SUPPLEMENTARY

Report of the Committee on

Professional Qualifications

Correlating Committee

Douglas P. Forsman, Chairman Oklahoma State University, OK

Jon C. Jones, Secretary National Fire Protection Assn.

(Nonvoting)

LouisJ. Amabili, Delaware State Fire School Rep. Int'l Society of Fire Service Instructors

Stephen P. Austin, State Farm Fire & Casualty Co. Rep. Int'l Assn. of Arson Investigators, Inc.

Dan W. Bailey, USDA Forest Service Gene P. Carlson, Oklahoma State University, OK Rep. Int'l Fire Service TrainingAssn.

Jack K. McElfish, Clayton CntyFire Dept., GA Rep. Int'l Assn. of Fire Chiefs

Mary Nachbar, Minnesota State Fire Marshal Division William Peterson, Piano Fire Dept., TX

Rep. Int'l Fire Service Training Assn. John P. Wolf, University of Kansas, KS Ted Vratny, Boulder Regional Communications Ctr., CO

Technical Committee on

Fire Investigator Professional Qualifications

Stephen P. Austin, Chairman State Farm Fire & Casualty Co., DE

Rep. Int'l Assn. of Arson Investigators, Inc.

Billy L. Buckley, S E A, Inc., FL Roger A. Furrow, Grinnell Mutual Reinsurance, IA

Rep. Nat'l Assn. of Fire Investigators Mary M. Galvin, State of Connecticut, CT David B. Hooton, TechniFire Services Co., TN Thomas E. Minnich, US Fire Administration, MD J. Brooks Semple, Smoke/Fire Risk Mgmt Inc., VA BacryW. Slotter, Robins, Kaplan, Miller & Ciresi, GA Dennis W. Smith, Atlantic City Fire Dept., NJ

Rep. T/C Fire Investigations Robert A. Stellingworth, Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco &

Firearms, DC

Alternates

John F. Goetz, Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco & Firearms, PA (Alt. to IL A. SteUingworth)

Joseph P. Toscano, State Attorney's Office New Haven, CT (Alt. to M. M. Galvin)

Jack A. Ward, Universal Fire Specialists, Inc., FL (Alt. to S. Austin)

Staff Liaison: Jon C. Jones

This list represents the membership at the time the Committee was balloted on the text of this edition. Since that time changes in the membership may have occurred.

The Supplementary Report of the Committee on Professional Qualifications is presented for adoption.

This Supplementary Report was prepared by the Technical Committee on Fire Investigator Professional Qualifications and proposes for adoption a Supplementary Report which documents its action on the public comments received on the proposed revision to NFPA 1033-1987, Standard on Fire Investigator Professional Qualifications, published in the Technical Committee Reports for the 1992 Fall Meeting.

This Supplementary Report has been submitted to letter ballot of the Technical Committee on Fire Investigator Professional Qualifica- tions which consists of 10 voting members; of whom 9 voted affirmatively, and 1 negatively (Mr. Smith).

Mr. Smith voted negatively stating: "I believe this document is insuffident in three principle areas,

which are of such basic and fundamental importance in the field of fire investigation, that without considerably more emphasis and detail, the Standard for the Professional Qualifications for Fire Investigator is incomplete.

These areas are;

1. The prerequisite knowledges and skills required for the examination of basic electricity, electrical systems, and appliances, which is only identified as "utilities," in Section 3-2.9.

2. The prerequisite knowledges and skills for the investigation of "explosions," in Section 3-2.10.

3. That the job performance requirements cannot be utilized effectively by an agency without the reference to authoritative sources, such as NFPA 907M, Manual for the Determination of Electrical Fire Causes, NFPA 422M, Manual for Aircraft Fire and Explosions, NFPA 991, Guide for Fire and Explosion Investigations, which are the recognized, authoritative sources of the National Fire Protection Association for fire investigations."

The Supplementary Report has also been submitted to letter ballot of the Correlating Committee on Professional Qualifications, which consists of 10 voting members of whom 9 voted affirmatively, and 1 ballot was not returned (Mr. Vramey).

168

N F P A 1 0 3 3 - - F 9 2 T C D

PART I

(Log # 48) 1033- 1 - (Entire Document): Reject SUBMITTER: Hunter B. (Terry) Lacy, Charlotte, NC COMMENT ON PROPOSAL NO: 1035-33 RECOMMENDATION: Revise the entire document to reflect a standards-oriented performance requirement . SUBSTANTIATION: The membership of the Correlating Commit- tee should have done: a better j o b of listening to LouisJ. Amabili. Mr. Amabili is correct in his assessment that this standard will not be useful as a "measuring stick" for performance evaluation. It is outrageous that the Committee was no t willing to listen to a fire service professional who has made a career of training. NFPA 1033/ 1987 was a document from which standards based training could be developed. COMMITrEE ACTION: Reject. COMMITI'EE STATEMENT: See Committee Action on 1033-2 (Log #42).

(Log # 42) 1033- 2 - (Entire Document): Accept in Principle SUBMITTER: Hunter B. (Terry) Lacy, Charlotte, NC COMMENT ON PROPOSAL NO: 1033-33 RECOMMENDATION: Revise the entire document using the context of this document with the format, wording, and language of the 1987 document .

NFPA 1033/1987 was a well-ordered document that only needed fine-tuning. Sure, there were questionable areas; however, the overall format provided a good foundat ion for the new Fire Investigator to realize what training h e / s h e needed to obtain the necessary skills. SUBSTANTIATION:: Many investigative agencies, training facilities, states, professional organizafions use(d) NFPA 1033/1987 as a basis for "standards based training" and were happy with the results. That possibility will never exist again because NFPA 1033/1992 is so poorly written and worded that even the most exper ienced investigator will not know what skills are required. It was my unders tanding that this standard's purpose was to establish qualifications for Fire Investigator, not a "how to" manual. What is NFPA 921/1991's purpose? COMMITI'EE ACTION: Accept in Principle.

Revise 1-2 PURPOSE, by adding the following after the last sentence:

'~Job performance requirements describe the performance required for a specific job. The complete list of requirements for each duty defines what an individual must be able to do in order to successfully

erform that duty;, however, it is not in tended to measure a level of owledge. Together, the duties and j o b performance requirements

define the parameters for the j ob of fire investigator." Add the following Appendix note to 1-2: A-l-2 See Appendix C.

COMMITI'EESTATEMENT: The Committee feels that the addit ion of the material contained in Appendix C addresses the concerns of the submitter of the comment .

(Log # 28) 1033- 3 - (1-3 General): Reject SUBMITI'ER~ James H. Shanley, Jr., Varley-Gampbell & Assoc. COMMENT ON PROPOSAL NO: 1033-33 RECOMMENDATION: This document , NFPA 1033, should be re turned to the Technical Committee SUI~TANTIATION: 1. The proposed revised standard makes no reference and has no requirements for a fire investi~ator to unders tand and apply the basics of electricity, electric theory and how electrical fires can and cannot start. This omission was made despite a proposal (1033-27 Log #16) which specifically pointed this out to the committee and which r ecommended that new text be provided in this area. A reference to NFPA 907M (Investigating Fires of Electrical Origin) was also recommended . This proposal was rejected because "specific text no t within the scope of the revised document." Electrical fires and qualifying investagators to investigate electrical fires is within the scope of this standard and must be addressed. Electricity is statistically one of the most common causes of fire, it is poorly unders tood by many investigators, and conse- quently is a very popular scapegoat. The work done on NFPA 907M and 921 sought to educate and correct the many problems in this area. The revised NF'PA 1033 ignores them.

2. The proposed revised standard 's fide, scope and purpose is specific to a ~ investigator. This document completely ignores the fact that fire investigators (public and private sector) are often called upon to investigate explosions. The few short paragraphs provided in section 3-2.10 regarding explosion investigation, are totally

inadequate. What is needed is an entire chapter dedicated to the specific knowledge, skill, and j o b performance requirements for investigating explosions.

