• Welcome to the new and improved Building Code Forum. We appreciate you being here and hope that you are getting the information that you need concerning all codes of the building trades. This is a free forum to the public due to the generosity of the Sawhorses, Corporate Supporters and Supporters who have upgraded their accounts. If you would like to have improved access to the forum please upgrade to Sawhorse by first logging in then clicking here: Upgrades

Firefighter's Right to Know

F

forensics

Bronze Member
Joined
Oct 22, 2009
Messages
95
Location
The holy City CHARLESTON SC
Firefighter's Right to Know

Well with the state legislatures across the country stepping into the building code approval process and removing the provisions to protect the Light Weigh Structural components what responsibility does the local AHJ and government entity have to the firefighters (both volunteer and career) to make them aware of the premature collapse in fire conditions.

Does the propensity of LWSC to fail and endanged the firefighters, even BEFORE flashover, demand that they be forewarned.

In light of that, a group of us in South Carolina are planning to propose and emergency amendment to the building code to require conspicious signage on the front of all commercial and residential structures that utilize LWSC components if they are not protected from fire exposure by fire sprinklers or other code approved protection adequate to shield the LWSC from temperatures that may lead to premature failure and expose the public firefighter employees and volunteers from the inherent danger of premature colapse.

WHAT SAY YOU ! Do we have a "Right to Know" responsibility to the fire service ?
 
Proposed and voted down at the last go-round of code change hearings. If I were a FF, I would be assuming anything built in the last twenty years could/would be LWSC.
 
No, twenty years is too short a time frame.

I was using roof trusses in the '70's.

What about some houses built using light gage metal? Heat and steel do not mix well.

Agree with Fatboy otherwise, Assume the worst. If it doesn't happen then good.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
My 1950's house has roof trusses. You need to assume lightweight construction and develop tactics and strategies to deal with it.
 
Both the above posts backs up my reply........FF's are most likely, or should be assuming trussed roof construction, now they need to assume that there are engineered floor and ceiling joists.
 
Well that seems an easy assumption in the comfort of your livingroom but what if you are on the front line in a home fire as a firefighter and there may be sombodys children inside the burning home ...what then...do you need to know ?

THE QUESTION IS ...DO WE OWE THE FIREFIGHTER A WARNING THAT ENTERING THE STRUCTURE COULD BE A LIFE AND DEATH DECISION FOR YOURSELF OR OTHERS
 
HERE IS WHAT THE IAFC THINKS AND A LAWSUIT IS INEVITIABLE

IAFC POSITION PAPER

Firefighter Safety and Lightweight Construction

Buildings incorporating lightweight construction* are likely to present a severe hazard to firefighter safety, if a fire involves or compromises the integrity of the lightweight structural elements. Due to this fact, the International Association of Fire Chiefs takes the following positions regarding lightweight construction:

Fire Operation Issues

1. Fire departments should provide firefighters with training on the hazards of lightweight construction.

2. Fire departments should develop, implement and enforce written standard operating procedures for fires in buildings that incorporate lightweight construction. The following policies should be included within the SOPs:

a. Extreme caution shall be applied in situations where lightweight construction is or could be involved in a fire; the possibility of rapid and sudden structural failure must be anticipated.

b. If a fire occurs in a structure that is known or suspected to incorporate lightweight construction, all firefighters operating at the incident scene shall be notified of the potential hazard and operations shall be conducted in a manner that recognizes the risk of rapid structural failure.

c. Extreme caution should be exercised when firefighters are allowed to operate directly above or below areas that are supported by lightweight construction that is involved in or has been exposed to a fire. All firefighters shall be immediately withdrawn from such areas if there are indications that lightweight construction is involved in or exposed to the fire.

d. Defensive strategy shall be employed in situations where the structural integrity of a building or a portion of a building is in doubt.

3. Fire departments should conduct pre-incident planning inspections of new and existing buildings, including multi-family residential buildings, to identify risk factors and facilitate the development of appropriate strategies and tactics**.

a. Firefighter safety should be a primary consideration in the pre-incident planning process.

b. Firefighters should look for and document the presence of lightweight construction while performing pre-incident planning.

c. Firefighters who are dispatched to a fire incident should be promptly notified of information that indicates the presence of lightweight construction or any other potential hazard.

Fire Prevention Issues

1. The model building and fire codes should only permit the utilization of lightweight construction in a new building, including one-and two-family detached dwelling units, when the building is protected by an automatic fire sprinkler system.

2. The model building and fire codes should require all existing buildings that incorporate lightweight construction to be retrofitted with appropriate fire protection systems when additions or renovations are performed or a change of use occurs. The appropriate fire protection should involve the installation of automatic fire sprinkler systems and/or enclosure of vulnerable structural components within approved fire resistant assemblies.

3. The model building and fire codes should require the installation of automatic fire sprinkler systems in all existing multifamily residential buildings that incorporate lightweight construction.

