Why does the fire service today, more than ever before, need to perform live-fire training using acquired structures?

According to a May 2003 USFA report, Trends and Hazards in Firefighter Training, from 1987 to 2001 there has been a 31% decrease in the incidence of structure fires throughout the United States. As a result of the decline in fires, firefighters on the whole have less fireground experience than their predecessors had a generation ago. As many of the more experienced firefighters and officers retire, they're replaced by young officers with comparably less experience.

As the direct experience of today's firefighters continues to diminish, there is a great concern that their inability to recognize flashover and building collapse, as well as to react quickly enough to avoid being caught by these two potentially fatal conditions, will continue to result in injuries and fatalities to firefighters.

Acquired perspective

Even though many fire officers and instructors agree with statements such as these, a growing number of departments throughout the United States have reduced, or eliminated entirely, the use of acquired structures for live-fire training.

There are a number of reasons why, not the least of which are highly publicized cases of tragic firefighter injury and fatality that have occurred over the past several years involving acquired structure live-fire training evolutions that went awry. The concern about potential firefighter injury and fatality is many times the prime-motivating factor regarding decisions to abandon the use of acquired structures.

However, it's important to put the use of acquired structures into perspective. While a fire department's response to an accidental or incendiary fire is an inherently hazardous activity, a live-fire training session in an acquired structure need not be inherently hazardous. With appropriate planning and execution, a live-fire training session that's compliant with NFPA 1403, Live Fire Training Evolutions, minimizes the unknowns and creates a calculated risk to maximize student safety.

Obtaining high levels of safety during live-fire training sessions through appropriate planning and execution is the result of a good management system. It's this good management system that ultimately turns an inherently hazardous activity, firefighting, into a calculated risk. NFPA 1403 provides the basic, minimum information that is the basis for a good live-fire training management system. Adding instructors who are live-fire training experts to the equation will further fine-tune and improve that management system.

Human error

For the instructor in charge of a live-fire training session's management system, planning for the prevention of human error and managing it when it occurs are key to minimizing risk. In Managing the Risks of Organizational Accidents, researcher James Reason describes the main principles of error management:

• The best people can sometimes make the worst errors.
• Short-lived mental states — preoccupation, distraction, forgetfulness and inattention — are the last and least manageable part of the error sequence.
• People will always make errors and commit violations, but we can change their working conditions to make unsafe acts less likely.
• Blaming people for their errors, though emotionally satisfying, will have little or no effect on their future fallibility.
• Errors are largely unintentional. It's very difficult for management to control what people didn't intend to do in the first place.
• Errors arise from informational problems. They are best tackled by improving the available information, either in the person's head or in the workplace.
• Violations are social and motivational problems. They are best addressed by changing people's norms, beliefs, attitudes and culture, as well as by improving the credibility, applicability, availability and accuracy of procedures.
• Violations increase the likelihood of violators committing subsequent errors, which in turn are more likely to have damaging consequences.

Perfect example

We recently observed a perfect example of error management occurred during a live-fire training session where an interior burn that went awry. Even though the evolution went wrong, adherence to NFPA 1403 established a redundancy that proved key in preventing potential injuries and allowed instructors to maintain control.

A 2-story farmhouse in the Midwest was modified and used during a live-fire training burn by a volunteer fire department that wanted to conduct live fire training using its compressed-air foam pumper. The department contracted with a local college to provide certified live-fire training instructors for the training exercise. Because the farmhouse was located in a non-hydranted area, the department established water shuttle operations with two dump sites and two engines set up at draft, in accordance with NFPA 1403.

Engine 1 at the first dump site was equipped with a compressed-air foam system and was to supply a 1ⁱ-inch CAFS line for the attack line. In addition, a backup plain-water 1ⁱ-inch preconnect was taken from Engine 1. Prior to the first live burn, the backup line was disconnected from this engine and connected to the Engine 2, the draft engine at the second dump site. This was done to comply with the requirements of NFPA 1403 that attack and backup lines come from separate water sources.

For the initial evolution, the instructors elected to use the plain-water attack line and use the CAFS line for backup because they thought the Class A foam would make reignition for the next evolution difficult.

The first evolution took place in a rear room on the second floor of the structure. Due to the nature of the fuel load and ventilation available, the one-room fire grew as rapidly as expected, quickly intensifying to flashover. In a short time, a fireball was pushing out a pre-cut vent hole in the roof above and out the second-floor fire-room back window. The fire then began to travel toward the front rooms on the second floor.