3. The proposed revised standard was generated without adequate coordination and correlation with the Fire Investigation Technical Committee and without adequate reference to other NFPA documents pertaining to fire invesfi~, fion, specifically NFPA 907M and 921. This is evidenced by the failure of this document to address such key areas as electrical fire investigation, basic fire science/behavior, and explosion investigation. Although two members of the Fire Investigation Technical Committee are present on the committee responsible for this document , it is my opinion that the revised NFPA 1033 was written without any regard for what already existed (NFPA 907M) or what was then in preparat ion (NFPA 921), and has since been adopted. 4. The new format of this proposed standard is difficult to follow

and determine what is, and what is not required by it. Prerequisite skill and prerequisite knowledge, key qualification criteria used throughout, are no t even defined. A major problem is the organiza- tion of Chapter 3. More work is needed to restructure it so that it is presented in a logical and easy to follow fashion. Currently it is a jumble, of requirements with much., repeti t ion and generalizafion. . . The difference between prerequisite knowledge and skdl m some cases is very fine and it is difficult to distinguish any difference between them. Not every prerequisite knowledge has to have a prerequisite skill specified, especially if the skill is simply the application of the knowledge. Using and applying this documen tas proposed to evaluate the qualifications of a fire investigator would be very difficult if no t impossible. Although 1 have submitted additional comments for specific

sections of the proposed revised standard, I feel there is too much that needs to be changed or added to make this document accept- able. Returning it to the committee is the only option at this late stage of the standard cycle. If the committee h a d m o r e carefully considered the proposals it had received, some or all of these problems may have been avoided at this point COMMITTEE ACTION: Reject. COMMITTEE STATEMENT: The committee has a t tempted through the use of task analysis and the development of j o b p_erformance . . . . . . . requirements, to define the crifical duties and tasks for t h e l o b of fire mvesugator. Specific references to the mvestlgauon of explosions and electrical fires are addressed in the committee action on 1033-4 (Log #28) and 1033-23 (Log #33).

The committee statement for 1033-47 (Log #32) deals with the responsibility for the review and selection o~ reference materials. Th~ committee did in fact take the work of the NFPA 921 committee into consideration throughout its deliberations. With regard to item 4 of the comment the committee has included an in depth discus- sion of the j ob performance requirement format in Appendix C of the document as proposed by Mr. Monigold in 1033-58 (Log #59).

(Log # 27) 1033-4- (1-1, 3-2.10, 3-2.10.1 and 3-2.10.2): Reject SUBMITrEI~ James H. Shanley, Jr., Varley-Campbell & Assoc. COMMENT ON PROPOSAL NO: 1033-33 RECOMMENDATION: Add the following sentence to 1-1:

"This standard does not specifically identify the j ob performance requirements necessary to perform as an explosion investigator, al though it is recognized that similarities exist in the investigation of fires and explosions."

Delete Sections 3-2.10, 3-2.10.1 and 3-2.10.2. SUBSTANTIATION: No where in the fide, scope or chapter 3 is the subject of explosion investigation included with the exception of the 3 par ~agrap hs r ecommendea . . . . for deletion in 3-2 .. 10 . . This . document as written cannot be apphed to explosmn mvesugauon there are too many differences between the phenomena of fire and explosion to lump them together. Considering that many if not most fire inve-sfig_a_ tors (both private and public sector) have or will become involved in the investigation of explosions, this new sentence is needed to establish the fact that this standard should no t be used to determine/evaluate the professional qualificafions of an explosion investigator. The three paragraphs in 3-2.10 are entirely inadequate to quaiify an individual to investigate an. explosion. I would. . r e commend that a new chapter 4 be written to cover the mvesuga- fion of explosions and this (and only this) would permit expansion of the scope to include explosion investigator qua]ificafions. COMMITI'EE ACTION: Reject. COMMITTEE STATEMENT: The committee discussed this issue at length during the development of the document. The standard is not in tended to define the job performance requirements fro the specialized job of explosion investigator (Bomb Technician). The scope of this document is to define the minimum job performance requirements for the j ob of the fire investigator.

169

N F P A 1 0 3 3 m F 9 2 T C D

(Log # 58) 1033- 5 - (1-3.5"): Accept in Principle SUBMITTER: Richard L. P. Custer, Wrentham, MA COMMENT ON PROPOSAL NO: 1033-33 RECOMMENDATION: Delete asterisk following paragraph number. SUBSTANTIATION: There is no material provided in Appendix A for this paragraph. Something may be missing. COMMITrEE ACTION: Accept in Principle. Add the following appendix note to 1-3.5 : A-1-3.5 See Appendix C.

COMMITrEE STATEMENT: Note was inadvertently omitted.

(Log # 1) 1033- 6 - (1-3.6): Accept in Principle in Part SUBMI'I3"Elta Richard L. Simpson, IAAI MN Chapter COMMENT ON PROPOSAL NO: 1033-33 RECOMMENDATION: Add another sen tence /paragraph to require the min imum qualifications of the e~aluator such as "The evaluator shall not be less than a certified fire investigator, or not less than the chief or head of a fire investigation bureau, investiga- tion division or investigative sector and have a background in fire investigation." SUBSTANTIATION: The evaluator must be qualified to conduct the evaluation of the investigator to maintain and assure the evaluation has been properly conducted. COMMITTEE ACTION: Accept in Principle in Part.

Strike the last sentence in 1-3.6 and add the following in it's place: "The evaluator must be qualified to conduct the evaluation of an

investigator." COMMITYEE STATEMENT: The committee discussed this comment at length. It is their opinion that evaluators must be qualified to evaluate assigned requirements. This does not in many cases require the evaluator to be an investigator.

(Log # 9) 1033- 7- (1-3.7): Reject SUBMITTER: Hal C. Lyson, Robins, Kaplan, Miller & Ciresi/IAAI MN Chapter COMMENT ON PROPOSAL NO: 1033-33 RECOMMENDATION: Add sentence "The fire investigator shall maintain a min imum o f hr of fire investigative training per year and shall be active in fire investigations to maintain the investigator's certification. SUBSTANTIATION: The fire investigation field is constantly changing with new technologies and the investigator should keep current with the new technologies. The investigator needs to have exposure to fire investigations to maintain h i s /he r skill level. COMMIT'I'EE ACTION: Reject. COMMITYEE STATEMENT: The document is in tended to set minimum qualifications for the j o b of fire investigator. Section 1-3.7, requires the investigator to remain current with investigation methodology. It is the committees opinion the the Authority Having Jurisdiction has the responsibility to define or set additional criteria, such as proposed in this comment.

(Log # 12) 1033- 8 - (Chapter 2): Accept SUBMITTER: David Hooton, TechniFire Services Co. COMMENT ON PROPOSAL NO: 1033-33 RECOMMENDATION: Add the following new text to Chapter 2 as follows: JPR = A Job Performance Requirement is a s tatement that describes

a specific j ob task; lists the items necessary to complete the task; and defines measurable or observable outcomes and evaluation areas for the specific task."

Prerequisite Knowledge: Fundamental knowledge one must have in order to perform a specific task.

Prerequisite Skills: The essential skills one must have in order to perform a specific task.

Task: A specific j ob behavior or activity. SUBSTANTIATION: Terms undefined. COMMITrEE ACTION: Accept.

(Log # 21) 1033- 9 - (Chapter 2): Accept SUBMITTER: James H. Shanley, Jr., Varley-Campbell & Assoc. COMMENT ON PROPOSAL NO: 1033-33 RECOMMENDATION: Revise and delete text as shown:

Special Tools. Tools of a specialized or unique nature which may not be required for every fire investigation as are the standard equipment and tools. Examples include heavy equipment, hydrocarbon detectors, microscopes, flash point tester, etc. SUBSTANTIATION: The existing text is worded in a very confusing manner and I was not sure of what it said or was trying to say. The last sentence was deleted because it does not belong in a definition. It is an evaluation criteria. COMMITrEE ACTION: Accept.

(Log # 22) 1033- 10 - (Chapter 2 (New)): Accept in Principle SUBMITTER: James H. Shanley, Jr., Varley-Campbell & Assoc. COMMENT ON PROPOSAL NO: 1033-33 RECOMMENDATION: Add the following new definitions:

Prerequisite Knowledge. Knowledge that the individual must already have to be able to perform specific tasks of the j ob perfor- mance requirements.

Prerequisite Skill. Skills an individual must possess to be able to erform the s ecific tasks of the j ob performance requirements

~ U B S T A N ~ ' ~ O N : These necessary definitions were not provided. The text is the same as provided in NFPA 1035. COMMITrEEACTION: Accept in Principle. COMMITrEE STATEMENT: See Committee Action for 1033-8 (Log #12).

