View
224
Download
0
Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
8/9/2019 Developing a Smoke Alarm Program for Colerain Township
1/87
Smoke Alarm Program 1
Running head: DEVELOPING A SMOKE ALARM PROGRAM FOR COLERAIN
Developing a Smoke Alarm Program for Colerain Township
Darian E. Edwards
Colerain Township Department of Fire And Emergency Medical Services
Colerain Township, Ohio
8/9/2019 Developing a Smoke Alarm Program for Colerain Township
2/87
Smoke Alarm Program 2
CERTIFICATION STATEMENT
I hereby certify that this paper constitutes my own product, that where the language of
others is set forth, quotation marks so indicate, and that appropriate credit is given where
I have used the language, ideas, expressions, or writings of another.
Signed: _______________________________________
8/9/2019 Developing a Smoke Alarm Program for Colerain Township
3/87
Smoke Alarm Program 3
ABSTRACT
The problem was that Colerain Township Fire Department did not have a smoke alarm
program, thus subjected residents, according to data, to a higher incident of injuries and deaths
due to fires.
The purpose was to develop and or implement a smoke alarm program for Colerain
Township to reduce injuries or deaths. 1. What were the associated risks of not having smoke
alarms. 2. Of the two common smoke alarms sensors, ionization and photoelectric, what did
Colerain Township recommend? 3. What area, within each of the five fire districts, had a high
risk of fire injuries or death?
This research project was to utilize an action research method and approach. There was
an extensive amount of literature review, questionnaires, observations and interviews to assist in
the pursuit of this research project.
Multiple studies shows that about 70% of all fire fatalities occur in residences that have
no functioning smoke alarms. Yet, 95% of the homes in the U.S. have smoke alarms. Of the two
smoke alarm sensors, the photoelectric smoke alarm is much more dependable for a quicker
response to smoke with a lesser degree of false alarms. In Colerain Township there are 29
distinct fire response zones. Of the 29 fire response zones, two zones accounts for 57% of all
civilian fire casualties.
It is this authors recommendation that an ordinance be passed that mandates the use of
photoelectric smoke alarms in new construction and phased into existing buildings. Along with
the ordinance there must be a well organized public education plan. The highest fire casualty
zones must be addressed with active fire department interventions such as smoke alarm
8/9/2019 Developing a Smoke Alarm Program for Colerain Township
4/87
Smoke Alarm Program 4
installation programs. Revisiting these residences at set intervals must be accomplished to
collect data for the programs longevity and continued support.
8/9/2019 Developing a Smoke Alarm Program for Colerain Township
5/87
Smoke Alarm Program 5
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Certification Statement 2
Abstract 3
Table of Contents 5
Introduction 6
Background and Significance 7
Literature Review 10
Procedures 20
Results 22
Discussion 33
Recommendations 36
Reference List 40
Appendix A 42
Appendix B 47
Appendix C 65
Appendix D 67
Appendix E 69
Appendix F 71
Appendix G 73
Appendix H 75
Appendix I 79
Appendix J 81
Appendix K 83
Appendix L 86
8/9/2019 Developing a Smoke Alarm Program for Colerain Township
6/87
Smoke Alarm Program 6
INTRODUCTION
The problem was that Colerain Township Fire Department did not have a smoke alarm
program, thus subjecting residents, according to data, to a higher incident of injuries and deaths
due to fires.
The purpose was to develop and or implement a smoke alarm program for Colerain
Township to reduce injuries or deaths. For decades it has been standard that homes will have
smoke detectors. For the last four decades the fire service has been preaching that smoke
detectors save lives.
1. What were the associated risks of not having smoke alarms. 2. Of the two common
smoke alarms sensors, ionization and photoelectric, what did Colerain Township recommend? 3.
What area, within each of the five fire districts, had a high risk of fire injuries or death?
This research project is to utilize an action research method and approach in order to take
immediate action to our problem by creating a concrete solution. There will be an extensive
amount of literature review, questionnaires, observations and interviews to assist in the pursuit of
this research project. While the overall research was that of an action method, question #1
utilized the historical method of research by analyzing data from many sources such as National
Fire Incident Reporting System, NFIRS, United States Fire Administration, USFA, multiple
reports and data collections. The evaluative method of research was utilized to assess and
analyze data and make a decision for question #2. Question #3 also used the evaluative method
of research to identify five distinct areas of high risk associated with injuries and deaths from
fires.
8/9/2019 Developing a Smoke Alarm Program for Colerain Township
7/87
Smoke Alarm Program 7
BACKGROUND AND SIGNIFICANCE
Colerain Township is the largest unincorporated jurisdiction in the state of Ohio. It is
located ten miles to the northwest of the city of Cincinnati. The northern boundary of Colerain
Township is that of Butler County, Ohio. According to the 2010 U.S. Census, the Township has
a population of 58,499 residents occupying 43.5 sq.ml. (Census) Colerain Township is only
surpassed by that of West Chester Township in Butler County with regards to population of
townships in the state of Ohio. West Chester boasts a population of 60,958. (Census) The
residents of Colerain Township are very diverse. We have a myriad of socioeconomics and
lifestyles with homes of the affluent to low-income and subsidized housing. The land use is that
of agricultural, light industry, and a large portion of retail. The Colerain Township Department
of Fire and Emergency Medical Services (Colerain Fire Department) has a rating of a Class two
from the Insurance Services Office.
Smoke alarms were not commercially available until the 1960’s. In 1965 the “single
station”, also referred to as “stand alone” smoke alarm was produced. At that time the use of
smoke alarms in the United States, U.S., was at less than 1%. In 1969 the battery operated
smoke alarm was made available to the public at a price of about $100 each. By 1975 General
Electric was producing smoke alarms for less than $40 each. (Bukowksi, et al., 2007) By the
year 2000, the price of smoke alarms had drastically dropped which allowed over 95% of
residences to have smoke alarms.
If in the U.S. today, we have approximately 95% compliance with the use of smoke
alarms in residence, and an even higher percentage of smoke alarms used in commercial settings,
then the question would be why do we still have a significant amount of injuries and fatalities
due to fires? In 1977 the U.S. had 7395 civilian fire deaths. In 2007 the U.S. had 3430 civilian
8/9/2019 Developing a Smoke Alarm Program for Colerain Township
8/87
Smoke Alarm Program 8
fire deaths. Most would say that we have cut civilian fire deaths in half, the smoke alarms
worked and have saved lives. However in 1977 there were 3,264,000 structure fires. Again
looking at the amount of structure fires in the U.S., in 2007 there were a reported 1,557,500 fires.
(Burn Survior Throughout The World Inc., N.D.) The civilian fire deaths have decreased in
direct relationship to the decreased amount of structure fires in the U.S.
The vast majority of smoke alarms in residential occupancies have the ionization sensor
technology. The ionization technology has been in use since the inception of alarms being mass
produced for the general public. The price of ionization smoke alarms is between 25% to 50% of
the price of a photoelectric sensor smoke alarm.
The American Red Cross provided Colerain Township Fire Department with hundreds of
ionization smoke alarms. For years the fire department would give the alarms to the residents at
no charge. The American Red Cross program was abandoned by Colerain Township Fire
Department approximately 4 years ago. Why would any organization stopped given away life
saving devices? The reason was simply because there was growing concern and studies being
made available as to the uncertainty and unreliability of the ionization technology in the smoke
alarms. Colerain Township Fire Department took a strong stand that they would not provide a
less than reliable, less than safe device to anyone, regardless of the price or who was backing the
program. Colerain would not give an inferior product to their residents, thus leaving them with a
false sense of security and protection to their families. Unfortunately without a strong smoke
alarm educational program, their will be a higher incident rate for injuries and or fatalities.
