Ut Oh!!!....

[1900]

INDIANA FIRE CHIEF SUING OTHER FIRE DEPARTMENTS FOLLOWING FF LODD: A Fire Chief is suing two other mutual aid departments over injuries he suffered while recovering the body of Firefighter from a burning house ...after the FF had been missing for 45 minutes. Madison Township Fire Chief Robert Black's lawsuit in southern Indiana's Jefferson Circuit Court accuses the Hanover and Kent volunteer fire companies of negligence for failing to keep track of firefighters at the scene.
Chief Black, 41, fractured his right ankle when he fell from a second-story balcony while trying to recover the body of Kent Township Firefighter Greg Cloud on Nov. 1, 2006. FF Cloud died from smoke inhalation, according to the suit filed Oct. 15. NOTE: There is no NIOSH report on that fire, due to the previously TSL discussed limited resources NIOSH has to investigate FF LODD's. The IAFC and IAFF have produced a report with recommended changes that is expect to be acted upon in 2009. Here is that report: www.cdc.gov/NIOSH/fire/IAFCPgmReview.html
The Indiana lawsuit alleges that FF Cloud remained in the burning house for about 45 minutes before Firefighters determined he was still inside. Chief Black previously said a head count came up one firefighter short and they knew it was FF Cloud because his truck was there but he couldn't be found. Chief Black and two other firefighters then went in to search for him.
The suit faults the Hanover and Kent VFD's for failing to have a system to track firefighters at the scene. Some departments use tags that are left behind to signify firefighters' whereabouts, while others use electronic systems. The suit also alleges the two departments did not make certain all firefighters used respirators, failed to maintain communications among firefighters and did not provide proper training. The suit said Black was incapacitated for several months due to the nature of the fracture. It does not specify a damage amount.

[1900]

I just wanted to touch on a few things, more or less a rant...My point with that is there are those that get it and then there are those that never will...

I was recently at a job and saw something that blew my mind. Now I wanna say that none of us are perfect and we've all had our moments...but I like to learn from those mistakes and make sure that it doesn't happen again.


So I was at this job and the Fire Ground Evacuation was pulled and everyone came out and mounted an exterior attack. A short time later it was decided to send crews back in to finish up. Before they sent crews back in the command staff asked for the building to be ladder. Now me and another Chief stood in the back yard and kinda just took everything in. We then watched a firefighter come and throw a roof ladder to a division 2 window on the d side of the fire building. After the firefighter threw the lader the division d officer stated over the radio, "the building has been laddered."

Now the ladder was thrown to the side of the window and the window was still in tact. The firefighter that threw the ladder asked the division d officer "do you want me to take the window?" The division d officer stated "Uhh, I don't know, no body told me too."

Me and the other Chief then approached the division d officer and asked him what the purpose of the ladder being thrown was. The division d officer stated "there sending crews back in.' Me and the other Chief stated then its for a means of egress for the firefighters inside or an entry point for a RIT team in the event something goes wrong. The firefighter that threw the ladder then cleared the window. However the ladder stayed to the side of the window. Me and the other Chief then asked the division d officer if the ladder was going to be placed correctly. The division d officer stated "I don't know I just got here." I then suggested throwing the ladder in the neighbors swimming pool cause it was of no use where it was currently at or in the neighbors swimming pool.

As we were having a conversation about proper ladder placement a probie belonging to the other Chief I was standing with came around the corner and the Chief asked his probie "what's wrong with that ladder." The probie stated without hesitation "its not under the window." His Chief advised him to fix it.