(Log # 23) 1033- 11 - (Chapter 2): Accept in Principle SUBMITTER: James H. Shanley, Jr., Varley-Campbell & Assoc. COMMENT ON PROPOSAL NO: 1033-33 RECOMMENDATION: In the third line of the definition for Job Performance Requirement replace at tainment with aonlication. SUBSTANTIATION: Knowledge and skills must exist'p5_i~ to performing a specific j ob and it is the anvlication of such which results in achieving the goals of a job. Tile way it is written currently implies that only at taining/possessing knowledge and skill is necessary to meet the performance requirements. COMMITYEEACTION: Accept in Principle. COMMITTEE STATEMENT: See Committee Action for 1033-8 (Log #12).

(Log # 25) 1033- 12 - (Chapter 2): Accept in Principle in Part SUBMITTER: James H. Shanley, Jr., Varley-Campbell & Assoc. COMMENT ON PROPOSAL NO: 1033-33 RECOMMENDATION: Add new text and delete text as shown:

Standard Equipment and Tools. The min imum type and quantity of fire investigation tools considered necessary to conduct any fire inves%ration including the equipment necessary to protect the safety of the investigator. Examples include photography equipment, flashlight, shovel, tape measure, etc~ NFPA 921, Fire and Explosion Investigations, section 6-4.1 for a more comprehensive list. SUBSTANTIATION: The definition as provided is very confusing and it is unclear as to what is being said. The last sentence was deleted because it does not belong in a definition section. It is an evaluation criteria. COMMITTEE ACTION: Accept in Principle in Part.

Edit the definition as follows: "Standard equipment and tools are: a 35mm camera, flash, and

film, flashlight shovel, broom, hand tools, tape measure, and evidence collection containers." COMMITrEE STATEMENT: In the committees opinion this list of tools and equipment are the min imum and investigator should be provided with when being evaluated.

170

N F P A 1033 - - F92 T C D

(Log # 26) 1033-13 - (chapter 2): Accept in Principle SUBMITTER: James H. Shanley, Jr., Varley-Campbell & Assoc. COMMENT ON PROPOSAL NO: 1033-33 RECOMMENDATION: In the first sentence of the definition for Job Performance Requirement revise to read:

" . . . describes the minimumperformance required. . ." . SUBSTANTIATION: It should be stated here as it is in the Purpose that these are minimums, just as with any other code or standard. COMMITI'EEACTION: Accept in Principle. COMMITTEE STATEMENT: See Committee Action and Statement for 1033-2 (Log #42) and the Committee Action on 1033-8 (Log #12).

(Log # 35) 1033- 14 - (Chapter 2 (New)): Reject SUBMITYER: Dennis W. Smith, Atlantic City Fire Dept., NJ COMMENT ON PROPOSAL NO: 1033-33 RECOMMENDATION: Add the following new definitions:

Failure Analysis. A logical, systematic examination of an item, t " p " component or assembl), and it s place and function in a system, to

identify and analyze the probability, causes and consequences of potential and real failures.

Fire Analysis. The process of determining the origin, cause, and responsibility as well as failure analysis of a fire or explosion.

Fire Investigation. The process of determining the origin, cause, and development of a fire or explosion. SUBSTANTIATION: These definitions involve different levels of investigation, and depend upon the purpose of the investigation and the different goals or responsibilities of the investigator, rlaese represent the different levels or concepts, for the investigator to be familiar. COMMITrEE ACTION: Reject. COMMITTEE STATEMENT: The terms referenced in this comment are not used in the document and do not require a definition.

(LOg # 2) 1033-15 - (3-1.1): Reject SUBMITrER= Richard L. Simpson, IAAI MN Chapter COMMENT ON PROPOSAL NO: 1033-33 RECOMMENDATION: Add a sentence as follows:

"The investigator shall have a minimum of three (3) years of fire fighting experience are one (1) year of fire investigation experience or some combination of the two." SUBSTANTIATION: Serf-explanatory, need experience to he

ualified. OMMrITEE ACTION: Reject.

CO MITrEE STATEMENT: The requirements of this comment are beyond the scope of the document. The establishment of prerequisites such as these are the responsibility of the Authority Having Jurisdiction or the certifying agency.

(Log # M) 1033- 16 - (3-1.1): Reject SUBMITTER: Dennis W, Smith, Atlantic City Fire Dept., NJ COMMENT ON PROPOSAL NO: 1033-33 RECOMMENDATION: Delete the second sentence:

"In addition, the fire investigator shall meet the requirements of 2-2.1 through 2-2.3 of NFPA 472, Standard for Professional Competence of Responders to Hazardous Materials Incidents." SUBSTANTIATION: Any mandatory levels of training, which are required by other stmadards, etc., should be met as a requirement of that standard, if it is applicable to the investigator. Specifically, if an investigator meets the definition of a "first responder", according to NFPA 472, then the investigator should meet those requirements, pursuant to that standard, not in accordance with NFPA 1033. The investigator who does not meet the definition of "first responder" should not be required to meet those requirements, and NFPA 472 should not apply. COMMITTEE ACTION: Reject. C O ~ b~rAT]~ , l~ r : It is essential that fire investigators recognize potentially hazardous situations.

(Log # 19) 1033- 17 - (3-2): Reject SUBMITTER: James H. Shanley, Jr., Varley-Campbell & Assoc. COMMENT ON PROPOSAL NO: 1033-33 RECOMMENDATION: Add the following new text:

Prerequisite Knowledge. Have an understanding and working knowledge of the investigativeprincipals and tools presented in NFPA 921, Manual for Fire andExplosion Investigations.

Prerequisite Knowledge by able to apply the Investigative tech- niques, methods and technology presented in NFPA 921, Manual for Fire and Explosion Investigations. SUBSTANTIATION: No general reference is made to NFPA 921 which goes into much greater detail than NFPA 1033 and is a document which all fire investigators should understand and use. The two documents NFPA 1033 and NFPA 921 should complement each other and not n-y to stand alone. I consider the material in NFPA 921 as prerequisite minimum knowledge for a fire investigator and this is consistent with how NFPA 921 was written and its

E ACTION: Reject. COMMIT13EE STATEMENT: The prerequisite knowledge and skills defined in the proposed draft of the standard are correct in the committees opinion.

(Log # 43) 1033- 18 - (3-2): Accept in Principle SUBMITYER: Hunter B. (Terry) Lacy, Charlotte, NC COMMENT ON PROPOSAL NO: 1033-33 RECOMMENDATION: Reorder the individual tasks to correlate closer with the order in which each task will occur on the fire scene. Using the existing numbering system, the tasks should be in the following order:

3-2.1, 3-2.4, 3-2.8, 3-2.2, 3-2.3, 3-2.9, 3-2.6, 3-2.5, 3-2.10, and 3-2.7. (Renumber the sect ions-- my use of the existing numbers is only

to simplify my comment.) SUBSTANTIATION: Although this document does not suggest that the individual tasks are to be performed in the order discussed, it will improve understanding ff the reader encounters the written material in an order similar to that which will occur on the fire scene. COMM]TIY.,EACTION: Accept in Principle.

Reorder Section 3-2 as follows: change section 3-2.4 to 3-2.2, renumber section 3-2.2 to 3-2.3 and renumber section 3-2.3 to 3-2.4. COMMITTEE STATEMENT: The committee agreed that the requirements should be in a more logical order.

(Log # 6) 1033- 19 - (3-2 through 3-7): Reject SUBMITTER: RussellJ. Smith, City of Bloomington/MN Chapter IAAI COMMENT ON PROPOSAL NO: 1033-33 RECOMMENDATION: Either add an "Appendix C" providing a minimum prerequisite of knowledge/criterla a n d / o r provide questions for each section. SUBSTANTIATION: Criteria/~uestions should be provided to test the proficiency, knowledge or skill of the investigator. The document as written will allow ~¢reat variance or standards of qualifications betweenjurisdlcttons or evaluators is the evaluator sets up the criteria for each section. COMMITTEE ACTION: Reject. COMMF/TEE STATI~F_~IT: This comment suggests action that is beyond the scope of the document.