What justification did Colerain Township Fire Department have in refusing to give away
free smoke alarms? Much of the fire service has become aware of scientific studies being
8/9/2019 Developing a Smoke Alarm Program for Colerain Township
9/87
Smoke Alarm Program 9
conducted with regards to the ionization and photoelectric smoke alarms. In 1995 Texas A&M
University published results of their three year study. They concluded that
“in the smoldering stage of fire the ionization alarm had a 55.8% failure
rate to the photoelectric alarms 4.06% failure rate. Note: ‘failure rate’ is
calculated from statistics showing one or more people died in a house fire. In the
flaming stage of fire compared , where the ionization alarm is claimed to have a
few seconds advantage, it had a 19.8% failure rate, to the photoelectric alarms
3.99% failure rate.” (Grosse, DeJong, & Murphy, 2011)
The applied research project will have an established link to the Executive Analysis of
Community Risk Reduction course taught at the National Fire Academy. This ARP will
empower the Colerain Township Fire Department and the residents of Colerain Township with
the ability to prevent, reduce, and mitigate the increase risk of injury or deaths due to a lack of a
smoke alarm plan. This ARP is to address education of the residents and fire personnel of the
smoke alarm concern. By doing proper research, we will have identified the best engineered
smoke alarm for increased safety. A proper plan will be developed for enforcement of any codes
or standards. There will also be an increase in the emergency response by the fire department
due to early notification of fire incidences in the homes.
The problem was that Colerain Township Fire Department did not have a smoke alarm
program, thus subjected residents, according to data, to a higher incident of injuries and deaths
due to fires. By developing and or implementing a smoke alarm program for Colerain Township,
there is a direct correlation to two of the goals in the strategic plan of the United States Fire
Administration (USFA). The first goal of the USFA, reduce risk at the local level through
prevention and mitigation, would be addressed. In addition, by the implementation of a risk
8/9/2019 Developing a Smoke Alarm Program for Colerain Township
10/87
Smoke Alarm Program 10
reduction program, we would be able to improve the fire and emergency services’ professional
status to our local community and possibly served as a mentor for other fire services that have
had similar dilemmas.
LITERATURE REVIEW
The purpose was to gather and review relevant information in the development and or
implementation of a smoke alarm program for Colerain Township for the reduction of injuries
or deaths in residential occupancies. The use of smoke alarms in the U.S. has become common
practices in all occupancies. The use of smoke alarms has risen from less than 5% in the early
1970’s to over 95% today. Building and fire codes have incorporated mandatory smoke alarms
in virtually all occupancies. Fire department life safety inspectors perform inspections of retail,
industry, places of assembly, apartment complexes, hotels, motels, etc.. Where the life safety
inspections fall short are single and two family residential occupancies. The concern of this ARP
is the residential occupancies of single family residences regardless of construction type.
In April 2006, the Public/Private Fire Safety Council published the WHITE PAPER
HOME SMOKE ALARMS AND OTHER FIRE DETECTION AND ALARM EQUIPMENT (White
Paper Alarms). The White Paper had 18 various private and public organizations represented
with their members as contributors to the research The organizations represented included
groups such as, USAF, Federal Emergency Management Agency, Consumer Product Safety
Commission, Underwriters Laboratories Inc., and the International Fire Chiefs Association.
8/9/2019 Developing a Smoke Alarm Program for Colerain Township
11/87
Smoke Alarm Program 11
Research Question #1
What are the associated risks of not having smoke alarms? Smoke alarms are designed to
activate when smoke conditions are present, thus giving occupants adequate warning and time to
exit a potentially toxic and fatal environment.
In the Smoke Alarm Response and Tenability report produced by Hughes Associates, Inc.,
they discuss several environmental factors inside a structure fire that affects the abilities of
individuals to exit the unsafe conditions. In the Tenability Analysis section it states “visibility
through smoke is not actually a measure of a life threatening tenability criterion. Reduce
visibility if often considered as a mechanism that slows occupants egress”. In the Tenability
Analysis it also states that “Many studies have used smoke concentration (or visibility) as a
criterion for which an occupant may stop attempting to egress”. The Smoke Alarm Response and
Tenability report does include thermal conditions as a measurable untenable condition. When
the temperature of a room reaches 120 degrees Celsius (248 Fahrenheit), at five foot from the
floor, occupants have a reported tolerance of seven minutes. (Christopher Mealy, 2011)
Being away from home does not remove a person from the dangers associated with fires.
Andrew K. Pantelis authored a research paper titled The Impact of Alcohol Consumption on Fire
Egress Behavior for the Executive Fire Officer (EFO) program. On page five of his introduction
he states, “The United States Fire Administration (USFA) has recorded that approximately fifty
percent of university-related fire fatalities nationwide involved people who were under the
influence of alcohol at the time of the incident”. (Pantelis, 2008) On page 30 of the Results
section of The Impact of Alcohol Consumption on Fire Egress Behavior , Pantelis explains that at
8/9/2019 Developing a Smoke Alarm Program for Colerain Township
12/87
Smoke Alarm Program 12
a blood alcohol level of 0.03% there is a mean increase in egress time of 11.20% and a mean
increase in egress time of 70.58% when the blood alcohol level of 0.12%.
Information contained on page 4, Executive Summary, of the White Paper Alarms states
that 96% of the residential occupancies have smoke detectors, 4% of the homes do not have
smoke detectors at all. There is also an additional 20% of the homes that have smoke detectors,
yet they are not working due to batteries either being missing or dead. Page 11 of the White
Paper Alarms references a report titled U.S. experience with smoke alarms, this report was
authored by Marty Ahrens. The reference states that homes with working smoke alarms
represents 30% of fire fatalities. The 4% of homes without smoke alarms account for 39% of all
fire fatalities. If you add the category of smoke alarms present, but inoperable, then the
percentage increases to 70% of the fire fatalities. (Council, 2006)
Marty Ahrens has done extensive research for the National Fire Protection Association
(NFPA). In a report titled Smoke Alarm Presence and Performance in U.S. Home Fires, Ahrens
states that “No smoke alarms were present at all in 40% of the home fire deaths. Alarms were
present but did not operate in 23% of the fatalities (Ahrens, ND).” This gives the total of fire
fatalities due to an absence of functional smoke alarms, regardless of structural occupancy
classification, similar to residential settings of 63%-70%.
Research Question #2
Of the two common smoke alarms sensors, ionization and photoelectric, what does
Colerain Township recommend for their residences? Smoke alarms that are for sale to the
residential consumers contain an ionization sensor or photoelectric sensor. Some detectors do
have both sensors present in the alarm. On any given day you can find the smoke alarms in the
8/9/2019 Developing a Smoke Alarm Program for Colerain Township
13/87
Smoke Alarm Program 13
big box stores such as Lowes, Home Depot, Wal-mart, etc. The prices vary from five dollars
each to over 30 dollars a piece. Does the type of sensor in the smoke alarm make a difference?
This ARP will show that it does.
Both of the smoke alarms reviewed in the ARP, ionization and photoelectric, can be
electrically powered by an a/c house current or battery power supply. The ionization smoke
alarm has a sensor that contains a small amount of radioactive material, americium, within the
ionization chamber. The americium is encased within a gold and americium ingots foil matrix.
The americium/gold source produces alpha particles. These particles then pass in between two
metal plates. One of the plates has a positive electrical charge while the second has a negative
electrical charge. The radioactive alpha particles move through the air, consisting of oxygen and
nitrogen, and displace electrons from the oxygen/nitrogen mixture. The electrons then become
either; positively charged and move towards the negatively charged metal plate, the negatively
charged electron move towards the positively charged metal plate. This moving of electrons to
the charged plates keep a small electrical current in the sensing chambers. If smoke particles or
other gases enter into the chamber, they disrupt the flow of electricity between the metal plates
which then activates the alarm. (EPA, Ionization Technology, 2012)
The photoelectric smoke alarm has a “T” shaped sensing chamber. The top of the
chamber, the horizontal bar, has a light emitting diode also known as an LED. The LED sends a
light from one end of the horizontal chamber to the other end. If smoke particles enter into the
sensing chamber, the light beam is then interrupted causing the light beam to have some
deflection of light. There is a photocell at the bottom of the “T” or the vertical beam. When
light hits the photocell it generates an electrical current. This electrical current then activates the
alarm. (EPA, Photoelectric Technology, 2012)
8/9/2019 Developing a Smoke Alarm Program for Colerain Township
14/87
Smoke Alarm Program 14
Are the two smoke alarm sensors equal? Should the fire service, more specifically
Colerain Township, recommend a particular sensor to their residents? When you do a simple
internet search “ionization versus photoelectric smoke alarms”, it returns 287,000 results. Many
of the reputable organizations that have researched which smoke alarm is better referred to a
common thread for their research. The Texas A&M University published a report in August of
1995. While this report may seem outdated for this ARP, much of its findings have found their
way into new smoke alarm research.
