The most important safety research carried out in the fire
service for 50 years is being buried by Civil Servants at the
Office of the Deputy Prime, says the Fire Brigades Union. The
union says the lack of action at national level is putting the
lives of firefighters and the public at risk with key parts
of the research being ignored.
FBU General secretary Andy Gilchrist accused the ODPM of “breathtaking
complacency”. He called for an urgent programme of national
action to be led by the ODPM and fire service stakeholders including
additional resources.
Commissioned after 9/11, the Buildings Disaster Advisory Group
(BDAG) research is the first to measure the effect on the human
body of fighting fires in a range of day-to-day scenarios and
in extreme conditions such as high rise blocks. It found that
a mix of heavy workload and heat from fires leads to dangerously
high levels of heat exhaustion in firefighters even in normal
firefighting conditions.
In the research trials the core body temperatures of firefighters
reached such high levels that most of the tests had to be stopped.
It shows that firefighters can only fight fires for between
13-16 minutes before unsafe body temperatures are reached.
Instead of urgent action at national level ODPM civil Servants
sent out a non-descript circular to fire authorities outlining
the research “for information”. They added that
it did not require a response and that it was not relevant to
the Government’s fire service policy.
But a DVD film taken of the research trials leaked to the union
contains footage of firefighters exhausted with many of the
tests being cut short on health and safety grounds. Many took
several hours to recover.
General Secretary Andy Gilchrist said: “The most important
safety research in 50 years is being swept under the carpet
because it shows we need more firefighters. They asked the questions
and now they don’t like the answers.
“The inaction of the ODPM is breathtakingly complacent.
It is putting the lives of firefighters and the public at risk.
“The research clearly shows that firefighting is dangerously
exhausting even for very fit individuals. We also need proper
rest periods to recover.
“This clearly suggests that more firefighters are needed
in the first response to fires with more needed throughout the
incident. This contradicts current Government thinking which
is why key parts of the research are being swept under the carpet.
“We need a national action plan put together by all fire
service stakeholders which must include more resources. Instead
we only have suggestions including changes to building design
which will take 50 years to have an impact.”
***ENDS***
National media contact: Duncan Milligan 07736 818100
Notes 1:
DVD BRIEFING: Extracts
HIGH RISE scenario of climbing stairs and fighting fire:
Watch Manager Keith Feltham: “If you went in
now you’d last a couple of minutes, that would be it then,
you’d become a danger to your crew.”
Narrator: Climbing many floors with EDBA [Extended Duration
Breathing Apparatus] and hose resulted in fatigue, heat strain
and physical exhaustion to the extent that committing firefighters
into a fire compartment would be unsafe, whilst
climbing unloaded was less arduous and the subsequent commitment
to the fire compartment would appear to be tolerable to the
majority of firefighters.
Simon Hunt – Area Manager and Project Manager BDAG
“ What has become clear is that existing assumptions
that firefighters would be able to climb a given number of floors
and then commence a fire fighting operation would given the
evidence we have here appear to be limited, in fact it might
require a separate team to commence fire fighting operations
where others have actually provided equipment and apparatus
for them.”
12.58 – 15.45
Narrator: As the trials progressed it became clear that
thermal load [heat] was the prohibiting factor for crews in
the accomplishment of any task and this would be at its most
severe in a fire compartment.
THE NEXT PHASE IS LOW RISE
19.00 – The timetable of the trials incorporated 5 basic
scenarios.
The first condition was on the top floor of a building (3rd
floor)
The second was on the second floor of a building.
The third – on the first floor.
The fourth – was the use of a lift and connection to a
dry riser on the second floor.
The fifth – in a basement.
Narrator: On a number of occasions the trials were
terminated early as firefighters were taken out due to heat
stress. The data from the live fires confirm that physiological
stress factors should play an important role in planning the
appropriate response [FBU comment: this means the number of
fire engines and firefighters sent - and the length of time
it is anticipated they will take to get there] to a major fire
incident.
Simon Hunt, Project Director again: “Certainly we’ve
been surprised by what we’ve found. In the
case of the firefighting with live fires, the distances we’ve
set and the fire sizes are nothing that might be regarded as
extreme and yet on pretty much a larger number of fires, firefighters
are going over the core temperatures and it is only because
we’ve got the safety systems in place that we are able
to ensure the firefighters safety. In an
operational incident those control measures may not actually
be in place.”
Narrator: The results of this work have shown that the
physiological demands of firefighting and rescue operations
are significant. These factors must be taken into account
when planning operational response [FBU comment: this means
the number of fire engines and firefighters sent to fires -
and the length of time it is anticipated they will take to get
there] producing guidance for fire and rescue procedures and
developing building designs. New and revised standards for
respiratory and protective equipment will also need to be re-evaluated
in the light of this research.
Note 2:
What the written research shows:
Heat exhaustion: it is usually recognized that a maximum safe
core body temperature is 38 degrees. In these tests the core
temperature for termination was in fact 39.5 degrees, already
above the maximum temperature considered to be safe.
