BY PETER ONG

The Seattle (WA) Fire Department currently has four fireboats: the 108-foot Leschi, built in 2007 and the primary fireboat on the saltwater side; the smaller Fireboat 1, built in 2006; Fireboat 2, built in 2014 and based on freshwater; and the Chief Seattle, built in 1983, retrofitted, and returned to service in 2013. This article focuses on the retrofitted Chief Seattle, the Seattle Fire Department's primary fireboat on the freshwater side of the city.

The Chief Seattle is a three-deck 96-foot, six-inch all-aluminum superstructure and hull fireboat retrofitted by Vigor Industrial in Seattle, Washington, under a firm fixed-price contract. Two of the main reasons for the retrofit stemmed from the Chief Seattle's three main engines not meeting current environmental emissions standards and the need for more interior space for equipment, medical treatment, and command and control. Originally, the Chief Seattle had three engines, shafts, propellers, and rudders. The retrofit removed one engine and its central shaft, propeller, and rudder. The two new MTU engines are "emissions-friendly" and, operating together, produce the same horsepower (hp) as the original three Detroit Diesel engines.

The Chief Seattle is the Seattle (WA) Fire Department's primary fireboat on the freshwater side of the city. Shown is the retrofitted Chief Seattle during sea trials. (Photos courtesy of Vigor Industrial unless otherwise noted.)

Richard Chester, senior engineer with 43 years in the Seattle Fire Department-23 of those years with fireboats-says that the original Chief Seattle had a very good [aluminum] hull that the fire department decided to keep. Seattle firefighters maintain the Seattle fireboats in every case except for those repairs requiring outside contractor assistance. "The vessel was very well maintained over the years," says Chester. "The hull was in excellent condition. We have been pleased with the hull design and the large platform it provides." The Seattle Fire Department decided to keep the hull and retrofit it because the budget did not cover the cost of a new 97-foot fireboat. The City of Seattle levy funds and Department of Homeland Security grant funds financed the Chief Seattle's retrofit.

Retrofitting Chief Seattle

According to Randy Wyllys, Vigor's project manager for the Chief Seattle retrofit process, Vigor used a crane to lift the boat onto land and performed the stripdown inside a canvas tent. "Vigor removed the superstructure all the way to the mast by cutting off the superstructure at the deck and removing it as one piece," describes Wyllys. "This included the medical room in the main deck and the pilothouse. Vigor gutted the engine room and removed all three main engines and generators and all the original propulsion systems-the shafts, propellers, and rudders. Vigor removed the center stern tube for the shaft and propeller and plated that over. All the insulation, paint, cabinetry, wiring, analog instruments, ceilings, furniture, joiners, and interiors were gutted and removed. The interior sea chests, engine beds, and hull interiors were removed. When finished, the only original part left was the Chief Seattle's outer aluminum hull. It took four to six weeks to strip the boat down to the

RICHARD MARINUCCI

A coordinated, planned, and prepared response to a hazmat event is a relatively new concept in the fire service.

By that, I mean that up until 25 or 30 years ago, fire departments responded to calls involving hazardous materials and did the best they could with minimal preparation. Often materials were diluted and "washed down" the drain or into a ditch. There were no "moon suits" or various levels of protection. Chemicals like mercury were just picked up and thrown in the trash. For the most part, departments did the best they could. If they realized they had something above their level of training or expertise, they contacted a private company. Thankfully, this has changed, and there is an expectation that fire departments will have the necessary knowledge to address these events in an appropriate manner.

The transition has occurred for a variety of reasons. There is much more awareness of the environment and the damage that is done when hazardous materials are not disposed of in a safe manner. Government agencies like the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and state government departments control the use and disposal of hazardous materials. The National Fire Protection Association (NFPA) has developed standards. Responders have learned from various historical emergencies and better understand the need to study and improve their capabilities. Besides being better stewards of the environment, firefighters and those who respond as part of a special team are much safer and exposed to fewer materials that can harm them.

Contrasting Approaches

The approach to hazmat events still strikes me as being such a contrast to fire response and even emergency medical service (EMS) calls. Firefighters going to fires are definitely on the go and doing what they can to save time. Response to priority one or life-threatening calls for EMS service requires quick action to effect a positive outcome. Firefighters are conditioned to operate quickly and often take shortcuts to reduce response time from the start of the alarm through the stabilization phase. They may not completely button up their protective clothing if they believe they need to rush into action. They will take extra risks if a life is at stake to the point that they will put themselves at risk by not totally using all safety items at their disposal. This is contrary to the methodical approach taken by well-trained hazmat teams, who rarely ever appear to be rushing.

This is where the patience part comes into play. I don't think I am too different from many in the fire service in that I want to see action. I don't like sitting around when something needs to be fixed, so I think there should be some hustle to resolve problems and incidents. During a fire, there is an initial blast of activity to initiate the operation. People know their jobs and begin to take steps that are visible and done with some sense of urgency. The same can be said on the scene of a vehicle crash with injuries or a cardiac case. We are conditioned to see something happen and are impatient when people don't appear to be hustling when taking action. When we don't completely understand how an incident is being handled, we default to our knowledge and wonder why there doesn't appear to be a sense of urgency. Though I still don't have the total patience I need when on these types of emergencies, I am getting better and learning to rely on the experts who have much more training and experience in the proper way to handle hazmat incidents.

Hazmat Response Evolution

Emergency response to hazmats has evolved considerably and continues to do so. Those who are committed to the profession are looking for better ways to respond and make sure respond