“Researchers at Texas A&M University, along with support from the
University of Colorado and Iowa, completed a three year smoke alarm study in
the August 1995. They were concerned that Underwriters Laboratories testing of
smoke alarms, by putting a smoke detector in a wooden box and then by blowing
hot smoke into it, was did not representative of real-world fire conditions.
Texas A&M’s testing was a fault-tree-analysis model designed by Bell
Laboratories for the United States military. After three years research they
concluded: - In the smoldering stage of fire the ionization alarm had a 55.8%
failure rate to the photoelectric alarms 4.06% failure rate.
(Note: ‘failure rate’ is calculated from statistics showing one or more people died
in a house fire. In the flaming stage of fire compared , where the ionization
alarm is claimed to have a few seconds advantage, it had a 19.8% failure rate, to
the photoelectric alarms 3.99% failure rate.” (Texas A&M University Study,
2011)
8/9/2019 Developing a Smoke Alarm Program for Colerain Township
15/87
Smoke Alarm Program 15
In the original research performed by Texas A&M University, the ionization smoke
detector had a higher failure rate than that of the photoelectric detector, regardless of type of fire
scenario being tested. A failure rate of any product between 20% to 56% would be unacceptable
by most consumers. To put this another way, compare the failure rates of the two smoke alarms
to that of two vehicles you were looking at purchasing for your family. One vehicle would break
down, depending upon road conditions, at a rate of 20% to 56%. The second vehicle would
break down on the same road conditions at a rate of 4%. Which vehicle would you get for your
family? When we look at the results of the Texas A&M University studies, we see that the
photoelectric smoke alarm is much more reliable than that of the ionization smoke alarm.
In July 2009, the NFPA issued a follow up report, original report February 22, 2008,
addressing the significance of the two smoke alarm sensor technologies. Appendix D, page 130,
addressed “nuisance alarms” of the two smoke alarm technologies. The report includes
information gathered from a study performed in Washington State From June 1, 2000 to July
31, 2002, 757 homes had either the ionization or photoelectric smoke alarms installed. The
same homes were visited nine months and 15 months later. At the nine month follow up visit,
20% of the ionization smoke alarms and 5% of the photoelectric smoke alarms were found to be
non-functional. The 15 month follow up had similar results. When questioned about the alarms,
the occupants common reason was that the alarms were disabled because of “nuisance” alarms.
Most of the nuisance alarms occurred from cooking, thus the occupants removed the batteries or
the entire smoke alarm. (Committee, 2009) Previously in this ARP it was noted that 23% of all
fire fatalities occurred in homes with smoke alarms that were disabled or non-functional.
There is one additional option that many organizations are advocating. The dual sensor
smoke alarm is equipped with both the ionization and the photoelectric sensing technology. In
8/9/2019 Developing a Smoke Alarm Program for Colerain Township
16/87
Smoke Alarm Program 16
theory if a smoke alarm has both sensors in the same unit, then there would be optimum
protection against both the smoldering and flaming fire. Unfortunately the dual technology still
produces the nuisance alarms, mainly from cooking, that leads to removal of batteries or
detectors thus increasing the risk of fire fatalities. For nine months the Consumer Product Safety
Commission conducted studies of homes in the Washington D.C. area testing the nuisance
alarms in the kitchens of residential homes.
“Results For smoke alarms 5 feet from the stove, nuisance alarms occurred
during 8.7% (41/469) of cooking events for ionization, 11.3% (53/469) for dual-
sensor, and 3.0% (14/469) for photoelectric smoke alarms. At 10 ft. from the
stove, nuisance alarms occurred during 4.9% (23/469) of cooking events for
ionization, 8.7% (41/469) for dual-sensor, and 6.0% (28/469) for photoelectric
smoke alarms. At 20 feet from the stove, nuisance alarms occurred during 1.1%
(5/469) of cooking events for ionization, 1.1% (5/469) for dual-sensor, and 0.9%
(4/469) for photoelectric smoke alarms.” (intern), ND)
Research Question #3
What area, within each of the five fire districts, had a high risk of fire injuries or death?
The information retrieved during the research of question three was obtained from the Firehouse
Software that is utilized for our departments National Fire Incident Reporting System (NFIRS).
The current edition utilized was Firehouse Software 7.2. The parameters of the searches were
limited to those of structure fires, interior fires. The searches were further filtered by requesting
information with regards to the incidents street location, assigned fire zone, and status of smoke
8/9/2019 Developing a Smoke Alarm Program for Colerain Township
17/87
Smoke Alarm Program 17
alarm in the area of the fire. A ten year search, January 1, 2003 through January 1, 2013, was
performed with regards to civilian injuries.
Five additional searches were performed for years, 2012, 2011, 2010, 2009, and 2008.
Theses searches were similar to the ten year search, with the exception of casualties. This
individual years of data were collected on all building fires, with interior fires.
It should be noted that the Firehouse Software search was original research conducted by
this author. All search result, as they relate to question three, were forwarded to Captain Mark
Walsh for his review. Captain Walsh is in charge of the Life Safety Bureau in Colerain
Township. Captain Walsh has extensive knowledge of the topic of this ARP. Captain Walsh can
be contacted through his direct office line of 513-245-6505.
During the time from January 1, 2003 through January 1, 2013 there were 87 civilian
injuries that resulted from 69 building fires. (Edwards, 2013) Of the 87 listed injuries, one
resulted in the death of a civilian. The results of the reports were categorized by the function of
the smoke alarms. The smoke alarm categories were; failed, none present, operated, too small of
a fire to activate, and undetermined. The category of undetermined includes both unknown
function and undocumented on the NFIRS.
Of the 68 fire incidents that resulted in 87 civilian casualties, 21 of those incidents had
smoke alarms either failed or were not present. This represents 31% of the total incidents where
the occupants did not have functioning fire alarms. (Edwards, 2013) Colerain has five fire
stations protecting its 58,499 residents occupying 43.5 sq.ml. Fire districts 102 and 103 did not
have fire casualties in the last ten years. District 25, Zone A represented 33% of the fire
casualties. District 26, Zone E represented 23.8% . District 109, Zones B and C each
8/9/2019 Developing a Smoke Alarm Program for Colerain Township
18/87
Smoke Alarm Program 18
represented 9.5% of the fire casualties which resulted in the last ten years in Colerain Township
Ohio.
From the year 2008 until 2013, there were 228 fires in Colerain Township that
were classified as being “interior” building fires. Of the 228 building fires reviewed, 32% of
these incidents had either an absence of smoke detectors or a failure of a present smoke detector,
a failure rate was usually between 30%-50% of detectors that were not present. (Edwards, Yearly
Fire Incidents Report, 2013) Colerain Township is divided into five districts. These five
districts are broken down into 29 separate zones. The results of the five year, building fire,
search shows that the following fire zones, of the five districts, have the highest incident rates of
the 228 building fires: District 102, Zone A has 2%; District 103, Zone A has 4%; District 109,
Zone B has 6%; District 25, Zone A has 19%; District 26, Zone E has 12% of the total fire
incidents (Edwards, Yearly Fire Incidents Report, 2013).
When comparing the incidents of casualties along with the incidents of interior
building fires, there are common factors. District 25 Zone A, District 26 Zone E, and District
109 Zone B had higher incidents of casualties and interior building fires. These three fire zones
have a high risk of fire and or casualty.
District 25 Zone A coincides with the Census Bureau as being census tracts 207.41 and
207.42. The area can be geographically defined as the neighborhood within Colerain Ave,
Springdale Rd, Pippin Rd, and Compton Rd,. The population of this zone is 7469. The average
household income is $47,500. (American FactFinder, 2010) Most of the adults in this area are
high school graduates without further formal education. This area can be considered working
class families with limited resources and funding.