(Log # 57) 1033- 20 - (3-2.1): Accept SLrBMITTER: Richard L P. Custer, Wrentham, MA COMMENT ON PROPOSAL NO: 1033-33 RECOMMENDATION: Replace the words "fuel chain" with "material(s) ignited". SUBSTANTIATION: The term "fuel chain" is ambiguous and not defined. The recommended change is consistent with the terminol- ogy in NFPA 901, NFPA 90tiM, and NFPA 921. COMMITTEE ACTION: Accept.

171

N F P A 1 0 3 3 m F 9 2 T C D

(Log # 13) 1033- 21 - (3-2.2): Accept SUBMITTER: David Hooton, TechniHre Services Co. COMMENT ON PROPOSAL NO: 1033-33 RECOMMENDATION: Add to the end of the paragraph:

I "Accessibility to the property is determined, and all potential means of ingress/egress are discovered." SUBSTANTIATION: TheJPR does not include relevant factors. COMMITTEE ACTION: Accept Add the text to the section renumbered 3-2.3 by the committee

action for 1033-18 (Log #43).

(Log # 56) 1033- 22- (3-2.2.1): Reject SUBMITTER: RichardL. P. Custer, Wrentham, MA COMMENT ON PROPOSAL NO: 1033-?,3 RECOMMENDATION: Replace the words "in the perimeter" with "at the fire scene and in the surrounding area." SUBSTANTIATION: The term perimeter is not defined in the context of the fire scene and is confusing in this context. The investigator should be looking for evidence both in and around the fire area itself and in the surrounding area where evidence such as accelerant containers, items removed from the premises and footprints or tire impressions be found. The recommended language conveys this concept more clearly. COMMITrEE ACTION: Reject. COMMITTEE STATEMENT: The current statement is the most efficient wording and accurately addresses the intent of the committee.

(Log # 33) 1033- 23- (3-2.3.1 andA-3-2.3.1 (New)): Reject SUBMITrER: Dennis W. Smith, Atlantic City Fire Dept., NJ COMMENT ON PROPOSAL NO: 1033-?,3 RECOMMENDATION: Include in Section 3-2.3.1:

"knowledge of basic electricity and electrical systems". Add A-3-2.3.1 Chapter 3, 9, 10, 11, 12, and 13 of NFPA 907M,

Manual for the Determination of Electrical Fire Causes, provide the investigator with guidance. SUBSTANTIATION: Specific reference to NFPA 907M provide the investigator with relative and specific information. COMMITTEE ACTION: Reject. COMMITTEE STATEMENT: This material is addressed in section 3-2.9.

(Log # 3) 1033- 24 - (3-2.4): Accept in Principle SUBMITTER: Richard L. Simpson, IAAI MN Chapter COMMENT ON PROPOSAL NO: 1033-33 RECOMMENDATION: Change last part of sentence in first paragraph as follows:

"and are kept in unrestricted areas" to "and keep out of restricted a r e a s . "

SUBSTANTIATION: Easier to understand - tells what you want. COMMITTEE ACTION: Accept in Prindple. COMMITTEE STATEMENT: See Committee Action and Statement for 1033-25 (Log #14).

(Log # 14) 1033- 25 - (%2.4): Accept in Principle SUBMITTER: David Hooton, TechniFire Services Co. COMMENT ON PROPOSAL NO: 1033-33 RECOMMENDATION: Add to paragraph:

"Appropriate security boundaries are identified, and alteration and contamination by environmental elements is minimized." SUBSTANTIATION: Securing the fire ground frequently involves more than securing it from persons. COMMITTEE ACTION: Accept in Principle. Modify 3-2.2 as renumbered in 1033-18 (Log #43) to read: "Secure the fire ground, given marking devices, sufficient person-

nel and special tools and equipment, so that unauthorized persons can recognize the perimeters of the investigative scene, are kept from restricted areas and all evidence or potential evidence is protected from damage or destruction." COMMITTEE STATEMENT: The modified language clarifies the intent of the committee for this requirement

(Log # 15) 1033- 96 - (3-2.4.2): Reject SUBMITTER: David Hooton, TechniFire Services Co. COMMENT ON PROPOSAL NO: 1033-33 RECOMMENDATION: Chan~e "use of marking devices" to "use of protective measures to secure tlae scene." SUBSTANTIATION: Securing the fireground may involve more than just using markingdevices. COMMITrEEACTION: Reject. COMMITTEE STATEMENT: Current wording reflects the intent of the committee.

(Log # 20) 1033- 27 - (3-2.4.2): Reject SUBMITTER: James H. Shanley, Jr., Varley-Campbell & Assoc. COMMENT ON PROPOSAL NO: 1033-33 RECOMMENDATION: Provide the definition of a markin~ device v here or in Chapter 2. SUBSTANTIATION: It is unknown what this device is and no definition or examples are provided. COMMITrEE ACTION: Reject. COMMYI'rEE STATEMENT: See Committee Statement for 1033-26 (Log #15).

(Log # 16) 1033- 28 - (3-2.7): Reject SUBMITTER: David Hooton, TechniFire Services Co. COMMENT ON PROPOSAL NO: 1033-33 RECOMMENDATION: Add "possible ignition sources are evaluated in respect to the assessment of fire damage and fuel type/ configuration." SUBSTANTIATION: To determine fire cause, all possible ignition sources have to be checked. The outputs already indicated that ignition sources had to be identified. COMMII"rEE ACTION: Reject. COMMITI'EE STATEMENT: Requirement reflects the intent of the committee.

(Log # 40) 1033- 29 - (%2.7): Accept in Principle SUBMITTER: Hunter B. (Terry) Lacy, Charlotte, NC COMMENT ON PROPOSAL NO: 1033-33 RECOMMENDATION: Add a sentence to encourage the necessary steps to be taken to prevent the contamination of physical evidence via the tools being used. SUBSTANTIATION: Evidence contamination can occur prior to the collection of physlcal evidence; thus, are should be taken during the scene examination to prevent said contamination. The mentioning of this necesstty in Section 34.4 is insufficient. COMMITYEE ACTION: Accept in Prindple. Add "or contamination" after the word damage in 3-2.7.

COMMITrEE STATEMENT: The revised wording reflects the intent of the committee and the submitter of the comment.

(Log # 55) 1033- 30 - (3-2.7.1): Accept SUBMITI'ER: Richard L. P. Custer, Wrentham, MA COMMENT ON PROPOSAL NO: 1033-33 RECOMMENDATION: Add the following to Prerequisite Knowl- edge: " . . . basic understanding of ignition processes, characteristics of

ignition sources and ease of ignition of fuels...". SUBSTANTIATION: In determination of cause it is important that the proposed ignition source be capable of ignition the proposed fuel. It must b~ at the correct temperature, have sufficient energy and be in contact with the fuel long enough to cause ignition. - - COMMITrEE ACTION: Accept

(Log # 17) 1033- 31 - (3-2.8): Accept SUBMIT'I~R: David Hooton, TechniFire Services Co. COMMENT ON PROPOSAL NO: 1033-53 RECOMMENDATION- Add "and burn patterns" after "all protected areas". S ~ A N T I A T I O N : Prerequisite skills require the correlation of burn patterns and protected areas, not just protected areas. COMMITYEE ACTION: Accept

172

N F P A 1 0 3 3 - - F 9 2 T C D

1033- 32 - (3-2.9*) : Reject (Log # 54) SUBMITTER: Richard L. P. Custer, Wrentham, MA COMMENT ON PROPOSAL NO: 1033-33 RECOMMENDATION: Revise as follows:

" . . . expert resources; so that the impact of the operation of a building system on fire spread and growth can be considered in identifying areas of origin and that the tampering with or defeating of any systems is identified."

Change A-3-2.9 to be consistent as follows: "Examples of defeating or tampering with systems: fire d o o r s . . . ' .

SUBSTANTIATION: The language as proposed is confusing and difficult to follow and the term "defeated system" in 3-2.9* is inconsistent with the term "tampered system" in A-3-2.9. The r ecommended changes clarify the meaning of 3-2.9*. COMMITTEE ACTION: Reject. COMMITTEE STATEMENT: The current wording of the require- men t would include those that were tampered with.

