal)
I thought the situation was dealt with quite effectively. As an on campus RA living in the secured area I had to field a lot of complaints from students about the lack of information. However, the college did the best they could inform the students without creating rumours or panic in a situation where one wrong word could have caused many problems.
The city's response was just as appropriate. They took no chances and closed off a two block radius around the area. If students want to complain about not getting to class on time then I say let them whine because I took the effort to walk the extra two blocks around the scene, and for those who could not get their cars and complain about it then I say they need to stop complaining because the best was done in the interest of their own safety.
If another event of the type were to happen in the future then I would recommend that everyone just take a breathe and relax. Let the city do their job protecting us, and keep in mind that the college works to protect students whether some people realize it or not.
Posted by Neponset on September 22, 2007 at 3:11 a.m. (Suggest removal)
surfdawg121
Think you posted on wrong article - done it myself when commenting on multiple articles.
Posted by hotrod2007 on September 22, 2007 at 3:18 a.m. (Suggest removal)
This article is very contradictory and another example of the city officials’ competence!
Ted Austin, the city's safety management director, DOESN’T think the NEW policy requiring the use of heat sensing equipment would have saved any of the nine men killed in the sofa store fire because the blaze spread so rapidly.
Per this article,
(a) firefighters had at least one heat-sensing, thermal imaging camera available that night, but it sat unused in a fire truck parked outside the store … COMMANDERS ordered crews to go inside to fight the blaze.
(b) “Video footage, photographs and FIRSTHAND accounts from of the sofa store fire indicate that the building's steel truss was exposed to heat and fire within minutes of the arrival of the first crews.” (The plaintiffs’ lawyers will lover this … Which crony will defend this statement? Or, will they blame the Charleston 9,)
(c) “Charleston firefighters were inside the sofa store for at least 30 minutes before the roof collapsed as flames consumed the building.”
(d) “The truss design is widely reviled in the fire service because it can hide growing fires and has a propensity to weaken and collapse when exposed to heat, sometimes in as little as 10 minutes.”
If the firefighter were “inside the building for at least 30 minutes” AND truss may collapse “in and little as 10 minutes” then 30 minutes minus 10 minutes equals 20 minutes. Plaintiffs’ lawyer -- Mr. Austin, how could the heat sensing equipment not have made in difference given a 20 minute window for analysis? Isn’t this equipment capable of sensing the body temperature which is well below the temperature to melt steel?
Mr. Austin you either know better or you’re not smarter than a fifth grader. If the latter is the case, I would suggest it would be in your best interest to get educated. I can promise this, when you and the anonymous person with firsthand knowledge are required to answer these questions, both of you will be thrown to the wolves.
It is my understanding that some city council members have only a high school diploma. Is most of the city leader other than the mayor uneducated? Also, how much are the taxpayers paying for with local structural engineers to solve second grade math problem? The city does have engineers on the payroll. Oh, you would want to use them because in the end every man will be for himself.
If the city can spend million of dollars on outside experts do the work of it leaders and things like our mediocre fish tank; we should be able to spend the funds necessary to properly train average firefighter. Previously, I have been very supportive of the mayor, but 32 years is enough.
VOTE! http://gregorieformayor.com/
Posted by Boosterhose on September 22, 2007 at 3:37 a.m. (Suggest removal)
So Joe Riley has to approve department policy now. Are we being inflicted with a second micromanager?
Come inspection day is Joe going to crawl under the front of my engine[wearing his suit] while Rusty crawls under the rear[wearing his dress uniform] looking for dirt?
Or is the chiefs position vacated and Riley is the next man up doing an underlings job?
While I certainly appreciate Little Joe wanting to pitch in, due to his track record I'd hate to see him calling the shots. Maybe he should have the author of the new memo do this.
Posted by Boosterhose on September 22, 2007 at 3:48 a.m. (Suggest removal)
Maybe if Joe wants to take a hand and make things safer for his firefighters he could enact a reg for Charleston residents. In the old days buildings had an plaque on the front saying which company would fight the fire in their building.
He could have a similar plaque on the front[it could be stylized and perhaps reflecting the Chas 9]. This plaque would be indicative of a truss type construction. Most new residences are made with wood trusses also. This could alert firefighters of this hazardous condition before ever going into the bldg.
Just a thought I'm kicking around for your discussion.
Posted by hotrod2007 on September 22, 2007 at 4:03 a.m. (Suggest removal)
surfdawg121,
I think you may be responding to another article; nevertheless, don’t be fooled that the city will protect you. The community is just becoming aware that we have the city has prioritized marketing and tourism over protecting the citizens they serve. Moreover, many large structures in the city of Charleston doesn’t have basic fire protection equipment that is considered the defacto standard.
Why, because city leaders have failed to follow though on their responsibilities to the citizens. For example, it was only after the death of 9 brave firefighters that the barriers were removed which prohibited businesses from deploying sprinkler system. Guess what, our mayor is a voting member of Charleston Water System http://www.charlestonwater.com/about_com... . I mention because (a) nine brave firefighters died and over night changes was made to make cost effective to deploy sprinkler systems; (b) To this day our LEADERS refuse to take any responsibility for their actions/inaction
Don’t buy into the propaganda. The Charleston existing administration is based on cronyism and $$$. They could care less about protecting you are me … Also, many of them have less education than you.
Be safe!
Posted by nitelite on September 22, 2007 at 6:26 a.m. (Suggest removal)
thanks for the info hotrod,
this situation gets uglier by the minute. and I also have to agree with boosterhose..joe is a fire expert now? people in charleston better wake up! Let riley continually build a new park, bet his friend who owns the SSS will contest the fine just as the city does the facts of the OSHA report. Sowhat more disrespect of the memory of our nine men will it take for the citizens of charleston to see this mayor for who and what he truly is. our city looks good on the outside but our INFRASTRUCTURE SUCKS! our firemen, police and city service employees are poorly paid. people need to start asking the RIGHT questions. remember when this tragedy first occured the talk was on how firefighters in charleston have to work two to three jobs just to make ends meet. And I bet most couldn't afford to live in the city they died protecting. So the mayor jumps in on the bandwagon to raise money, but out of all of these improvements for the department to implement safety changes,
I ask you this, what has he done to enhance the lives of those firemen who live behind and continue to place their lives at risk?
NOTHING! ABSOLUTELY NOTHING!
THIS IS FACT and NOT OPINION! HE DID MORE FOR THE DEPENDENTS OF THE NINE (WHICH HE SHOULD HAVE) AND NOTHING FOR THOSE WHO ARE STILL HERE SERVING ON THE CFD.
IF YOU LEARN NOTHING ELSE, HIS NON ACTION SPEAKS LOUDER THAN ANY 8 MINUTE PRESS/SPIN CONFERENCE AT CITY HALL.
AND IF HE SAYS PARK ONE MORE TIME!
http://youtube.com/watch?v=umfO8upIIBo
Posted by burton on September 22, 2007 at 6:54 a.m. (Suggest removal)
"If I can't guarantee 100 percent that I can bring you out, I don't put you in. It's about being responsible for the lives of the people that work for you. As a chief, I took that seriously," Smith said.
