The workers who service these utility lines shouldn't be put in peril because of improperly installed generators.

One of the reasons that it takes longer than anyone would like to restore power is that the lineman doing that work have to constantly be on guard against stray power that can maim or kill. I realize that some know-it-all will say that they are supposed to take the steps to isolate each line segment they are working on and that is true. But when the lines are down in the street like plates of spilled spaghetti and poles have been turned into tooth picks it gets a little challenging to find places to ground those lines on both sides of the work. Add to that the twelve hour shifts worked for days on end and you have the makings of a young person’s funeral.

After one of our more serious summer storms I was doing damage assessment to check the accessibility of buildings in the Takoma Park Fire Station’s service area. I was flagged down by a utility crew that told me that there was power coming back out to their lines from an improperly connected generator. They explained that they were not allowed to talk to the home’s occupants themselves because the conversation might get ugly given that such depraved indifference to the safety of others for the sake of ones own convenience has killed dozens of lineman over the years. I donned my helmet and safety vest over my work uniform and started up the front walk just as a utility manager arrived in his sedan. Since the supervisors, who come in pickup trucks, were being so thinly spread managers were also getting into the effort. I turned back to let him handle it and got quite a surprise.

This gentleman was around the age when most in his industry would retire. I expected that he would have the meter pulled and then explain to the occupants that they were endangering the lineman and that their service would remain disconnected until the counties electrical inspector could verify that the makeshift generator connection had been cleared. Instead he opened the trunk of his car and pulled out a lovingly cared for set of all leather climbing gear. (Climbing gear of any recent manufacture would be predominantly synthetic materials.) He put his suit coat in the car and donned a pair of leather lineman’s boots that although in beautiful condition were obviously older than some of the linemen he was managing. He had a member of the crew that had been waiting for him pull the meter and install a blank with a locking meter ring to prevent the blanks removal. He walked up to one of the trucks and took out a large insulated wire cutter. He then donned his climbing gear and pole gaffs, climbed the pole, donned his insulated gloves, and cut all three of the wires that served that home so that the service drop wires fell into their front yard. He then ordered the other end of the drop removed from the home. (The wires between the pole and the strain relief bracket on the house belong to the utility. The wires from the eve down to the meter belong to the buildings owner.) He then went up to the door and talked to the occupants to inform them that their service would not be restored without an order from the county and why. I asked the foreman of the crew why the manager would cut the drop personally and the foreman said that it was the managers way of taking complete responsibility for the removal of the service drop from the home.

Let me assure you that a service drop that is removed to render lines safe from a generator back feed is the very last thing that gets replaced after a wide spread power outage. With the threat of sudden death removed, work to restore power to hundreds of homes could then resume. When I got home to my own darkened house after my shift with the Volunteer Fire Department had ended I read in the paper that a lineman had been killed the previous day by a generator back feed only two counties away.

Something else that you may want to be aware of is that the International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers (IBEW) is committed to seeking reckless maiming or manslaughter charges against anyone who injures or kills a lineman by connecting a generator to a building’s wiring without the proper safeguards in place. If someone were being so callous with your life you would get a little testy too.

The Moral is that if you didn’t have a generator connection installed and inspected in advance you must not try to connect one to your home’s wiring with improvised methods! Just run cords from the generator to the loads that you need to power. If the load is not cord and plug connected and thus cannot be supplied by a cord from the generator then be prepared to do without it.

Tom Horne is a Master Firefighter / Rescuer of the Takoma Park Volunteer Fire Department which is an assisting agency of the Montgomery County Fire & Rescue Service, Maryland by vocation.  He is also a practicing Electrician by craft with over forty years experience in the installation, maintenance, and operation of emergency and standby power systems.

Copyright 2001 by Tom Horne. Reprinted with permission. All rights reserved.

This Year – Don’t Just Change Your Smoke Alarm Batteries Change Your Smoke Alarms

Ionization Versus Photoelectric Smoke Alarms

By Skip Walker

Like most, I used to think that a smoke alarm was a smoke alarm.  After all, everything in stores must be certified by an independent lab such as UL.  The reality is that all smoke alarms are not the same.  Most residential smoke alarms use one of two basic technologies.  They are either ionization or photoelectric.  The simple truth is that there are very significant differences in the way these devices respond in real-world fires.  Ionization alarms are notorious for nuisance tripping from cooking and even the steam from a shower, but they are very slow to respond – if they respond at all – in a room filled with smoke from a smoldering fire.