(Log # 53) 1033- 33 - (3-2.9.1): Accept SUBMITTER: Richard L. P. Custer, Wrentham, MA COMMENT ON PROPOSAL NO: 1033-33 RECOMMENDATION: Replace "passive systems" with the following:

[ "building compartmentat ion such as fire walls and fire doors;" SUBSTANTIATION: Detection and suppression systems are

enerally considered the active fire protect ion systems in a building. uilding compartmentat ion (usually fire rated construction) is

considered the passive protection and "building comparmaentation" is the term used in 3-2.9*. COMMITrEE ACTION: Accept.

(Log # 10) 1033- 34 - (3-2.10.1 and 3-2.10.2): Reject SUBMITTER: Hal C. Lyson, Robins, Kaplan, Miller & Ciresi/IAAI MN Chapter COMMENT ON PROPOSAL NO: 1033-33 RECOMMENDATION: Under Prerequisite Knowledge, delete:

"and the difference between low and high order explosions" and under Prerequisite Skill, delete:

"distinguish between low and high order explosion effects." SUBSTANTIATION: Low and high order is not universally accepted terminology and is no t recognized in certain fields. The meaning of the text does no t change with the deletions. COMMITrEE ACTION: Reject. COMMITTEE STATEMENT: This terminology is accepted and

used in the field.

(Log # 7) 1033- 35 - (3-3.3): Reject SUBMITTER: RussellJ. Smith, City of Bloomington /MN Chapter IAAI COMMENT ON PROPOSAL NO: 1033-33 RECOMMENDATION: Under Prerequisite Knowledge add:

"working knowledge of 35 m m camera, film and flash." Eliminate rest o f the verbiage in this paragraph.

SUBSTANTIATION: The investigator does no t need to be aware of all 35 mm cameras and does not need to be an expert in cameras. He does need to be aware of the use and limitations of that (his) investigators camera, film and flash. COMMITTEE ACTION: Reject. COMMITrEE STATEMENT: The requi rement reflects the intent of the committee as written.

(Log # 44) 1033- 36 - (3-4): Accept in Principle SUBMITFER: Hunter B. (Terry) Lacy, Charlotte, NC it/" COMMENT ON PROPOSAL NO: 1033-33 ~- RECOMMENDATION: Reorder Section 3-4 (using existing number) to correlate with the order in which these tasks should be performed at the fire scene:

Section 3-4.1, 3-4.2, 3-4.4, 3-4.5, 34.6, 3-4.3. (Renumber the sections - - my use of the existing number is only to

simplify my comment) . SUBSTANTIATION: Although this document does no t suggest that the individual tasks are to be per formed in the order discussed, it

will improve unders tanding if the reader encounters the written material in an order similar to that which will occur on the fire scene. COMMITrEE ACTION: Accept in Principle. Renumber section 3-4 as follows: renumber section 3-4.6 to 3-4.3,

and renumber section 3-4.3 to 3-4.6. COMMITrEE STATEMENT: The committee agrees that the section should be presented in a more logical order.

(Log # 52) 1033- 37 - (3-4): Accept in Principle SUBMITTER: Richard L. P. Custer, Wrentham, MA COMMENT ON PROPOSAL NO: 1033-33 RECOMMENDATION: Switch paragraphs associated with 3-4.3 (Dispose of evidence . . . ) with paragraphs assodated with 3-4.6 (Select appropriate evidence . . . ) and renumber accordingly. SUBSTANTIATION: Disposal o f evidence is the last action taken and should be ment ioned last. COMMITTEE ACTION: Accept in Principle. COMMITTEE STATEMENT: See Committee Action and Statement for 1033-36 (Log # 44).

(Log # 8) 1033- 38 - (3-4.3): Accept in Principle SUBMITrER: RussellJ. Smith, City of Bloomington/MN IAAI Chapter COMMENT ON PROPOSAL NO: 1033-33 RECOMMENDATION: Re-arrange so that Disposal of Evidence would be placed last in the order of sequence of these sections. SUBSTANTIATION: Reflects order of activities for the investigator COMMITrEEACTION: Accept in Principle. COMMITrEE STATEMENT: See Committee Action and Statement for 1033-36 (Log # 44).

(Log # 41 ) 1033- 39 - (3-4.3): Reject SUBMITTER: Hunter B. (Terry) Lacy, Charlotte, NC COMMENT ON PROPOSAL NO: 1033-33 RECOMMENDATION: Delete existing wording and replace it with "Retain evidence and file information in accordance with govern- mental and deparmaental regulations. At time of appropriate disposal, do so in a manner consistent with regulations for disposal of the type of evidence being disposed of." SUBSTANTIATION: Regulations and laws dealing with municipal information and evidence of crimes do no t authorize disposal; these regulations and laws simply identify the length of time that evidence, documents, and other information must be retained. COMMITTEE ACTION: Reject. COMMITrEE STATEMENT: The current wording of the require- ment meets the intent of the committee.

(Log # 18) 1033- 40 - (3-4.4): Reject SUBMITTEI~ David Hooton, TechniFire Services Co. COMMENT ON PROPOSAL NO: 1033-33 RECOMMENDATION: Add the term "degradation" to the statement "To avoid contamination and investigator inflicted damamagcef SUBSYI'ANTIATION: Consideration of degradation to evidence must be considered by the investigator when packaging evidence. COMMrrrEE ACTION: Reject. COMMITTEE STATEMENT: The requi rement as currendy stated includes this protection f rom "degradation. "

/ / f (Log # 51 ) 1033- 41 - (3-4.6.2): Reject SUBMITrER: Richard L. P. Custer, Wrentham, MA COMMENT ON PROPOSAL NO: 1033-33 RECOMMENDATION: Replace the word "case" with "fire incident". SUBSTANTIATION: The word "case" in the context o f a fire investigation, generally refers to a criminal or civil litigation matter. Since this is no t always the situation, the term fire incident would be more generic and therefore preferable. COMMIqUrEE ACTION: Reject.

173

N F P A 1033 - - F 9 2 T C D

COMMITI'EE STATEMENT: The term "case" is recognized and used in the field.

(Log # 49) 1033- 42 - (3-5.2): Reject SUBMITTER: Richard L. P. Custer, Wrentham, MA COMMENT ON PROPOSAL NO: 1033-33 RECOMMENDATION: Delete the word "case." SUBSTANTIATION: The word "case" in the context of a fire investigation, generally refers to a criminal or civil litigation matter. Since this is not always the situation the word "case" should be deleted. What is important is that the questioning strategy be r e l e n t . COMMITrEE ACTION: Reject. COMMITI'EE STATEMENT: See Committee Statement for 1033-41 (Log #51).

(Log # 45) 1033- 43 - (3-5.3): Reject SUBMITTER: Hunter B. (Terry) Lacy, Charlotte, NC COMMENT ON PROPOSAL NO: 1033-33 RECOMMENDATION: Delete the words "or interrogations" from the sentence. SUBSTANTIATION: In an effort to equalize all available factors in the investigation, all contacts with people possessing information needed by an investigator should be referred to as interviews. Interrogations inherently has a hostile nature and the use of such a term does not enhance the need to show the occurrence of an objective investigation. Furthermore, this standard has obviously been written to include non-governmental investigations; thus, the more of a need to delete the referenced wording. COMMITTEE ACTION: Reject. COMMITI'EE STATEMENT: "Interrogation" is a term of art in the legal community that has been defined by the Supreme Court.

(Log # 46) 1033- 44- (3-6.2): Reject SUBMITTEI~ Hunter B. (Terry) Lacy, Charlotte, NC COMMENT ON PROPOSAL NO: 1033-33 RECOMMENDATION: Delete the phrase "the chain of custody is maintained." SUBSTANTIATION: Courts throughout the country:, state and federal, civil and criminal, have all shown a propensity to abolish the chain of custody requirement where a document, item, photograph or any other piece of evidence can be identified on the witness stand by a competent witness as being the original, as being credible, as being relevant, as being authentic, or any of the other standards still being required for the admissibility of evidence. The infamous "chain of custody requirement" may be one of the areas where the plaintiff/government gets itself into trouble in a trial by trying to Pcrove more than the court would otherwise require.

OMMI'ITEE ACTION: Reject. COMMYITEE STATEMENT: Chain of custody is a legal require- ment.