Now heres where it gets interesting. The ladder was on an awkward angle so I advised the probie to put the roof hooks out and that would take care of the awkward angle. I have to give credit to the probie I was gonna lower the ladder and throw out the roof hooks and the probie said I'll just raise it a little climb it and throw the hooks. So I said "yeah duh." Not only easier but he can get a peak in the room. Ok back to the interesting part. As the probie begins to climb the ladder to throw the hooks the division d officer states to him "don't forget to put your shield down. " I have to tell you I lost it. First the probie didn't have a shield he had bourkes and goggles. So I stated "he don't have a shield"...I then stated to the probie "thats it you just ruined the whole fire and now we can't position the ladder in its proper place cause you don't have a shield on your helmet." ARE YOU F#@king SERIOUS...we had no concern about clearing the window, we had no concern about proper ladder placement...yet god forbid we don't put our shield down? I'm confused...well about one thing, but it answered another question for me..I now know why we continue to lose firefighter!

So I thought about this entire event and at first I thought back to the statement "no one told me too" and consider maybe the officer didn't want to free lance or who knows...but then I thought about it more and I think its just mere incompetence. I mean we knew to give the order to put our shields down but we didn't know to give the order to ensure firefighter safety!!! Basically we worry so much and spend so much time on being warm and cozy and feeling safe, we forget that doing our jobs correctly is safe. Yes even when everything is right something can go wrong, however if we are doing our jobs correctly then what can be said. Incompetence or ignorance is no defense.

I don't know I'm done obviously this has been driving me nuts for sometime now and had to rant.

PS...Back to defining a firefighter comment: If you have never been inside a burning building can you call yourself a firefighter?...if you have never been on a line in a kick ass job and know the feeling of losing pressure, or having inadequate pressure or having too much pressure to be effective can you be a chauffer...so therefore if your not a firefighter and your not a chauffer how can you be an officer??? Just wondering!

[WebBoss]

You put my thoughts into good words better then I could have.

Thank you chief.

Getting there late into the job; I was frustrated after 10 minutes. I can only imagine how you felt.

Luckily... and somewhat surprisingly... no one got hurt, and everybody went home.

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
-=> Something add to further expand on the chiefs story...

I arrived about 20 minutes into the incident, with an ambulance, and went forward as manpower. Anyone who knows me, knows that I can't stand still for long, especially if things aren't going as I see right.

I noticed that there was no ground ladders up, yet there was a ladder truck sitting out front with a couple of people standing around it. I asked operations "Do you want me to throw ladders?" He replied... "Why, the main is up to the roof." Because I try to be proactive, I grabbed one of my guys and got him to help me throw a few ladders. (I wasn't told not to) He threw a ladder up out front, and was told that it was just in the way. I threw the ladder on Side D, and while I was trying to position it the right way, the Division D officer tried to "help" by working against me and placing it where he saw fit. Not going to argue with the officer - he had an assignment, and technically I was freelancing.

1900 - What you missed, and this was the best one yet - is when we threw a ladder to side C, after we took out the window and cleared the sash and cross bar and all that, we were told by the interior crew of the hometown department that we were just causing my damage then the fire did. It was right around that point that I said "F This" and told my guys to sit out front, as far away as possible, and just take a breather.

In todays time with all the ways to reach out and teach everyone... unfreaking real.

I am far from knowing everything or being the "Best" but damn... when officers demostrate less ability then even Fire 1 students - there is a serious serious problem.

[papacheese]

I'd find the Chief's story really amusing if it wasn't so F'ing sad.....

And as for the Indiana situation: even MORE F'ing sad.

[1900]

Chief Black previously said a head count came up one firefighter short and they knew it was FF Cloud because his truck was there but he couldn't be found.

Yet another good reason for NO POVs...

[papacheese]

"The Indiana lawsuit alleges that FF Cloud remained in the burning house for about 45 minutes before Firefighters determined he was still inside. Chief Black previously said a head count came up one firefighter short and they knew it was FF Cloud because his truck was there but he couldn't be found. Chief Black and two other firefighters then went in to search for him."

If I'm reading that correctly (and maybe I'm not), it would appear that when the PAR was done, they came up one FF short - then waited another 45 minutes before looking for him?

Is that possible?

