The most powerful piece of advice I ever received regarding what we need to do for people came in the context of overhaul. It came long before I was taught about customer service and Mrs. Smith. The wisdom imparted to me was that the most important thing you could do for people was to “save their undershorts and socks.” Now today that might seem like pretty strange advice, but it was important to that retired old sage that I “got” it; recovering someone’s underwear was his way of saying that we must always remember who we work for. Dan Lyman said remember to try to feel how the family we are working for at that moment is seeing things and feeling.

The philosopher who gave me this advice had fought in World War II; he had been a prisoner of war, and he understood what mattered to people. He understood that good firefighters try to understand what other people are feeling. He explained how you can always wear the same pants for a week or two—even a shirt may last you a few days—but clean underwear was important to your self-esteem. Dan had a hard life, but he was always ready to help anyone who asked, anyone he could. Dan understood what was important in life, in training, and in service. Dan was right with everyone he knew and was always offering to help out with advice, support, tools, and most of all his time.

I was reminded of Dan’s advice when I read the U.S. Fire Administration’s (USFA) report “Fire in the United States 1995 to 2004.” I thought, what could we do to help make things better? Why are so many good Americans dying in residential structure fires? Why in a nation with the most righteously focused, superiorly trained, and best equipped firefighters in the world couldn’t we do better to reduce the number of roughly three and a half thousand Americans who die in home fires each year?

As you read the report, you can’t help but get energized about trying to change this current American reality. We know we need to increase awareness of the dangers of today’s polymer-based fires to every possible demographic, with particular focus on the very young and people over the age of 60. We understand that survival is now measured in seconds to escape, not minutes, and we know that smoke detectors, despite some of their shortfalls, are effective. However, we absolutely understand that sprinklers save lives and reduce property damage.

The report highlights that civilian fire deaths are far higher in the southeastern United States, particularly among African American and Native American populations. There is also no excuse for any one community in America to have disproportionate numbers. Now is the time for every firefighter-related organization to help in developing a target plan under the direction of the USFA to meet this challenge today, not in the next fiscal year.

We have abundant resources in these communities to make positive and lasting advances. Ten states and the District of Columbia account for half the fire deaths in America annually. What would make the biggest difference instantly? Sprinklers, smoke detectors, community life safety messages through fire education programs and connected role models of firefighters—you and me. What will make the biggest difference is our boots on the ground and our hands-on approach. I believe that everything else is just chin dribble.

Each of these states and DC has the leadership, the vision, and the willpower to do whatever it takes to protect its citizens. The only thing missing is us, because we firefighters are at our best when we work for and with others. Participating firefighters will turn this around. There is no force like inspired firefighters and knowing where we are needed most and knowing who needs us. People in need of protection are an irresistible attraction for us. Just like protecting our friends in the schoolyard from bullies—it’s what we do.

Regarding the neighborhoods that could use sprinkler systems, what if we got Congress along with the 10 states’ governors to back a program of Sprinklered Habitats for Humanity? Would you step up like Dan and give a little of your time? What if the firefighters in the 10 states and DC supplied the labor? Could we help retrofit sprinklers in high-risk residential occupancies? Could we work with the American and National Fire Sprinkler Associations and the smoke alarm manufacturers to aid subsidized property owners in high-risk communities? Could we do it in single-family homes, with permission? Firefighters can do great things when we act with enthusiasm and intensity.

We see former presidents building houses. Can we ask them to sprinkler every one? We have powerful programs for improving firefighter safety and survival such as Everyone Goes Home, Courage to be Safe, Get Out Alive, Safety and Survival, and Saving Our Own. We need to continue all of these and add a new one, which brings us back to our roots of service to the community—the people.

We exist to serve the public, and now it is time to try something completely different, completely new. It’s about human dignity, service, and making the right choice. By accepting this new challenge, you will empower your communities. You always have a choice. You have the talents, and you have the energy. Please, let’s band together and make a difference.

Over the past three years, volunteer, part-time, and career firefighters were charged with committing numerous criminal acts, including arson. Recently, two Texas volunteer firefighters were charged with multiple counts of arson resulting from seven Harris County fires. What is unusual about this case is that one of the firefighters was twice convicted of theft, including equipment theft from another fire department he once served. These incidents generate negative press for the fire department, which erodes years of hard work within the community the department serves. Worse yet, a firefighter’s previous employment or criminal history may result in a lawsuit based on the department’s negligent hiring of the employee.

A negligent hiring lawsuit may have various elements or requirements based on state law. In New Jersey, for example, a fire department would be liable for the negligent hiring of an employee when the fire department knew or had reason to know of the particular unfitness, incompetence, or dangerous attributes of the employee and could reasonably have foreseen such qualities creating a risk of harm to other persons and, through the employer negligence in hiring the employee, the employee’s incompetence, unfitness, or dangerous attributes proximately caused some injury. [See DiCosala v. Kay, 91 N.J. 159, 172-74 (1982).]

Ordinarily, an injured person attempts to hold the fire department liable simply because the firefighter causing harm is a department employee. These cases are based on the “respondeat superior” theory, which means that a master is liable, in certain cases, for the wrongful acts of his servant, and a principal for those of his agent. Negligent hiring claims seek to hold a fire department liable based on a separate act of negligence by the department itself. Accordingly, negligent hiring claims are not analyzed under the same principles as agency law-based claims; in many states, immunity for agency-based claims do not extend to a fire department committing an independent act of negligence in the hiring of a firefighter. For example, the New Jersey Tort Claims Act (N.J. Stat. Ann. Section 59:2-10) infers immunity on public entities for the criminal, malicious, or willful acts of their employees and bars any negligence claims against public entities arising from the same conduct. However, the employer may remain liable for the negligent hiring or supervision of an employee. A federal court in New Jersey addressed this issue in 2007 when it refused to dismiss a complaint against the New Jersey National Guard Youth Challenge Program, which allegedly hired a program supervisor who physically and sexually assaulted and raped a 16-year-old cadet. A New York trial court also refused to dismiss negligent hiring and training claims against the City of New York when an off-duty police detective unintentionally discharged his department-issued firearm inside a bar, causing injury to a bar patron. [Barton v. The City of New York, 15 Misc. 3d 504, 831 N.Y.S. 2d 882 (2007).]

In alleged negligent hiring claims, the injured party will focus on the firefighter’s preemployment history, including prior terminations and criminal charges. In Texas, a plaintiff introduced an employee’s 10-year-old driving while intoxicated (DWI) and drug possession charges in a negligent hiring, retention, and supervision claim resulting from a fatal motor vehicle accident with a garbage truck. [See Best Disposal Services, Inc. v. Burch, 2005 W.L. 762619 (Tex. App. – Waco).]

Current law trends permit negligent hiring or supervision claims against political subdivisions to remain where there is evidence suggesting that the employee was unfit for hire. Clearly, fire departments hiring an employee with a negative history do so at their own peril. Political subdivisions, fire department administrators, and chief officers who want to avoid negative publicity and potential liability can take a number of steps to reduce the risk:

1. Require the prospective employee to fill out a thorough, written application. The application should require the employee to provide information relating to his prior residential addresses, educational and employment history, employment terminations, traffic citations, criminal convictions, and participation in civil litigation. The department should also request a history regarding the prospective employee’s prior training, education, and experience in fire and emergency medical services, as well as personal references. The application should include an authorization form permitting the department to later contact and obtain information from private and public employers or to otherwise obtain information that a business or other organization may be reluctant to release without such a document. If needed, authorization forms may also obtain credit information.
2. Although it is likely that a fire officer has met with and interviewed the prospective candidate prior to submission of an application, the fire officer should review the application with the candidate in person. The interviewer must ask detailed questions regarding all parts of the application. Thereafter, the fire department must call the candidate’s former employers and references.
3. The fire department must conduct a public records search, which begins at the local police department and courthouse. Check the police department serving the jurisdictions where the prospective employee worked or lived, or conduct an online Web search. You can learn significant information about younger firefighters by checking Web sites such as MySpace.com.
4. Although often slow to provide a response, every department must use a government fingerprint-based search if available. Although not every criminal index database is checked by fingerprinting, a search will certainly prevent a fire department from hiring a known felon. Even if the search misses a prior conviction, the fire department will demonstrate due diligence in making its employment decisions.

The number of volunteer firefighters is declining on a national scale. Many volunteer fire departments are desperate for young, able-bodied men and women to provide emergency services for the public. Seldom do volunteer departments conduct thorough background checks prior to employing a volunteer. This practice may work in the short term, but it will cost the fire department if it refuses to acknowledge the potential risks of hiring a suspect candidate.

A fire department must not be concerned with its refusal to hire an unqualified employee. Courts will support an employment decision where a prospective employee is rejected based on an unfavorable history. Even where an employee may be protected based on a classification such as race, sex, nationality, or religion, courts will place the burden on the prospective employee where the department can clearly articulate a reasonable basis for not hiring the employee. A chief must remember that once the employee is hired, it is much more difficult to remove him if he later turns out to be undesirable. For that reason alone, a fire department should be extremely cautious in making its employment decisions.

Ignorance is no longer bliss. Fire departments must be proactive and willing to discriminate based on a negative history. Many journalists look for a story about a corrupt public servant. Don’t let your department be the subject of negative press based on poor hiring decisions.

DAVID C. COMSTOCK JR. is a partner with the Comstock, Springer, and Wilson, LPA law firm in Youngstown, Ohio. He is a 25-year veteran of the fire service and chief of the Western Reserve Joint Fire District in Poland, Ohio. He also lectures on company officer operations, liability, and personnel issues. His articles have appeared in many fire service magazines, including Fire Engineering. He is president of the National Association of Fire and Emergency Service Attorneys.

I don’t think anyone in the fire service could have anticipated how deadly the summer of 2007 would be for U.S. firefighters. Fifty-four firefighters lost their lives in the line of duty from May 1 through the end of August. Eighteen of the 54 fatalities were the result of firefighters being lost, caught, or trapped in structure fires. This four-month period saw a line-of-duty death every 2.22 days. Firefighters lost, caught, or trapped accounted for a staggering 33 percent of the 54 fatalities incurred.