(Log# 11) 1033- 45 - (3-6.5.1): Accept SUBMITTER: Hal C. Lyson, Robins, Kaplan, Miller & Ciresi/IAAI MN Chapter COMMENT ON PROPOSAL NO: 1033-33 RECOMMENDATION: Under Prerequisite Knowledge, "common to fire." insert ~ before the word "fire". SUBSTANTIATION: Accidental fire usually do not have a motive, incendiary fire usually does. COMMITTEE ACTION: Accept.

1033- 46 - (3-7.5): Reject (Log # 4) SUBMITTER: Richard L. Simpson, IAAI MN Chapter COMMENT ON PROPOSAL NO: 1033-33 RECOMMENDATION: Delete entire section. SUBSTANTIATION: Most fire investigators do not conduct public information presentation and often times the information is privileged. The job of providing information is often directed to the public information officer, attorney or client. The knowledge to meet this requirement is covered in 3-7.2, 3-7.3, and 3-7.4.

COMMIXTEE ACTION: Reject. COMMITrEE STATEMENT: The committee discussed this issue at length during the development of the document. It is the commit- tees opinion that this requirement is a minimum requirement for all fire investigators.

(Log # 32) 1033- 47 - (A-3-1.3): Reject SUBMITTER: Dennis W. Smith, Adantic City Fire Dept., NJ COMMENT ON PROPOSAL NO: 1033-33 RECOMMENDATION: Add the following new text:

"Chapter 5 of NFPA 921, Guide for Fire and Explosion Investiga- tions, provides guidance for the investigator." SUBSTANTIATION: Specific reference to NFPA 921, provide the investigator with relative and specific information. The knowledge of this chapter should be considered essential information for the investigator. COMMITTEE ACTION: Reject. COMMITTEE STATEMENT: After lengthily discussion the committee has taken the position that it will not recommend specific publications for the preparation of investigators to meet the requirements of this standard. The committee recognizes that NFPA 921 along with many other publications are used and accepted in the field. The authority havm~jurisdiction should based on the needs of the organization, revaew and select those materials that best meet the needs of the individual and the organization.

(Log # 31) 1033- 48 - (A-3-2 (New)): Reject SUBMITTER: Dennis W. Smith, Atlantic City Fire Dept., NJ COMMENT ON PROPOSAL NO: 1033-33 RECOMMENDATION: Add the following new text:

"Chapter 3, 4, 6, 11, and 12 of NFPA 921, Guide for Fire and Explosions Investigations provide guidance and basic information for the investigator". SUBSTANTIATION: Specific reference to NFPA 921, provide the investigator with relative and specific information. The knowledge of this chapter should be considered essential information for the investigator. COMMITrEE ACTION: Reject. COMMITrEE STATEMENT: See Committee Statement for 103347 (Log #32).

(Log # 30) 1033- 49 - (A-3-2.10): Reject SUBMITTER: Dennis W. Smith, Atlantic City Fire Dept., NJ COMMENT ON PROPOSAL NO: 1033-33 RECOMMENDATION: Add the following new text:

"Chapter 13 of NFPA 921, Guide for Fire and Explosion Investiga- tions, provides guidance for the investigator." SUBSTANTIATION: Specific reference to NFPA 921, provide the investigator with relative and specific information. The knowledge of this chapter should be considered essential information for the investigator. COMMITI'EE ACTION: Reject. COMMITrEE STATEMENT: See Committee Statement for 103347 (Log #32).

(Log # 29) 1033-50- (A-3-2.3): Reject SUBMITTER: DennisW. Smith, Atlantic CityFire Dept., NJ COMMENT ON PROPOSAL NO: 1033-33 RECOMMENDATION: Add the following new text:

"Chapter 8 of NFPA 921, Guide for Fire and Explosion Investiga- tions, provides the investigator with guidance." SUBSTANTIATION: Specific reference to NFPA 921, provide the investigator with relative and specific information. The knowledge of this chapter should be considered essential information for the investigator. COMMIT]FEE ACTION: Reject. COMMITrEE STATEMENT: See Committee Statement for 1033-47 (Log #32).

174

N F P A 1 0 3 3 m F 9 2 T C D

(Log # 24) 1033- 51 - (A-3-3.3): Accept SUBMITI~I~ James H. Shanley, Jr., Varley-Gampbell & Assoc. COMMENT ON PROPOSAL NO: 1033-33 RECOMMENDATION: Revise first sentence as follows:

"The use of a 35 mm camera or other similar high quality format is highly recommended". - - SUBSTANTIATION: Appendix material cannot establish manda- tory requirements. Additionally, there are other photographic formats/sizes which give equal or better results to a 35 ram. C O M I ~ T r E E ACTION:Accept.

(Log # 47) 1033- 52 - (A-3-3.3): Accept in Principle SUBMITTI~R: Hunter B. (Terry) Lacy, Charlotte, NC COMMENT ON PROPOSAL NO: 1033-33 RECOMMENDATION: Delete the sentence "The use of a 35 mm camera is mandatory."

Replace the deleted sentence with: "The investigator should utilize a camera that he is familiar with, is

comfortable with, and will visually document the fire scene with still photographs." S ~ A N T I A T I O N : A RIDICULOUS STATEMENT - the 35 mm camera is only one of ..several cameras on today's market that will fulfill the need to adequately document the fire scene with photo- graphs. Furthermore, investigators who use larger format cameras can all legitimately be proud of their enlarged prints (14 x 20 or bigger) when their counterparts who use 35 mm can only display their grainy photos. "Hae emphasis should be on ability to use the camera, not the camera itsett. COMMITrEE ACTION: Accept in Principle. COMMrr rEE S T A ~ E N T : See Committee Action for 1033-51 (Log #24).

(Log # 38) 1033- 53- (A-3-4 (New)): Reject S U B M I T T ~ DennisW. Smith, Atlantic City Fire Dept., NJ COMMENT ON PROPOSAL NO: 1033-33 RECOMMENDATION: Add the following new text:

"Chapter 9 of NFPA !)21, Guide for Fire and Explosion Investiga- tions, provides the investigator with guidance." SUBSTANTIATION: Specific reference to NFPA 921 provide the investigator with relative and specific, information. . . The. knowledge of this chapter should be constdered essenual lnformauon for the investigator. COMMITTEE ACTION: Reject. COMMITrEE STATEMENT: See Committee Statement for 1033-47 (Log #32).

(Log # $7) 1033- 54 - (A-3-5 (New)): Reject SUBMITTER: Dennis W. Smith, Atlantic City Fire Dept., NJ COMMENT ON PROPOSAL NO: 1033-33 RECOMMENDATION: Add the following new text:

"£laapter 5 and 7 of NFPA 921, Guide for Fire and Explosion Investigations, provides the investigator with guidance. SUKSTANTIATION: Specific reference to NFPA 921 provide the investigator with relative and specific information. COMMITrEE ACTION: Reject. COMMITTEE STATEMENT: See Committee Statement for 1033-47 (Log #32).

(Log # 36) 1033- 55 - (B-I.1): Accept $UBMITTERa Dennis W. Smith, Atlantic City Fire Dept., NJ COMMENT ON PROPOSAL NO: 1033-33 RECOMMENDATION: Include references to:

NFPA 907M, Manual for the Determination of Electrical Fire Causes, 1988

NFPA 422M, Manual for Aircraft Fire and Explosion Investigations, 1989 SUBSTANTIATION: These provide the investigator with specific, technical reference related to aspects for which the investigator may be responsible. COMMITTEE ACTION: Accept.

(Log # 50) 1033- 56 - (B-I.1): Accept in Principle in Part SUBMITTEI~ Richard L. P. Custer, Wrentham, MA COMMENT ON PROPOSAL NO: 1033-33 RECOMMENDATION: Add the following referenced publications:

NFPA 906M, Fire Incident Field Notes, NFPA 907M, Manual for the Determination of Electrical Fire

Causes. SLrI~TANTIATION: Both of these documents are directly relevant to the prerequisite knowledge and skill requirements of this standard. NFPA 907M relates to paragraphs 3-2.7 and 3-6.6 and NFPA 906M relates to much of Section 3-3 and several other areas. CoMMrlTEE ACTION: Accept in Principle in Part. Add NFPA 906M to Appendix B.