• The term “lightweight construction” refers to structural systems and assemblies that are fabricated from components that have substantially less mass than traditional construction methods used for equivalent applications. The lightweight components may be assembled from various combinations of combustible and non-combustible materials including wood and steel. Lightweight construction systems that are involved in or exposed to a fire are susceptible to rapid failure. Examples of lightweight construction include lightweight trusses and wood I-beams used in place of solid sawn lumber.

• ** The pre-incident planning process should include procedures for reporting any fire code violations that are discovered to the appropriate code enforcement authorities.

SUBMITTED: April 14, 2010 ADOPTED BY IAFC Board of Directors on: April 30, 2010
 
Every time a Firefighter enters a burning or damaged structure it could be a life and death decision.

More restrictions, more regulations are not the answer.
 
A building official acting in his official capacity has no duty to the firefighters other than to enforce the formally adopted regulations.

The proposal to require warnings be posted is in effect an attempt to ban a certain type of construction. If the fire departments wanted to find out if light weight construction was being used they could likely find this information from the building department for newer buildings.

I find the hysterics and fear mongering around these issues insulting. This seems to be a common strategy for the fire industry. There are risks and they need to be managed but lets do this in an objective manner. The Fire Operation Issues proposed by the IAFC seems to be a step in the right direction.

What would be the nature of the lawsuit? The governmental body who adopted the building regulations is immune and so is the building official who did his job. The firemen are obviously aware of the risk and they knew being a fireman exposed them to significant risks. The building owner and his consultants who complied with the code should not be at risk. Who are they going to sue and what will be the legal basis?
 
Lightweight construction is a hazard to be prepared for and to be knowlagable about, similar to going into a paint store with 55 gallon bbls of paint thinner, or a garage with quanities of flammables. In this day of computers and computer programs, buildings should be inventoried with the associated hazards likly to be found. That information should be given to those responding to an emergency. I learned early in my career not to depend on the white hats to look for my safety and well-being on the fire ground.
 
Well that seems an easy assumption in the comfort of your livingroom but what if you are on the front line in a home fire as a firefighter and there may be sombodys children inside the burning home ...what then...do you need to know ?
Click to expand...
"We will risk lives to protect savable lives. We may risk lives to protect savable property. We won't risk lives in an attempt to save what is lost." What they need to know is how to size up the incident appropriately and make decisions that are in the best interest of all involved, including their firefighters. These placards will never be an adequate substitute for general knowledge of their response area and the risks it involves. Even if required for lightweight construction, the lack of such a placard should never be the determining factor as to whether it is safe to enter a burning building. The problem has been identified. If it needs further clarification, then it's a training issue.

THE QUESTION IS ...DO WE OWE THE FIREFIGHTER A WARNING THAT ENTERING THE STRUCTURE COULD BE A LIFE AND DEATH DECISION FOR YOURSELF OR OTHERS
Click to expand...
If they don't know that already, they should be in a different line of work. Complacency - such as the belief that they can go in simply because the building is framed with dimension lumber - will kill them just as quickly as lightweight construction will.

Lashing out with "emergency amendments" to the code (30 years later) because we haven't yet convinced decision makers to require sprinklers will not change anything.
 
Mark K said:
A building official acting in his official capacity has no duty to the firefighters other than to enforce the formally adopted regulations.The proposal to require warnings be posted is in effect an attempt to ban a certain type of construction. If the fire departments wanted to find out if light weight construction was being used they could likely find this information from the building department for newer buildings.

I find the hysterics and fear mongering around these issues insulting. This seems to be a common strategy for the fire industry. There are risks and they need to be managed but lets do this in an objective manner. The Fire Operation Issues proposed by the IAFC seems to be a step in the right direction.

What would be the nature of the lawsuit? The governmental body who adopted the building regulations is immune and so is the building official who did his job. The firemen are obviously aware of the risk and they knew being a fireman exposed them to significant risks. The building owner and his consultants who complied with the code should not be at risk. Who are they going to sue and what will be the legal basis?
Click to expand...
Product liability suits appear to be the likely direction. Manufacturers of plated wood trusses and composite I joists, architects and engineers who specify them, and builders who build with them. Why is the insurance industry not involved in this discussion after all it appears this is part of the agenda to reduce the risk of fire by requiring sprinkler retrofits to everything from existing doghouses and clubhouses to residences of all classes. If 13R systems truly have the benefits claimed then fire insurance would seem to play into the conversation. I will gladly specify a 13R system if asked to. Is it reasonable to say I should have installed a 13R system or taken additional precautionary measures over the objections of a homeowner?

"Is it required? Um no, but it is my opinion it is a good idea."
 
forensics said:
Firefighter's Right to KnowWell with the state legislatures across the country stepping into the building code approval process and removing the provisions to protect the Light Weigh Structural components what responsibility does the local AHJ and government entity have to the firefighters (both volunteer and career) to make them aware of the premature collapse in fire conditions.