8/9/2019 Developing a Smoke Alarm Program for Colerain Township
19/87
Smoke Alarm Program 19
District 26 Zone E coincides with the Census Bureau as being census tracts207.05 and
207.62. The area can be geographically defined as the neighborhood, south of District 25 Zone
A, Colerain Ave, Compton Rd, Pippin Rd, and Banning Rd. The population of this zone is 6211.
The average household income is $53,500. The educated majority is that of a high school
graduate. This area can be considered working class families with limited resources and funding
similarly found in District 25 Zone A.
Districts 102 Zone A and 103 Zone A are very similar in make up. They each represent a
population of about 1500. The average household incomes are $73,000 to $95,000. The
majority are high school graduates, yet the percentage of college graduates increase slightly.
Data shows that there were no casualties in these areas in the last ten years. Also these two
zones only represent a combined total of 6% of the building fires.
District 109 Zone B is the furthest most northern part of Colerain Township. It has a
population of about 3,000 people. The average household income is $63,000. The education is
primarily that of high school graduates. (American FactFinder, 2010)
In summary, it can be argued that the values of a smoke alarm are so obvious that we
routinely have discussions with our elementary schools. Smoke alarms save lives and reduce
property damage due to early notification to the occupant and then fire departments. The
contrary to that statement can also be said. In the absence of “working” smoke alarm, the risks
of injuries and fatalities due to a fire is substantially higher when compared to occupancies with
functioning alarms. The majority of homes have functioning smoke alarms, yet about 70% of
fatalities occur in homes without functioning smoke alarms.
8/9/2019 Developing a Smoke Alarm Program for Colerain Township
20/87
Smoke Alarm Program 20
Statistically, the ionization and photoelectric smoke alarms are the only two types that are
used in residential occupancies. The Ionization is most often the alarm of choice to be installed
in homes, it is after all the most inexpensive. Research shows two major areas of concern with
the ionization detector. First, it has a high failure rate in a smoldering fire. Second, the
increased number of a nuisance alarms create an environment where occupants disable or
remove the alarm, placing themselves into an elevated likelihood of casualty or death due to
fires. The photoelectric, while is more expensive, is more reliable in a smoky environment and
does have a lower nuisance alarm rate. Cheaper is not always better, photoelectric should be
recommended by Colerain Township.
After analyzing our firehouse software and NFIRS, it was determined that our two major
high hazard areas were District 25 Zone A and District 26 Zone E. These two districts have the
majority of structure fire incidents along with the higher percentage of nonfunctional smoke
alarms. The census bureau shows that these two districts also coincide with being the least
amount of formal education and lower family income when compared to the other districts and
zones within Colerain Township.
PROCEDURES
The purpose of the applied research project was to develop and or implement a smoke
alarm program for Colerain Township to reduce injuries or deaths from fires in the residential
occupancies. The research methods utilized were historical and evaluative research for the
research questions. The overall research associated with this ARP was an action research
method.
The development of this project began while in preparation for the Executive Analysis of
Community Risk Reduction course taught at the National Fire Academy in March of 2013. This
8/9/2019 Developing a Smoke Alarm Program for Colerain Township
21/87
Smoke Alarm Program 21
author analyzed demographics as they related to the community of Colerain Township, Hamilton
County Ohio. The primary source of research materials for community make-up was found on-
line at the United States Census Bureau. An advanced search of data such as population,
education, household income, was performed on the American Factfinder portion of the Census
Bureau web site.
Discussions with Captain Mark Walsh, fire safety inspector with Colerain Township,
provided additional insight into the current controversy of smoke alarm technologies and the
varied research and endorsements. The recent actions, taken by Chief Bruce Smith of Colerain
Township Fire Department, to cease in the participation of the distribution of smoke alarms to
the residents, caused concern of increased risk of injuries and or death due to the lack of a smoke
alarm safety program.
A subsequent literature review was conducted at the request of this author to Captain
Mark Walsh in March of 2013. Articles and research from fire service trade associations and fire
service research and education establishments were presented. An online search of organizations
such as the National Fire Protection Association, Environmental Protection Agency, and general
online searches using Google were preformed to access current and relevant material as they
relate to residential smoke alarms.
The National Fire Incident Reporting System and Firehouse Software programs were
accessed and searched to analyze fire injuries, deaths, and smoke alarm information as they
relate to interior building fires within Colerain Township. Most of the research in this area came
from the Firehouse Software version 7.2. To duplicate the data, one would open the software,
click onto the “reports” tab, click onto the “NFIRS incident reports”, followed by clicking onto
the highlighted “NFIRS incident reports”. The data was filtered by four subcategories: time
8/9/2019 Developing a Smoke Alarm Program for Colerain Township
22/87
Smoke Alarm Program 22
frame of incident, basic page 1, NFIRS 3 structure fire report, and NFIRS 4 civilian casualties
report.
The criteria and focus of the materials reviewed were pertinent to the Colerain Township
geographic area along with being relevant and focused to the research as it relates to this ARP.
The materials also needed to be as relevant as possible. While it can not be argued that having a
lower number of injuries and fatalities from fire incidents is a goal of the fire service, it does
create limitations to the amount of data that can be extracted and analyzed for this authors ARP.
RESULTS
Research Question #1
What were the associated risks of not having smoke alarms? Not having functional
smoke detectors can contribute to a decrease in the amount of time a person has from the
discovery of the fire until the interior conditions are beyond that of a survivable environment.
According to the report, Smoke Alarm Response and Tenability, “The primary goal of a smoke
alarm is to provide adequate warning to occupants before conditions become untenable in a fire”.
In theory when smoke goes across the sensor of a smoke alarm, the alarm then activates giving a
warning to occupants to vacate the building. In the absence of a smoke alarm, smoke is allowed
to continue to build up in the confined environment of a structure. This smoke build up creates a
situation where “reduced visibility is often considered as a mechanism that slows occupant
egress…for which an occupant may stop attempting to egress”. (Christopher Mealy, 2011)
Smoke alarms also give early notification of fires to allow occupants time to escape the heat that
increases in a structure. Imagine if you were asleep while a fire is developing a floor below you.
The heat would rise to your level and possibly block your path of egress. On page 3 of Smoke
Alarm Response and Tenability it states that 120 degrees Celsius is the threshold for tenability.
8/9/2019 Developing a Smoke Alarm Program for Colerain Township
23/87
Smoke Alarm Program 23
At 120 degrees Celsius, 428 degrees Fahrenheit, a person can tolerate this exposure for 7
minutes.
The increased risk of death due to residential fires was remarkable in comparison to the
percentage homes without smoke alarms. It is astonishing that 39% of all fire fatalities are
related to the 4% of homes that do not have smoke alarms. The value of a working smoke alarm
can also be seen in the fact that another 30% of fire fatalities occur in 20% of the homes that
have some non-functional smoke alarms. (Ahrens, ND) The totality of the smoke alarm issue is
that people are approximately 300% more likely to die in a residential house fire without
working smoke alarms than of a home with a functioning smoke alarm.
Research Question #2
Of the two common smoke alarms sensors, ionization and photoelectric, what does
Colerain Township recommend for their residences? Much of the research work performed by
Texas A&M University has been referenced and duplicated throughout the United States in
recent years. Marty Ahrens has also contributed a significant amount of research and effort in
the assessment of ionization versus photoelectric smoke alarms. Colerain Township
recommends the use of photoelectric smoke alarms. While the smoke alarms are marketed for
different types of fires, smoldering and flaming fires, on average the photoelectric outperforms
the ionization smoke alarm. In many studies it was shown that during a smoldering fire, the
photoelectric smoke alarm could activate 12-30 minutes faster than the ionization smoke alarms.
The ionization smoke alarms are marketed for the flaming fire, yet it has been shown to activate
just seconds before the photoelectric smoke alarm. When comparing the seconds versus minutes
faster, the photoelectric smoke alarms seem to give the residents much more advanced warning
of potentially deadly environments in the home. The ionization sensing technology has a higher
8/9/2019 Developing a Smoke Alarm Program for Colerain Township
24/87
Smoke Alarm Program 24
incidence of false, nuisance, alarms than the photoelectric. The occurrence of nuisance alarms
was the main reason for people to remove the batteries from smoke alarms, or removing the
smoke alarm altogether, thus making the resident more susceptible to death in a residential fire.