As fire safety consultants nationwide were tallying the numbers, I couldn’t help thinking about the 1990-2000 U.S. Fire Administration (USFA) study that showed that lost, caught, or trapped firefighters are now the second leading immediate cause of firefighter fatalities, at 18.2 percent. The statistics cited in the first paragraph reveal a horrific 11.8 percent increase over the national average over a 120-day period. This number of fallen firefighters raises the question: What is it that we as fire service professionals are missing in our pursuit of a safer profession that is causing us to lose firefighters at rates that parallel line-of-duty deaths of the 1970s?

Fundamentally speaking, I think we have lost perspective on one of the most basic foundations of our work—proactive education based on updated information. The emphasis in the fire service appears to be more on rescue and recovery of firefighters in trouble than in the timely delivery of updated information that can be incorporated into education that may dramatically change decisions during size-up. This is essential to preventing firefighters from having their judgment overwhelmed by conditions on the fireground, placing them in needless jeopardy. Where do we go from here?

In Northwest Indiana, Safety Training Services (STS), a company owned and operated by firefighters, has developed the “Caught or Trapped” survival awareness program to specifically target conditions that precede firefighters’ being lost, caught, or trapped. I developed and wrote the program, which started as a variety of training ideas expressed by instructors at STS. Robert Groszewski, a battalion chief and 23-year-veteran of the Gary (IN) Fire Department and president of STS, produced it.

The four-hour classroom program centers on USFA statistical data on firefighter fatalities and The Disorientation Study endorsed by the National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health (NIOSH). The class also discusses the Mayday protocol and tactical size-up considerations for lost, caught, or trapped firefighters. Discussions on open area searches, escape from entanglement techniques, and the different types of building collapse are used to emphasize the difficulties that may be incurred when firefighters are overcome by conditions missed on size-up that may necessitate firefighter rescue. Additional discussions on rapid intervention and survival awareness emphasize the small window of survivability for firefighters in trouble and the tactical difficulties involved when transitioning the fireground from a suppression operation to a high-priority rescue.

The centerpiece of the practical part of the program is the advanced training simulator. It measures 22 × 16 feet, is taller than 10 feet, and enables firefighters to experience a floor collapse in a 10 × 10 room. The floor of the room drops 31⁄2 feet during the lean-to collapse. This allows students/firefighters to experience the disorientation that they may experience when they lose all visual references while their body or their environment is in motion, an occurrence that happens at every working fire with a heavy smoke condition.

Firefighters are trained in the simulator in groups of six. Two firefighters start each scenario by traversing a 30-foot tunnel prior to entering the smoke-filled simulator. The first two firefighters travel the tunnel and enter the simulator to conduct a primary search, as would be performed during a structure fire. During the primary search, the first two firefighters experience the floor collapse and declare a Mayday. The remaining four firefighters are staged on the roof of the simulator and act as a rescue team. The rescue team experiences debris-filled vertical and horizontal approaches, simulating void spaces, en route to the lost, caught, and trapped firefighters. The rescue team must also breach a wall in near-zero visibility conditions to reach the trapped firefighters inside the simulator. Again, firefighters experience firsthand the problems incurred when one of their own is lost, caught, or trapped.

When possible, line officers lead all search and rescue teams entering the simulator while staff officers stay outside the simulator. Remaining within the incident command system format, staff officers see firsthand the problems incurred when they transition from a search and suppression effort to a high-priority rescue effort involving firefighters lost, caught, or trapped. The staff officers are not counted as part of the original six-firefighter group. All parties involved with each evolution are equipped with radios, and radio traffic follows individual fire department standard operating procedures (SOPs). This allows members of individual fire departments to problem-solve the practical application of existing fireground SOPs as the evolution unfolds in a controlled environment.

Firefighters and instructors hold a quick informal critique after every evolution to discuss options, techniques, and their experiences. This allows firefighters to explore a variety of solutions to problems they experienced not only in the simulator but also previously on the fireground.

null

The training achieves the following goals:

1. Makes firefighters aware that the second leading cause of firefighter line-of-duty fatalities is becoming lost, caught, or trapped on the fireground.
2. Illustrates how the disorientation sequence plays a role in firefighter fatalities.
3. Illustrates the importance of fireground accountability.
4. Introduces the Mayday protocol and the parameters for declaring a Mayday.
5. Teaches basic survival awareness by discussing fire dynamics, building types, the warning signs of collapse, and the types of collapse.
6. Teaches sound search and rescue techniques.
7. Teaches size-up and search techniques for rapid intervention.
8. Teaches tactical considerations when switching from suppression strategy to a high-priority rescue.
9. Teaches the importance of a strong command presence and managing resources when a Mayday is called.
10. Discusses considerations for developing standard operating procedures.

DAVID N. DIEHL is captain of Engine 2 in the East Chicago (IN) Fire Department, where he has served since 1995. He is an OSHA-compliant training instructor and a fire safety consultant. He began his career in the fire service as a reserve firefighter with the Oxnard (CA) Fire Department in 1985 and served as a volunteer firefighter in Northwest Indiana for seven years.

Size-up of older commercial buildings continues throughout the entire operation. One of your key tactical decisions will involve estimating, stretching, and charging the correct size of attack line on arrival.

Most fire officers, firefighters, and instructors recommend using the 2½-inch attack line on all commercial building fires. When coupled with the 1 1/8-inch or 1¼-inch solid stream tip, the 2½-inch attack line is second to none regarding water flow, reach, and knockdown power. It is not my intention to turn this column into a nozzle debate. The facts are that commercial buildings have a heavier fire load and large undivided showroom areas. These two factors alone are enough reason to warrant a 2½-inch line. Even a contents fire fueled by the high hydrocarbon content used in common materials today can quickly overwhelm a smaller line flowing less water.

Photo 1. This engine company is stretching a 2½-inch preconnected backup line at a commercial building fire. The nozzle firefighter has piled the hose at the back step of the rig and has continued with the stretch, taking only the nozzle. If personnel do not address several key problems prior to charging the line, this line will take a lot longer to put into operation than it should. Two of the most obvious problems are (1) completely clearing the hosebed and (2) properly flaking out the hose in the street or down the sidewalk to assist with the engine company’s advance into a potentially deep commercial occupancy.

Photo 2. This photo was taken approximately two minutes after photo 1. In this photo, the engine chauffeur has realized the potential problems with the hoseline, which he and the nozzle firefighter corrected. The hose that was previously piled behind the engine has been flaked out in the street. Firefighters used an “S” or a “Z” pattern to facilitate a rapid advance into the store. The nozzle firefighter has also positioned several feet of hose directly behind him to assist in the advance.

Although laying out the hose as shown here will certainly work, perhaps a better method may be to flake the hose up and down the sidewalk so that the hoseline will not impede ladder apparatus placement. The worst-case scenario would be a ladder company setting up for the use of the aerial or tower ladder and unknowingly lowering the outrigger onto the hoseline, creating a very efficient hose clamp. If this occurs, both the engine firefighter and the member setting up the ladder apparatus would be at fault for not being aware of the situation.

Regardless of whether or not your department uses preconnected attack lines, every stretch will require estimation. If your department uses preconnected attack lines, you must estimate the stretch to ensure you will have enough hose to reach the seat of the fire. If your department uses a static load hosebed, then you must estimate how many lengths to pull off the bed before breaking the line and connecting the coupling to the discharge outlet.

When estimating a stretch in a commercial building, ensure that you are able to cover the entire occupancy in which you intend to operate. Covering the entire occupancy is important if the fire extends to the cockloft or is later discovered in the cellar. There will be no time to add additional lengths of hose to your stretch when fire is discovered extending above or below you.

To stay out of a short-stretch dilemma, I learned the following simple rule-of-thumb for estimating hose stretches. At a commercial fire, take the depth of the store and double it. With the depth of the store doubled, you will have enough hose if the cellar access is in the rear of the first floor and the fire is in the front of the cellar. In this case, the attack line will need to be stretched to the rear of the store, down the cellar stairs, and then back to the front of the store to the seat of the fire.

Now that the fire occupancy is covered, you must account for the hose that will be used from the entrance door back to the engine. In addition, I always add an extra length to the stretch in case there are several turns, or if the advance must weave through heavy stock or long aisleways. Most engine companies use the standard 50-foot hose lengths. However, some engine companies have one or more 100-foot lengths for various reasons. If you have 100-foot lengths, adjust this rule-of-thumb to work for you.

As involved as estimating the stretch sounds, it is very easy with practice. Most firefighters already perform this estimation at many fires without knowing it. Practice this skill by performing quick drills at your buildings during EMS, carbon monoxide, and other nonfire emergency runs. If time does not allow for a hose stretch, then make the estimate and stretch a search rope to simulate the hose. Mark the rope and measure it when you get back to quarters, to evaluate your skills. If time does not allow for a hose stretch or rope simulation, walk through the estimate in your head or talk through it with other members. Performing these drills will make estimating a stretch second nature.

Photo 3. This engine company has prematurely started water in the hoseline. The hose was not properly flaked out as in photo 2. Members will have to work twice as hard to remove the kinks; flake out the line; and, in some cases, remove knots in the hoseline. If this is the first hoseline at an incident, the fire will have more time to spread, and the building might be untenable when the line is finally ready to advance. Had this been a second line, the first line’s crew or members conducting a search might have been placed in a precarious position, since their protection would have been severely delayed.

In many cases, abandoning this line and starting to stretch a new line might be your best option, depending on the situation and severity of the “spaghetti” in the street. To avoid this situation, make sure that when the line is stretched, someone looks at the layout and path that the dry line takes to the nozzle team. Although it is every engine firefighter’s responsibility, many departments assign a member to this important task of ensuring the line is laid out correctly and all of the kinks are removed after the line is charged, before entering the building.

However your department chooses to perform this task, it must be done. Take the time early in the incident to properly stretch and flake the hose. This will ensure that a smooth advance to the seat of the fire will be unimpeded by pressure or water loss caused by kinks that can result in injured firefighters. Additionally, it will be easier for engine firefighters to feed hose into the building. This will result in an efficient advance and faster fire knockdown. Take time to make time!

Here are some questions and comments for the kitchen table. Discuss them at a drill and see what answers you come up with.

• If the fire occupancy type is not obvious on arrival, what actions can be performed to assist you in locating the fire store?
• The building in photos 1 and 2 is a self-service laundry. What are some hazards commonly associated with a self-service laundry in these older type commercial buildings?
• If you do not already stretch 2½-inch attack lines regularly, discuss how your unit or department might get a 2½-inch attack line in operation.
• In photo 2, what other hazards or size-up points can you bring up for discussion?
• In photo 2, the windows are Plexiglass® or Lexan®. Which tools would you use to defeat these windows?