Does the propensity of LWSC to fail and endanged the firefighters, even BEFORE flashover, demand that they be forewarned.

In light of that, a group of us in South Carolina are planning to propose and emergency amendment to the building code to require conspicious signage on the front of all commercial and residential structures that utilize LWSC components if they are not protected from fire exposure by fire sprinklers or other code approved protection adequate to shield the LWSC from temperatures that may lead to premature failure and expose the public firefighter employees and volunteers from the inherent danger of premature colapse.

WHAT SAY YOU ! Do we have a "Right to Know" responsibility to the fire service ?
Click to expand...
You do have a right to know, but nobody promised you a rose garden.

Part of a fire response could be to look at when the structure was built. If it is mid 70's on then it is a pretty good bet it is platform framed using plated wood roof trusses. Mid 80's platform framed, plated wood roof trusses, and composite I joists. At least it is not balloon framed and has draftstopping and fireblocking. All residences are likely to be piled to the brim with combustible materials adding a substantial fire load. Should there be a placard at the front of the residence that provides this information? That type of information should be accumulated by the FD as part of their ongoing response to the changes in the built environment. I can go to GIS websites to find out land-use zones, critical areas, fire districts, water & sewer purveyors, and a host of information. My guess is it would be readily achievable to add generic fire related information such as: Built 1981 - 13, 13D or 13R system - plated wood roof trusses - I joist floors.
 
It is not a matter of the Firefighter's Right to Know, It is a matter of education, fire fighters need to know about the dangers associated with lightweight construction (LWC).The vast majority of wood-frame dwellings built in this country since the 1970s utilize wooden truss-designed roof and floor systems, including I joists and LW metal trusses.

It is a matter of education, fire fighters need to know about the dangers associated with lightweight construction (LWC).
 
My point exactly Mark and imhotep. The FF's have access to databases, that if they are wanting to know, then start sending engine crews out when they are in a down mode, and do housing inventories. What is the construction method, they do it on commercial around here, expand it to residential.
 
There is hope on the horizon. At our conference last week we had a presenter from UL Engineering who are in the process of current research and full scale testing of traditional housing v. new light weight housing in cooporation with grants from DHS. The session was on ventilation effects with the introduction of new materials and their use such as effects with (windows, doors, siding, sheathing and structural members) the final testing analysis (all preliminary for now and not ready for release) is eye opening especially the sooner flashover and collapse time frames verses ventilation limited and controlled fires and a final report should be ready soon to educate all.

Here is a link to the presentation: http://mfis.org/mfiswordpress/wp-content/uploads/2011/09/Kerber-Handout.pdf

In addition, we add this type (residential construction, material types and addresses) of information onto our Pre-incident plans housed on the computers in the rigs in addition to hard copies for the platoons for round table training.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Firefighter fatalities has steadily decreased over the past 20 years

And the use of Lightweight framing has increased.....

http://www.usfa.fema.gov/fireservice/fatalities/statistics/history.shtm

Show the need....It is all matter of education

who would pay for this debacle?

More bureaucracy, Please.

And yes one death is too many, but putting signs on buildings is not the answer.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
forensics said:
Well that seems an easy assumption in the comfort of your livingroom but what if you are on the front line in a home fire as a firefighter and there may be sombodys children inside the burning home ...what then...do you need to know ?THE QUESTION IS ...DO WE OWE THE FIREFIGHTER A WARNING THAT ENTERING THE STRUCTURE COULD BE A LIFE AND DEATH DECISION FOR YOURSELF OR OTHERS
Click to expand...
Yes, when you get hired...thinking it's just another job with better bennies, a uniform and cool vehicles.

I'd be careful who you insult...you usually have no idea who they are or what they have done.
 
forensics said:
Well that seems an easy assumption in the comfort of your livingroom but what if you are on the front line in a home fire as a firefighter and there may be sombodys children inside the burning home ...what then...do you need to know ?
Click to expand...
That you have been properly trained. If such knowledge arriving on scene changes your SOP, the framing isn't the greatest safety issue.
 
i'm not completly up to speed down here, but in VT where i was, all public buildings, which are required to be permitted and inspected are identified at the entrance to the building with a specific placard which identifies the type of construction. (wood/metal/ combustible/noncombustible/trussed roof/floor systems) (private residences are only inspected/req'd to be permitted in 5 local municipalities) all with a coded triangle at the door. this is SPECIFICALLY for firefighters going into the buildings. ALSO, troffers (luminaires) in suspended ceilings are SUPPOSED to be supported by the BUILDING structure, INDEPENDANT of the ceiling grid work by threaded rods, chain or wires so that in the event the gridwork FAILS, THE FIXTURES STAY SUSPENDED. this wording use3d to be included in the codes, IBC/NEC, now ot's gone. You need to go to ceiling manufacturers info to get it for enforcement. IT NEEDS TO BE PUT BACK INTO THE CODE.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top