Extracts from:
Physiological Assessment of Firefighting, Search and Rescue
in the Built Environment.
Published by the ODPM
Executive Summary
All firefighting and other rescue activities are dependent to
a greater or lesser extent upon the physiological capabilities
of firefighters. Thus the physiological limitations of firefighters
must be considered when planning for conventional and terrorist
incidents within the built and natural environment.
Currently, there is limited information available to fire and
rescue service incident commanders on whether activities assigned
to firefighters may exceed their ability to undertake the task
safely within their physiological limitations, taking account
of appropriate personal and respiratory protective equipment
(PPE and RPE). This information is required for all operational
incidents, from those attended on a routine basis, through to
extreme events. While acknowledging that the expectations and
performance demands placed upon firefighters will differ with
the activity, there is presently little human factors guidance
to support both planned and dynamic risk assessment of work
activities.
Ambient conditions: no-fire
4 (12%) were successful in completing the scenario, rescuing
the casualty;
10 (31%) were terminated because the threshold core temperature
was reached;
6 (19%) were stopped for safety reasons (usually associated
with apparent uncertainty or confusion on the part of the firefighter,
possibly fatigue or heat induced); and
12 (38%) were terminated prematurely due to a shortage of air
(all in the SDBA conditions).
There were no successful outcomes on the two days when the routes
were novel to all participants (day 1 and day 4), suggesting
that participants achieved success on the scenario only once
they had ‘learned’ the route.
(From page 18, Chapter 3.1)
Live fire: basement/ground/first/top floor
Of the 40 serials on all floors, 9 (22.5%) were classified as
completely successful….
… Fifteen (37.5%) were stopped as their core temperature
exceeded the termination criterion of 39.5ºC, and a further
16 (40%) were stopped for safety reasons either by the safety
officers or by the firefighters themselves.
In 24 of the 40 serials, the casualty was successfully rescued,
but the serial was subsequently stopped prematurely as one of
the termination criteria was reached during the remaining firefighting
and search and rescue operations. These were classified as a
‘partial success’, as although the desired outcome
of casualty rescue was achieved, the firefighters failed to
complete the scenario safely using SOPs.
(from p 27 Para 4.1)
Note 3
Leaked DVD (time lapse indicated for broadcasters)
The first is a HIGH RISE scenario
8.10 – 11.08
A vertical component of gaining access to fire compartments
was studied in a multi storey building to record the physiological
demands of reaching different floor levels. Climbing stairs
maybe required where either no firefighting lifts have been
provided or in the case of their failure. The crews were instructed
to self pace the climb taking rest periods on the way up. This
assessment did not cover the physiological component of returning
to the fire service access levels. Two separate assessments
were conducted in personal protective equipment both with and
without carrying extended duration breathing apparatus (EDBA).
For each floor climbed when carrying EDBA and hose it
took approx 30 seconds and core temperature rose by 0.02 degrees
celsius. Separate teams were tasked with providing
the water supply needed and they were timed.
FF Laura Noble
“It’s the weight of the set, not so much the hose,
it was done up so tight – its quite restrictive”
Watch Manager Keith Feltham
“If you went in now you’d last a couple of minutes,
that would be it then, you’d become a danger to your crew.”
Climbing unloaded took approx 15 seconds per floor and
core temperature rose by 0.01 degrees celsius. At the
termination of the test a finger prick lactate sample was taken
as soon as possible, between 1 – 3 minutes after exercise
completion. Final readings were taken and participants provided
subjected role………….and thermal comfort.
Participants were then escorted back to the instrumentation
area where they were cooled and reweighed. Climbing
many floors with EDBA and hose resulted in fatigue, heat strain
and physical exhaustion to the extent that committing firefighters
into a fire compartment would be unsafe, whilst climbing
unloaded was less arduous and the subsequent commitment to the
fire compartment would appear to be tolerable to the majority
of firefighters.
Simon Hunt – Area Manager and Project Manager BDAG
“ What has become clear is that existing assumptions that
firefighters would be able to climb a given number of floors
and then commence a fire fighting operation would given the
evidence we have here appear to be limited, in fact it might
require a separate team to commence fire fighting operations
where others have actually provided equipment and apparatus
for them.”
12.58 – 15.45
At the start of the scenario base line measures of breathing
apparatus (BA) cylinder pressure and core temperatures were
recorded. Thereafter at 5 minute intervals readings of air pressure
and core temperatures were taken. Once a core temperature of
39 degrees was reached readings were taken every 2.5 minutes.