Author’s note: If you have photos that Fire Engineering can use in this column for a positive learning experience, please send them to ndemarse.fireeng@gmail.com. Please include your full name and a detailed description of the incident.

NATE DeMARSE is a firefighter with the Fire Department of New York. He and his brother Curtis own Brotherhood Instructors, LLC.

On September 27, 2006, at 1628 hours, the Niles (IL) Fire Department (NFD) received a call concerning a worker entrapped in a trench collapse and requested the response of the Mutual Aid Box Alarm System (MABAS) Division 3 Technical Rescue Team (TRT).

A single-story, 20- × 25-foot house was being extensively rehabbed and expanded. At the time of the collapse, the roof and the interior walls, floors, and ceilings had been removed. The rear (side C) exterior wall had also been removed, leaving the side B wall above the victim unsupported except by the A/B corner. The earth alongside side B had been excavated down to the foundation’s footing. A worker was operating in the unprotected trench, rolling a tar-like waterproofing onto the foundation wall when the trench collapsed. The hole was about seven to eight feet deep before the collapse and less than five feet deep after the collapse. Whether or not this incident met the Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) definition of a trench (a hole deeper than it is wide), it definitely was an unsafe condition for firefighters.

The initial alarm assignment was a standard structure fire response of two engines, one ladder truck, one ambulance, and a command officer. Engine 5 was the first unit on the scene, at 1632 hours; the Battalion 4 district chief arrived at 1635 hours and established command.

On arrival, Engine 5 staged three houses away to leave the front of the building open for additional resources. The Engine 5 officer sized up the incident and used plywood from the construction site to lay ground pads. The victim was entrapped facing the wall (on which he had just rolled tar waterproofing) and up against it, buried up to the small of his back in clay soil. Many of the TRT members and first-due firefighters working at the site also became covered in tar. Since the victim spoke only Spanish, a TRT member served as translator between the victim, the TRT, and paramedics.

Additional plywood was placed between the victim and the trench wall, and 4 × 4 cribbing blocks were used to create temporary shores. A ladder was also placed into the trench next to the victim. Battalion 4 requested the full TRT response at 1643 hours.

Thirty TRT members from the 18 departments of MABAS Division 3 responded along with Rescue 3, the TRT vehicle. Three heavy rescues also responded for support: Morton Grove Squad 4, Northbrook Squad 12, and Park Ridge Squad 35. Arriving well ahead of Rescue 3, the Squad 4 lieutenant (a long-time member of the TRT and a member of the Illinois Urban Search and Rescue Task Force 1) placed struts from his squad using plywood, and digging from ladders was begun. Some areas of the trench walls were benched (because of the collapse and digging), making those areas safe without shores.

On arrival, I assumed the rescue branch leader role. I observed the work of Squad 4 and the first-due firefighters and reviewed our TRT’s trench collapse checklist as I prepared for the arrival of the TRT members and the TRT vehicle Rescue 3. Plan A was to continue the initial shoring and digging. When the additional TRT members arrived on-scene, the initial firefighters would be rotated out. A cut station for cutting lumber was set up, and additional shores were placed.

Three TRT groups worked on shoring and digging—the original group over the victim area and one additional group on each side of the first group. The work area was tight, only about 14 feet wide from house to house. Of that, four feet was the trench. The trench was 20 feet long. Spoil piles were at each end. This made it possible to work only one side of the trench, placing all the rescuers in this tight area.

Shoring the masonry wall above the victim was a concern. A raker shore would have been the only way to stabilize the wall. However, because of the open trench, it would have been time-consuming and would have delayed the shoring and digging of the trench by more than one hour. Since the wall appeared stable and lacked any signs of distress, firefighters with experience in construction checked it periodically.

Safety officers were placed at both ends of the trench to keep extra staffing out. A TRT safety officer monitored TRT operations in and around the trench. The natural gas meter for the building was on the exposed foundation wall at the A/B corner. About six to eight feet of gas main was found to be exposed and unsupported. The gas utility was summoned; the meter valve was checked to ensure it was closed.

As the victim was unearthed, it was noted that his legs were folded backward and he was in a kneeling position. Once his legs were exposed, the digging became tedious and time-consuming. Shoring was checked, and additional shoring had to be added as the depth of the dig increased. A sewer vacuum truck was requested to assist with soil removal. The TRT had trained on using such a device in trench collapses. However, in this case, the truck’s boom could not reach the victim.

Several firefighters and TRT personnel suggested breaching the concrete foundation from the basement side. This idea was not pursued, since the continued stability of the masonry wall above the victim was a concern. It was also unknown what effect soil pressure would have on the wall or the victim. If a large piece of concrete were removed, would the foundation wall or masonry wall collapse? Would the victim be pushed through the hole? The TRT leadership did not know and could not afford to find out. Because of the tight work area, the trench could not be widened for sloping or benching. The driveway of Exposure 2 was paved, and a large amount of the soil the workers had excavated was on it. Plan B wound up being making sure Plan A was safe and working.

The TRT group designed a victim-removal plan involving positioning Truck 2’s aerial ladder over the victim and rigging a high-point anchored haul system. Before rigging began, the group had the ladder positioned and extended over the hole to ensure its reach. Once it was established that the ladder would reach, it was swung back to the street and lowered to grade, and the tip of the fly was rigged with a two-point anchor and a 4:1 haul system. Once rigged, the ladder was placed back over the victim, and the 4:1 haul system was staged to the side of the trench. The haul crew stood by. Safety checks included ensuring that the aerial was deenergized once in place, that the aerial operator remained at the turntable and took direction only from the TRT haul group leader, and that the anchor rigged was on the main beams and not the sacrificial section of the fly (the last three or so rungs, which are bolted on).

The TRT haul group was also informed that only the victim, a single-person load, would be hauled to ensure the tip was not overloaded. The original removal plan was to haul the victim straight up. Ultimately, the victim could not be raised using the haul system because of his position. The rigging was begun before the victim’s legs were exposed. The TRT could not get its rescue extrication vest around the victim. He would have to be rolled to the right. The TRT would wind up using brute force to lift and roll him and then pass him on a backboard out of the hole.

At one point in the operation, one of the victim’s coworkers started up the backhoe and was going to do something with it. The safety officer promptly stopped the worker and had him removed from the area without incident.

Although the operation began at about 1630 hours and it was sunny and 70°F, it ended in darkness two hours later with the temperature approaching 50°F. This had been anticipated; lights were set up early. The TRT used its confined space blower with heater to warm the victim as he grew increasingly anxious and cold because of the wet clay.

The incident commander had established an EMS group. An advanced life support ambulance was ready to transport the victim, and the paramedics were in contact with medical control. The victim received oxygen and two large-bore IVs, and a paramedic monitored him throughout the operation. Although the local trauma center wanted the patient’s EKG to be monitored, this was not possible because of the confined area.

A number of things went well at this incident. Responders’ skills were polished, and teamwork was very evident. The TRT had drilled together that morning.

• Many TRT members came up with similar ideas and passed them along to their group leaders, who communicated them to the rescue branch leader.
• There were delays in moving equipment from the TRT vehicle to the team at the collapse site. Most non-TRT firefighters did not know where equipment on the TRT vehicle was stored or that certain tools necessarily required other components to be useful. For example, a strut needs ends, a hose with a control valve, and a compressed air supply. We are developing a plan to correct this situation.
• The sewer vacuum truck’s reach was limited, since most municipal vacuum trucks are used on paved roads, usually directly adjacent to the manhole or catch basin.
• Monitor the victim’s coworkers. You never know when one of them will try something, as above where a coworker, unhappy with the slow progress of rescue, attempted to use the backhoe.
• TRT personal protective equipment (PPE) is a must. All firefighters and TRT members wore appropriate PPE for the incident’s conditions. Several of the first-arriving firefighters wearing regular structural turnouts and TRT members wearing coveralls became covered in the tar. However, there was no fire hazard. Keep in mind what gear is appropriate under the incident’s conditions and requirements. Remember, heat stress and fatigue may occur sooner to members when digging in structural firefighting PPE instead of TRT PPE.
• Anticipate a changing environment. Darkness and colder weather set in as the incident came to a close. Both rescuers and the victim would have been affected by the conditions had this operation gone on for several hours.

The operation took two hours and one minute from when the first engine arrived until the TRT passed the victim to the Niles Fire Department paramedics in the warm zone.

This incident was clearly within the scope of operational-level personnel (as defined by National Fire Protection Association 1670, Standard on Operations and Training for Technical Search and Rescue Incidents), since the collapse involved a straight trench less than eight feet deep.

DREW SMITH, a 29-year veteran of the fire service, is deputy chief of the Prospect Heights (IL) Fire District. He has developed recruit, company, tower ladder, and aerial ladder training programs. He is chairman of the Illinois Technical Rescue Team Steering Committee and director of the regional MABAS Division 3 Technical Rescue Team and serves on the state fire marshal’s training committee. He has presented several programs at FDIC.

It never ceases to amaze us how adept firefighters are at finding ways to improve or modify existing ideas, practices, or tools. The examples below illustrate that point very well. Again, these are not our tricks but ideas we have seen or learned from others, which we want to share. Before using any of these suggestions, make sure they are approved by your department’s administration. Run them by your officer or discuss them around the kitchen table. Remember that modifying tools or using them for a purpose for which they were not designed may void the manufacturer’s warranty and could expose you to potential injury.

Put notches on door chocks. This is probably the most ingenious thing we have seen yet. It has been around for awhile, but not everyone may have seen it. The late Lt. Andrew Fredericks, Squad 18, Fire Department of New York, who was killed on 9/11, is credited with devising this simple but effective modification to the standard wooden door chock. By using a grinding wheel and making two wedge-shaped notches, one in each side of the wooden door chock, you create a door chock that is virtually impossible to dislodge from the door jamb (photo 1). To insert the chock, give it a one-quarter turn, and insert it above the middle hinge of the door. Once it is in, turn it back to its original position. The door and door frame will bite down on the notches, “locking” it in place (photo 2). Using an inexpensive and disposable door chock eliminates the need to use one of your firefighting tools as an overpriced door chock.