Do you see the underlying message this Chief is sending? Wow, I bet the lawyers are chomping at the bits! They can't wait to file these "wrongful/wilful death suits on behalf of the families. Voters of Charleston, it is time to look in the mirror and stop using the excuse that King Riley is all you can vote for because of his opponents. If that is the case, then look for King Riley to be the next Berlin G. Meyers! You think he is not going to run again if he wins in Nov?
Posted by granny2 on September 22, 2007 at 7:27 a.m. (Suggest removal)
I think Garvin made more mistakes than Rusty, he is the one that opened the door, and he is the one that sent the men in. Get rid of him. Didn't he also make the inspection on the store months before without making note that it had a still trust. Wonder what his inspection notes said (safe to go in if store is on fire)
Posted by right2work on September 22, 2007 at 7:37 a.m. (Suggest removal)
Even when they do something you all think is right, you still berate the department. Way to support the firefighters. It's about saving lives people, not appeasing the Safety Nazis. Let the Styrofoam coating of the universe begin anew.
Posted by bickleseagrave on September 22, 2007 at 7:50 a.m. (Suggest removal)
A fire's, a fire. Looking at the photo accompanying this article, not much has changed. Firefighters using a booster line in partial turnout gear. Proper protection and equipment should be used at EVERY fire. Where is the line drawn where there should be total protection. If everyone follows the proper procedures at every call, no matter how minor, it just becomes second nature. Same goes with IC, use it at even the most minor calls and it will be easier at the larger ones.
Posted by oldcap on September 22, 2007 at 8:07 a.m. (Suggest removal)
Nothing has changed for us.
Firefighters are speaking out now!!!!! Here and more spoke out at firefighter Hourly.
Great job Ron and Glen
Posted by granny2 on September 22, 2007 at 8:12 a.m. (Suggest removal)
FF's has to help themselves sometimes, I am sure every one of them knows to ware their safety equipment, but as the picture showes they are not wearing it. Looks like they are asking for trouble.
Posted by right2work on September 22, 2007 at 8:19 a.m. (Suggest removal)
Read before you comment people. The picture in not current it was taken 6/21/2007. Three days after the SSS fire.
Posted by jammer on September 22, 2007 at 8:50 a.m. (Suggest removal)
I'm going to repost this here...
I thought maybe it was just the federal government that doesn't listen to it's people, Anarchy we have become
but it seems this city is the same, Joe's being told a thousand times over things need to change and he still refuses to even listen... as if no one is talking he repeats over and over and over how he supports Rusty
it's absolutely ludicrous
Welcome to Charleston, one of America's pioneer Anarchy's
Posted by LeeWalton9 on September 22, 2007 at 9:01 a.m. (Suggest removal)
Once again and still we are seeing a true leader at work. If you doubt Joe Riley's leadership, your dislike for him prevents you from seeing the facts. From Hugo to the fire, he knows what to do to respond to problems to make them opportunities for improvement.
Posted by exorcist_pencocky on September 22, 2007 at 9:29 a.m. (Suggest removal)
Attention please, Attention please one grape kool-aid for LeeWalton9, to go please and with ice, the fires hot.
Posted by OldChasFirefighter on September 22, 2007 at 9:38 a.m. (Suggest removal)
Got some food for thought. I realize that hindsight is always 20-20, but where was the City Safety Director before this? Seems to me that possibly one of the responsibilities that he might have would have been to make sure all the city departments were current on their training, information, etc. Just a thought.
I still believe that OSHA missed the boat on this one, the citations sound like something out of a industrial safety book, "fire brigade" etc. I was afraid of this because they were not set up to really handle an animal like this. Several weeks ago I called and talked to Dottie Ison, who assured me that they knew what they were doing. While I'm on that, please explain to me how Joe can fight their findings on one hand, saying that the city had an IC, but on the other hand he pays a panel to come in, says that the department will work on their recommendations, and the IC is one. Pardon my math, but that does not equal out to me.
The truth of the fire may never be known, but in my mind what really needs to happen is some agency needs to come in, take all the audio and video tapes and pictures, PERSONALLY INTERVIEW all the men that were present and reconstruct the event. I mean who pulled where, at what time, what time the first supply line was layed, where it was layed, how far it was layed, what size it was, figure that friction loss etc. and see what all it was supplying.
I have heard there might have been water issues, and in my simple mind, that all factors in how I decide to attack a fire, and if I need to make adjustments, such as pulling back.
Bootlicked, you had a good idea, I think that if it is a commercial building with hazards, it is probably already in the codes about the NFPA 704 sign. On the bottom there is a spot for special hazards. The city could use a certain sign for steel truss systems. Just a thought.
Posted by exorcist_pencocky on September 22, 2007 at 9:40 a.m. (Suggest removal)
News report from inside sources.
Yesterday, city of charleston city hall, starting at 9:00am EST and continuing during the course of the day, received in excess of 400 phone calls demanding rileys resignation.
Thus prompting a Live5 Talkback visit, keep the pressure on.
Posted by OldChasFirefighter on September 22, 2007 at 9:42 a.m. (Suggest removal)
cont
I am going to put out my own thoughts on the union, come on guys, it is time for you to come up front. If you represent 1/3 of the department lets get it in gear. I hope that you are positioning yourself to take a lead role in the near future. Maybe you are just waiting for a few more things to come out. I hope so, but I think that you could be doing a little more now. Remember, you should be leading these men. I would be looking into the OSHA report, asking why it did not address other things and possibly asking the Feds to look into it. I might be wrong, but my little brain thinks that OSHA dropped the ball, big time. Why did they not refer to standards specifically for Firefighting etc. If you think about it where is the panel coming up with their recommendations? Out of the air? So if this information was out there prior to the fire, why was it not being used. What makes the recommendations good now and not then? And that I believe would bring you right around to the General Duty Clause.
Once again, just food for thought.
God bless all the men of the CFD the ones here now and the ones who have gone before us. May we honor your memory with real change that will make our department safer for the future.
Posted by exorcist_pencocky on September 22, 2007 at 9:50 a.m. (Suggest removal)
>>> OldChasFirefighter - God bless all the men of the CFD the ones here now and the ones who have gone before us. May we honor your memory with real change that will make our department safer for the future. <<<
amen
Posted by MrGoodwrench on September 22, 2007 at 10:09 a.m. (Suggest removal)
"Riley announced the new truss policy during a press conference called to dispute state findings that the city knowingly placed its firefighters at risk during the June 18 blaze. He said he is unaware of any other fire department in the state that has a specific policy for battling blazes in buildings with truss construction."