During the last 30 years we have installed several hundred-million smoke alarms in US residences.  Today nearly 95% of homes have at least one smoke alarm.  Recent data for residential fire deaths shows that there are approximately 8 deaths per 1,000 fires.  This number has remained largely unchanged over the last 30 years. This is a difficult statistic to explain.

“I estimate that at least 10,000-15,000 people have died unnecessarily in smoldering house fires since 1990 because they relied on ionization detectors.”

Jay Fleming, Deputy Fire Chief , Boston, MA.

Ionization type smoke detectors account for well over 90% of the smoke alarms installed in residential construction in the US.  This technology uses a small amount of radioactive material to detect changes in the airflow across the sensor.  On average, ionization units respond about 30 seconds faster to an open-flame fire than photoelectric type alarms.  However, in a smoldering fire, ionization units respond on average 30 to 60 minutes slower than a photoelectric unit.  In some cases, they may not respond at all.  Most residential fire fatalities occur at night and are result of smoke inhalation.  The flash-over point in a fire is basically the point where the fire goes critical.  Twenty to thirty years ago, the flash-over point in a fire occurred in as little as 12-14 minutes.  Due primarily to the increased use of synthetic and engineered materials, flash-over now often occurs in as little as 2-4 minutes.  This leaves the occupants significantly less time to safely exit their home in a fire.

The issue with ionization alarms is more than just the inferior response times.  A recent Alaskan study shows that ionization units are up to 8 times more likely to be non-functional in the first year after installation.  Because ionization units are very prone to nuisance tripping from cooking, etc., people become frustrated and intentionally disable the units -  i.e. they remove the battery, etc.  This leaves the home unprotected.  Homes with non-functional smoke alarms account for around 2/3′s of all fire deaths.  Statistically, ionization alarms are the most likely to be disabled.  Most of the other 1/3 of fire deaths occur in homes where a functional alarm is installed.  However, in far too many cases, the alarm sounds too late to alert the occupants.

For Dean Dennis and Doug Turnbull, the battle to ban ionization alarms is a very personal mission.  Both lost daughters in separate Ohio college off-campus housing fires.  These two fires claimed a total of eight lives.  There more than 20 smoke alarms in these two  fires.  All of the alarms were ionization type alarms.  Most were functional but some had been disabled, apparently due to nuisance alarm problems.  As a way to bring awareness to this critical life-safety issue,  Dean and Doug teamed up to form Fathers for Fire Safety.  Their group works very closely with the World Fire Safety Foundation, an Australian group that has been instrumental in educating the fire safety community and general public about this critical issue.

One of the most disturbing aspects of this is that it is not new information.  There is significant research going back to the mid-1970′s showing that ionization smoke alarms “may not operate in time to alert occupants early enough to escape from smoldering fires.” (source AFAC)

“We put 50 million smoke detectors in buildings in America in a two year period and our fire loss and death rate goes up.  We’re having a little trouble explaining these things.”

Gordon Vickery, former head of the US. Fire Administration

Source: Fire engineering magazine, September 1980

Boston Deputy Fire Chief Jay Fleming has been calling for the effective ban of ionization units since the 1990′s.  Although it has taken decades, there is a growing public awareness of this issue.  The International Association of Firefighters (IAFF) officially changed their position in 2008  calling for the switch to photoelectric smoke alarms.  After several highly publicized fires, the state of Vermont effectively banned ionization units in residential construction effective January 1, 2009.  In July, 2010, the City of Albany became the first city in California to require photoelectric smoke alarms in new construction and remodels.  In November 2010, the City of Palo Alto enacted an ordinance mandating photoelectric technology smoke alarms.  Hopefully, California will step up and join Vermont in banning ionization technology altogether at the state level.

August 2008: The 292,000 member, International Association of Fire Fighters (IAFF), has changed their position on smoke alarms to formally endorse photoelectric smoke detectors.  IAFF members protect over 85% of the population in the US and Canada.

The IAFF’s Official Position is to:

a) ONLY Recommend Photoelectric Smoke Detectors/Alarms

“RESOLVED, That the IAFF propose and support the mandate of only photoelectric smoke detectors in United States and Canadian federal law, in all state, provincial and local legislation, and in all standard development organizations’ building fire and life safety codes and standards . . .”

b) NOT Recommend Combination Alarms

“WHEREAS, dual alarms, also called combination alarms, that contain both technologies are available but the benefit over photoelectric in the response to fires is marginal. They are more costly, and they will experience the same nuisance problem as ionization smoke alarms . . .”

