Live-Fire Training Near Miss

Live-fire training is a controversial topic. Attempts to deliver realistic training using an often-uncontrollable phenomenon (fire) have led to some high-profile fatalities and a legion of injured firefighters. Such events have given rise to a heated debate about the value of live-fire training. Because we have yet to find a suitable, affordable and satisfactory substitute for actual live-fire training, we must continue working to find ways to minimize the risk.

Standards (NFPA 1403 in particular) have been developed with the intent of managing these risks. The International Society of Fire Service Instructors (ISFSI) has developed a notable training program that includes a certification in conducting live-fire training exercises. This program is designed to provide the knowledge, skills and tools to become a proficient instructor in the field of live-fire training and the means to conduct a safe drill. The ISFSI program demonstrates that “safe” and “live-fire training” are not mutually exclusive. In addition, there are a number of nationally recognized subject-matter experts who deliver lectures and training programs on conducting live-fire training.

This month’s featured near-miss report takes us to a live-fire training facility where everything appears to be in place, but a near miss still occurs. The report reinforces the need to avoid cutting corners, so as to not overlook any aspects of the training exercise. The near miss identifies a string of omissions that result in an injury and damaged equipment.  
 
Near-Miss Report Excerpt #12-193
“The incident occurred mid-day after multiple successful scenarios had already occurred. The fires were to be attended by two firefighters designated as ignition team members who had a 1¾” charged hoseline for controlling the fires. The interior operations were also being monitored by a safety officer who was in direct contact with an exterior safety officer as well as a RIT team with a 2½” hoseline.

“Per the preplan for the live burn, the temperature within the burn building was to be monitored by a safety officer, and interior temperatures were not to exceed 650 degrees F. As the incident occurred, three recruits had been led into a burn room with dimensions that were approximately 8 x 10 feet. The lead instructor had entered first, and the assistant instructor had come in behind the recruits. This particular group’s entry had been delayed and they had not brought in a hoseline of their own.
 
“Immediately upon entering the room, the lead instructor noted high heat conditions and noted that his rubber helmet band had broken due to melting. At the same time, one of the ignition team members utilized the interior 1¾” hose and began applying water to the fire, starting at the ceiling using a circular pattern. Immediately the heat conditions in the room became worse and all members rapidly evacuated the room and the burn building.

“Upon exiting the burn building, it was apparent that the lead instructor’s bunker coat and helmet had received significant heat damage, and upon further investigation, it was determined that the lead instructor had received second-degree burns to his left upper shoulder. It was also discovered that several members had received heat damage to their SCBA masks and bunker coats. Interior temperatures were estimated to have exceeded 800 degrees F; however, actual room temperatures were not known because temperature gauges were not operational.”

Preparation
What can be deduced from this event? The opening lays out a pretty robust risk-control plan: interior and exterior safety officers, ignition officers with their own protective hoseline, mention of a pre-burn plan, and a temperature threshold. The bases seemed to be covered.

One significant step to include in the preparation phase is the conscious acknowledgement that something can go awry. The second step is to consider the likelihood that any failure will probably be due to a human oversight, shortcoming or other failure. An analysis of this particular near miss by the report-submitter points out several shortcomings.

The third step includes involving someone who is knowledgeable (possibly even certified) to serve as the incident commander (IC) for the exercise. As you re-read the report for this article, you may note that all of the individuals had a specific role to play. Once they settled into their role, the focus of their responsibility narrows to their specific function. Before you know it, they are all engrossed in their sphere of responsibility, and capably managing their part of the exercise. But who is “flying the plane,” so to speak? Assigning a lead to the exercise–someone who will not perform any of the tactical work–adds another layer of protection to promote a safe learning environment for all.

Finally, the preparation phase of any live-burn exercise should include a review of a few case studies for the instructor cadre to promote elevated situational awareness, communication and teamwork.

Prevention
Live-fire training provides immense value to new and incumbent firefighters, especially as the fire service sees continued reductions in actual working fires. The knowledge and skills that can be exercised on a well-managed live-burn exercise provide an exceptional learning environment that translates to good decision-making on the fire scene. The bridge between classroom instruction and pulling up to a working fire has to be built with a combination of practical exercises and realistic evolutions that mimic the working fire environment. In teaching firefighters what to do and what to expect, we end up with firefighters who are better prepared to mount an effective fire attack. The lessons should not be punctuated with actual pain and discomfort. The best lessons in life don’t have to be learned the hard way. The hard way is often too costly of a means to make the point.
 
Sidebar: Related Links & Suggested Uses

www.firefighternearmiss.com
Use the Search Reports feature and enter “burn building” in the Keyword Search text box. 103 reports regarding near misses in burn buildings have been submitted. These reports can be used as case studies, training aides and supplemental submissions for budget justifications.

www.nfpa.org
The NFPA’s website has a read-only feature that you can use to peruse pertinent NFPA standards related to training and burn buildings. Related standards include:
–    NFPA 1250: Recommended Practice in Fire and Emergency Services Organization Risk Management
–    NFPA 1402: Guide to Building Fire Service Training Centers
–    NFPA 1403: Standard on Live Fire Training Evolutions
–    NFPA 1584: Standard on the Rehabilitation Process for Members During Emergency Operations and Training Exercises.

www.youtube.com
Various videos found on YouTube show live-fire training exercise.
–    Alabama Fire College burn trailer: www.youtube.com/watch?v=GqZTPmv8dkw
–    Live-fire exercise involving a mayday and firefighter injury: www.youtube.com/watch?v=Pfnd-c66G8U
–    Live-fire training exercise at a training facility showing pre-burn preparation briefing: www.youtube.com/watch?v=K3Z8buUz1q0
–    Live-fire instructor training: www.youtube.com/watch?v=oJMOjBYFQiI
–    Live-fire training in a burn building: www.youtube.com/watch?v=MTigP_cQEUE
–    Live-fire training in a burn building: www.youtube.com/watch?v=DTSjjEjfp0c

www.isfsi.org
Click on the “Programs” tab to get information on becoming a credentialed live-fire training instructor.

www.fdsoa.org/home/index.html
The Fire Department Safety Officers Association website can put you in touch with safety officers who have extensive backgrounds in conducting live-fire training exercises at fixed-burn facilities and acquired structures.