LETTERS TO THE EDITOR
Never too much information on the dangers of truss roofs
I have just read your Editor’s Opinion, “I’ll Take the Hit,” that appeared in the March issue of Eire Engineering. I hope that you will never let anyone talk you out of repeating articles on the dangers of firefighting —particularly truss roofs—no matter how quickly they follow one another.
One night when I was the acting deputy chief on the department from which I retired, we received a call for a supermarket fire. Upon approaching the scene, I could view fire venting from the wood truss roof through a monitor top ventilator. Without thinking of the many classes 1 had taught concerning wood truss roofs to department members, I assigned a truck company to the roof to open up the monitor top to aid in ventilation; my intent was to allow companies to perform a more aggressive attack at ground level. Within a matter of a minute or two, I realized my error. You never saw a firefighter travel up a ladder so quickly to that roof level to advise the truck crew to immediately abandon their operations and get over to the neighboring roof. Fortunately, this incident ended rather well. The arsonist was successful in destroying his unprofitable business, but not in taking any firefighters to eternity.
I thoroughly enjoy reading your magazine. I find it to be the most informative of all the fire journals, and it meets my needs in my present position.
Dwight R. Elliott
Chief Engineer
Illinois Department of Mental Health
and Developmental Disabilities
“Hear! hear!” to Tom Brennan’s March editorial! It is so true that repetition is the mother of safety and efficiency, but firefighters now are having to fight the building designs, also.
In the metro-Atlanta area, a DeKalb County firefighter fell through the floor to his armpits in an apartment house with wood truss floor joists. (Interestingly, the building is equipped with a lifesafety-type residential sprinkler that, at the time of the fire, was charged.) Apparently, a plumber’s carelessness with a torch got the inside of the walls on fire. With the truss construction in the floors, tile fire ran everywhere and eventually burned so severely that it weakened the floor; a firefighter’s weight caused him to fall through. Another firefighter pulled him out of the inferno.
- Both firefighters had on full protective clothing, and the only injuries were from a glove pulling off the man who went through the floor, and a facial burn to the firefighter who saved his coworker.
- The fire was so severe and extensive inside the three-story garden apartment building that about 75 percent of the sheetrock had to be removed to chase down all the fire.
- The building was still under construction—there was no weight of furniture to add to the dead load of the structure. Even in this case, we still had fire severe enough to weaken a floor to the point of failure.
Tom, you’re absolutely correct. Wood trusses will kill! The bottom line is that they are a cheap way to build new structures. Dollars talk, and apparently firefighters’ lives are not important to these developers. Maybe the warning sign law introduced in New Jersey will catch on nationwide. Unfortunately, this will not eliminate the hazards associated with wood truss construction.
Dave E. Williams, CFPS
Allendale Mutual Insurance Co.
Atlanta, Georgia
“Definitive Decon” not definite
I read the article “Definitive Decon” in your March issue. Although the author takes an interesting approach, I must take exception to a couple of ideas presented in the article.
First, the term “definitive decontamination” is very misleading. The “thorough removal of all contaminants” is virtually impossible. When the haz-mat incident requires the use of protective clothing or encapsulated suits, the clothing can be violated in three ways: degradation, penetration, and permeation. Permeation is the chemical movement through protective clothing on the molecular level. Definitive decontamination of protective clothing or anything else porous is not possible because we will never be able to clean the residue left behind on the molecular level.
Second, cold weather notwithstanding, I can’t justify in my mind the logic of tracking the hazardous material(s) from the incident site back to the fire station. In essence, another haz-mat incident has just occurred at the firestation. I firmly believe AI.I. decontamination must be done at the incident site.
Captain Steve Weber
Training Officer
Corsicana (Texas) Fire Department
Clarification on UF6 article
“Fire Hazards with Uranium Hexafluoride Cylinders,” which appeared in your February issue, contains one serious error. On page 51, the author states that “Cylinders of enriched uranium-235, packaged in protective overpacks for transportation, will require a nuclear safety evaluation prior to the application of water to prevent an inadvertent nuclear chain reaction or criticality condition.”
If the Department of Energy is shipping containers of fissile material in such a way that the accidental application of water could cause a self-sustaining nuclear chain reaction, the practice should be stopped instantly. Who or where is the expert to make the “nuclear safety evaluation?”
I have consulted with my successor, Mr. Walter Maybee, SFFE, Manager of Fire Protection-Department of Energy, to be sure that the policy of shipping fissile material in such a manner as to make an accidental criticality impossible had not changed from Atomic Energy Commission days. It has not. Fissile materials are shipped in such a manner that an accidental criticality is impossible from the application of water.
More than 20 years ago, a hyperactive nuclear safety specialist submitted a label for the shipment of fissile material which contained the warning, “In Case of Eire, Use No Water.”
FB: “Can this package be safely rained on?”
NSS: “Certainly.”
FB: “Can it fall overboard?”
NSS: “Certainly.”
FB: “What is this nonsense about water?”
NSS: “Oh, those firemen have those big hoses. They could pile up all the units, reflect and moderate the neutrons with water, and make a criticality accident.”
FB: “You are saying that a bunch of firemen could build a nuclear reactor by accident?”
NSS: “That’s right!!!”
FB: “How come it costs so much and takes so long to do it on purpose?”
The label was changed.
Francis L. Brannigan, SFPE
Consulting Editor, Fire Engineering Formerly Public Safety Liaison Officer. US. Atomic Energy Commission
Department seeks information on memorial statues
The Port Jervis Eire Department is a volunteer department protecting a city of approximately 10,000, plus two adjacent contract districts having 5,000 residents each. We operate five engine companies, one 100-foot aerial truck, one heavy-duty rescue vehicle and a fire/police van, and we respond to about 400 calls annually.
Our department is in the process of planning an appropriate memorial statue for our fallen and deceased members. We would be both grateful and interested in hearing from any fire department that presently has such a memorial. Of particular interest would be the name and address of the firm that may have manufactured the memorial, as well as a picture, should one be available. The information should be sent to: City of Port Jervis Fire Department, P.O. Box 1002, Port Jervis, N.Y. 12771.
James W. Rohner
Eire Chief Port Jervis Fire Department
We enjoy hearing from our readers. Whether you have questions or comments, write to Fire F.ngineering, 250 Fifth Ave., New York, NY 10001.