Progress along the route was recorded by noting the time at
which lead firefighters reached key landmarks. During the trials
both 45 and 70ml hose were used inside the building where both
sizes of hose had to be dragged up to 45 metres to where the
casualty was located. When the larger diameter 70ml hose was
used the firefighter was supported by a further pair of firefighters
to assist in advancing the hose into the fire compartment. No
live fires were used but an external probe registered ambient
temperatures and humidity. This was attached to but not in contact
with the BA set that the firefighters wore. The trials were
all self paced and participants were instructed to stay low
at all times when in the building. Again, to mimic worse case
scenarios under operational conditions. The termination criteria
were essentially fourfold. If the air pressure of the BA set
as judged by the firefighter became low participants abandoned
the task and withdrew using standard operating procedures. If
a core temperature of 39.5 degrees celsius was reached the physiologist
terminated the test for that individual immediately and they
were withdrawn from the building and actively cooled. If the
participant or the safety officer judged the situation to be
unsafe at any time the test was terminated for the individual
in question and they were withdrawn from the building and actively
cooled. Or if the team succeeded in completing the scenario
the test was terminated as they exited the building. As the
trials progressed it became clear that thermal load [heat] was
the prohibiting factor for crews in the accomplishment of any
task and this would be at its most severe in a fire compartment.
FF Ben Walsh
“That was very very hard. You know, you are on your knees
for a considerable amount of time. Hard work on your knees and
wearing that kind of set and that sort of fire gear which is
very close fitting and doesn’t allow for circulation of
air, it doesn’t cool your body down, so its extremely
hot and extremely hard work.”
THE NEXT PHASE IS LOW RISE
16.10 – 17.20
The next phase of the trials incorporated fire fighting and
search and rescue under live fire conditions. The live fire
trials began on the fourth floor of an industrial building in
Moreton on the Marsh. It was acknowledged by everyone involved
that the programme of live fire provided a significant challenge
for both crews and equipment.
Simon Hunt – Area Manager and Project Manager BDAG
In the live fire trials we’ve tried to ensure we gather
the most data that we can, to ensure we feed into different
project areas that we are investigating. So we are also establishing
not only the physiological capabilities of firefighters but
also amounts of water used to fight fires, the effect that has
on the fires, the fire environment within the fire compartment
and how firefighters are responding to it. We are also looking
to establish in the long term an intervention model to take
into account the time it actually takes the firefighter to effectively
deal with an incident.
19.00 – The timetable of the trials incorporated 5 basic
scenarios.
The first condition was on the top floor of a building.
The second was on the second floor of a building.
The third – on the first floor.
The fourth – was the use of a lift and connection to a
dry riser on the second floor.
The fifth – in a basement.
Each scenario was logged and recorded from a master time code
set for all data teams. This time line meant the ignition, pre
burn and any subsequent activity had a common reference in order
to analyse all the data at a given point in the exercise.
The data was to be gathered by four teams. Physiological data
including body core temperature, the fire environment including
smoke density and fire compartment heat gradient, BA air uptake
and duration and a video record of task analysis both inside
and outside the fire compartment. Once all the parameters had
been fixed the data logging systems were set and tested as a
preliminary to the trial starting.
There was a preburn time of 40 minutes. Very early on it was
realised how critical good communications are to efficient fire
– ground operations. In order to randomise the tests the
pairings for teams for search and rescue were changed for each
scenario. The other fire – ground roles were also regularly
changed. Each fire had at least one 75kg casualty to rescue
and also other casualties were used in order to keep the search
and rescue process unpredictable. The trials were intensive
and paramedic help was on standby. The firefighting teams were
monitored closely at all times as working in these conditions
can quickly affect anyone.
The most challenging scenario was in the basement where crews
were tested to their limits. On a number of occasions
the trials were terminated early as firefighters were taken
out due to heat stress. The data from the live fires confirm
that physiological stress factors should play an important role
in planning the appropriate response [FBU: numbers and speed
of attendance] to a major fire incident.
FF Jim McPartland
“After we got into that second fire compartment that really
turned the temperature up. Just rocketed up.“
FF Ollie Stalworthy
“We were working ok and then suddenly the heat really
hit me and I could feel it on my neck, getting really hot through
the flash hood.”
FF
“I had plenty of air left and I felt ok but when I was
told to return and I stood up it dawned on me that I wasn’t
ok – I felt light headed and my legs were wobbly.”
FF
“We got to the second fire – I felt the heat on
the back of my neck and on my knuckles – when we got to
the landing I suddenly felt sick.”
Simon Hunt
“Certainly we’ve been surprised by what we’ve
found. In the case of the firefighting with live fires,
the distances we’ve set and the fire sizes are nothing
that might be regarded as extreme and yet on pretty much a larger
number of fires, firefighters are going over the core temperatures
and it is only because we’ve got the safety systems in
place that we are able to ensure the firefighters safety. In
an operational incident those control measures may not actually
be in place.”
The results of this work have shown that the physiological demands
of firefighting and rescue operations are significant. These
factors must be taken into account when planning operational
response [FBU comment: means numbers deployed and speed of deployment]
producing guidance for fire and rescue procedures and developing
building designs. New and revised standards for respiratory
and protective equipment will also need to be re-evaluated in
the light of this research.