I'm gonna climb up on my soapbox for a second: we need a standardized ISO position with standardized training at each working incident - no exceptions. A well-trained, competent ISO should make sure all these measures are taken without having to step on any Division officer toes or bother the Ops or IC. Truth is, most of these things would get done with any well-trained and effective department, in which case the ISO functions merely as an insurance policy that they were accomplished. The NFA "Safety Officer" course typically offered at most academies is old, out-dated, and doesn't even address proactive measures like what's being described here. The position demands far better than just filling it with the next available officer who happens to walk up to the CP...the person doing it needs to be TRAINED.

If the Chief's Association would like to arrange for a good, comprehensive ISO course, they can have the FDSOA come in and give a 16 hour class....and the graduates could get nationally certified. Here's the thing though: the IC shouldn't be functioning as the ISO, even though it's perfectly within their right...IMO there's just too much going on to give it the proper amount of attention.

End of soapbox.

[fireman1190]

it sounds like they didn't realize he was missing until 45 minutes went by....
Either way it is entirely unacceptable.

About POV's, I agree. We do not need POV's on scenes. The first part of maintaining crew integrity and personnel accountability are to arrive on the scene as one unit.
Arriving in POV instead of one unified Engine crew means we are already divided units from the start, and from there it becomes much harder to operate as one crew. It almost always leads to freelancing, which as we know, gets us killed.

[1900]

I'm gonna climb up on my soapbox for a second: we need a standardized ISO position with standardized training at each working incident - no exceptions. A well-trained, competent ISO should make sure all these measures are taken without having to step on any Division officer toes or bother the Ops or IC.

Your HIRED!!!...see you on the next job!....

Heck I'd settle for someone that actually knew how to do accountabilty...wait that is as long as accountability isn't piling plastic tags on the bumper of the command car is it?[rand=62862323495844851951261957902980607837449186512506517335754558]

[papacheese]

LOL...we can talk terms later, Chief....accountability is just one of seveal assignments for the ISO, although you most definitely don't want him/her standing by a doorway, grabbing tags...there's a lot more to do. One of the things I liked most about the FDSOA class was the emphasis on building construction and reading smoke...two things that are woefully lacking from the NFA class. The ISO should function as the IC's alternate set of eyes, constantly circling the structure, keeping tabs on interior crews, building integrity, setting up rehab, monitoring the radio for Maydays, etc. One of the misconceptions out there is that the ISO is supposed to function as the "PPE Nazi", ie: the visor comment you mentioned earlier. If a %^&*( firefighter doesn't care enough about their own vision to slip the visor down without someone telling them, then they need to go back to FF1 again.

Until someone comes up with a passive accountability system (which allegedly is in the works), the best we can hope for still leaves a lot to be desired...there are just too many ways to avert the system, either deliberately or not. As far as POV's go, while I certainly understand your thoughts, I'm reluctant to turn away qualified help (the key word being "qualified"...sightseers stay behind the yellow tape). Our policy is that a POV responder MUST go to the CP and turn in their tag, although as I just pointed out, that can be easily by-passed. Anyone doing that is immediately sent to Personnel (the politically correct term for Manpower) for assignment. Does it work? Realistically, about half the time.

[WebBoss]

PopCheese - correct me if I'm wrong, or maybe I'm just off by a little...

Shouldn't the safety officer be mobile and constantly doing 360's checking the entire operation and stability of the structure... etc.

Accountability should be a seperate function, possibly falling under the safety officer's duties?

I always thought of accountability as more of a management position - knowing where the players are and when; whereas Safety is more of a recon type position.

[JDub]

Sean I couldn't agree more....

Now though I am still wet behind the ears, it is also my opinion the accountability should be given to someone that is going to be assigned the entrance where the crews are making their entry. The safety officer monitors the entire seen not just that one door. Now the safety officer should constantly check in with the accountability officer to make sure everything is kosher of course. The ISO has so much on his/her plate that carrying arounf tags should not be one of their jobs.

At the Glenn Ave job for example, papacheese wasn't holding tags on the outside of the building. He was monitoring the safety of the crews and in this case he was inside with a CO meter and making sure we didn't take our masks off.