The problem with this DUMB ASS is he's too stupid & blind to see that no other fire department around here needs to have a policy dealing with truss roof's. They're smart enough to check the ceiling space for fire, and if the structure has a truss roof & the roof area is involved in fire, they don't send anybody in. I'm about sick & tired of listening to Riley's BULL S**T!!!!!! That's always been the problem with the CFD, Riley & Chief Thomas have blow-fished so many people (citizens) over the years that they're such a wonderful department, they can't even see that their antiquated methods led to the deaths of these guys. I think if I hear Riley state CFD is Class 1 again I'll just about shoot myself. Everybody knows the rating is a joke, and the "Gestapo" tactics he uses to control the guys within the department is ridiculous. Yes the guys on the line are AWESOME firefighters, I have no problem with them, but the leadership is horrible. I'm not trying to bash the firefighters at all, but I'm sick to death of listening to this horse crap. I know that Chief Thomas did not intend for those guys to lose their lives, but for him to continue operating with the same old tried and true methods that worked in the 70's & early 80's just doesn't cut it any more. Fires don't burn the same as they did 25-30 years ago. They burn hotter & faster, and fire department's are too short-handed to combat fires the way they did 30 years ago. They've suffered too many budget & personnel cuts over the years because the cities want to save a buck, and unfortunately too many of the citizen's of the cities and towns in the Charleston area have never taken the time to stop by visit their local fire houses, and speak with the guys who are paid to protect them. Too many times you're happy to continue on your merry way, never giving a second thought to the trucks racing down the highway trying to save someone's life, much less to pull over to the right & stop (which by the way is state law), and what the HELL, there aren't as many fires today, but DAMN, 25-30 years ago, firefighters didn't do EMS, Haz-Mat, Technical Rescue, Weapon's of Mass Destruction, RIT, etc. They have to do more today with less than any other time in the history of the fire service. The fire service MUST evolve through education & training in order to face the challenges of today's world. Yes it's wonderful & good to maintain the history & traditions of the fire service, and it's absolutely vital to pass this on to the next generation, but as the fire service changes, today's firefighters MUST change with it. To do anything less is criminal!
Posted by jcaulkins on September 22, 2007 at 10:23 a.m. (Suggest removal)
Just out of curiousity, how many commercial buildings in the Charleston area have steel truss roofs? Look up the next time you go into Lowes or Home Depot (at least you can see them). Might be another good story for Ron and Glenn.
Posted by nickiegarbeil on September 22, 2007 at 10:49 a.m. (Suggest removal)
He knows how to spin a story to keep his behind our of legal trouble...simple as that...they didn't come up with this truss system policy on their own...it's been in the fire service for YEARS...they are now backtracking to implement things that SHOULD have been implemented PRIOR to this tragedy...
Now, with that being said...positive move? Yes...but I would wager a bet that it was recommended they do it...the changes they have met thus far are from the recommendations...without them, they would have never implemented ANY change...Riley knows what to do to keep his nose above the tide...this is his political side step...just as ANY politician would do...but it isn't cause for Kudos...
As for RT...why don't we have a public forum with RT...citizens sit and ask RT questions about fire service related issues...heck, we will devote the entire night to TRUSS SYSTEMS...bring your popcorn folks...he doesn't have a clue...the CFF can tell you that...THEY have BEEN telling you that...you just don't listen...
Posted by exorcist_pencocky on September 22, 2007 at 10:53 a.m. (Suggest removal)
And yet, MrGoodwrench, many residents of the city of charleston still believe mayor joseph p. riley is the best that they could ever have, it simply hurts too much for them to think, or to try.
Fire fighters, these are the people you risk your families welfare, and your lives for everyday.
Kipling...
>>> In the place where 'e is gone—
Where it's always double drill and no canteen;
'E'll be squattin' on the coals
Givin' drink to pore damned souls,
An' I'll get a swig in Hell from Gunga Din!
Din! Din! Din!
You Lazarushian-leather Gunga Din!
Tho' I've belted you an' flayed you,
By the livin' Gawd that made you,
You're a better man than I am, Gunga Din! <<<
Posted by charleytowngirl on September 22, 2007 at 10:55 a.m. (Suggest removal)
Good points, MrGoodWrench....
Part of the problem with a lot of the citizens following this story is that many of them get their news from television rather than the newspaper. And many of those that read the paper, might not read the online version so they have access to the comments.
Many people are being blindly misled by Mayor Rumplestiltzkin and don't see his political side stepping of the issue. They only hear that one day Charleston will be a model for other departments, that he has implemented policies that no other department in the state uses, etc., etc., etc. I don't think most citizens have taken the time to listen/read other fire experts opinions or taken the time to educate themselves on some of the issues. They don't see what is really happening because what gets put on TV is not near as in depth as the articles have been.
The only way more citizens are going to lend support and demand change is for the FF's to step up and start speaking out publicly. And we all know the reasons they can't do that.
Maybe it is time for there to be some sort of Rally for Change in Charleston. FF's from all over the county have stated that they would come to Charleston to help. Maybe a huge Rally would get the attention of the rest of Charleston. Odd that so many from across the country see the problems but the citizens of Charleston have been fooled by Mayor for so long that they can't see what is happening in their own back yard!
Posted by BILLYBOB on September 22, 2007 at 11:06 a.m. (Suggest removal)
KEEP IT UP!!!!WHEN THE KING SPENDS THE PROPER AMOUNT OF MONEY ON THE CFD,THERE WILL NOT BE ENOUGH LEFT TO SUE THE TOWN OF JAMES ISLAND AGAIN!!!!!!!!!!!HE DOES NOT CARE WHAT THE VOTERS DECIDE THEY WANT.CITY OF CHAS PEOPLE ARE STARTING TO SEE WHAT THE JAMES ISLAND PEOPLE HAVE KNOW FOR YEARS!!!!TAKE OVER AND GROW HIS EMPIRE WITHOUT TAKING CARE OF WHAT HE ALREADY HAS!!!!!!
Posted by FiddlerCrab7 on September 22, 2007 at 11:26 a.m. (Suggest removal)
Take a look at some of the studies on truss structures and other construction referenced in this NIOSH report -- beginning in the 1980s!
http://www.cdc.gov/niosh/docs/2005-132/#...
And if Charleston wants to be a national model, then why is it focusing on only what's happening statewide? As quoted in this article, the mayor "said he is unaware of any other fire department in the state that has a specific policy for battling blazes in buildings with truss construction."
I agree that an article on the popularity of steel truss structures would be great, i.e. hardware stores, discount stores, furniture stores, and so on. Some of these stores carry a lot of products that might be quick to burn.
Here's a good article in Fire Rescue 1 magazine:
http://www.firerescue1.com/fire-attack/a...
Posted by exorcist_pencocky on September 22, 2007 at 11:29 a.m. (Suggest removal)
charleytowngirl - >>> Maybe it is time for there to be some sort of Rally for Change in Charleston. FF's from all over the county have stated that they would come to Charleston to help. Maybe a huge Rally would get the attention of the rest of Charleston. <<<
And hopefully "Spotlight" the mess mayor joseph p. riley, jr. has made in the city of charleston, South Carolina. Hold a rally and I will make it a point to be there.
Though I won't spend any money in the city of charleston. Boycott, you know.
Posted by trinitytim on September 22, 2007 at 11:41 a.m. (Suggest removal)
Nickie, Check PM in a minute.
Posted by charleytowngirl on September 22, 2007 at 11:46 a.m. (Suggest removal)
It's ok, Exorcist...I'll share my benne seed wafers with you.
Posted by trinitytim on September 22, 2007 at 11:53 a.m. (Suggest removal)
vesta,
check your PM
Posted by trinitytim on September 22, 2007 at 12:02 p.m. (Suggest removal)
charleytowngirl,
check your PM too.
Posted by nickiegarbeil on September 22, 2007 at 12:07 p.m. (Suggest removal)
Tim, got it...check yours..
Posted by FiddlerCrab7 on September 22, 2007 at 12:17 p.m. (Suggest removal)
Perhaps I overlooked this in the article, but has the city stated when it's implementing a comprehensive training plan for all firefighters on construction issues and potential risks?