Colerain Township recommends the photoelectric smoke alarms be utilized in residential
occupancies.
On October 1, 2012, this author attended a presentation by Kidde. Kidde is one of the
larger smoke alarm manufacturers. Ms. Carmel Leek, Regional Sales Manager of Kidde Fire &
Security, gave a presentation on the newer ten year lithium battery smoke and carbon monoxide
alarms. The Kidde company, realizing the dangers of battery removal in alarms, is marketing
their “hassle free” smoke alarm. Ms. Leek confirmed that none of the newer “hassle free” alarms
have an ionization sensor, they are all photoelectric. During the presentation Ms. Leek was
quoted as saying: “these eliminate nuisance alarms” and “wants to see a push for photoelectric
alarms”. During discussions of ordinances requiring photoelectric alarms, she stated that these
ordinances were “very commendable”. (Leeks, 2013)
Research Question #3
What area, within each of the five fire districts, had a high risk of fire injuries or
death? During the time from January 1, 2003 through January 1, 2013 there were 87 civilian
injuries that resulted from 69 building fires. (Edwards, Civilian Casualties by Incident, 2013) Of
the 87 listed injuries, one resulted in the death of a civilian. The results of the reports were
categorized by the function of the smoke alarms. The smoke alarm categories were; failed, none
present, operated, too small of a fire to activate, and undetermined. The category of
undetermined includes both unknown function and undocumented on the NFIRS.
8/9/2019 Developing a Smoke Alarm Program for Colerain Township
25/87
Smoke Alarm Program 25
Of the 68 fire incidents that resulted in 87 civilian casualties, 21 of those incidents had
smoke alarms either failed or were not present. This represents 31% of the total incidents, where
the occupants did not have functioning smoke alarms. (Edwards, Civilian Casualties by Incident,
2013)
Colerain has five fire stations protecting its 58,499 residents occupying 43.5 sq.ml. Fire
districts 102 and 103 did not have civilian fire casualties in the last ten years. District 25, Zone
A represented 33% of the fire casualties. District 26, Zone E represented 23.8% . District 109,
Zones B and C each represented 9.5% of the fire casualties which resulted in the last ten years in
Colerain Township Ohio.
From the years 2008 through 2012, there were 228 fires in Colerain Township that were
classified as being “interior” building fires. Of the 228 building fires reviewed, 23% of the
building fire incidents did not have a smoke alarm present. During the same five year period,
9% of the building fire incidents had a failure in the smoke alarm. This resulted in 32% of these
incidents where the occupants did not have an early warning of a deadly environment. (Edwards,
Yearly Fire Incidents Report, 2013) The results of the five year, building fire, search shows that
the following fire zones, of the five districts, have the highest incident rates of the 228 building
fires: District 102, Zone A has 2%; District 103, Zone A has 4%; District 109, Zone B has 6%;
District 25, Zone A has 19%; District 26, Zone E has 12% of the total fire incidents (Edwards,
Yearly Fire Incidents Report, 2013).
8/9/2019 Developing a Smoke Alarm Program for Colerain Township
26/87
Smoke Alarm Program 26
2008-2012 Smoke Alarm Activation
The total of fire incidents, during the five year period, that had smoke alarms fail in
addition to the incidents where there was an absence of smoke alarms represents 32% or 73 of
the fire incidents.
The total of fire incidents, during the five year period, that were large enough, where
smoke alarms activated represented 34% or 77 of the fire incidents.
8/9/2019 Developing a Smoke Alarm Program for Colerain Township
27/87
Smoke Alarm Program 27
The total of fire incidents in 2012 that had smoke alarms fail in addition to the incidents
where there was an absence of smoke alarms represents 42% or 21 of the fire incidents.
The total of fire incidents, that were large enough, where smoke alarms activated
represented 22% or 11 of the fire incidents.
8/9/2019 Developing a Smoke Alarm Program for Colerain Township
28/87
Smoke Alarm Program 28
The total of fire incidents in 2011 that had smoke alarms fail in addition to the incidents
where there was an absence of smoke alarms represents 22% or 7 of the fire incidents.
The total of fire incidents, that were large enough, where smoke alarms activated
represented 44% or 14 of the fire incidents.
8/9/2019 Developing a Smoke Alarm Program for Colerain Township
29/87
Smoke Alarm Program 29
The total of fire incidents in 2010 that had smoke alarms fail in addition to the incidents
where there was an absence of smoke alarms represents 32% or 13 of the fire incidents.
The total of fire incidents, that were large enough, where smoke alarms activated
represented 39% or 16 of the fire incidents.
8/9/2019 Developing a Smoke Alarm Program for Colerain Township
30/87
Smoke Alarm Program 30
The total of fire incidents in 2009 that had smoke alarms fail in addition to the incidents
where there was an absence of smoke alarms represents 26% or 15 of the fire incidents.
The total of fire incidents, that were large enough, where smoke alarms activated
represented 43% or 25 of the fire incidents.
8/9/2019 Developing a Smoke Alarm Program for Colerain Township
31/87
Smoke Alarm Program 31
The total of fire incidents in 2008 that had smoke alarms fail in addition to the incidents
where there was an absence of smoke alarms represents 37% or 17 of the fire incidents. The total
of fire incidents, that were large enough, where smoke alarms activated represented 23% or 11 of
the fire incidents.
As the fire companies canvass the high risk targeted areas of District 25 Zone A
and District 26 Zone E, Those with older ionization smoke alarms will have them replaced with
the photoelectric smoke alarms provided by the fire department. With the limited resources of
the department, we are not able to replace or install smoke alarms in every room of every
residence. When we encounter a home that has either a missing smoke alarm or an ionization
alarm, we shall install one photoelectric smoke alarm on each floor. The occasion will be used
as an educational opportunity for the occupants. In order to further assist the occupants, we shall
8/9/2019 Developing a Smoke Alarm Program for Colerain Township
32/87
Smoke Alarm Program 32
provide them with coupons for smoke alarms purchases at Lowes and Home Depot home
improvement stores.
There is a great need for proper documentation of smoke alarms distributed. The crews
installing the alarms shall document data such as; address of home, location of installed detector,
and date of installation. The Washington State Study showed that 20% of installed ionization
smoke alarms were inoperable within months due to nuisance alarms. Only 5% of photoelectric
alarms were disabled by the residents. (Committee, 2009) A time of no less than six months
should pass after the installation of a photoelectric smoke alarm, at that time a inspection should
occur at the residence. The data collected from the follow up inspection should produce data
showing how many, or what percent, of the photoelectric smoke alarms were disabled and why.
Those residences that already have photoelectric smoke alarms installed should have
positive reinforcements. For those that are providing their families with the utmost in fire alarms
should be rewarded. Coupons redeemable for local restaurants and other establishments that
sponsor this program can be disseminated to the public. Many of the local businesses support
Colerain Township public safety educational programs. A few of these businesses offering
rewarding coupons for food and or services would be; Firehouse Subs, Larosa’s Pizza, Gold Star
Chili, and Quaker Steak and Lube. When people are rewarded for their positive safety, they will
get positive reinforcements. This will assist in our marketing of the educational program.
Along with educating the public so that individuals can make a positive change. We are
also making positive changes in our local fire codes. We have been educating our elected
officials with the need for photoelectric smoke alarms. We have drafted code changes that
require all newly built occupancies to have photoelectric smoke alarms. The newly drafted fire
code will also require all rental properties to change to photoelectric smoke alarms. Colerain
8/9/2019 Developing a Smoke Alarm Program for Colerain Township
33/87
Smoke Alarm Program 33
Township is not the only jurisdiction in Ohio to address the problem with code changes. Other
jurisdictions in Ohio have adopted single station photoelectric smoke alarms. These cities or
townships are Shaker Heights, Chagrin Falls, Brooklyn, Mayfield Village, Mooreland Hills,
Lynhurst and the City of Cincinnati for all rental properties. (Dean, 2013)
The public information officers within Colerain Township Fire Department will keep the
general public informed of our smoke alarm program. Various photos of our fire fighters
canvassing the neighborhoods will be posted on social media sites that the fire department
utilizes such as Facebook, Twitter, and fire department website. The local media outlets will be
informed and updated through news releases. The Northwest Press, a local publication, will
have informational guest columns written for dissemination to the public. Correspondences with
the owners of rental property within Colerain Township will be in the form of mailed
documentation explaining the requirements of landlords.