Modify the SCBA strap when rescuing a downed firefighter. We aren’t sure of the exact origin of this one; we learned about it following the tragic death of Bret Tarver at the Southwest Supermarket fire in Phoenix, Arizona, on March 14, 2001. This modification of the firefighter’s SCBA waist strap (described below) makes it much easier for rescuing firefighters to drag the downed firefighter. It also helps to maintain the thermal protection provided by the firefighter’s personal protective equipment (PPE), since most of it cannot be removed once the strap has been modified.

To modify the waist strap, first extend both sides of the waist strap all the way out. This is best accomplished by holding onto the buckle with one hand and releasing the tensioners with the other (photo 3). It is best to do this to both sides of the waist strap before unbuckling it. Second, with one end of the waist strap in each hand, unbuckle it and run one strap over the top of the firefighter’s leg and the other strap under the opposite leg. Next, bring the two ends together in the crotch area and rebuckle the strap (photo 4). By doing this, you can use the shoulder straps of the SCBA to drag the firefighter without the SCBA or other PPE unintentionally being pulled off the firefighter while he is being removed from the building. If the waist straps are not long enough to connect to each other, improvise by using a piece of webbing. (See Tricks of the Trade, January 2007.)

Use dry 13⁄4-inch hose to lift a firefighter out of a hole. Under the heading of “good ideas can come from anyone,” we have this trick. While conducting the Nance Drill at Collin County Community College Fire Academy in McKinney, Texas, one of the recruits remarked that “it would be easier to pull the firefighter up and out of the hole with a length of dry 13⁄4-inch hose than with the rope.” He was right! Replace the rescue rope with a 50-foot section of 13⁄4-inch hose (photo 5). Lower the middle of the hose down to the rescue team. Have the rescuing firefighters position the loop under the base of the SCBA and then in front of the firefighter’s shoulders (photos 6, 7). If you have a small piece of webbing, you can use that to lash the two ends of the hose together near the firefighter’s armpits. Now with a minimum of two firefighters on each of the running ends of the hose, hoist the firefighter up and out of the hole. This same procedure can also be used to lower the rescuers down into the hole.

Place an orange flag on an open overhead compartment door. “Dear Chief: Many things have transpired since last we spoke ....” You know where this is going. How many times have we heard of an overhead compartment door being completely ripped off the apparatus as it leaves the fire station, usually causing extensive damage to the station as well? One simple trick we have used for years is to affix an orange safety flag to the inside of the door (photo 8). When the driver checks the side-view mirrors, the flag will be hanging down in plain view and remind him that the doors are open/up (photo 9). The flags are inexpensive and easy to mount to the apparatus doors with a strip of plastic and a few self-tapping sheet metal screws. Use the appropriate length of screws, and check with the apparatus manufacturer before drilling into the doors. A little prep time here can save a lot of problems down the road.

Add a loop on your helmet for hanging a remote microphone. If you use a remote microphone on your handheld radio, you might be interested in this one. Tie a small loop of cord (or a braided shoestring) approximately two to three inches in diameter to your helmet, where the chin strap attaches to the underside of the helmet (photo 10). You can clip your remote microphone to the loop, and it will be conveniently positioned for transmitting or receiving radio messages (photo 11). You may want to experiment to see which side works best. It will vary depending on whether your department uses voice amplifiers on its SCBAs. Other electronic equipment may also make one side preferable to the other.

Turn flashlights off. We have learned that most of the time, especially early in the incident, flashlights are much more helpful if they are turned off—yes, off. Flashlights are for searching, locating, and identifying things inside the structure. They aren’t “driving” lights on a 4×4 that have to be turned on and left on for the duration of the incident. It is amazing how much the halo from the flashlight can obscure your vision. Like driving with your high beams on in the fog, the light from the flashlight reflects off the particulate matter in the smoke (photo 12). Most of the time, we are crawling down a smoke-filled hallway looking for a faint orange glow (photo 13). The light, especially if the firefighter behind the nozzle man has his light on, will greatly reduce the crew’s ability to locate the fire. They also may not observe light coming in around doors or windows. Even at night, if we do a good job of lighting up the exterior of the structure, our crews inside can see the light from the outside and recognize those windows and doors as potential egress points if things suddenly go bad.

Clamp locking pliers on garage door tracks.One simple method of preventing an overhead garage door from coming down behind you is to clamp a pair of locking pliers to the rail (photos 14, 15). Affix them to the rail as snugly as possible and as close to the top of the track as is practical. Remember to pull the safety release on the garage door opener if one is present. This will prevent accidentally activating the door opener and keep it from trying to force the door closed. Another benefit of this method is that we do not “lose” one of our firefighting tools (ax, pike pole, halligan, or ladder) because it is needed to prop open the garage door.

Remove crossbars and panic hardware from aluminum doors. Removing the panic bar hardware from commercial doors ensures that crews will have an unobstructed entrance to and exit from the structure. Accomplishing this can be frustrating. The key is the direction from which you strike the crossbar to remove it. Often, we instinctively try to remove the bar by hitting it on the top in a downward motion with a flathead ax or maul. The trick is to remove the glass and then go to the side opposite the crossbar and strike it with thrusts parallel to the ground, much as if you were trying to force a door with a battering ram (photo 16). This allows the threads of the screws, which are made from a harder material, to be pulled through the softer aluminum door frame (photo 17). This works much easier than trying to break the screws or force them to tear through the door frame.

Use the pike pole on vent-enter-search (VES) to help orient the searching firefighter. Something else you may wish to try is this: When performing VES, have the outside firefighter take an eight-foot pike pole. If the size and layout of the room being searched permit, the reach of the pole can be used to push the door to the room closed to reduce the amount of heat and smoke entering the area. The firefighter can lay the handle end of the pike pole in the center of the room while maintaining a firm grip on the hook end (photo 18). If for some reason the firefighter performing the search becomes disoriented, he can return to the middle of the room, find the handle of the pike pole, and follow it to the window (photo 19). This is an additional level of safety. Now the firefighter at the window will have a light shining into the area, his voice to help keep his partner oriented, and the pike pole as a physical guide to the point of egress.

STUART GRANT, a 28-year veteran of the fire service, is a battalion chief with Dallas (TX) Fire Rescue. He is certified as a master firefighter and fire instructor with the Texas Commission on Fire Protection. He is assigned as Battalion 3 and is a leader of Texas Task Force 2. He has served in many capacities within the department, including academy commander, hazmat officer, paramedic, and rope rescue member. He has been a H.O.T. instructor and speaker at FDIC and is an instructor at Collin County Community College in McKinney, Texas, and at the Texas A&M University Municipal Fire School. He has two associate’s degrees and a bachelor’s degree in fire administration.

LES STEPHENS, a 16-year veteran of the fire service, is a battalion chief with the Garland (TX) Fire Department. He is a certified master firefighter and an instructor with the Texas Commission on Fire Protection. Stephens is assigned to Battalion 2. He has served as his department’s training instructor and is an instructor at Collin County Community College in McKinney, Texas; FDIC; and Texas A&M University Municipal Fire School. He has an associate’s degree in fire protection from Tarrant County Community College.

Last month, when discussing dedicated company assignments, we explored some ways adopting this practice can improve overall fire company operations. Since dedicated company assignments can be perceived as restrictive, not to mention a major cultural change for some departments, let’s address some common questions and concerns.

Q. How will the personnel in the fire station get training or experience on the other apparatus or companies?

A. Being in the same station offers immediate access to the other companies for training and familiarization. This offers more opportunities than if members were assigned to single-company fire stations. If you are assigned to an engine company at a single-company fire station, you can and should participate in multicompany training with neighboring truck and rescue companies. If not already part of your department culture, it’s important to embrace the “every day is a training day” philosophy.

Q. What happens when dedicated company members are off-duty?

A. Fortunately, we work most of our scheduled shifts per year, but when members are off-duty, there are a few ways to fill in:

• Fill in from within the company—i.e., the engineer acts as the officer, and the firefighter acts as the engineer; of course, this depends on training, policies, and contracts.
• Move across the floor from the engine to the truck or rescue.
• Fill in from another fire station.
• Call in overtime.

Some departments have established fill-in priorities—in-house members have priority to ride on the other company before an outside member. It’s important this be done with good intentions, such as having the appropriate training.

Q. What happens when a truck company member has to work on an engine company, or vice versa? After being assigned to one type of company for awhile, how can this person still be proficient in the other?

A. As mentioned above, we must make time for training every day and at least every week for volunteer departments. Many departments have established a progressive career development path by allowing members to gain experience on engine companies before being assigned to truck or rescue companies.

Additionally, consider the impact on acting, relief, or fill-in officers and engineers when temporarily assigned outside their normally assigned company. They don’t have the luxury of knowing the company members, the apparatus, the area, or the assigned members.

Q. What if someone does not want to work on a busy engine company all the time?

A. Although there are many variables, working on a busy engine company can be a good thing, especially if you’re not as experienced as you’d like to be. However, you could bid into a slower company in your fire station or another station when the timing is right (there’s a vacancy and you have the seniority).Burnout is a valid concern; however, it will most likely be the exception than the rule. It’s important to remember that some of our busiest engine companies are not as busy as some of our ambulances.

Q. Won’t it interfere with the ambulance rotations?

A. We must be careful not to allow the integration of fire and EMS to interfere with how we assign personnel. Here are some proposals to address this:

• Firefighter/EMTs assigned to engine companies can rotate between engine companies and ambulances as assigned firefighter/paramedics do on advanced life support engines.
• Firefighter/EMTs assigned to truck and heavy rescue companies can rotate to an ambulance three shifts per quarter to maintain EMS knowledge, skills, and abilities.
• Firefighter/EMTs rotate from their assigned company to the ambulance for one shift and back to their assigned company.
• Senior (advanced, master) firefighter/EMTs assigned to truck and rescue companies at multicompany fire stations don’t rotate to ambulances.

Q. What if you don’t have the staffing to support this concept?

A. Although staffing levels are a challenge for many fire departments, we should be cautious in how we allow them to dictate personnel assignments. We should assign personnel based on sound operational need. Staffing levels, whatever they are, shouldn’t force us into normalizing unsafe practices.