Perhaps training on load-bearing structures/beams, impact of large open spaces (i.e. furniture show rooms), structural stress, truss assembly, establishing collapse zones, and so on? I'm not a ff, so this is based on what I've read, but it seems like a good place to start.
I also wasn't aware the city had a safety officer. If so, has the city been enforcing its codes (according to municode.com) on fire scene management? Example:
(Code 1975, § 24-7)
Sec. 13-3. Unauthorized persons to remain outside fire line.
As far as may be practicable, no person whatever, not connected with the fire department, police department, public service department or underwriters' agents, shall be allowed to remain within the line of operations unless actually employed. For this purpose, a cordon shall be drawn around the fire, within which no person shall enter unless his services are required.
Posted by sprky131 on September 22, 2007 at 12:21 p.m. (Suggest removal)
Please forgive me for being forward with a few questions. Let me share a few things about myself first. I'm a firefighter in a northern state of 40,000 people with 48 firefighters. This new policy is very old news, we have been in this practice for more then 10 years now. Realizing from the posts which I have read the leadership. and training there is very deficient. I would ask do any of the firefighters there read the trade magazines and share this information which is read, and clearly been reprted in? Do you as firefighters on the fireground have the leway to question, and bring up safety concerns? Do you have any documentation of your concerns over the years with fireground activities? Is there any way to use this documentation to your advatage here now? again I apoligize if this appears to be forward, no disrespect intended. I'm just part of the brotherhood trying to get a better feel for what all of you are going through, and dealing with. My prayers are with all of you.
Posted by nickiegarbeil on September 22, 2007 at 12:29 p.m. (Suggest removal)
Sprky,
I am just a concerned citizen, but if I may respectfully suggest you also visit the site: www.firefighterhourly.com
The problems here are much deeper than any of us could have imagined...welcome aboard...
Posted by charleytowngirl on September 22, 2007 at 12:30 p.m. (Suggest removal)
F7, Isn't safety officer one of the positions that the panel recommended? If so, I don't think they had a safety officer at the time of the fire, but they do now.
Posted by FiddlerCrab7 on September 22, 2007 at 12:47 p.m. (Suggest removal)
Hi Charleytowngirl. I meant to say safety management director instead of safety officer.
I understand the fire department is hiring/has hired Bryan Kleskie to fill the department's new safety officer position. The part I didn't realize is that, according to this article, the city has a safety management director. Or maybe I'm not understanding the article correctly.
In a general sense, I would think the city's safety management office would have been looking after city operations. I'm not sure I'm explaining myself -- I'm fighting a cold and my head is spinning from all the news.
Posted by FiddlerCrab7 on September 22, 2007 at 12:55 p.m. (Suggest removal)
Here's the article about the new CFD positions. I just wasn't aware the city had a general safety management office.
http://www.charleston.net/news/2007/aug/...
Posted by Harpo on September 22, 2007 at 12:56 p.m. (Suggest removal)
sprk131, the overall defining watchword for this state
is 'mediocrity'. The Charleston Fire Department is
staffed with lion-hearted fire fighters who are led by
a management structure that progressively becomes more
mediocre as you ascend to the top of it. The mayor is
an incumbent who is repeatedly reelected by non-
progressives and minorities and his appointees are
largely political or personal in nature.
This fire chief Thomas is a computer-illiterate rube
with the typical rebel mentality that refuses to ever
admit wrong, even when it gets stuffed up his arse.
The mayor demands and repays blind loyalty from his
lieutenants and that's the main problem in this town.
The election for this mayor is November and the
current efforts to put these discussion points out to
the public are being done too slowly and in too few
avenues. What's needed is a rally headed up by the
fire fighter's union and what few brave fire fighters
are willing to risk their jobs.
Were that to occur in really large numbers, retribution
would be almost impossible against them en masse. The
effect on the voting muggles would be great, I think.
Posted by charleytowngirl on September 22, 2007 at 1 p.m. (Suggest removal)
F7.,I wasn't aware that the city has a safety director either, but not sure their job would be to respond to fires. Would be something to look in to, though.
Harpo, good idea, could not have said it better myself!
Posted by FiddlerCrab7 on September 22, 2007 at 1:08 p.m. (Suggest removal)
I wouldn't expect the city position to respond to fires, either, but perhaps to ensure the overall safety of city operations in a general sense? Just a question, among many other questions, that's on my mind...
Posted by hotrod2007 on September 22, 2007 at 1:46 p.m. (Suggest removal)
Perhaps the city's safety management director is a new FIREWALL to protect leadership from the accountability after the fallout.
Posted by yeahright on September 22, 2007 at 1:51 p.m. (Suggest removal)
I think you're right on the money Harpo. The majority of Chas. voters don't access boards such as this and, unfortunately, also display the same blind loyalty to Riley that his appointed and elected underlings exhibit. A couple thousand people marching down Broad Street with CNN and FOX News cameras in tow would keep this issue in the national spotlight and certainly raise awareness to local voters.
Posted by charleytowngirl on September 22, 2007 at 1:57 p.m. (Suggest removal)
I'd just like to see Riley field questions from the FF's instead of members of the press. I'd pay to see that and funds could be used for training!
Posted by BattChiefNCFD on September 22, 2007 at 2:15 p.m. (Suggest removal)
F7, North Charleston has a policy on any major fire that the city's safety officer is notified, day or night. It is up to her to determine if she will respond. For many years this job was handled by one person, but just recently the position has been filled with one full-time Safety Officer. She has responded on many calls, haz-mat, auto accidents, narcotics scenes, and most recently to the commercial fire three weeks ago off Rivers Ave & Remount Rd, & has taken numerous pictures which will be developed into a training program for the department to utilize incident command training, strategy & tactics training, fire ground, etc. using pictures of actual city buildings and actual fire scenes within the city. Normally the training is based on pictures around the US and in many ocassions don't reflect the make-up of the communities many fire department's protect. It is beneficial in developing programs utilizing buildings and scenes from your own city because it gives the added benefit of being a structure or incident/scene that your personnel are familiar with, and in most cases many of the guys are familiar with the incident, how things were handled, what happened good, and what mistakes were made & how they were corrected or will be corrected in the future and provides the opportunity for younger officer's and driver's to get hands-on training dealing with many different situations.
PS, to someone else reading, I haven't forgotten you, just had a mishap with my cell phone & didn't have your number. My daughter has now returned my phone this past Thursday. I've been really busy at work & haven't been on the past week or so, but have still been following in the paper.
Posted by FiddlerCrab7 on September 22, 2007 at 2:21 p.m. (Suggest removal)
Thanks for the great info, BattChiefNCFD.
Posted by charleytowngirl on September 22, 2007 at 2:29 p.m. (Suggest removal)
Battchief, I was just wondering this morning where you've been! Good to see you back!
Posted by hebthree on September 22, 2007 at 2:32 p.m. (Suggest removal)
Something is brewing and it ain't sweet tea
Posted by charleytowngirl on September 22, 2007 at 2:42 p.m. (Suggest removal)
care to elaborate, Hebthree?
Posted by FiddlerCrab7 on September 22, 2007 at 2:45 p.m. (Suggest removal)
Sorry to keep posting on this issue, but I've got a clearer angle now.
If the CFD has had a tradition of fighting fires in a certain way -- for example, if this 2001 Charleston.net article is accurate -- then would that not have been of concern over the years to a city's safety management department?
http://archives.postandcourier.com/archi...