DISCUSSION / IMPLICATION
There is very little discussion needed on the associated risks of not having a smoke alarm
in the home. Both the White Paper Home Smoke Alarms and Other Fire Detection and Alarm
Equipment and the Smoke Alarm Presence and Performance in U.S. Home Fires, both indicate
that the absence of a working smoke alarm accounts for almost 70% of all fire fatalities.
The results of this ARP is very similar to other studies. It was determined that in the
analysis of building fires from 2008 through 2012, Colerain encountered a 9% failure rate of
smoke alarms. The same study showed that 23% of the incidents had no smoke alarms present.
If we look at the Abstract of Smoke Alarm Presence and Performance in U.S. Home Fires it was
reported that nationally “smoke alarms were present but failed to operate in 9% of the reported
fires” (Ahrens, ND) It was also reported that 31% of the reported fires had no smoke alarms
present. While it is reported that nationally there was a higher percentage of fires without smoke
8/9/2019 Developing a Smoke Alarm Program for Colerain Township
34/87
Smoke Alarm Program 34
alarms present, it is worth noting that the five year analysis had 24% of building fires where the
smoke alarms were listed as “undetermined”. The undetermined category could account for a
slight change in the percentage of smoke alarm presence and or activation.
On page seven of the Smoke Alarm Presence and Performance in U.S. Home Fires, it
states that two-thirds of fire deaths in the residential occupancies occurred without the protection
of a working smoke alarm. The ten year analysis of civilian casualties for Colerain show that
there was a single fatality, there was no working smoke alarm present. It is noted that a true and
fair comparison can not be done with data showing a single event. However, it is also worth
asking the question of “had there been a working smoke alarm”, could this single fatality have
been prevented?
When we mention that people need an early warning for fire incidents, many times we do
not take into account of “all” people. People in general need as much advanced warning of
smoke and or fire. Consider the reaction and escape time of those that are slower due to age,
younger and older. There are many people that may have some disabilities, be it mental or
physical. The disabled in residential occupancies are common. To put their unique situation in
perspective when compared to a healthy adults reaction and escape time, keep in mind that
Andrew K. Pantelis’s research paper, titled The Impact of Alcohol Consumption on Fire Egress
Behavior, showed that being under the influence of alcohol can substantially increase the amount
of time for a person to react to smoke alarms. Could one not draw an inference of an intoxicated
persons reaction time with that of a person that has slowed perception or physical abilities due to
age or disabilities? The presence of smoke alarms will give “all” people advanced notification
and alarm of fire conditions. Thus giving them the increase in time from the discovery of fire
conditions to that of exiting the building.
8/9/2019 Developing a Smoke Alarm Program for Colerain Township
35/87
Smoke Alarm Program 35
In the same study produced by Marty Ahrens, it states on page eight that in 62% of the
fires in which battery operated smoke alarms were present, yet did not operate, it was because
the batteries were missing or disconnected. When questioned about why occupants removed or
disabled the batteries, the common reason given was due to “nuisance” alarms, or false alarms.
In the July 2009 NFPA report, the nuisance alarm was addressed. In the Washington State study
of 757 homes, the rate of ionization smoke alarms being disabled was 4 to 1 in comparison to
photoelectric smoke alarms. Unfortunately in my study I was unable to conduct an interview to
ascertain the reasons for disabled alarms in Colerain.
Why not recommend a dual sensor smoke alarm, thus protecting against a flaming fire
and from a smoldering fire? When we review the Pilot Study For Nuisance Alarms, it is
discovered that the combination sensor smoke alarm has occurrences of a false, or nuisance,
alarm at an even higher percentage that the ionization smoke alarm technology. (intern), ND)
The implications of this ARP is that smoke alarms must be in all occupancies to give the
best chance of survival through an early warning of fire conditions. As important as it is to
ensure smoke alarms for everyone, it must be the proper alarms. It is apparent that smoke alarms
with the ionization sensors are the least reliable. They have a higher incident of false or nuisance
alarms. They are prone to delayed responses in smoldering fires, by as much as 15-30 minutes
after photoelectric alarms activate. In general they give a false sense of security to occupants.
The refusal to participate in the Red Cross’s smoke alarm program is the appropriate one.
Colerain Township Fire & EMS should not be part of a program that gives false sense of security
or faulty equipment to their residents. The Colerain Township
An additional item noteworthy of discussion would be the words of Kiddie Smoke
Alarms. In an email received from Adrian Butler, of the World Fire Safety Foundation, Kiddie
8/9/2019 Developing a Smoke Alarm Program for Colerain Township
36/87
Smoke Alarm Program 36
describes aspects of their newer “Worry-Free” smoke alarms. A very interesting thing is that in
their overall product line features, Kiddie states, “Only smoke alarms with a photoelectric smoke
sensor programmed to reduce nuisance alarms” (Butler, 2013) are sold as the “Worry-Free”
smoke alarm. Why not an ionization smoke alarm? Can they not make ionization sensor alarms
that minimize “nuisance” alarms?
This study presents overwhelming evidence of a need for a smoke alarm program
targeted specifically at two response zones within Colerain Township. There are two response
zones, District 25 Zone A, and District 26 Zone E, that represent 58.8% The same two zones, out
of 29, represents 31% of the total interior building fires within Colerain Township. Any smoke
alarm project that is undertaking by this author or the Colerain Township Fire & EMS should be
started within the highest risk area.
RECOMMENDATIONS
What is Colerain Township Fire & EMS to do about our dilemma? Our dilemma is not
handing out less than reliable smoke alarms with the inability to purchase large quantities of
smoke alarms for citizens. The first step will be public education. Instead of simply
understanding why people are disabling their smoke alarms, we need to educate the public as to
why the smoke alarm is activating. It has become apparent to this author that most of the non-
fire service public do not have the knowledge of the two different types of smoke alarm sensors
on the market. Public education needs to be an active role in getting people to change to a more
reliable smoke alarm. Colerain has utilized social media sites such as twitter, facebook, and our
fire department web site to educate the public to the risks associated with ionization smoke
alarms and the benefits of the more reliable photoelectric smoke alarms. In addition to social
media this author has written an article as a guest columnist in the local newspaper and given
8/9/2019 Developing a Smoke Alarm Program for Colerain Township
37/87
Smoke Alarm Program 37
interviews with the local television news media. The use of social media has presented us with
the ability to reach more people while using less of our budget.
Future endeavors will incorporate mass mailings of public safety announcements.
Valpak coupons is a local mailing that mass mails coupons to residential homes. Valpak has
divided their mailing areas into “zones”. Each zone consist of 10,000 residences. At a price of
$150 per zone, or 10,000 homes, our fire department is able to get our public safety message
printed and mailed. We will begin with a smoke alarm message. Then a different message will
be sent out on a quarterly basis. This marketing “partnership” will bring businesses and the fire
department together while getting vital safety information to the community. It benefits the fire
department by having thousands of homes delivered tailored safety messages, while providing
the business sponsor with advertisement at a rate of less than 50% cost of the standard rate.
One limitation with this marketing program is that is does not deliver to our identified
high hazard district. 25. This is due to low economy and return on investment for the Valpak
company. In order to combat this and get equal education for the residents, we will need to
canvass the area with fire personnel and educational materials. Very simply firefighters going
door to door with flyers and educational handouts.
The public service announcements and neighborhood canvassing will be a positive
change. It will engage our citizens in conversation and allow us feedback about their concerns
and reintroduce the residents to their fire service.