Q. Can this concept create division within a fire station?

A. Yes, but divisive attitudes are a choice and can happen for a multitude of reasons regardless of rotating or dedicated companies. It’s important for personnel to be leaders at their level to help department culture change toward a more “pride and ownership” and “everyday is a training day” mindset. Although we function as teams within teams, it’s important to remember we are all on the same team. Officers, especially company officers, must not allow divisiveness to infiltrate the organization.

Q. What if this concept facilitates laziness or complacency?

A. Company officers and chief officers must not tolerate this behavior. For our safety, we must avoid the attitude of “kicking back,” “taking a break,” or “hiding,” because laziness facilitates complacency, and complacency kills firefighters.

Q. Isn’t multitasking a current trend?

A. It’s true that employers get more value for their dollar through multitasking, but today’s fire service is becoming more and more complex, requiring a wider array of knowledge, skills, and abilities. Every year we seem to have more training and safety requirements to accomplish. Our safety is directly related to our proficiency; therefore, it’s important to recognize when we are spreading ourselves too thin.

The fire service prides itself on solving all kinds of problems from a minor vehicle collision to a complex fireground operation; however, it’s important to realize that problems, projects, and requests are unlimited whereas resources (people, money, and time) are limited.

Q. Aren’t we smart enough to do all this stuff in the fire service?

A. Yes, we are definitely smart enough; today’s fire service is full of educated, multitalented people. The real question is, How much is enough or too much? How much time do we have for training to master all that’s expected of us? Even with dedicated company assignments, we’re more likely to be generalized specialists (jacks-of-many-trades, masters of some).

Q. What if the department is too transient?

A. Even though today’s fire service may be more transient (this may also be generational in nature), we must be cautious in allowing this to dictate how we operate. We should take a serious look at the revolving fire company door and determine if constant rotating negatively impacts company continuity, cohesiveness, consistency, and ultimately fire company competence. Note: There is a distinct difference between fire company competence and individual competence.

Q. We haven’t killed anyone with the way things are; why change now?

A. This is a very dangerous and irresponsible attitude. Just because it has been working doesn’t mean it’s right. It may only indicate you haven’t been caught yet.

Additionally, why complicate things by adding unnecessary risk for company officers? They are the ones dealing directly with the constant change of personnel rotating through their respective companies, not to mention changing apparatus themselves. We should be setting them up for consistent success.

Q. Is it possible that company performance will degrade over time?

A. That is always a possibility, regardless of whether you use rotating or dedicated company assignments. Establishing a culture of discipline is crucial, but it’s also important to be able to recognize the warning signs of deteriorating company performance such as lack of motivation, lack of teamwork, diminishing competence, and divisiveness within the company or toward other companies.1

Q. How did we come to constantly rotate personnel in the first place?

A. We may have drifted into constant rotating out of convenience or fairness. Gradually, constant rotation becomes part of our culture; we normalize it.

• We rotate so often, sometimes multiple times per shift, that we must continually manipulate our staffing and adjust our accountability system to reflect staffing accuracy.
• In “Drifting into Failure” (Editor’s Opinion, October 2007), Fire Engineering Editor in Chief Bobby Halton states: “Drifting involves small changes or adaptations to existing proven firefighting practices, which, before several seemingly innocent changes, were working well to protect us. These changes to our accepted practices by themselves appear to be insignificant; however, over time, and combined with previous adaptations and changes, [they] put firefighters at unacceptably high risk.”

The Anchorage Fire Department has begun implementing ways to improve consistency at the company level, thus slowing down the revolving fire company door. For starters, more than half of its 13 fire stations consist of single-engine companies, which are already dedicated companies by design. Some company officers have assigned their crews to dedicated companies at multicompany fire stations. Other company officers have paired themselves with engineers. Even though they still rotate from apparatus to apparatus, they rotate together but less often.

The intent of this article is not only to share the advantages of dedicated company assignments but also to encourage further discussion pertaining to company assignments. Have we drifted into our current practice? Is it based on tradition, convenience, or budget? Are we willing to evaluate its effectiveness to determine if current practice is still the best practice?

Understandably, if rotating is part of your department’s culture, there will be resistance to changing the status quo. Nevertheless, we must ask ourselves if constant rotating will improve company performance without compromising safety. If not, we must look for alternatives such as dedicated company assignments.

Changing to dedicated company assignments is not a cure-all, but coupled with a disciplined, progressive training culture, this practice can go far toward improving fire company operations (teamwork) while increasing our margin of safety.

1. Okray, Randy and Thomas Lubnau II, Crew Resource Management for the Fire Service (Fire Engineering, 2004), 155.

PAUL J. URBANO began his fire service career in 1986. He has been a member of the Anchorage (AK) Fire Department since 1995 and serves as the captain of Fire Station #1. He has an associate’s degree in fire service administration from the University of Alaska Anchorage.

Your medic unit responds to a 54-year-old male with chest pain. On your arrival, he appears pale and diaphoretic and states he was watching television when the pain developed. He denies shortness of breath. You place him on oxygen as your partner records his vital signs at B/P 118/64 R-18. You place the patient on a cardiac monitor and observe a normal sinus rhythm rate in the mid 60s and significant ST segment elevation in leads ll, lll, AVF. You establish an IV of 0.9 percent NS and give aspirin according to local protocol. You follow with 0.4 milligrams of sublingual nitroglycerin (NTG). After a second NTG spray, the patient develops hypotension with a systolic B/P of 64/P. You initiate a fluid bolus of 300 cc after ensuring his breathing sounds are bilaterally clear. The fluid does little for his blood pressure. You consider a second bolus while your partner prepares a dopamine drip. The patient’s blood pressure remains in the 60s, and the dopamine drip is initiated at five micrograms per kilogram per minute.

Despite aggressive treatment, you arrive at the emergency department with the patient still experiencing chest pain and his blood pressure still in the 60s. What causes this? Did the typical myocardial infarction (MI) treatment help or hurt this patient? What lessons did you learn for future runs?

Firefighters easily understand heart function. The heart is a hollow, muscular organ. It acts as a pump, thereby maintaining blood circulation, much like a two-stage fire pump on your apparatus.

A two-stage fire pump operates on the principles of pressure and volume; the heart functions similarly. The right side of the heart must get blood flow to the lungs and back to the heart again; this is the principle of volume. As a result, the right ventricle is much thinner walled, requiring less oxygen than the left ventricle.¹ The blood goes into the left side of the heart and must be pumped greater distances to get to the fingers and toes; this is the principle of pressure. The left ventricle has a much thicker wall than the right ventricle.

When a patient suffers an MI involving the inferior wall, EMS must consider several things. The inferior wall of the heart is served by the right coronary artery. ST segment elevation in leads II, III, AVF are diagnostic of this type of inferior infarction.² Up to 90 percent of adults have a right coronary artery branch that supplies blood flow to the right ventricle. (2) If a patient has a thrombus in the right coronary artery, the resulting infarct may occlude this branch, which supplies blood flow to the right ventricle. This form of MI actually causes infarction of both ventricles.³ Studies indicate that 30 to 50 percent of inferior infarcts will involve the right ventricle during the course of their MI. (1) Approximately five percent of MIs are isolated to the right ventricle. Although isolated RV infarctions (RVI) are rare, these patients may have chest pains and have a normal 12-lead EKG.⁴An effective right ventricle requires both the ventricle and the inter-ventricular septum to be functioning correctly. When decreased perfusion occurs to this area, it causes the myocardium to become noncompliant and may decrease preload, significantly affecting cardiac output. This may lead to considerable hypotension (3) caused by the decrease in compliance, reduced filling capacity, and decrease in right side stroke volume. (1)

RVIs become problematic for paramedics because the traditional treatment for chest pain and MI may actually cause these patients to develop hypotension and become unstable. A study published in the International Journal of Clinical Practice in April 2004 stated that RVI was associated with considerable morbidity and mortality and that in-hospital mortality was higher in patients with an RVI than those with an isolated inferior wall MI. (4)

Nitroglycerin and morphine sulfate (MS) are two common medications given for chest pain and MI. They provide pain relief and decrease myocardial oxygen demand to a stressed heart. These medications create vasodilatation of the vessels, allowing for more blood flow, oxygen, and peripheral pooling, reducing preload.⁵ In the patient with pulmonary edema, this is the needed effect. However, in a patient with an inferior MI having right ventricle involvement, NTG and MS begin a cascade effect, leading to further complications.⁶

Since the right ventricle has a much thinner wall than the left ventricle, it cannot tolerate the lack of blood flow. The strength of contractions actually decreases and compromises effective pump function. The traditional medications for MI and NTG and MS cause peripheral pooling and vessel vasodilatation. The preload reduction decreases the amount of fluid in the ventricles. Moving the fluid to the peripheral spaces creates insufficient volume for the ventricles to pump effectively. The effect of these medications creates a situation similar to “cavitation” of the fire pump.

When RVI patients develop hypotension, we routinely give small fluid boluses (of 200 to 300 milliliters) and then move to pressors. Most seasoned medics remember when MI patients were fluid restricted. IV therapy was typically D5W at a keep open rate. Today, most EMS protocols suggest dopamine for hypotension unresponsive to fluids. One of dopamine’s effects on blood pressure is that it increases cardiac output by increasing the heart rate. When no fluid is in the pump, you may constantly increase the rate and not see an increase in blood pressure. It is the equivalent of a pump operator’s increasing the pump pressure without cutting in a hydrant. Eventually, the tank dries up and the pump cavitates without a secure water supply. These patients will continue to be hypotensive.

A patient with an inferior wall MI must have a right-sided EKG done immediately after an MI diagnosis; move the left chest leads to the same positions on the right side chest wall. ST segment elevation of one mm or more in leads V4 right through V6 right (V4R-V6R) is a positive indication for a right ventricular infarct. (1)

While a complete right-sided EKG is preferred, some EMS situations make this impractical. In such instances, a quick way to look for RVI presence is to take the left leg of the four lead limb leads and move it to the V4 position on the right side of the chest and move the EKG machine to lead III. By doing this, the left leg becomes a positive camera that, when placed in the V4R position, looks directly at the right ventricle. (2) Even the slightest ST segment elevation (one mm or more) in this lead should raise suspicion of RVI presence (record this strip and mark it V4R). At this point, your patient has an inferior wall MI with RVI. The V4R lead is the best lead for determining RVI, with approximately 90 percent specificity. (2)

Other methods for RVI determination include pulsus paradoxus (the decrease or disappearance of the pulses during inspiration) and Kussmaul’s sign (abnormal deep and fast respirations). In a July 2000 article in Clinical Cardiology, Haji and Movahed report that hypotension patients with these signs show an 88 percent sensitivity and a 100 percent specificity for a clinically significant RVI. (1)

Some consider NTG and MS contraindicated in RVI. Not all patients with RVI develop hypotension.7 EMS protocols must include the suspicion, assessment, and treatment of RVI in the acute MI patient. While there are clear risks to preload reduction in RVI, the advantages of pain relief and reducing oxygen demand make withholding NTG and MS unnecessary unless hypotension is present. With a normotensive patient in pain, use NTG and MS cautiously. Administer fluids to offset preload reduction, and take frequent vital signs to catch hypotension early.