COMMITTEE STATEMENT: See Committee Action 1033-55 (Log #36).

(Log # 5) 1033- 57- (Appendix C): Reject SUBMITTEI~a RussellJ. Smith, City of Bloomington/MN Chapter IAAI COMMENT ON PROPOSAL NO: 1033-33 RECOMMENDATION: Add Appendix C. SUBSTANTIATION: As indicated in 1033-19 Comment 3-2 through 3-7 (Log #6) A minimum set of questions/criteria needs to be developed for each section. C o M M r r r E E ACTION: Reject. COMMITrEE STATEMENT: See Committee Action and Statement for 1033-19 (Log #6).

(Log # 39) 1033- 58 - (Appendix C): Accept SUBMITrER: Gerald E. Monigold, Illinois Fire Service Institute COMMENT ON PROPOSAL NO: 1033-33 RECOMMENDATION: Add Appendix C Explanation of the Concepts and Use of JPR's standard as shown.

Appendix C

This information is not apa r t of the requirements of htis NFPA document but is included for information purposes only.

EXPLANATION OF THE STANDARDS AND CONCEPTS AND OFJPR's

The primary benefit of establishingnational professional qualifica- tion standards is to provide both public and private sectors with a framework of the job requirements for the fire service. Other benefits include: enhancement of the profession; individual as well as or~,,anization.al growth and development; and standardization of pracuces.

NFPA Professional Qualification Standards identify the minimum job performance requirements for specific fire service positions. The standards may be used for training design and evaluation, certification, measuring and critiquing on-the-job performance, defining hiring practices, and setting organizational policies, procedures, and goals (other applications are encouraged).

Professional Qualification Standards for a spedficjob are orga- nized by major areas of responsibility defined as duties. For example, the fire fighter's duties may include fire suppression, rescue, and water supply; and the Public Fire Educator's duties include education, planning and development, and administration. Duties are major functional areas of responsibility within a job.

The professional qualification standards are written as Job Performance Requirements (JPR's). Job Performance Requirements describe the performance required for a specific job. JPRs are

OUped according to the duties of a job. The complete list of JPRs each duty defines what an individual must be able to do in order

to successfully perform that duty. Together, the duties and their JdPR's define the job parameters; that is, the Standard as a whole is a

escription of a job.

BREAKING DOWN THE COMPONENTS OF A JOB PERFORMANCE REQUIREMENT

The Job Performance Requirement is the assembly of three critical components. These components are the:

175

N F P A 1033 B F 9 2 T C D

(1) task that is to be per formed (2) tools, equipment, or materials that must be provided to

successfully complete the task (3) evaluation parameters a n d / o r performance outcomes.

EXAMPLE

(1) task (l)

(2) tools, equipment, or materials (2)

(3) (3) evaluation parameters and performance outcomes

ventilate a pi tched roof;

given an ax, ap ike pole, an extension ladder, and a roof ladder;

so that a 4 x 4 foot hole is created, all ventilation barriers are removed; ladders are properly posit ioned for ventila- tion; ventilation holes are correctly placed; and smoke, heat, and combustion by-products are released from the structure.

The task to be performed. The first componen t is a concise, brief statement of what the person is supposed to do.

Tools, equipment, or materials that must be provided to success- fully complete the task. This componen t insures that all individuals completing the task . . . . are given the same minimal tools, e uipment, or materials when being evaluated. By hslang these items, ~ e per- former and evaluator know what must be provided in order to complete the task.

Evaluation parameters a n d / o r performance outcomes. This component defines how well one must perform each task--for both the performer and evaluator. TheJPR guides performance outcomes. Thispor t ion of theJPR promotes consistency in evaluation by reducing the variables used to gauge performance.

In addition to these three components , t heJPR contains prerequi- site knowledge and skills. Just as the term prerequisite suggests, these are the necessary knowledge and skills one must have prior to being able to perform the task. Prerequisite knowledge and skills are the foundation for task performance.

Once the components and prerequisites are put together, theJPR might read as follows:

Example 1:

The Fire Fighter I shall ventilate a pi tched roof; given an ax, a pike pole, an extension ladder, and a roof ladder; so that a 4 x 4 foot hole is created; all ventilation barriers are removed; ladders are properly positioned for ventilation; ventilation holes are correcfly placed.

Prereouisite Knowledge: Pitched roof construction; safety considerations with roof ventilation; the dangers associated with improper ventilation; knowledge of ventilation tools; the effects of ventilation on fire growth; smoke movement in structures; signs of backdraft; and the knowledge of vertical and forced ventilation.

Prer¢ q uisite Skills'. . Remove roof coverin. ~;,' properly, initiate roof cuts; use the pike pole to clear ventilataonbarners; use ax properly for: sounding, cutting, and stripping: position ladders; and climb and position self on ladder.

Example 2:

The Fire Investigator shall interpret burn patterns; given standard equipment and tools and some s t ructura l /content remains; so that each individual pattern is evaluated with respect to the burning characteristics of the material involved.

Prereouisite Knowledge: knowledge of fire development and the interrelationship of heat release rate, form, and ign[tability of materials.

Prerequisite Skill: interpret the effects of burning characteristics on different types of materials.

EXAMPLES OF POTENTIAL USES:

Certification:

JPRs can be used to establish the evaluation criteria for certification at a specific j ob level. When used for certification, evaluation must be based on the successful completion of JPRs.

First, the evaluator would verify the at tainment of prerequisite knowledge and skills prior toJPR evaluation. This might be through documentat ion review or testing.

Next, the candidate would then be evaluated on completing tile JPRs. The candidate would perform the task and be evaluated based on the evaluation parameters a n d / o r performance outcomes. This performance based evaluation can be either practical (for psycho- motor skills* such as "ventilate a roof ' ) or written (for cognitive skills* such as "interpret burn patterns").

Using Example 1, a practical performance based evaluation would measure ones ability to "ventilate a Ditched roof ' . The candidate passes this particular evaluation i f ~ e standard was met--i .e. , a 4 x 4 foot hole was created; all ventilation barriers were removed; ladders were properly posit ioned for ventilation; ventilation holes were correctly placed; and smoke, heat, and combustion by-products were released from the swucture.

For Example 2, when evaluating the task "interpret burn patterns." the candidate could be given a written assessment in the fc~rm of a scenario, photographs, and drawings and then be asked to respond to specific writt~/n questions related to theJPR's evaluation param- eters.

* NOTE: Psychomotor skills are those physical skills that can be demonstra ted or observed. Cognitive skills (or mental skills) cannot be observed, but are rather evaluated on how one completes the task (process oriented) or the task outcome (product oriented).

Remember, when evaluating performance, the person must be given the tools, equipment, or materials listed in the JPR before they can be properly evaluated--i.e., an ax, a pike pole, an extension ladder, and a roof ladder.

Curriculum Development /Training Design and Evaluation:

The statements contained in this document that refer to j ob performance were designed and written as Job Performance Requirements. While a resemblance to instructional objectives may be present, these statements should not be used in a teaching situation until after they have been modified for instructional use.

Job Performance Requirements state the behaviors required to perform specific skill(s) on the j ob as opposed to a learning situation. These statements should be converted into instructional objectives with behaviors, conditions, and standards that can be measured within the teaching/ learning environment. A Job Performance Requirement that requires a fire fighter to "ventilate a pi tched roof ' should be converted into a measurable instructional objective for use when teaching the skill. (See Figure 1).

Using Example 1, a terminal instructional objective might read as follows:

The learner will ventilate a pitched roof; given a simulated roof, an ax, a pike pole, an extension ladder, and a roof ladder; so that 100 percent accuracy is attained on a skills checklist (At a minimum, the skills checklist should include each of the measurement criteria from theJPR).

Figure 2, is a sample check list for use in evaluating this objective.

While the differences between job performance requirements and instructional objectives are subtle in appearance, the purpose of each statement differs gready. JPRs state what is necessary to

~ erform the j o b in the "real world". Instructional objectives; owever, are used to identify what students must do at the end of a

training session and are stated in behavioral terms that are measur- able in the training environment.

By convertingJPRs into instructional objectives, instructors will be able to clarify performance expectations and avoid confusion related to using statements designed for purposes other than teaching. Additionally, instructors will be able to add local /s tate/regional elements of performance into the Standards as in tended by the developers.