Albany, CA Fire Chief Marc McGinn recently spoke on this important issue at both the Golden Gate ASHI and the Silicon Valley ASHI/CREIA Chapters.  Chief McGinn has called for, “the immediate removal of the fraudulent, deadly, ionization so-called smoke alarms from all stores and homes before more people are needlessly maimed or killed.”

After hearing Chief McGinn speak, Douglas Hansen said, “This issue has more impact on the life safety of your clients than just about anything. Actually, make that just plain anything.” As professional inspectors, safety related issues are one of our most important tasks.

How do you know which you have?  It’s not always possible to know.  In general, if the unit has a Hush feature, it is an ionization unit.  If the label says anything about radioactive materials, Americium-241 or the model number ends in an “I” – then it is an ionization unit.  When there is any doubt, there is better than a 90% chance it is an ionization unit.  To be safe, simply replace all unknown units with photoelectric units.

There are combination photoelectric/ionization units on the market.  These suffer the same issues as ionization only detectors.  They nuisance trip due to the ionization detector.  In some cases, the manufactures alter the sensitivity/response of the units to smoke to reduce nuisance tripping.  The design of certain combination units is such that the response is identical to ionization only units.  The International Association of Fire Fighters specifically recommends against installing combination alarms.  I suggest that we do so as well.

There are also combination photoelectric/carbon monoxide (CO) alarms.  These combination units are more expensive.  From a safety standpoint, smoke alarms should be replaced every 10 years.  Most carbon monoxide detectors should be replaced every 5 years.  So you are either replacing the smoke alarm portion more often than needed or you may be relying on a CO detector that is past may be past the replacement date.  Combination units also are a single point of failure.  Separate units simply make more sense.

As CREIA inspectors, public awareness of this issue must become the number one priority for each of us.  This issue doesn’t just affect the safety of our clients, it directly impacts nearly everyone of us, our families, our friends and our neighbors.

This year, don’t just replace your smoke alarm batteries – replace your alarms with photoelectric units and recommend that all of your family, friends and clients do the same!

About the author:

Skip Walker lives in the SF Bay Area and has performed over 2,800 paid inspections since becoming a CREIA member in 2003.  Skip is both a CREIA Master Inspector and an ASHI Certified Inspector.  Skip is an ICC Certified Residential Combination Building Inspector and a F.I.R.E. Certified Inspector.  Skip is the past education chair for the Silicon Valley ASHI/CREIA Chapter, CREIA State Secretary and the CREIA Region Three Director.  He also holds a California Real Estate Appraisal Trainee License.  Skip may be reached at HomeInspection@sanbrunocable.com.

This is a dryer vent fire just waiting to happen; it’s not just the crushed vent, it’s also the pipe itself: flexible metal pipe has ridges on the inside that can catch and hold dryer lint, leading to buildup. And if you use dryer sheets, your dryer lint will have waxy deposits in it that contribute even more to the fire hazard.

Think of it as plaque buildup in your dryer vent: you really don’t want to block that flow!

Did the occupant of this house have to search for a key?

It’s a nightmare scenario: in the middle of the night, your smoke alarm goes off. You wake up to a house rapidly filling with dense smoke. You crawl to the front door and try to open it, but the deadbolt is locked. The key to the deadbolt isn’t in the lock, because you didn’t want to give a burglar easy access by cracking the glass in the sidelight and reaching through to unlock the door. So the key is somewhere else… probably resting on the piece of trim directly over the door. Reaching it means standing up in the hot fumes, fumbling to find the key. If you manage to find it, you then need to get it into the lock, with your eyes watering and lungs burning. You’ve lost precious escape seconds.

Egress doors should not be key-operated from the inside.

All exterior doors should have single-key deadbolts, with a knob on the interior to unlock it. If the door has a glass inset, or there are glass sidelights, you can reinforce these with stronger glass to prevent break-ins. Belongings can be replaced; it is far more important to make sure the occupants of a home can get out in an emergency.

Not what you want to find on an egress door.

Fire code calls for egress doors that do not require “special knowledge” to operate. The location of a key qualifies as special knowledge.