Financial limitations prevent the local fire departments from purchasing large quantities
of photoelectric smoke alarms for distribution to the public. On May 1, 2013 the Colerain
Township Fire & EMS was given a $1,000 credit to be used at the local Meijer’s store. The
$1,000 has been appropriated for the smoke alarm program to purchase photoelectric smoke
8/9/2019 Developing a Smoke Alarm Program for Colerain Township
38/87
Smoke Alarm Program 38
alarms. These alarms are to be placed on the fire apparatus for disbursement to the public as
deemed necessary by the emergency response crews. This is the first securing of outside
donations and funds for the program. Additional sponsors and monies will need to be
appropriated to continue with an adequate supply of photoelectric smoke alarms.
A future partner in protection will the International Association of Firefighters Local
3915, Colerain Career Firefighters. They are willing to contribute monies to worthwhile
educational programs. Local 3915 has authorized the disbursement of $500 to purchase
additional photoelectric smoke alarms upon the distribution of the current supply of smoke
alarms obtained through the Meijer’s original donation. There is potential to increase future
funding for this project. There are many community based fraternal organizations that are more
than willing to contribute, these groups are; The Knights of Columbus, The Masonic Lodge,
Moose Lodge, Citizens Fire Academy, etc.
How will we follow up to see if this program is beneficial and working? The
short term goal would be to conduct follow up inspections of homes that have our photoelectric
smoke alarms installed in them. The follow up inspections should occur at six month and 12
months post installation. This information will give us insight as to how many alarms have been
altered by the occupants and why. The long term evaluation would take several years. This
would be to collect data as to civilian fire injuries and or fatalities. The goal would ultimately be
to significantly reduce the occurrences of civilian fire injuries, allow time for occupants to exit
the home during fire conditions while it is still tenable, and to ultimately reduce fire loss with a
quicker response from the fire department by early notification of the occupants of smoke.
The final goal of this project would be the passing of an ordinance that requires all newly
built, or significantly renovated, structures to have photoelectric smoke alarms installed. The
8/9/2019 Developing a Smoke Alarm Program for Colerain Township
39/87
Smoke Alarm Program 39
ordinance would also have provisions for multi-family rental units to phase out the less reliable
ionization smoke alarms for the installation of photoelectric smoke alarms on a sliding time
scale.
8/9/2019 Developing a Smoke Alarm Program for Colerain Township
40/87
Smoke Alarm Program 40
REFERENCES
American FactFinder . (2010). Retrieved March 1, 2013, from United States Census Bureau:
http://factfinder2.census.gov/faces/nav/jsf/pages/index.xhtml
Texas A&M University Study . (2011, February 11). Retrieved April 02, 2013, from The World Fire Safety
Foundation: http://www.theworldfiresafetyfoundation.org/texasaandm.html
Ahrens, M. (ND, ND ND). Smoke Alarm Presence and Performance in U.S. Home Fires. Retrieved April 1,
2013, from NFPA.org:
http://www.nfpa.org/assets/files/PDF/Foundation%20proceedings/Smoke_Alarm_Presence_an
d_Performance_in_US_Home_Fires-Ahrens.pdf
Bukowksi, R. W., Peaconk, R. D., Averill, J. D., Cleary, T. G., Bryner, N. P., Walton, W. D., . . . Kuligowski, E.
D. (2007, December). Performance of Home Smoke Alarms. Retrieved March 26, 2013, from
National Institute of Standards & Technology:
http://www.fire.nist.gov/bfrlpubs/fire07/PDF/f07063.pdf
Burn Survior Throughout The World Inc. (N.D., N.D. N.D.). United States Fire Statistics. Retrieved March
26, 2013, from Burn Survivor: http://www.burnsurvivorsttw.org/fsafety/usstats.html
Butler, A. (2013, September 16). Worry-Free.
Christopher Mealy, A. W. (2011). Smoke Alarm Response and Tenability. Baltimore: Huges Associates,
Inc.
Committee, N. 7. (2009, July 01). TASK GROUP ON SMOKE DETECTION FOLLOW-UP REPORT . Retrieved
April 02, 2013, from NFPA.org:
http://www.nfpa.org/assets/files//PDF/Research/FinalReportTaskGroupSmokeDetectionFollow
Up.pdf
Council, P. F. (2006, April). WHITE PAPER Home Smoke Alarms. Retrieved March 27, 2013, from
USFA.FEMA: http://www.usfa.fema.gov/downloads/pdf/white-paper-alarms.pdf
Dean, D. (2013, May 14). (D. Edwards, Interviewer)
Edwards, D. (2013, April 09). Civilian Casualties by Incident. Colerain Township, Ohio, USA.
Edwards, D. (2013, April 14). Yearly Fire Incidents Report. Colerain Township, Ohio, USA.
EPA, U. (2012, June 27). Ionization Technology . Retrieved April 02, 2013, from United States
Environmental Protection Agency: http://www.epa.gov/radiation/sources/smoke_ion.html
EPA, U. (2012, June 27). Photoelectric Technology . Retrieved April 02, 2013, from United States
Environmental Protection Agency: http://www.epa.gov/radiation/sources/smoke_photo.html
8/9/2019 Developing a Smoke Alarm Program for Colerain Township
41/87
Smoke Alarm Program 41
Grosse, L., DeJong, J., & Murphy, J. (2011, February 24). Texas A&M Univestity Study . Retrieved March
27, 2013, from World Fire Safety Foundation:
http://www.theworldfiresafetyfoundation.org/texasaandm.html
intern), A. L. (ND, ND ND). PILOT STUDY OF NUISANCE ALARMS. Retrieved April 08, 2013, from
Consumer Product Safety Commission: http://www.cpsc.gov/PageFiles/98715/smokealarm.pdf
Leeks, C. (2013, October 01). Kidde Smoke Alarms. Cincinnati, Ohio.
Pantelis, A. K. (2008). The Impact of Alcohol Consumption on Fire Egress Behavior. Emmittsburg: National
Fire Academy.