If hypotension is present, 0.9 NS is the desired treatment using two large-bore IVs, ensuring that the patient’s breath sounds are bilaterally clear, comfortably administer significant volumes of fluids. Patients with RVI are noted for their jugular venous distention (JVD) and clear breath sounds. (1) Frequently, they require one to two liters of fluid to increase blood pressure. (3) By adjusting the fluid’s flow rate, you may titrate amounts of NTG and MS to help manage your patient’s pain level.

This concept involves filling the weakened right ventricle with fluid until it overflows to the lungs, picks up oxygen, and returns to the left side of the heart for distribution to the rest of the body. If fluid loading does not provide the desired blood pressure increase, some practitioners suggest low dose dobutamine for the pump effect to strengthen contractions. Dobutamine helps strengthen contraction of both the right ventricle and the ventricular septum without the dramatic heart rate increase. (1)

When you reach the emergency department (ED) with a diagnostic 12 lead displaying a possible inferior wall MI, showing documentation of elevation in the V4R lead assists the ED in employing the proper course of action more quickly; revascularization of the right coronary artery will be administered, saving heart muscle. Save yourself from dealing with a hypotensive patient before the hospital.

Viewed as a two-way pump, the heart is an easy concept to grasp. Inferior wall MI involving the right ventricle is prone to hypotension, and a right side EKG is standard care in all patients with this condition. All patients with inferior wall MI with hypotension should raise suspicion of an RVI. Do not restrict fluids from these patients provided that their bilateral breath sounds show no evidence of rales. It may take considerable amounts of fluid to stay ahead of the game. Use traditional MI treatments with caution, as they may cause hypotension.

1. Haji, Showkat, Assad Movahed, “Right Ventricula Infarction – Diagnosis and Treatment.” Clinical Cardiology. July 2000 23, 473-482.

2. Phalen, Tim. The 12 lead ECG: In Acute Myocardial Infarction. Mosby. 1996.

3. Horan, Leo G., Nancy C. Flowers. “Right Ventricular Infarction: Specific Requirements of Management.” American Family Physician. Vol. 60, October 15, 1999.

4. Kahn, Joel K., M. Bernstein, “Isolated Right Ventricular Myocardial Infarction.” Annals of Internal Medicine. Vol. 118 Issue 9 May 1, 1993.

5. Mistovich, Joseph, Randall Benner. Advanced Cardiac Life Support. Prentice-Hall. 1998.

6. Marini, John J., Arthur P. Wheeler, Critical Care Medicine. Williams and Wilkins. 1999.

7. Liu, Rex. “Right Ventricular Infarction.” eMedicine. June 29, 2006.

JIM DAVIS is a captain/paramedic and EMS supervisor with the Columbus (OH) Fire Department. He is a flight nurse for Medflight of Ohio, an adjunct faculty member at Columbus State Community College, and a member of the Ohio State Board of EMS.

Firefighters stand among the ranks of our nation’s bravest first responders, constantly putting themselves in harm’s way to keep our communities safe. Sadly, these heroes’ efforts sometimes end in tragedy as they make the ultimate sacrifice while fighting to save the lives of others.

Across the nation, firefighters face not only the ancient enemy of fire but newer challenges like terrorism and hazardous materials. America’s firefighters deserve our respect and our gratitude.

They also deserve federal support for their efforts to prevent fires, to rescue and care for victims, to promote fire safety, and to improve skills and techniques. That is why Senator Chris Dodd of Connecticut and I recently introduced a bill to reauthorize the U.S. Fire Administration (USFA) and provide additional resources to help the agency meet its growing responsibilities and our communities’ needs. As co-chairs of the Congressional Fire Services Caucus, Senator Dodd and I welcome our fellow Caucus co-chairs, Senators John McCain of Arizona and Joe Biden of Delaware, as co-sponsors in this effort.

Since its creation in 1974, the USFA and the National Fire Academy (NFA) have helped prevent fires, protect property, and save lives among firefighters and the public. Today, the USFA is also integrated into our national, all-hazards system and our homeland security efforts.

January marked the fifth anniversary of the USFA’s transfer to the Department of Homeland Security (DHS). As the ranking member of the Senate Committee on Homeland Security and as a co-chair of the Congressional Fire Services Caucus, I believe it’s noteworthy that this bill does much more than reauthorize the USFA.

For example, the bill designates $5 million to support necessary technology upgrades to the National Fire Incident Reporting System (NFIRS). This important system helps state and local governments report and analyze fires, and it allows nationwide data sharing in standardized formats. The NFIRS database—the world’s largest collection of fire incident information—helps all levels of government to probe the nature and causes of injuries, deaths, and property loss resulting from fires. That information will benefit firefighters and the public.

Another vital component of this bill establishes a rotating position at the DHS National Operations Center (NOC) to be filled by a state or local fire service official. In our comprehensive, all-hazards approach to major disasters, it is critically important to have fire service representation at the NOC during a catastrophic event.

The bill has other important provisions, including an initial $70 million authorization for the USFA that would be increased each year through 2012. In addition, the bill expands NFA training programs to include such topics as hazardous-materials fires and fire-based emergency medical services. It authorizes expanded research on fires in urban-wildland interfaces and in rural areas. It encourages the USFA to adopt national voluntary consensus standards on firefighter health and safety—an important topic, considering that about 100 brave firefighters lose their lives in the line of duty each year, with many more suffering serious injuries.

My home state of Maine is keenly aware of the dangers of fire and the importance of effective fire services. Maine is one of the most rural states in the nation, and most of its housing is wood frame. Some households rely on woodstoves for primary or supplemental heat. According to the Maine Department of Public Safety, nearly 50 Mainers died in fires every year through the 1950s, 1960s, and 1970s. The average so far for this decade is 18, and 2007 produced only 12 fire-related deaths—still too many but a considerable improvement.

Maine public safety officials attribute the decline to factors such as wider use of smoke detectors and improved building codes, as well as to fire prevention efforts. As our national resource and clearinghouse for fire research, education, and training, the USFA certainly deserves a share of the credit for my state’s progress in reducing the loss, devastation, and death caused by fires.

I have no doubt that the USFA’s influence will continue to grow. Its new campaign for preventing smoking-related home fires is a worthy effort. And its expanding curriculum of online courses on topics such as incident command for nursing home fires, emergency medical service at multicasualty incidents, and emergency response to terrorism is a valuable resource for firefighters.

The USFA is a fine example of the good that can result from federal, state, and local collaboration to counter the danger of fire and to address new threats that firefighters face. I will continue to work with my Senate colleagues to reauthorize and improve this valuable component of the DHS.

I also have worked for years to secure homeland security grant funding to help states and localities procure equipment, training, and other valuable resources for firefighters through the FIRE Act and SAFER Act grant programs. It’s a double-dividend investment that protects our communities and the firefighters who serve them. Reinforcing the work of the USFA is another way to honor our local firefighters and to ensure that they are able to develop and maintain the capabilities necessary to respond to any emergency, natural or man-made.

I offer my sincere gratitude and best wishes to all of our country’s firefighters, with a special greeting to those of you attending this year’s Fire Department Instructors Conference in Indianapolis. You are all part of a noble effort aimed at saving lives.

U.S. SENATOR SUSAN M. COLLINS, R-ME, is a ranking member of the Senate Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs and a co-chair of the Congressional Fire Services Caucus.

Our communities are changing—growing and being redeveloped at a rapid pace. As new construction flourishes, firefighters are responsible for looking at the way this affects our preplanning, inspections, emergency medical services, and—most importantly—fire attack. Fire attack in this modern fire environment poses new challenges. As a result of new construction methods and the increased use of synthetic materials, fires now burn hotter and faster; often the first-arriving crews have to play catch-up. It is the engine company’s capability or lack thereof that will set the stage for the outcome of most fires.

New construction methods and materials used in our communities contribute to the fire problem’s severity. Not too long ago, our buildings featured unreinforced masonry and heavy timber construction. Today, however, lightweight roof truss construction is standard, metal studs have replaced wood, and synthetics and plastics have replaced natural materials.

This increases our danger on the fireground. Flashover and rapid fire growth now must be foremost in our minds on arrival. Thirty years ago, flashovers were less frequent, and the time to flashover was much longer. Now, flashovers are more frequent and occur much more quickly. We use water to fight fires because of its excellent ability to absorb heat [British thermal units (Btus)]. Hotter fires require more water to overcome these Btus. This is what we are up against: one pound (0.46 kg) of paper when burned generates roughly 2,800 Btus; one pound of wood, roughly 8,000 Btus; and one pound of polymer plastic, roughly 22,000 Btus.

The synthetics and plastics now used in new construction burn almost three times hotter than materials used in older construction. This leads to rapid flame spread and a high-heat release rate as these higher fuel loads are consumed. In addition, when burned, plastic produces 300 times more smoke per pound than wood. Take these numbers and consider that buildings are also now more energy efficient—equipped with better insulation, limited ventilation, energy-efficient windows, and hurricane glass.

Deploying the correct hoseline size for the job in the right location is imperative. Properly placed streams are likely to save more lives than any other fireground tactic—once the fire goes out, a lot of our problems are solved, and things will get better. Fire advancement is obviously stopped, exposures are no longer at risk, and we can more safely do our jobs.

In this modern fire environment, we firefighters may need to reexamine our firefighting tactics. The first-arriving engine company officer is responsible for determining the proper size attack line, nozzle type, hose length, and entry location. Is a 95-gpm combination fog nozzle really the right tool to knock down a fire in a new construction building? As building construction changes, so must our tactics. In this modern fire environment, the rapid or “blitz” attack is becoming more popular. It involves applying a large amount of water immediately to knock down the visible fire. Using a high-flow handline or a portable monitor for just seconds can stop fire advancement. Once the fire is darkened down, handlines can be advanced to extinguish the fire completely (photo 1). The quicker we do this, the quicker things get better. Never use this type of attack if the building is occupied by civilians or firefighters.