The interior instructor led the initial attack team up a center hall staircase to the front room, where conditions were deteriorating rapidly. Heavy black smoke was pushing out the front windows, with interior visibility near zero. The instructor ordered the nozzleman to apply water into the doorway of the room of involvement. As the nozzle's bale handle was opened, the water supply was quickly lost.

Outside, we could hear the sound of a pump primer screaming. This was not a good sign. Shortly thereafter, students on the attack team informed the instructor that they were becoming “disoriented” and requested to back out of the structure. With conditions deteriorating, the instructor took the students down to the first floor and out of the building. After all students exited the building, the interior instructor grabbed the CAFS line outside the front of the building. Accompanied by two other instructors, he advanced the line to the second floor and knocked the fire down in a matter of seconds. The overhaul required was extensive.

The water supply problem was not a ruptured attack hose, a broken fire pump or any other mechanical problem. It was human error. The pump operator, an inexperienced trainee, was not qualified to operate a fire pump at a live-fire training burn without a qualified operator overseeing him. The root cause of the problem was inadequacies in the management system that positioned the inexperienced pump operator there. However, because NFPA 1403's requirements were adhered to, a charged hoseline was immediately available from a secondary water supply source and was ready to go when needed.

Best practices

The instructor in charge of a live-fire training exercise has four primary issues of management concern. The first two are hardware-related: the suitability and working condition of the burn building and fire apparatus, originally and over time. The third and fourth, perhaps the most problematic, are software-related: managing the human factor and conducting the live-fire evolution itself.

In the example above, when the human error of the pump operator losing prime occurred, the NFPA 1403 — compliance process performed well in that it provided a redundancy in the form of a secondary water supply. The NFPA 1403 document is chock-full of information and checklists that either prevent activities from turning into a nightmare, or kick in as undesirable conditions occur to minimize or prevent firefighter injury altogether.

NFPA 1403 contains advice and technical information on fire industry best practices in conducting live-fire training. It allows an instructor to plan for, foresee and prevent dangerous conditions and events. To that end, we have compiled the following list of additional best practices based on our years of experience in conducting, participating and observing live-fire training sessions in acquired structures.

1. Focus on the training session's objective. Avoid instruction overload. While we're all tempted to at one point or another, don't try to teach too much at one time. This is critical to maintaining a high level of safety.

   For example, if the learning objective of a live-fire training session is instruction on the execution of a coordinated aggressive interior fire attack, keep the session and everyone involved focused on the objective. This isn't the time to concurrently teach or allow students to run the command, safety, accountability, water supply, operations or other incident management sectors for the first time. Your most qualified and experienced instructors need to manage these key support systems that are so critical to safe live-fire training.

   Reduce the unknowns by using a cadre of well-qualified and experienced live-fire training instructors who have worked together in the training environment before. It's especially important that these key instructors operate the interior attack, backup attack, water supply and rapid-intervention teams. If the water supply to be used relies on tanker or drafting operations, an instructor experienced in rural water operations should be included.

2. Put in place all support systems, procedures and safety checks for personnel and equipment before igniting any training fire. A live-fire training session is a well-planned event; it isn't the same as conducting a real-world accidental fire response. Never have the crew roll in and size-up on fire apparatus as if they are working a normal response.

   Live-fire training must be managed as a highly controlled situation. The instructor in charge, incident command structure and students must know exactly where each fire will be lit, predict how it will behave, and plan when and how it will be attacked before conducting the exercise. Removing as many variables as possible allows for a greater span of command control and safety margin for the trainees. You control fire growth, movement and extinguishment — it does not control you.

3. Button up room interiors during structure preparation to prevent excessive and/or unwanted fire extension. As soon as an interior room-and-contents fire extends past where you wanted or expected it to, the fire is controlling your actions. Keep it the other way around by placing fire sets only in rooms that have intact finishes that are free of damage. Seal switch plates, outlets and other holes in the walls to prevent excessive fire extension.

   When unwanted fire extension occurs, deviation from the burn plan and burn plan timeline occur due to the extra time it takes to chase fire. This is, at best, a non — value-added activity for the students, and at worst, a situation that can lead to injury.

4. Test apparatus and equipment before use. At the point of flashover, it's too late to find out the hoseline or nozzle is not working properly. Operate pumps and flow hoselines for several minutes prior to conducting a live-fire exercise. Be sure that all pumps and power equipment are working correctly. Testing fireground support systems, including radios, is an important safety issue before giving a green light to burn.

   For example, during one training burn, the department we worked with had a pumper with new, never-before-used attack hose. After stretching and charging the new and marked “tested” hose, many hose couplings blew off the fabric hose ends. It's prudent to shake down all newly purchased equipment during non — live-fire training sessions to make sure it will perform when required.