176

N F P A 1033 m F 9 2 T C D

Knowledge, and Pre~qui- ate Skills are all used as information from which insnmcuooal objecrlves can / be written. ~ ~ /

Convem'ng JPRs into Instructional Objectives

JPR ~

The Fire Fighter I shall ventilate a pitched roof given an axe, a pikepole, an exumsim l a d ~ , and an~o[lad~ so that a 4 X 4 foot hole is created, all vemilalion bamc=s are removed, ladders axe properly positioned for vem~mons, and v e n i s o n holes are conectly placed.

Pr~,equiaitc Knmcladge:

Pi:rAe~ r o o f ~ , safay ~ m i o n s wit~ roof v m : ~ , . . ~e ~ang, r: ~ w~k bq, roe~ vem~.a- t~," k.owz,~#e o/ ~ mob; dAe ~ecu oy ~ on f~re ~ . ~r.otz ~ in ~ ; ~igm of bac*~alt : and t ~ t n o w ~ of wnic~ an~ fo~r~ wnala- tion.

Prereqaia~ Skilla:

Remo~ roof cm, m ,~ ; prop~rO is~ia~ roef cat~; ..~ due pil~ po~ to clem. veuilmiom barrim~; a ~ ~ proper~ for: so, u~a~ ,cuu~ asd=~,pisS; i ~ i m l a a ~ s :

EXAMPLE TERMINAL OBJECT[YEN

I (Copiflve/Kaowledge Domain)

The Ftre Fighter shall describe the methods. processes and safety lm~auuoas to be taken in order to pe~otm ventituion on a pitched roof in; a safe mama=.

JPRs may be converted into any Insw~uonal Objective format. For demonstration pur- poses, these examples have been written as Terminal and Example /

(PsyctmmotorlSk~ Demaia) (see example ~ checklist)

The F~e Fighter shall d e m ~ ventilating a piw, hed roof, given the proper tools, within 5 minul~ and with 100% a f~n~y on the ~ checldist.

EXAMPLE ENABLING OBJECTIVES (Cognitive)

E~4MPLE ENABLIN G ORIECTIVES (Psyeiwmomr)

The Fire Fighter shall list the safety precautions to be taken when performing roof ventilation as stated in the "XYZ" ventilation manual, with "X"% accuracy on a written evalual~n.

The Fire Fighter shall demonswa~ removing roof covering in order to prepa:e a roof for vemila~on with I00% accur~, y on the ~It~ checklisL

The F'~ Fighu~ shall explain the effects of vmtilatioo on fire growth as it relates to fire ~ imensity and movement through smactnres, with "X"% accuracy o~ a written evaluagon..

The Fh'e Fighter shall demonstrate Lhe removal of vm~lafioo ~ (ceiling matemls, insulation, etc.) in cadef to cJeffir tho vemdafi~m o~ning whh 100% accuracy on the ~ checldisL

Given the condifioos sunmunding an mcidem, the Fire Fighter will idemify Backdmft, Fiashover and other clangm~us conditions created by fire and the effects of ventilation on these condifionaswith"X"% ar~-uracy on a written evaluation.

The Fire Fighter shall demonsuate the proper use of firefighling t~is used for ve~lilalioo with 100% acctracy on tho skills checkl~

1 7 7

NFPA 1033 m F92 TCD

Skills Checklist (Roof Ventilation)

OBJECTIVE: The Fire Fighter shall demonstrate ventilating a pitched roof, given the proper tools, within 5 minutes and with 100% accuracy on the skills checklist.

YES NO

© ©

© ©

© ©

© ©

© ©

1. 4' X 4' hole was created,

2. All ventilation barriers were removed.

3. Ladders were property pesitimed.

4. Ventilation holes were certectly placed (directly over fire, highest point, etc.).

5. Task completed within 5 minutes. (Tune to complete task:

Prerequisite skills and knowledge should be converted into enabling objectives. These help to define the course content. The course content would include each of the prerequisite knowledge and skills. Using the above example, the enabling objectives would be pitched roof construction; safety considerations with roof ventilation; remove roof covering; properly initiate roof cuts; etc. This ensures that the course content supports the terminal objective.

NOTE: It is assumed that the reader is familiar with curriculum development or training design and evaluation.

OTHER USES

While the Professional Qualifications Standards are principally used to guide the development of training and certification programs, there are a number of other potential uses for the documents. Because fire documents are written inJPR terms, they lend themselves well to any area of the profession where a level of performance or expertise must be determined.

These areas might include:

Employee Evaluation/Performance Critiquing. TheJPRs can be used as a guide by both the supervisor and the employee during an evaluation. TheJPRs for a specific job define tasks that are essential to perform on the job as well as the evaluation criteria to measure when those tasks are completed.

Establishing Hiring Criteria. The Professional Qualifications Standards may be used in a number of ways to further the establish- ment of hiring criteria. The Authority Having Jurisdiction could simply require certification at a specific job level--e.g., Fire Fighter I. TheJPRs could also be used as the basis for pre-employment screening by establishing essential minimal tasks and the related evaluation criteria. An added benefits is that individuals interested in employment can work towards the minimal hiring criteria at local colleges.

Employee Development. The Professional Qualifications Standards can be useful to both the employee and the employer in developing a plan for the individual's growth within the organization. TheJPRs and the associated prerequisite skills and knowledge can be used as a guide to determine additional training and education required for the employee to master his job or profession.

Succession Planning. Succession planning or career pathing addresses the efficient placement of people into jobs in response to current needs and anticipated future needs. A career development path can be established for targeted individuals to prepare them for ~owth within the organization. TheJPRs and prerequisite

owledge and skills could then be used to develop an educational path to aid in the individual's advancement within the organization or profession.

Establishing Organizational Policies, Procedures and Goals. The JPRs can be incorporated into organizational policies, procedures, and goals where employee performance is addressed.

Bibliography

Boyatzis, IL E. (1982). The Comt)etent Manager: A Model For Effective Performance. New York-John Wiley&: Sons.

Castle, D. K. (1989). Management Design: A Competency Approach to Create Exemplar Performers. Performance and Instruction. ~,~ 42-48.

Cetron, M., & O'Toole, T. (1983). Encounters with the future: A forecast into the 21st centurv. NewYork: McGraw Hill.

Elkin, G. (1990). Competency-Based Human Resource Develop- ment: Making Sense of the Ideas. Industrial & Commercial

L~, 20-25.

Furnham, A~ (1990). The Question of Competency. Management. 22. 37.

v

178

N F P A 1 0 3 3 - - F 9 2 T C D

Gilley, J. W., & Eggland, S. A. (1989). Principles of human resource developmgt~t, Reading: Addison-Wesley.

Hooton, J. (1990),J~b Performance = Tasks + Competency x Future Forces. Unpublished manuscript, Vanderbilt University, Peabody College, Nashville, TN.

McLagan, P. A. (1989). Models for HRD Practice. Training and Development Journal.. Reprinted.

McLagan, P. A., & Suhadolnik, D. (1989). The Research Renort. Alexandria, VA: American Society for Training and Development.

Nadler, L (1983, October). HRD on the spaceship earth. and Develonment lournal. 19-22.

Nadler L. (1984). T_~e Handbook of Human Resource Develoo- ale.ilL. NewYork: Weiley-Interscience.

Naisbitt, J., (Speaker). (1984). Me~atrends (Cassette Recording No. 210). Chicago: Nightingale-Conant.

Spellman, B. P. (1987). Future Competencies of the Educational Public Relations Specialist (Doctoral dissertation, University of Houston, 1987) Dissertation Abstracts International, _4~ 02A.

Springer, J. (1980).Job Performance Standards and Measures. A Series of Research Presentation and Discussions for the ASTD Second Annual Invitational Research Seminar, Savannah, Georgia (November 5-8, 1979). Madison, Wisconsin: American Society for Training and Development-

Tracey, W. R. (1984). Desiwnin~ Training and Develooment _~tt.e,i~. NewYork: AMACOM. SUBSTANTIATION: Theproposed Appendix has been developed to assist agencies using Professional Qualifications standards in the interpretation and use of Job Performance Requirements. COMMITTEE ACTION: Accept.

179