A lightweight portable monitor can achieve quick knockdown rapidly, effectively, and with limited staffing. Several makes and models are on the market, each with its own features and benefits. A lightweight portable monitor weighs less than 20 pounds and can deliver around 500 gpm from one 21⁄2-inch or three-inch hoseline. Since it is often preconnected (photo 2), one firefighter can easily deploy this monitor to put a lot of water on the fire fast. This attack must be coordinated with other crews on the fireground; when executed properly, it will knock down a large amount of the fire quickly. Remember that depending on the volume and involvement of the fire, this rapid attack will last only about 15 to 30 seconds, until the visible fire is darkened down.

Once this occurs, crews can make entry to locate, confine, and extinguish the rest of fire. The rapid attack tactic merely halts the fire temporarily; an aggressive crew must still get inside and put the rest of the fire out completely. However, this task will be significantly easier and safer, since the bulk of the fire has been extinguished.

Once the rapid attack has occurred, you can use the lightweight portable monitor as a manifold from which to advance handlines. Typically, the more popular monitors have a built-in shutoff. This allows the firefighter to shut off the monitor, attach a gated wye or reducer, and advance a handline directly from the monitor (photos 3, 4). This setup is ideal for times when firefighter staffing is limited; firefighters can carry a separate hose pack that includes a break-apart nozzle combination with a separate shutoff and nozzle tip (photo 5). As the hoseline is advanced from the lightweight portable monitor, if additional hose is needed, the nozzle shutoff can be closed, the nozzle tip removed, and an additional hose bundle attached to the shutoff. This allows quick advancement of additional hose without shutting down the entire operation.

The gated wye is what makes this lightweight portable monitor a manifold to which an additional hoseline can be attached. Keep in mind that certain brands of monitors come equipped with a safety shutoff that activates if the monitor is moved slightly. This feature can pose a problem when the monitor is used as a manifold, since the monitor could accidentally shut off if it is moved when advancing hose. It may be necessary to secure it in the open position with a piece of rope or webbing to ensure that your water supply is not compromised.

If used properly, the lightweight portable monitor is an effective and safer tactic for facing the new enemy—the modern fire environment. If there is no threat to the occupants, why endanger firefighters’ lives? With a rapid attack, we can minimize many dangers that new building construction poses. One way to achieve this is a quick knockdown with a lightweight portable monitor, followed with a much safer aggressive interior attack using the monitor as your water supply. This is just one more tactic for us to add to our playbook—one that can help to ensure safety.

Author’s note: Thanks to Engineer (Ret.) Mac McGarry of the Glenview (IL) Fire Department for his help with this article.

CHRIS MARTIN is an 11-year veteran of the fire service and an engineer with the Clay Fire Territory in South Bend, Indiana. He is an Indiana-certified fire officer 1, EMT-B, and fire instructor. Martin has a bachelor’s degree in marketing from the University of Notre Dame and is a member of the MABAS Division 201 Tactical Rescue Team.

Question: Most of us realize that staffing is key to successful operations at fires. Some departments still struggle with the number of members on apparatus. If training is also key, should we train with one- and two-person companies?

Staffing issues have plagued the fire service over the past decade or so and, in my opinion, will continue to do so until we reinvent ourselves as a trade. This problem can be attributed to several things: a decrease in fire incidents; economic concerns; shrinking municipalities—the citizens we protect are moving to “the burbs”; increased use of fire protection “sharing” (mutual/automatic aid); and our continuous ability to keep responding and protecting despite the cuts. (Some of these influences are good things—reduced fire rates, for example. Fire kills on average 1,500 children a year.) Until we as an industry find our new niche in the community, we will be faced with these reductions.

The staffing problem manifests itself in the area of fireground evolutions and training sessions. In most municipalities, fireground evolutions are based on four or more firefighters participating in the evolution. This number is even larger in some departments. How many departments can “split” their six-person truck company into different evolutions and tasks? Thirty years ago, a four-person parallel or right-angle ladder raise was the norm for most municipal departments. Many of us now do not have four-person truck companies on a regular, or any, basis.

The situation affects not only fireground evolutions of individual departments but also of departments that rely on mutual/automatic aid. If a neighboring community staffs its engine with three firefighters and decides to reduce staffing to two firefighters and your department relies on that department as its second- or third-due engine, your department now has decisions to make. How will that work at your next fire? Can you still rely on those engines for a quick water supply?

Regardless of the constraints, I believe we must respond and protect those who rely on us. We have done so for hundreds of years and must do everything to continue to do so.

—John “Skip” Coleman recently retired from the Toledo (OH) Department of Fire and Rescue as assistant chief. He is a technical editor of Fire Engineering, a member of the FDIC Educational Advisory Board, and author of Incident Management for the Street-Smart Fire Officer (Fire Engineering, 1997) and Managing Major Fires (Fire Engineering, 2000).

Craig H. Shelley,
fire protection advisor,
Dhahran, Saudi Arabia

Response: Not all fire departments are fortunate to have full staffing in compliance with National Fire Protection Association recommendations. How, therefore, can they operate to maximum efficiency and increase their safety? Training!

I am in no way condoning inappropriate staffing levels; but, again, we are not all fortunate to have optimum staffing. It is one thing to arrive on-scene with limited staffing and operate in complete confusion and another to arrive on-scene and operate according to standard operating procedures (SOPs) and in a disciplined fashion. Again, training is the key.

A highly disciplined and well-trained unit can operate with maximum efficiency for its numbers. If we are sending our troops into battle without full resources—i.e., full staffing—then the only way to help protect them is to ensure they are well protected with proper personal protective equipment (PPE), operate according to SOPs, and are highly and well-trained. If we look at the United States armed forces special operations teams, we can see their successes when operating with small groups. What sets them apart from their enemy? Training. We need to provide training to our responders whatever their staffing. If departments are responding with two- or three-person companies, these persons need to be trained to operate in a cohesive and safe manner.

Rick Lasky, chief,
Lewisville (TX) Fire Department

Response: As much as I’m a proponent of four-person staffing on engines, quints, and ladder trucks, I also realize that, depending on your situation, you may only be able to staff an apparatus with one, two, or three firefighters. That being said, we should always fight for better staffing. It’s hard for some people to understand just how much of a difference having a fourth person on an apparatus makes when operating at emergencies, especially at a structure fire. I have witnessed as a chief just how much of an impact having a fourth member on an apparatus can have. It’s something you have to see firsthand to understand completely.

It’s been said that publishing an article on how to train or work with fewer apparatus crew members would give ammunition to those people fighting adequate staffing on the other side in their attempt to justify why we don’t need the staffing we’re asking for. That could be true in some cases, but I think the argument also has to be made that if you can have only two or three people assigned to an apparatus, for whatever reason, you need to train these people to work within those staffing constraints in emergencies. Not doing so or burying your head in the sand for the sake of an argument for four-person staffing is dangerous.

The emphasis should always be on four-person staffing when you can pull it off, but if you’re going to run with two or three people, you need to train your people on how to operate within that system so they can do so safely. When only one person is assigned to an apparatus, it is even more critical that these firefighters train properly and have the SOPs to support that staffing situation so that they can operate safely on the fireground or other emergency site until enough personnel arrive on-scene. A department probably can’t do anything about one- or two-person crews, but it always has the ability to make sure that its personnel work as safely as possible.

Jeffrey Schwering, lieutenant,
Crestwood (MO) Department of Fire Services

Response: Training our firefighters to think on their feet has to be the most important thing all can do to enhance safety and survival on the fireground for everyone. We all understand that if adequate staffing is not present at a working incident, the incident outcome probably will not be a positive one. One- or two-person companies are behind the eight ball when they leave the house. I have experienced this as a volunteer and as a career officer.

We have an obligation to train one- and two-person companies. Training our firefighters is the key. All officers and members need to train on the basics every day. Regardless of the number of members on the apparatus, knowledge of fire behavior, building construction, reading smoke, the National Incident Management System, etc., will help the first-arriving firefighters to make educated and safe decisions and to know where to begin working a fire.

Although it is hard to imagine one- or two-member companies in 2008, many companies face this every day. In my area of the country, three on a company engine or truck is normal. The fire service must continue to move forward toward adequate staffing and continued training of all members, which can lead to a reduced number of line-of-duty deaths.

Gary Seidel, chief,
Hillsboro (OR) Fire Department

Response: As we are aware, it takes sufficient resources to manage the all-hazard response we provide to the communities we serve. Whether our response is to a high-rise, a single-family dwelling, a commercial or an industrial occupancy, a wildland fire, or a four-story apartment house fire, it is all about having adequate resources arriving in a timely manner with appropriate apparatus and adaptive crews to safely and effectively mitigate the incident. The same applies to any other incident to which your agency responds. Our best service delivery to emergency responses is not through a piecemeal approach.

It would be nice if every agency had enough fire stations geographically and demographically placed and a variety of apparatus staffed with equal numbers of personnel readily available to meet the needs in the all-hazards response arena. However, this is not to be.

I would look at several questions before I address the training issue:

• What relationship does the department have with the governing body?
• Has the department assessed the risks to the community?
• Has the department developed realistic plans?
• What is the desired level of service delivery to the community?
• What is the standard/duty of care?
• What is the vicarious liability to the department?
• What are the respondent superior issues the department faces?
• Does the department have the financial backing to support its service delivery model?
• Do the citizens really understand what they are getting?

These questions relate to the service delivery system and how department members should train. Training is not about numbers; it is about being prepared and equipped to safely respond and deliver a professional service and, hopefully, save a life. It is about being certified and qualified.

A department must train on tactics that are within its companies’ capabilities and must become proficient in them. This, however, will be a limiting factor for your department. One- and two-person companies must also train with the surrounding agencies that may be similarly staffed or, hopefully, have three, four, or five persons on an apparatus.

Bobby Shelton, firefighter,
Cincinnati (OH) Fire Department

Response: Training and staffing are the two keys to firefighter safety and survival. Having had the experience of working for career and combination departments, those two issues go hand in hand and are always major. A minimum of four-person crews makes fire department response more efficient, effective, and safer, which saves the municipality money in the long run. We should train according to the national standard.