5. Use hand tools and ground ladders. Now's the time to ensure that the appropriate students are carrying a hand tool and have laddered the building. Ground ladders are the most important second means of egress from upper floors. Additionally, they will be needed when it's time to cover pre-cut roof scuttle holes used for vertical venting.

6. Use a thermal imaging camera. If you own a TIC, integrate it into the lesson plan. It is vital that students practice using this lifesaving new technology under controlled live-fire conditions. Training should cover victim rescue and how to gather size-up information to plan an initial attack.

7. Place identifying markers on hoselines to identify which apparatus is supplying which line. This is as easy as wrapping a band of duct tape around the hose, near the nozzles. This practice allows easy identification of all attack hoselines and their source pumpers, removing confusion over which hose lines are connected to what source and making for quick deployment if an emergency occurs.

8. Use subject-matter experts when trying new technology for the first time. If you incorporate new, recently purchased technology like a TIC or CAFS, it's best to rely on the services of seasoned outside experts who are well-versed in the correct tactical application of the technology under live-fire conditions. Don't go the trial-and-error route in your first live-fire application of newly purchased technology.

9. Establish an entry-and-exit control point to enhance accountability. The accountability officer needs to keep track of who went in the building with how much air and when, as well as know when they either exit or fail to exit in the appropriate amount of time with their team.

10. Use a separate team of non-trainee firefighters who are qualified to perform ignition. This team will be responsible to use students to move pallets and straw into rooms to create fire sets and is responsible, in conjunction with the safety officer, to ignite the fires in a safe and effective manner. A charged and ready hoseline should be at the doorway.

11. Terminate the exercise immediately if deviations from the original burn plan occur. Any unplanned event means that command is losing or has already lost scene control. Immediately back the troops out of the building.

12. Scale the fire load and volume appropriately for the students' level of experience. This is a due-diligence issue for the instructor in charge. The lesson plan should take into account what fire load and volume are required for the specific evolution based on the students' learning needs.

13. Never use flammable liquids for fire ignition. Use appropriate fuel loads for fire sets. Wood pallets and straw are the staples of an interior fire set. A dry pine tree, even though it is an ordinary combustible wood fuel, will have explosive, dangerous fire growth if placed in a compartment as part of a fire set. Always control fuel type, quantity and loading to prevent a dangerous situation from occurring. Specifically, synthetic home furnishing materials will provide quick flashover times as compared to wood fuels. They should not be used at all or used sparingly on a special-exception basis. You must balance realism and safety.

Anyone who has been in the fire service for any length of time knows that things rarely go according to plan. However, plans are nonetheless essential, especially for live-fire training evolutions. Instructors can be prepared for the unexpected and deal with it properly by having a plan and following NFPA 1403 and these live-fire training best practices.

Dominic Colletti is the assistant chief of the Humane Fire Company in Royersford, Pa., and the global foam systems product manager for Hale Products Inc. Colletti is the author of Class A Foam — Best Practice For Structure Firefighters and co-author of Foam Firefighting Operations 1 and The Rural Firefighting Handbook with Larry Davis. He can be reached at dcolletti@idexcorp.com.

Larry Davis is a full member of the Society of Fire Protection Engineers, a certified Fire Protection Specialist and a certified Fire Instructor II with more than 30 years of experience. He has written numerous texts on rural firefighting and most recently co-authored The Rural Firefighting Handbook and Foam Firefighting Operations 1 with Dominic Colletti. Davis can be reached at rfofire@stx.rr.com.

NFPA 1403

One gut-wrenching issue is the sobering reality of special experts who use the NFPA 1403 document in court as a sledgehammer, as a prosecution aid during criminal trials involving alleged negligence for live-fire training fatalities. The document is sometimes used to assign blame and perform the Monday-morning quarterback game. In some court cases, defendants were unaware of the standard. In others, they knew about it but did not have a copy.

To stop this insanity we considered that a major step toward preventing future firefighter injury and fatality during live fire training would be to provide a free copy of the NFPA 1403 document to every fire agency in the United States. During the spring of 2003, we spoke to the management at NFPA and requested that they offer the NFPA 1403 document for free on their Web site. They listened. The document is now available in a read-only format at www.nfpa.org/Codes/CodesandStandards/Responders/responders.asp.

Help get the word out by passing on the above link to your own fire officer and instructor e-mail distribution lists. Today, every fire officer and instructor can and should have the latest version of NFPA 1403 at their fingertips.

FIRECHIEF.COM

Visit our Web site for more articles on live-fire training by Larry Davis and Dominic Colletti.