OK, this fiddler crab is burrowing back into the sand...
Posted by nickiegarbeil on September 22, 2007 at 2:46 p.m. (Suggest removal)
Thank you for the info BattChief... :)
Does the City of NC meet periodically with various companies and go over any of this information? How does NCFD handle pre-plans as far as sharing that information with companies that may come into contact with buildings outside of their "jurisdiction"...if that makes sense?
One of the most important issues I find in this tragedy is the fatalities were all from stations outside that particular stores fire jurisdiction...they were not familiar with the floor plans, the exits, the risks in the roof system...
Posted by hebthree on September 22, 2007 at 2:48 p.m. (Suggest removal)
I believe the elaboration started when the Mayor held a pointless news talk that spoke of nothing we don't already know or haven't heard over and over.
I've seen firefighterhourly pick up tremendously and the words from exorcist_pencocky have been more "determined"
I think the hard work from everyone on here that's been so persistent is finally starting to pay off.
Posted by nickiegarbeil on September 22, 2007 at 3 p.m. (Suggest removal)
Ok, Hebthree...that's still a little vague :)
Posted by hebthree on September 22, 2007 at 3:18 p.m. (Suggest removal)
Is it? I'm sorry - those aren't my intentions. Just lately it's been report after report after report and every single one of them have 50+ comments from everyone.
Sooner or later something has to give.
We should all just keep being determined. =)
.
.
.
.
Pressure eventually cripples the vigorous.
If I were RT I would step down.
When pride comes, then comes dishonor, but with the humble is wisdom. - Proverbs 11:2
Posted by aCFDchiefsson on September 22, 2007 at 3:28 p.m. (Suggest removal)
Wow - look at these comments. I had no idea so many people cared.
Posted by nickiegarbeil on September 22, 2007 at 4:12 p.m. (Suggest removal)
hebthree...I think I am having heart failure...I must have totally misunderstood your views...I think I need to go back and re-read...wow...cool
Acfdchiefsson...if you aren't being facetious, then yes...we do care...very very much...none of us take any pleasure in what we read, say and or do..it is all about preventing this from ever happening again...please tell you father to stay safe...I just wish we had found out information BEFORE this tragedy..
Posted by aCFDchiefsson on September 22, 2007 at 4:26 p.m. (Suggest removal)
Thank you.
Posted by nickiegarbeil on September 22, 2007 at 4:29 p.m. (Suggest removal)
:) We are always looking for more help you know...you know what they say...power in numbers, my friend...power in numbers...
Posted by aCFDchiefsson on September 22, 2007 at 5:09 p.m. (Suggest removal)
Quantity doesn't always equate quality. From what I see it seems everything is under control.
I've shaken the hands of a lot of CFD men. I've eaten holiday meals with them. It's been an honor to walk in these stations and speak with these guys and hang out.
I walk proudly in public with CFD shirts and I wish the best for these guys.
What saddens me is the political crossfire the men have been put between.
Posted by BattChiefNCFD on September 22, 2007 at 5:10 p.m. (Suggest removal)
Nickie, when you say "meet with various companies" do you mean companies within the FD? I'm thinking that's what you mean so hear goes. On any business be it a commercial business, school, church, so forth, we normally get the first, second, and third due companies together to perform a walk-through. This includes the Truck Co. & if at all possible the Rescue Co. too. During the walk-through we obtain vital information from owner, manager, emergency contact numbers, etc. We take note of locations of electric shut-off/meter, gas, square footage, number of floors, number of exits, stairways, elevators, etc. roof construction, overall building construction (type I fire resistive, type II non-combustible, type III ordinary construction, type IV heavy timber, and type V wood-frame), plus as detailed a diagram of the lay-out of the building as possible (which isn't as hard as it was 20 years ago due to computers, printers, etc.) we use to have to hand draw each lay-out & it was pretty difficult trying to draw several thousand square ft buildings with multiple turns, offices, etc. Once this information is gathered, it is submitted to our inspection bureau, and copies are made & the original is returned to the first due station. The pre-plan is then kept in a binder which is kept on the truck. This information is available for any type response to ascertain information needed. This information is not given to out-lying stations because it wouldn't be practical to have a copy of every pre-planned business in the city on every truck, you wouldn't have room, but as I stated; the information is available to any company needing it. We are in the process of purchasing software which would allow us to keep this information on a computer & access this info from MDT's (mobile data terminals) on the apparatus which would then allow any apparatus, chief officer, etc. to pull up any business, pre-plan, etc. they wanted in a matter of seconds. At this time we currently have one MDT on an engine, with two more being added to two additional apparatus perhaps within the next week if it hasn't already been done. The goal is to equip each truck with this equipment, but it's going to take some time due to the cost.
Posted by nickiegarbeil on September 22, 2007 at 5:39 p.m. (Suggest removal)
That is precisely what I was trying to find out...I wanted to know if you all had MDT's...awesome...Do you know what those cost?
Posted by nickiegarbeil on September 22, 2007 at 5:41 p.m. (Suggest removal)
BattChief,
Even if the departments cannot provide a MDT in each truck, the duty chief could always be entrusted with the device at the scene and give that information to the men...
Posted by BattChiefNCFD on September 22, 2007 at 6:09 p.m. (Suggest removal)
Yes, all the Batt's have lap-tops & will have the software installed when it's purchased. Not exactly sure how much they cost, but it's several thousand dollars.
Posted by BattChiefNCFD on September 22, 2007 at 6:11 p.m. (Suggest removal)
This would include the computer terminal, software for operation, installation, etc.
I forgot to put this in before submitting
Posted by nickiegarbeil on September 22, 2007 at 6:15 p.m. (Suggest removal)
No that's fine...sounds great...I just found out about this type of program while digging around...I wasn't sure if ANY local departments had them, and not sure of the feasibility. I think it sounds like a tremendous program to have and a wonderful tool for informing the men in the trenches...How long has your department utilized this idea?
Posted by BattChiefNCFD on September 22, 2007 at 6:32 p.m. (Suggest removal)
Engine One has had the computer terminal and I believe it's been for two years now.
Posted by FiddlerCrab7 on September 22, 2007 at 6:34 p.m. (Suggest removal)
BattChiefNCFD, can any cost of the MDTs be covered by FEMA fire grants?
And just wondering (as a general question), do these fire grants require NIMS compliance?
http://www.fema.gov/emergency/nims/compl...
Posted by FiddlerCrab7 on September 22, 2007 at 6:39 p.m. (Suggest removal)
Here are the grants I'm referring to:
http://www.firegrantsupport.com/afg/awar...
Posted by charleytowngirl on September 22, 2007 at 6:45 p.m. (Suggest removal)
Seems to me that this is also information that a dispatcher could access and pass on to the trucks enroute to a structure fire.......
Posted by nickiegarbeil on September 22, 2007 at 7:07 p.m. (Suggest removal)
charleytowngirl..I agree, but I worry that you have missed communications that way...of course I'm not completely sure how it all works, but it wold seem to be a much more effective program on scene...if the Departments utilize proper IC command, the IC would have the information to pass on to the "troops" upon their arrival...I am sure it isn't that complicated to use, it just kinds of seems that way since I am hardly experienced...I would love to see one though.