NFPA 1500, Standard on Fire Department Occupational Safety and Health Program, (2007 ed.) 8.5.7 states: “In the initial stages of an incident, at a working structural fire, a minimum of 4 individuals is required.” Also, two of those four individuals must be on standby. Section 8.5.12 states that no personnel, including the incident commander, safety officer, or fire apparatus operator, shall be assigned to stand by if abandoning critical tasks will jeopardize the safety and health of firefighters working the incident.

We should train to go to work with adequate staffing even if it is not available at the time.

Ron Hiraki, assistant chief,
Gig Harbor (WA) Fire & Medic One

Response: We operate with two members on an engine company and two members on the medic unit. Despite this, we have developed and written all of our engine company evolutions for three members. Normally, the engine company and the medic unit respond in tandem. On arrival at the scene, they can perform the three-member engine company evolution. If the medic unit is out of the station, another engine company or medic is usually not far behind.

Flexibility is an essential trait of being a good firefighter. Our goal was to define the tasks to be completed for an engine company evolution, and the appropriate sequence. We organized these tasks by position (e.g., officer, driver, nozzleman) best suited to complete them. This simple organization of tasks increases safety and efficiency because the officer has to give only one command and members aren’t standing around figuring out who will do what and bumping into each other.

The key is to have everyone learn the tasks each position must perform and the sequence of the tasks. That way, when there are only two members or a member has a problem or when the officer has to do “officer stuff,” the other members can help out. It might be more confusing if we developed and wrote our engine company evolutions for one, two, and four members. All members must train on all of the tasks that each position must perform and the sequence, and we must be flexible.

Randall W. Hanifen, lieutenant,
West Chester (OH) Fire-Rescue

Response: Training with one- and two-person companies is a must if this is how your department operates at scenes. With the decline in volunteer retention rates and citizens not wanting huge tax bills, the fire service is left with two options: respond with the resources available or not respond at all. The second option is not feasible; therefore, we must train how we will be expected to operate. Although I am not advocating violating the many safety standards that require the use of four firefighters, there are operations that can be conducted without actual entry, such as a transitional attack that starts defensive and progresses to offensive when sufficient personnel arrive. Departments that train with sufficient personnel but typically arrive with fewer will suffer at the scene, because officers will begin to improvise because of the change in staffing. If they are unfamiliar with the decisions that need to be made because of a shortage of personnel, serious safety issues could arise. Second, departments that cross-staff vehicles should train with the different configurations that could arrive at a scene. This will enable all personnel to become familiar with the limiting factors present based on the given staffing. Failing to train with the given number of personnel available is equivalent to training a probationary firefighter to ventilate the roof with a chainsaw and then giving him only an ax when he arrives at the scene.

Richard Wilson, lieutenant,
Bartlett (IL) Fire District

Response: How many of these companies are on duty at a time? If we have only one company of two, I would say no if we can muster up two firefighter companies. No training is ever lost, no matter how small. The only aspect needing attention is availability for the next incident if you are trying to complete a drill on NFPA 1410, Standard on Training for Initial Emergency Scene Operations, (2005 ed.). The time to break down and return to service would be the only hangup. If management has no problem with response times, train away. Safety for all personnel is the most important thing to remember. Train like it is the real incident with two members first in, two out, water supply with two firefighters (rural operations included), and laddering a building or completing a rescue. Some questions I would raise: Would you have to make an interior attack with just two people? Who else is coming to the incident? How far away are they? Remember the two-in/two-out policies. Let’s work smart.

Gregory P. Perricone,
deputy chief instructor,
Suffolk County (NY) Fire Academy

Response: Is there any such thing as a one- or two-person company? Can one or two persons perform the functions that should be done by four or five? I think it is impractical and unrealistic to train individuals or pairs of individuals to act as independent fire companies.

However, I do understand that many paid and volunteer departments have staffing shortages. How do we overcome this obstacle? Not by training firefighters to work in smaller groups. We train them to work with larger groups composed of their mutual-aid companies or departments. By entering into memorandums of understanding or mutual-aid agreements, neighboring departments/companies would train and turn out together. It is a paradigm shift that could work.

Signers to these agreements would retain control of their personnel and equipment while providing substantial staffing on the fireground.

Recently in Suffolk County, a call for a smell of gas at a major university brought as many as five neighboring departments to the scene. Some of these units arrived with two to three personnel onboard. By pooling the available personnel, we identified the odor without putting the first-due fire department in a precarious position. Could you imagine the horror if that incident commander hadn’t called for help and there had been an explosion?

Now imagine that same scenario where only two firefighters respond, enter the building, and experience a gas explosion. Who would be there to rescue the rescuers? Firefighting is dangerous enough. Two-person engine companies are a disaster waiting to happen.

Brian Zaitz, firefighter/paramedic,
Metro West Fire Protection District,
Wildwood, Missouri

Response: We all known the motto “Train like you fight,” with which I totally agree, especially when discussing drilling related to staffing. I work for a fire district where three-person engine and truck companies are the standard. Our current preferred operating methods (POMs) and training exercises are developed around this staffing level. Although it would be great to have four or five firefighters on the truck, it is not a reality for most fire districts and departments. Training and POMs should reflect district staffing. For example, our first-due fire training uses all three positions. The officer is responsible for conducting a 360; performing outside ventilation, if possible; and reporting back to the front. The firefighter deploys the attack line and performs initial forcible entry and awaits the officer. The chauffeur operates the apparatus and secures a water supply. This POM or training would not be applicable as it is written to a department that has two or four firefighters assigned to the apparatus. POMs and training need to reflect realistic staffing levels.

Todd Ungar, lieutenant,
Willoughby (OH) Fire Department

Response: There are many ways to train with one- and two-person crews. At the very minimum, SCBA and personal protective equipment (PPE) donning and doffing proficiencies, basic pump and ladder operations, and familiarization with the response area can be covered. I’m also assuming that companies with this level of staffing are probably supplemented by off-duty, part-paid/volunteer, or mutual-aid response at the emergency scene. In this case, there must be a general level of knowledge of that company’s response district. Basic walkthroughs of buildings, familiarization with standpipe and hydrant locations, and general preplanning of operations can be done with one- or two-person crews. These crews, although short-staffed, will still set the pace for the initial response. There should also be some effort to train with surrounding companies or departments; they may be in the same situation, and training with them would further improve operations at emergencies.

Mike Newbury, captain,
St. Louis (MO) Fire Department

Response: We train to prepare for emergencies, to gain experience, to gain knowledge, and to gain a point of reference so we can adjust our actions in the real-world scenarios (i.e., if we train to lead a line off in one way, we should do it in the same way at a fire scene, making allowances only for obstacles and hazards particular to the fire scene and not present during training). The closer we can simulate a real scene when training, the better and more safely we can operate at a real emergency scene.

The problem with one- and two-person companies is adhering to the two-in/two-out rule, RIT, and other best practices put in place for firefighter safety. More specifically, if your department does not have the budget or will not pay for full companies in combination departments, does not have the volunteers available for a training session in volunteer departments, or commonly responds with one- or two-person companies, how do you comply with the two-in/two-out rule and RIT requirements?

If your answer is to group enough one- and two-person companies together to have the personnel to cover these requirements and institute the incident command system (ICS), obviously you should train with your surrounding companies and practice the methods you will use to cover the things you need at an emergency scene—water supply, attack team, RIT, search team, second line, ventilation team, and ICS, for example. So if this is your plan, train with one- and two-person companies with the intent of merging multiple companies into teams that cover all of the above.

If your answer is, “We just don’t have the personnel for all that stuff and never will, so we should train with what we have,” I suggest you adopt the first answer and train with the surrounding companies with whom you will work at a real emergency scene and develop a flexible SOP with the surrounding jurisdictions to merge your companies and theirs into teams with enough personnel to cover ICS, RIT, two-in/two-out, firefighter accountability, and so on. Why? Safety first. These things have become standards to help keep firefighters alive and unhurt.

If you are in a situation in which you must rely on one- and two-person companies, it will take some practice (training) to get multiple one- and two-person companies on the same page before having to work at a real emergency. Joint training sessions will help create that template on how to organize and command a scene and to determine who will operate in what capacity.

As an example, Pumper 1, the first on-scene, will do water supply (driver/engineer) and initial ICS and size-up (second firefighter on pumper 1); Pumper 2 will lead off the attack line with its two firefighters; and Pumper 1’s one firefighter will be the initial RIT. The next-arriving company will be Ladder 1 and will do ventilation as a two-person team. When the next-arriving company arrives, the two firefighters will become permanent RIT. This may sound rigid, but if all you have are one- and two-person companies, multiple one- and two-person companies have to work together for safety’s sake.

Jessie Rosewall,
assistant chief-paramedic,
River Delta (CA) Fire District

Response: I work for a small part-time paid and volunteer fire department in California that runs about 380 calls a year within a 32-square-mile radius. We train just as if we were on a call—with two-person engine companies relying on mutual aid. If we have more than two on an engine, we put the firefighters in a support mode. If we have enough to run full training, we run as if they would be our second-in equipment or our mutual-aid response.

As we figure it, most people have about 30 minutes of good work time before they become too fatigued to work and pose a danger to themselves and others. When we run training, we keep this in mind.

Jay Wieners, chief,
Lake Hiawatha (NJ) Fire Department

Response: Obviously, staffing is a key factor in any firefighting operation. We not only have to accomplish several tactical objectives at most incidents, but we must also accomplish them in a coordinated fashion and in compliance with the two-in/two-out standard. For most departments, staffing is a major issue. Personnel in paid departments are often cut to the bare minimum, or less, by town hall number crunchers who see the fire department as an expense, not an emergency service. In volunteer departments, staffing is often a crapshoot, especially during daytime hours. With this being our reality, training is an issue in two regards.

First, firefighters must train under realistic conditions similar to those they will face on the fireground. We are setting ourselves up for failure when we drill with a four-person hose team and have only a two-person team in a real situation. The same holds true for other operations. We have to train with the personnel we will have at a real incident.

Second, we must train firefighters in the SOPs to be followed to accomplish tactical objectives in a coordinated manner. Most importantly, firefighters must be trained in the procedures to be followed when they don’t have enough resources on-sce