LETTERS TO THE EDITOR
DEPARTMENTS
A suggested solution to the question of fire service subscriptions/donations
There appears to be a solution to the question of who pays for fire suppression if the department relies solely on donations or subscriptions for its operation.
The department must act like any other service business. Either you pay in advance and gain a discount or you pay at the time of need on the basis of cost and materials. This would answer the moral question.
How would the department collect? First, if the owner refused to pay, the department could file a mechanic’s lien like any other contractor who did work and didn’t receive payment. This would require the services of a lawyer, but most jurisdictions allow his fees to be added to the debt as well as any other costs of collection.
A second point is that anyone who has fire insurance can add a rider that pays the cost of fire department service charges. Yes, it costs money, but it also will pay off in the case of loss. The coverage can be bought for any amount the insured wishes. It was designed for just such circumstances as this, where a regular supported department is not established and the department that responds expects to be paid.
Testing sprinkler Siameses helps prevent disasters
We would like to compliment Francis L. Brannigan on his fine article on automatic sprinklers in the May 1985 issue of FIRE ENGINEERING. There was one point, however, where he stated that he didn’t know of periodic testing on Siamese connections. Perhaps we can offer a solution that we use for this problem:
The New York City Fire Department, guided by Fire Prevention Directive 12-62, mandated by Chapter 26, Article 17 of the Administrative Code, requires a hydrostatic test on the sprinkler Siamese from the connection itself to the lower check valve, as well as a flow and pressure test on standpipe systems every five years. The Bureau of Fire Prevention has been witnessing these tests for many years and found that the time and effort spent was well worth it. We’ve managed to help prevent possible disasters by finding defects and ordering repairs on Siamese connections and other sprinkler and standpipe system components.
Ronald t. Kanterman Supervising Inspector
Christopher J. Montgomery Fire Prevention Inspector Bureau of Fire Prevention New York City Fire Department New York, NY
The property owner who decides not to insure his property, especially from fire, should receive little sympathy from any of us for failure to protect his assets. For him, he probably doesn’t care if it burns, or has sufficient financial resources to cover the loss.
Your comment is a good one, we should all work to get tax supported fire protection in all jurisdictions. Until then, subscription departments or any department not supported by taxes should think about billing for their services and property owners should think about arranging for payment of those charges either through insurance or savings.
Jonathan H. Allen Insurance Underwriter for a national insurance company and a Lieutenant with the Ellington Volunteer Fire Department Ellington, CT
Smoke ejector hanger used for forcible entry
I have enjoyed your magazine for years and have learned many things that have helped both myself and the firefighters who I’ve trained. Some of the information possibly may have saved a life. I would like to share a bit of information that I think most firefighters will find of value.
My engine company responded to a call that was reported as a sounding smoke detector in a fairly new apartment complex. While en route, the dispatcher informed us that the alarm had been sounding for some time and that a police officer on the scene found no smoke or fire.
The apartment was locked and the manager was gone. We felt the door, which was very cold, and checked the windows. We knew that we had no fire, but we knew that we had to get in to check further.
We decided to try opening the door with the smoke ejector hanger. We placed it between the doorjamb at the height of the doorknob. With very little pressure, we forced the jamb the distance of the throw of the lock and the door swung open. There was no damage to the door or the jamb.
In my eight years of firefighting, I have never heard or read that the hanger could be used for forcible entry. Any type of hanger, such as the Ziamatic Quick-Grip or the Super Vac Door Bar, would work. Placed at the same height of the doorknob and with enough pressure to force the jamb the distance of the throw of the lock, the door will open.
The construction of the building obviously would dictate the hanger’s use. Metal studs or the usual 2 X 4-inch or 2 X 6-inch studs wouldn’t pose much of a problem. A doorjamb fixed in a concrete or masonry wall probably wouldn’t yield the distance needed to overcome the throw of the lock. Another obstacle would be a deadbolt lock.
This hanger method is by no means the fire service’s answer to its forcible entry problem. But with knowledge of the use of this tool in forcible entry, it may be handy in some instances. It worked for us.
Kim R. Nessel Firefighter/EMT Eau Claire Fire Department Eau Claire, WI
FIRE ENGINEERING encourages more letters to the editor
FIRE ENGINEERING wants to know your thoughts on and reactions to not only articles that have appeared in our pages, but any issues that concern and impact the fire service.
Through our Letters to the Editor column, FIRE ENGINEERING is trying to establish an informational exchange among all facets of the fire service, suppression, prevention, protection, and investigation. Your ideas and input may prove beneficial to your own department, to the department in the next district, and maybe to the department on the other side of the Mississippi.
Your feedback also enables us to shape our editorial content to meet your department’s (and others’) particular needs. So, write to us. And, again, thanks for your help and support.
Tom Brennan
Editor