Posted by BattChiefNCFD on September 22, 2007 at 7:15 p.m. (Suggest removal)
Charleytowngirl:
Yes, the dispatchers can pass on contact information, and other information that is entered into the netword, but without the MDT's they can't send a lay-out of the building which is vital.
F7, I don't know for sure if the MDT's are covered by federal grants, but I would be suprised if they weren't. We have a grant's coordinator for the city who handles our grants. We have received quite a few grants over the past several years, but I don't know if this is one that has been sought. Information I will pass on definitely because I never thought about it. In reference to the grant funding being tied to NIMS, yes, by 2008 all municipalities nationwide must have the required training IS 100, 200, 800, 700, 300 & 400 in order to continue to qualify and receive federal grant funding. I'll tell you another thing that I've question on several ocassions, but haven't gotten a good answer yet; are there grants for a fire boat? I don't know for sure, but with all the federal funds supplying rescues, engines, etc. I can't imagine we couldn't qualify for a federal grant for a fire boat. In actuality, we need at least two. With the amount of water front, ports, and shipping in the charleston area, for us to not have a fire boat in my opinion is inexcusable. When I say us, I mean all the fire departments in Charleston County. Most are participants in the MIRT (marine incident response team) Program developed through Chas. Co. So in the event of a ship-board fire, any municipality where the fire occurs would benefit from the use of this equipment. Not to mention a pier or wharf fire. Thanks for the idea.
Posted by charleytowngirl on September 22, 2007 at 7:31 p.m. (Suggest removal)
Does anyone know if the City of Charleston has a grants coordinator or is this a function of the Chief?
Posted by nickiegarbeil on September 22, 2007 at 7:34 p.m. (Suggest removal)
Charleytowngirl,
I do believe there is a grant coordinator..I'll check around
Posted by charleytowngirl on September 22, 2007 at 7:35 p.m. (Suggest removal)
and BattChief, this might sound like a silly question, but when would one find time to look up the layout of a buidling on a computer while at a fire. Especially with things happening so quickly.....Is there someone specifically assigned to do that and get the information broadcast or does the IC do that?
Posted by charleytowngirl on September 22, 2007 at 7:41 p.m. (Suggest removal)
Maybe I'll apply for the job if they don't have one! I keep encouraging my husband to apply for PIO opening.
Posted by aCFDchiefsson on September 22, 2007 at 7:44 p.m. (Suggest removal)
charleytowngirl - is your husband in the CFD?
Posted by teeitup on September 22, 2007 at 7:50 p.m. (Suggest removal)
This format has taken the place of the old cb radios
Posted by charleytowngirl on September 22, 2007 at 7:51 p.m. (Suggest removal)
no, aCFDchiefsson....He's a retired Marine.
Posted by BattChiefNCFD on September 22, 2007 at 7:51 p.m. (Suggest removal)
Charleytown girl:
it would be a matter of clicking an icon then entering an address and choosing the page with the info or choosing the page with the layout. Or, in the event the location is too close and the response time is lickedy spit, then another individual a Batt Chief, the IC, or officer of another truck could access the information. Remember, in most instances where this would be used would be for commercial fires, large building fires, etc. and in most instances, if there's anything to it, you're gonna be there for a while so there is time to gather the information.
Posted by charleytowngirl on September 22, 2007 at 7:55 p.m. (Suggest removal)
Does your department use it often?
Posted by charleytowngirl on September 22, 2007 at 8:41 p.m. (Suggest removal)
www.linkcharleston.com has the podcast interview with Jay Lowry of Firefighterhourly.com available now. Check it out. Great interview!
Posted by BattChiefNCFD on September 22, 2007 at 8:47 p.m. (Suggest removal)
I don't know to be honest with you. I haven't been in the station for a year, and when I was, my station didn't have it. We never had an incident where we needed to use it. the bigger fires I've responded to have either been when I was running duty, or I responded to off-duty.
Posted by charleytowngirl on September 22, 2007 at 8:55 p.m. (Suggest removal)
I'm surprised a great tool like that wouldn't be used on all commercial building fires.
Posted by charleytowngirl on September 22, 2007 at 8:57 p.m. (Suggest removal)
According to a story of LinkCharleston.com, the October issue of FireChief magazine did a cover story of Chief Thomas and we should finally hear what else he has to say. They say the October issue is due out next week. Should be interesting reading.
Posted by BattChiefNCFD on September 22, 2007 at 9:07 p.m. (Suggest removal)
Understand, not all fires are of the magnitude of the SSS. Sometimes they are smaller fires that an aggressive attack contains it to the area or room of origin. In some instances, the fire has a little extra help & because of the volume of fire upon arrival, it becomes a defensive operation from the get-go. I would say that the last fire I can remember where it would have come in handy would have been the Nortwoods Assembly fire. I responded off-duty with my oldest son & took pictures, and helped pull some lines to supply other trucks, but I didn't have any gear so I didn't get involved with fighting the fire. Another big fire was the Medical Arts Bldg. fire about 3 or 4 years ago. I missed this one as I was working part-time at Target at the time, and didn't find out about it until about 9 that evening. I don't know if anything was used that day though. I do know with the new software when it is purchased and installed we will definitely be utilizing this technology.
Posted by charleytowngirl on September 22, 2007 at 9:16 p.m. (Suggest removal)
so the new software you refer to then will be used at more fires?
Posted by florida_ff on September 22, 2007 at 9:22 p.m. (Suggest removal)
The new policy signed by Charleston Mayor Joe Riley on Sept. 5 and announced this week, requires city firefighters to use a heat-sensing camera to detect hidden fire and prohibits firefighters from entering such structures if a truss roof or floor has been exposed to fire.
Two weeks to get a policy on safety out to the members after it was signed. I am glad no one got injured during that time. So, now brothers and sisters of CFD, you have to wait until a ladder truck arrives since that is where the TICs are kept, correct? You still need to pull the ceiling to see into the attic space because the TICs can not "see" heat through solid objects including glass. It will have to wait until the ceiling tiles heat up to record the temp. A better policy is that you pull the ceiling as you enter ANY structure that may have fire over your heads and keep pulling as you go and put out any fire over your heads.
I read of a city years ago that required by code that the truss construction be placarded outside the structure similar to the NFPA hazmat 704 placard.
This policy takes future blame off the city and chief and places it on the member who enters the structure. How about the policy on accountability? Safety? Preplan with needed fire flows and hazards? RIT / RIC checking that exits are free to open from the outside while crews are working inside? These were all the responsibility of the IC. Checking the status of the crews that were getting their a--es handed to them and not ordering a retreat. IC creating an Operations sector because of everything that was happening.
Oh ya, ye is the best thing since sliced bread, but the bread is old ond molded. Get rid of it and get something fresh. (Sorry, had to say it)
Posted by FiddlerCrab7 on September 22, 2007 at 9:37 p.m. (Suggest removal)
BattChiefNCFD, a friend of mine lives in the Seattle area where they have some fireboat protection. The location of fireboats is apparently an issue, but I've heard the boats play a key role in helping with boat and waterfront fires and rescues.
Here's an article about water-related firefighting concerns in the broader region around Seattle, and the efforts to seek funding. Maybe there's some relevancy to the Charleston/North Charleston area. I've often thought about the potential issues with the port traffic and tour boats.
http://archives.seattletimes.nwsource.co...