[1900]

One of the misconceptions out there is that the ISO is supposed to function as the "PPE Nazi", ie: the visor comment you mentioned earlier. If a %^&*( firefighter doesn't care enough about their own vision to slip the visor down without someone telling them, then they need to go back to FF1 again.

You could not have been more accurate with that statement!

As for the Accountability Officer vs. ISO I was saying they are the same or should be the same. My point was if you cant function adequately as an Accountability Officer then you are sure to be a piss poor ISO, but like the Papa said most peoples definition of a ISO is mother hen firefighter "put your shield down, put your gloves on, go to rehab. etc..."

A ISO to me should be a well seasoned level headed firefighter like an ex-chief or current veteran chief. Like previously stated the ISO is the IC's extra set of eyes. And the IC needs someone assisting with tactical decisions while keeping the firefighers overall safety in mind. Me as an IC do not need my ISO worrying about gloves and shields, I need them watching the smoke or fire conditions on the two sides I cant see, or catching some type of buidling construction tell tale that may play a key role or give us a hint, anyway you get my point.

On a side note something that I have believed in more then anything is a firefighters/officers/ISOs having knowledge of building construction is far more a benefit then most things.

[papacheese]

Boss and JDubb: you gentlemen are correct: an ISO should make certain that an accountability system is set up and functioning, but not actually be the guy holding the tags. Many departments assign this responsibilty to the ISO to ensure that it get's done and it's one less thing for the IC to have to worry about.

And Chief: we are most definitely on the same page regarding building construction: it is without a doubt one of the single most important factors in the decision-making matrix, especially today. I constantly harp on my guys that "The building is your enemy...know your enemy" (Francis Brannigan)

I made up a checklist for myself that's kept in the back of 3100's vehicle....all the factors that need to be taken into consideration. (Yes, I'm getting old and forgetful...as well as hard of hearing...anyone know of a full headset that can be used with the portables?)

[papacheese]

"At the Glenn Ave job for example, papacheese wasn't holding tags on the outside of the building. He was monitoring the safety of the crews and in this case he was inside with a CO meter and making sure we didn't take our masks off."

I have a confession to make...I completely missed that situation, believing (obviously in error), that the wide-open warehouse doors were sufficent ventilation...to give credit where it's due, BC Tom Poole asked if I had taken a reading, and to be perfectly blunt, I f'd up and hadn't....another lesson learned (trust me, that will NOT happen again and was something of a real eye-opener for me). Halfway down the aisle, not more than maybe 30 feet from the wide open doors, the CO reading topped off at 130 ppm...not a "drop dead" level, but high enough to have a possibly adverse effect over a lengthy overhaul period. Live and learn....

And one last thing: although there are no commerically available hydrogen cyanide meters out yet, it's presence can usually be linked to higher CO levels....meaning it's most often present when CO levels are high, since both are most often produced in the smoldering and overhaul phases. A CO level of 130 would probably give you a headache after fifteen minutes of hard work; a significantly lot less hydrogen cyanide would make you dead.

[WebBoss]

Oct 26, 2008 19:14:15 GMT -5 papacheese said:

And one last thing: although there are no commerically available hydrogen cyanide meters out yet, it's presence can usually be linked to higher CO levels....meaning it's most often present when CO levels are high, since both are most often produced in the smoldering and overhaul phases. A CO level of 130 would probably give you a headache after fifteen minutes of hard work; a significantly lot less hydrogen cyanide would make you dead.

If you have a 4 gas meter with a properly calibrated O2 sensor in it, that is fine. Hydrogen Cyanide will displace the oxygen to the point that it will create low O2 readings and trigger the meter. So with a 4 gas meter, you can not only check for the presence of CO, but the absence of adequate O2 as well.

See... I actually learned something as a SpazMat Tech.

[papacheese]

Interesting intrepretation...another bullet in the ole Safety Nazi holster...