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

By Bill Adams

"Apparatus Purchasing" last addressed access steps in October 2012. National Fire Protection Association (NFPA) 1901, Standard on Automotive Fire Apparatus (2009 ed.), was in effect then and still is today.

Nothing has changed concerning minimum sizes, slip resistance, or spacing. Requirements for handrails, access ladders, and work platforms are the same. Recent apparatus deliveries show firefighters may still be "inconvenienced" when entering and exiting some chassis cabs. Safely climbing onto a rig to access equipment is still challenging. Squaring off the back ends of pumpers and eliminating rear steps have resulted in many manufacturers providing access ladders. Others still provide fabricated and folding steps that are minimally sized just to meet NFPA 1901. When they are stacked vertically in-line above each other, climbing them is like climbing a pompier ladder. Good luck.

Unless somebody gets hurt, little attention is paid to steps. Then, finger pointing starts. Apparatus manufacturers (OEMs) are usually faulted until someone points out the fire department wrote the specifications (specs)-including the step requirements.

At recent trade shows, I saw many types of materials used for stepping surfaces. I show no preference or recommend one in lieu of another. This article addresses common NFPA-compliant stepping surfaces and how purchasing specifications sometimes fail to adequately describe them. When fire departments are not specific in detailing step sizes, materials, and locations, manufacturers are only bound to comply with NFPA 1901's minimum requirements.

Materials

The terms treadplate, tread bright, diamond plate, grip strut, bustin insert, open grating, and perforated steps are often used generically for materials similar to trademarked products. As an example, Grip Strut® is a trademarked product of B-Line Products by Cooper Industries. Bustin Industrial Products manufactures open steel and aluminum grating-both commonly called bustin inserts. McNichols manufactures Diamondback® stepping surfaces and Perf-O Grip®, which, according to the company, is a "grating with a unique surface of large debossed holes and perforated buttons to provide slip resistance." Industrial Metal Supply's Web site says aluminum treadplate comes in two alloys and three styles. Spec writers should check its informative site.

Jim Kirvida, of CustomFIRE, says, "Today's NFPA-compliant four-way Treadplate, called 3003H22 TB FTQ (3003 alloy/H-22 temper/Tread Brite/Fire Truck Quality), is nothing more than the original C-104 pattern aluminum treadplate. But instead of the raised diamonds having sharp top ridges, the tops are flattened and are left with very slight cross-sectional gashes." Unless otherwise noted, all materials referenced herein are NFPA 1901 compliant for slip resistance. Technocrats and safety gurus desiring comprehensive data should refer to NFPA 1901; any of the aforementioned metal suppliers; and the "Firefighter Tread Plate Slip Resistance Study" done by William Marletta, PhD, CSP, in 1999 for the NFPA Committee on Fire Apparatus.

Historically, running boards were made of wood (photo 1). Steel treadplate followed with progressive manufacturers such as Young Fire Apparatus using perforated mild steel called Morton Cass in the early 1970s (photo 2). Aluminum treadplate be