Posted by nickiegarbeil on September 22, 2007 at 10:05 p.m. (Suggest removal)
Apparently from what I am told, the Chief is responsible for grants...
Posted by FiddlerCrab7 on September 22, 2007 at 10:09 p.m. (Suggest removal)
Florida_ff, rescue capability has been one issue discussed in Charleston.
I saw the pictures today in the Orlando Sentinel of the plane wreck on I-95 – that must have been a heck of a shock to motorists. Do you know if the departments that responded used rescue trucks and other rescue resources?
http://www.orlandosentinel.com/news/loca...
Posted by RTC on September 22, 2007 at 10:32 p.m. (Suggest removal)
Okay, people, Nickie told me to post this.
My husband works for the port, so I asked him about the fireboat situation. If I can get this straight, he said that if they need a fireboat the Coast guard has them. The ships also have their own firefighting equipment onboard. The containers are only on the docks for minutes before they are moved, and when handling any hazardous cargo the land fire dept. is always standing by. The ports up North and on the West coast have more structures on their docks than the Port of Charleston does, so they have more need for fireboats. I think I got that right.
BTW, my husband was a firefighter and a police officer before I ever met him, and he still feels a close bond with both departments. We both agree that R.T. should go away, and hubby says that he kissed his way up to the top, and that there have always been more qualified men for the job. (not exactly his words)
I hope that I made some sense to you all, and that I didn't offend anyone with the R.T. comment.
Go CC firefighters!
Posted by FiddlerCrab7 on September 22, 2007 at 10:40 p.m. (Suggest removal)
I don't want to sound alarmist, but what happens if there's a fire on a tour boat, such as the Spirit?
Posted by RTC on September 22, 2007 at 10:59 p.m. (Suggest removal)
FiddlerCrab, I guess they use their equipment(extinguishers) until the Coast Guard can reach them. They should also have lifeboats big enough to hold all of their passengers if it's bad enough.
Posted by nickiegarbeil on September 22, 2007 at 11:26 p.m. (Suggest removal)
Thank you RTC...I felt it was important information that should come from you and your husband... :)
I appreciate you sharing it with us all. It is nice to know there are coverages...Don't be intimidated to post your thoughts here...no one will bite and no one will tell you to go away...
Post on!! :)
Thanks again.
Posted by joy on September 23, 2007 at 12:14 a.m. (Suggest removal)
The Ralley Against Riley - Please make it before the election! Give me a place and a time, and I will be there with as many people as I can round up.
An event like this to organize is not my forte, so someone who's forte it is - PLEASE get this going! And like I said, BEFORE the mayoral election.
Posted by nickiegarbeil on September 23, 2007 at 12:22 a.m. (Suggest removal)
So noted...someone will send you a private message...or you can send one to me, and I will hold it until its ready to roll..
Thanks Joy
Posted by rjahopp on September 23, 2007 at 12:56 a.m. (Suggest removal)
Until the formal investigations are completed, the origin and role of the SSS truss roof, ceiling fire is unknown.
Although, the time/origin of a ceiling fire is unknown and may never be known, a few facts shed light on the FF tactics employed:
- an IC with 34 years of experience determined the significance of what he saw on his initial inspection – he did not sense a ceiling fire.
- IC noted minimal smoke wafting in ceiling tiles at the back of the store; there is no known reason to challenge his opinion that the smoke had seeped into the store from the fire at the side of the building/deck, which he had reported upon arrival.
- the FF’s were not initially engaged in the store to attack the fire; they were checking for the presence of fire and civilians.
- other firemen were engaged inside after the fire started walking in.
- the ceiling fire may have started after the fire walked into the SSS – if true, initial use of the heat-sensing camera would not have detected a ceiling fire.
- IC was not engaged in FF efforts and left the SSS once the fire crept inside; he should have been updated as interior conditions deteriorated. It is not public knowledge if that happened (I suspect not).
- Even if IC had been updated, Thomas was advised that a 911 call indicated “a person was trapped at the back of the building.” NIOSH guidelines: Use defensive strategies whenever trusses have been exposed to fire and evacuate fire fighters using an exterior attack, “UNLESS life-saving operations are under way.” The first Mayday call came AFTER dispatch was notified that Tyrrell was rescued. Mike Smith, authority on construction and firefighting, also believes a fire commander is justified sending people inside if they have info. that someone is trapped inside.
Ted Austin’s belief that the new policy may not “have saved any of the nine men killed in the sofa store fire” would therefore be accurate.
NIOSH Publication No. 2005-132: May 2005 “Preventing Injuries and Deaths of Fire Fighters due to Truss System Failures” states NIOSH has not investigated any such LODD’s in the Southern U.S. NIOSH has investigated truss fire LODD’s in North, N. Central, South West, Mid-West, Western and Far Western states. That may shed light on why other fire departments in S.C. do not seem to have a specific policy for fires in a buildings with a truss roof.
NIOSH reports that 60% of the buildings in the U.S. have truss roofs, which does explain why the new policy assumes that City firefighters already recognize metal truss construction, even though it is developing a curriculum for truss roof fire tactics. It is puzzling why firemen would not be aware of their existence and associated dangers; many FF have access to the Internet.
As noted above, even if the CFD knew the SSS had a truss roof, there is no guarantee that a detectable ceiling fire existed when they arrived.
Posted by joy on September 23, 2007 at 1:06 a.m. (Suggest removal)
rjahopp - get your facts straight. CFD firefighters "go go go" - sound familiar? They use aggressive firefighting tactics. The firefighters were in the store way before the call came in about the civilian in the back.
Posted by nickiegarbeil on September 23, 2007 at 1:37 a.m. (Suggest removal)
Joy...it is obvious the city pays this mouthpiece well...No one here gives him any credence...
I find it interesting that the City was anxiously demanding that citizens and fire personnel give the investigations time before passing a judgment on the incident.
The first of many damning reports is out and they STILL refuse to accept it...If this were such a top notch department with everything(training) they needed, why was it so easy for the investigators to come forward with 27 recommendations so quickly? This person is just another attempt at damage control for the City. A pathetic attempt considering he originally came out under a "cloak" of being a family member of a survivor...then he intimates that there is some fraction of risk of lawsuits toward people posting in this blog...another intimidation tactic waged to shut the general public up when they threaten to expose the fallacies of this department and administration. Their own council member spoke out against them...
Notice he only attacks those he feels he is superior to..
He also fails to report that there is a small window of opportunity to perform a rescue in a truss system. The men were, as you pointed out, in the building BEFORE they knew of a man in the rear..their window of opportunity was highly compromised and they should have been pulled out. And of course we cannot forget that when St. A pulled this man out from the rear EXTERIOR, the Chief was notified AND he STILL did not pull his men out...
Pathetic...so very pathetic that the City has had to resort to planting their thugs in the message board...LOL
Posted by nickiegarbeil on September 23, 2007 at 1:39 a.m. (Suggest removal)
The sad thing truly is, he knows more from reading a book in the last couple of weeks than BOTH IC's do after YEARS of experience...LOL And it truly isn't saying very much...He is fairly efficient in reading and posting on the points, but has no clue how to apply them to the real facts..
Posted by nickiegarbeil on September 23, 2007 at 1:42 a.m. (Suggest removal)
Joy, in case you have some opportunity to listen to this podcast...This gentleman is quite informed about the inner workings of both the department AND the fire service...
It is one of the best interviews I have heard.. :)
http://www.linkcharleston.com/?view=resu...
Look for the Interview on podcast with Jay Lowry...fantastic.
Posted by FiddlerCrab7 on September 23, 2007 at 5:15 a.m. (Suggest removal)
If my understanding of other resources is correct, one issue is that the void can conceal fire above the visible ceiling. I'm not suggesting it has direct bearing on the OSHA situation, but it's an issue to be aware of with trusses.
This October 31, 2001 NIOSH report states:
“The truss voids in the ceiling may harbor a well-concealed fire that is ready to burst out with almost an unbelievable fury when oxygen is admitted to a void containing heated carbon monoxide.”
http://www.cdc.gov/niosh/fire/reports/fa...
Here are some recommendations and guidance from the NIOSH Publication No. 2005-132: May 2005:
• Immediately open ceilings and other concealed spaces whenever a fire is suspected in a truss system.
- Be aware that fires can be in the truss void or other concealed areas (see Figure 2). Once the fire enters a concealed space, it can travel to remote locations rapidly, since the wooden web members surrounded by open air space provide an excellent fuel source [Brannigan 1999].
- When a truss is suspected to be above a ceiling, use a pike pole or other tools to open up the ceiling and check for truss construction [Brannigan 1999]. If there is a fire barrier in the void, use the same procedure on the opposite side.
- Be aware of the possibility of flashover or back draft when opening concealed spaces and take the appropriate safety precautions.
- When opening ceilings or other concealed spaces, have charged hose line(s) ready.
- Be aware of the nearest exit and of other fire fighters in the area. The incident commander must consider and provide for alternative exit routes from all locations where fire fighters are operating [Klaene and Sanders 2000].
• Understand that fire ratings may not be truly representative of real-time fire conditions.
There's also an IC-related recommendation:
- Consider using a thermal imaging camera as part of the size-up operation to aid in locating fires in concealed spaces.
Here's an EMSVillage article about truss structures:
http://www.emsvillage.com/articles/artic...
F7
Posted by nickiegarbeil on September 23, 2007 at 7:37 a.m. (Suggest removal)
F7..excellent job...
I think it is also important to remember that there really isn't a necessity for the void to be filled with flames..smoke and heat are equally as dangerous. Once the heat reaches it's combustion point, flashover occurs. When that puff of smoke was noted by C2, the tiles should have been poked or at the very least, the TIC used and when the temperature got to a certain point, then they should have removed the men...
It is so much easier to remain on the side of caution than to err and lose human life...
Posted by oldcap on September 23, 2007 at 8:12 a.m. (Suggest removal)
RJHopp - been to "Austin"?
Posted by vesta on September 23, 2007 at 10:31 a.m. (Suggest removal)
oldcap: My thoughts exactly!
Posted by vesta on September 23, 2007 at 10:47 a.m. (Suggest removal)
rjahopp: We have been warned to be careful how we address your comments, but you had better be VERY careful how you post them: "It is puzzling why firemen would not be aware of their (truss roof construction) existence and associated dangers; many ff have access to the Internet."
So, you are now suggesting that the CFD ffs are only going to be properly trained if they do it themselves from the internet???
You comment that the IC did not "sense a ceiling fire". That is what the TICs (expensive as they are) are for.
"IC was not engaged in FF efforts and left the SSS once the fire crept inside..." That IC, I assume is Garvin, because Thomas, according to reports, did not enter the store.
Part of Incident Command is to, in fact, recognize who is the Incident Commander at any given time. This is done by RADIO recognition, not by visually spotting who the ff thinks is the chief from a distance in a smoke filled environment or, if the ff is inside, through the walls of the building. It would sound like this: "Dispatch, Car 1 is on the scene and taking command from Car 2." Situation: the ffs at the back, including the St. Andrews ffs who did, in fact, rescue the civilian, had no idea that Thomas was at the front of the building, and, in command. Without proper IC being taught, Thomas himself would have no idea what was going on at the back of the building much less inside the building. Listen to the tapes. We do not hear Garvin telling Thomas that he(Garvin) is at the back of the building, but that there are ffs inside. Nor do we hear Thomas asking Garvin if any ffs are in the building.
Maybe, just maybe, NIOSH hasn't had to issue reports on other truss building fires in the SE because other chiefs in this area are trained in, and well aware of the dangers of truss roof construction and would not assume ffs would be safe fighting fires inside such an environment.
Posted by charleytowngirl on September 23, 2007 at 10:59 a.m. (Suggest removal)
Vesta, check pm, please
Posted by vesta on September 23, 2007 at 11:01 a.m. (Suggest removal)
CTgirl: Back at you!
Posted by nickiegarbeil on September 23, 2007 at 11:08 a.m. (Suggest removal)
Maybe RJAHopp IS Austin?
Vesta, you hit the nail on the head. NIOSH investigates LODDs. Obviously there haven't been any, and we can assume from that(I have spoken to neighboring departments), that they are better informed in their IC and their tactics in handling Truss systems...
This guy is definitely working for the City...the capacity is still to be determined...
Posted by vesta on September 23, 2007 at 11:12 a.m. (Suggest removal)
rjahopp: And, further explaining, when the announcement is made on the radio to dispatch about who has taken over command of the fire ground, every ff, who is equipped with a radio (we certainly hope), then knows, no matter where they are on the fire ground, who is going to be issuing the commands. Of course, likewise, as I have stated numerous times, proper incident command also dictates that accountability tags or IDs are left with the Incident Commander before a fire fighter enters a burning structure. This is why it is IMPORTANT for the Incident Commander to be in one spot on the fire ground....his job is NOT to run in and out of the building and around the back of the building. He/she is outside in one location, assessing the situation, holding those tags, knowing how many and who are inside, and able to issue commands to his/her sub-commanders. One of the sub-commanders could be in charge of the civilian rescue at the back. When a superior chief reaches the scene and takes command, proper incident command regulations would dictate that he (the superior chief about to take command) would ask the individual who had been in charge such questions as (1) who is in the building --civilians and ffs (2) what, if any backup the individual has requested prior to the superior chief's presence (3) what procedures the individual has enacted prior to the chief's presence (4) where the fire is located.
Posted by charleytowngirl on September 23, 2007 at 12:58 p.m. (Suggest removal)
Why does the city STILL send only ONE engine in response to an automatic alarm at hospitals or schools? This seems to be a HUGE public safety issue and I wonder why the media hasn't asked the same question. Can you imagine what would happen if a fire broke out in a school or hospital? Is Charleston prepared to handle this?
What kind of response do other departments in the area send on automatic alarms?
Posted by exorcist_pencocky on September 23, 2007 at 12:59 p.m. (Suggest removal)
As for tourism in charleston south carolina, the lack of sprinkler systems in a number of places tourists stay would scare me, especially if I were elderly.
Posted by charleytowngirl on September 23, 2007 at 1:02 p.m. (Suggest removal)
As a parent, I would be worried about my child in school with a ONE Engine response to an automatic alarm.
Posted by charleytowngirl on September 23, 2007 at 1:09 p.m. (Suggest removal)
There should be a law requiring sprinklers in any business, whether it's hotels, bars, restaurants, movie theaters, auditoriums, HOSPITALS, schools, etc, where large numbers of people gather.