8/9/2019 Developing a Smoke Alarm Program for Colerain Township
42/87
Smoke Alarm Program 42
Appendix A
8/9/2019 Developing a Smoke Alarm Program for Colerain Township
43/87
Smoke Alarm Program 43
8/9/2019 Developing a Smoke Alarm Program for Colerain Township
44/87
Smoke Alarm Program 44
8/9/2019 Developing a Smoke Alarm Program for Colerain Township
45/87
Smoke Alarm Program 45
8/9/2019 Developing a Smoke Alarm Program for Colerain Township
46/87
Smoke Alarm Program 46
8/9/2019 Developing a Smoke Alarm Program for Colerain Township
47/87
Smoke Alarm Program 47
Appendix B
8/9/2019 Developing a Smoke Alarm Program for Colerain Township
48/87
Smoke Alarm Program 48
8/9/2019 Developing a Smoke Alarm Program for Colerain Township
49/87
Smoke Alarm Program 49
8/9/2019 Developing a Smoke Alarm Program for Colerain Township
50/87
Smoke Alarm Program 50
8/9/2019 Developing a Smoke Alarm Program for Colerain Township
51/87
Smoke Alarm Program 51
8/9/2019 Developing a Smoke Alarm Program for Colerain Township
52/87
Smoke Alarm Program 52
8/9/2019 Developing a Smoke Alarm Program for Colerain Township
53/87
Smoke Alarm Program 53
8/9/2019 Developing a Smoke Alarm Program for Colerain Township
54/87
Smoke Alarm Program 54
8/9/2019 Developing a Smoke Alarm Program for Colerain Township
55/87
Smoke Alarm Program 55
8/9/2019 Developing a Smoke Alarm Program for Colerain Township
56/87
Smoke Alarm Program 56
8/9/2019 Developing a Smoke Alarm Program for Colerain Township
57/87
Smoke Alarm Program 57
8/9/2019 Developing a Smoke Alarm Program for Colerain Township
58/87
Smoke Alarm Program 58
8/9/2019 Developing a Smoke Alarm Program for Colerain Township
59/87
Smoke Alarm Program 59
8/9/2019 Developing a Smoke Alarm Program for Colerain Township
60/87
Smoke Alarm Program 60
8/9/2019 Developing a Smoke Alarm Program for Colerain Township
61/87
Smoke Alarm Program 61
8/9/2019 Developing a Smoke Alarm Program for Colerain Township
62/87
Smoke Alarm Program 62
8/9/2019 Developing a Smoke Alarm Program for Colerain Township
63/87
Smoke Alarm Program 63
8/9/2019 Developing a Smoke Alarm Program for Colerain Township
64/87
Smoke Alarm Program 64
8/9/2019 Developing a Smoke Alarm Program for Colerain Township
65/87
Smoke Alarm Program 65
Appendix C
2012 Smoke Alarm Activation Summary
Street Zone Detector Function
Day 102 A None PresentGosling 102 A Operated
Blue Rock 103 A None Present
Blue Rock 103 A None Present
Blue Rock 103 A Undetermined
Green Springs 109 A Operated
Kemper 109 B None Present
Pippin 109 B None Present
Sudbury 109 B Undetermined
Hazelcrest 109 B Undetermined
Waldent Glen 109 C Operated
Berthbrook 25 A Failed
Arborwood 25 A None Present
Springdale 25 A None Present
Birchway 25 A Not Documented
Pippin 25 A Operated
Springdale 25 A Operated
Colerain 25 A Operated
Springdale 25 A Too small to activate
Adair 25 A Undetermined
Marker 25 A Undetermined
Bevis 25 D None Present
October 25 D Operated
Hanois 25 F None Present
Wenning 25 G None Present
Yuba 25 G None Present
Yuba 25 G Undetermined
Pindale 25 G Undetermined
Coogan 25 G Undetermined
Coogan 25 G Undetermined
Chippenham 25 H Failed
Wilson 25 H Undetermined
Crestland 25 H Undetermined
Owl Creek 25 J None Present
Orchardhill 26 A Failed
Galbraith 26 B Operated
Fireshade 26 B Too small to activate
Acre 26 C None Present
8/9/2019 Developing a Smoke Alarm Program for Colerain Township
66/87
Smoke Alarm Program 66
Colerain 26 C None Present
Nandale 26 C Operated
Cheviot 26 C Undetermined
Blue Rock 26 C Undetermined
Blue Acres 26 C Undetermined
Jonrose 26 E Failed
Beckys Ridge 26 E None Present
Pippin 26 E None Present
Woodhill 26 E None Present
Regal 26 E Operated
Planet 26 F Operated
Planet 26 F Undetermined
Total Function Total Zone
4 Failed 2 102 A
17 None present 3 103 A
11 Operated 1 109 A
2 Too small 4 109 B
16 Undetermined 1 109 C
10 25 A
2 25 D
1 25 F
6 25 G
3 25 H
1 25 J1 26 A
2 26 B
6 26 C
5 26 E
2 26 F
8/9/2019 Developing a Smoke Alarm Program for Colerain Township
67/87
Smoke Alarm Program 67
Appendix D
2011 Smoke Alarm Activation Summary
Street Zone Detector Function
Dunlap 102 C None PresentPoole 103 A Undetermined
East Miami River 103 B None Present
Swissvale 109 A Operated
Overdale 109 A Undetermined
Pippin 109 B Operated
Haverknoll 109 B Operated
Spaulding 109 B Too small
Walden Glen 109 C Operated
Walden Glen 109 C Operated
Walden Glen 109 C Operated
Walden Glen 109 C Undetermined
Walden Glen 109 C Undetermined
Springdale 25 A None Present
Colerain 25 A Operated
Arborwood 25 A Operated
Darbi Dew 25 A Undetermined
Amberway 25 A Undetermined
Pippin 25 A Undetermined
Thimbleglen 25 B Undetermined
Colerain 25 B Undetermined
Niagara 25 D None Present
Wuest 26 A Operated
Rocker 26 C Operated
Colerain 26 C Operated
Colerain 26 C Operated
Colerain 26 C Operated
Cheviot 26 D Operated
Compton 26 E Failed
Galbraith 26 E Failed
Jonrose 26 E None Present
Sheldon 26 E Undetermined
8/9/2019 Developing a Smoke Alarm Program for Colerain Township
68/87
Smoke Alarm Program 68
Total Function Total Zone
2 Failed 1 102 C
5 None Present 1 103 A
14 Operated 1 103 B1 Too Small 2 109 A
10 Undetermined 3 109 B
5 109 C
6 25 A
2 25 B
1 25 D
1 26 A
4 26 C
1 26 D
4 26 E
8/9/2019 Developing a Smoke Alarm Program for Colerain Township
69/87
Smoke Alarm Program 69
Appendix E
2010 Smoke Alarm Activation Summary
Street Zone
Detector
Activation
Brehm 103 A Undetermined
Country Village 103 C Operated
Springleaf 103 C Too Small
Springlake 103 D Too Small
Crest 109 B Operated
Wincanton 109 B Undetermined
Amberway 25 A None Present
Niagara 25 A None Present
Amberway 25 A Operated
Amberway 25 A Operated
Amberway 25 A Undetermined
Amberway 25 A Undetermined
Eddystone 25 B Operated
Chagrin 25 C Operated
Town Terrace 25 D Failed
Niagara 25 D Operated
Storm 25 D Too Small
Pebble Valley 25 E Operated
Cornwall 25 G Undetermined
Roosevelt 25 H None Present
Galbraith 26 B FailedGalbraith 26 B None Present
Sandy 26 B None Present
Galbraith 26 B Operated
Galbraith 26 B Operated
Georgianna 26 B Operated
Rocker 26 C Failed
Colerain 26 C None Present
Colerain 26 C None Present
April 26 C Operated
Cheviot 26 C OperatedNandale 26 C Undetermined
Colerain 26 C Undetermined
Oak Creek 26 D Operated
Apple Valley 26 D Too Small
Lookover 26 E None Present
Lookover 26 E None Present
8/9/2019 Developing a Smoke Alarm Program for Colerain Township
70/87
Smoke Alarm Program 70
Tripoli 26 E Too Small
Blue Lark 26 F None Present
Uranus 26 F Operated
Mars 26 F Operated
Total Function Total Zone
3 Failed 1 103A
10 Not Present 2 103 C
16 Operated 1 103 D
5 Too Small 2 109 B
7 Undetermined 6 25 A1 25 B
1 25 C
3 25 D
1 25 E
1 25 G
1 25 H
6 26 B
7 26 C
2 26 D
3 26 E3 26 F
8/9/2019 Developing a Smoke Alarm Program for Colerain Township
71/87
Smoke Alarm Program 71
Appendix F
2009 Smoke Alarm Activation Summary
Street Zone Detector Activation
Day 102 A UndeterminedGosling 102 A Undetermined
Dunlap 102 C Undetermined
Brehm 103 A Too Small to activate
Springdale 103 C Undetermined
Springwater 103 D Operated
Desert Gold 103 D Too Small to activate
Gravenhurst 109 A Failed
Chestehill 109 A Operated
Overdale 109 A Operated
Pippin 109 A Operated
Haverknoll 109 B Operated
Waldon 109 B Operated
Walden Glen 109 C Operated
Walden Glen 109 C Operated
Pippin 25 A Failed
Colerain 25 A None Present
Burgess 25 A Operated
Colerain 25 A Too Small to activate
Aries 25 A Undetermined
Red Skin 25 D None Present
Philknoll 25 D None Present
Pippin 25 D Operated
Town Terrace 25 D Operated
Windswept 25 D Too Small to activate
Hollis 25 D Undetermined
Holly Glen 25 D Undetermined
Redskin 25 D Undetermined
Colerain 25 E Operated
Field Glen 25 G Operated
Trinidad 25 G Operated
Sacremento 25 G Undetermined
Sacremento 25 G Undetermined
Ash hill 26 A Failed
Galbraith 26 B Failed
Firshade 26 B Failed
Cheviot 26 B Operated
Galbraith 26 B Operated
8/9/2019 Developing a Smoke Alarm Program for Colerain Township
72/87
Smoke Alarm Program 72
Blue Acres 26 C None Present
Banning 26 C Operated
Rocker 26 C Operated
Banning 26 C Operated
Blue Acres 26 C Too Small to activate
Bay Towne 26 D Operated
Weiss 26 D Operated
Regal 26 E Failed
Pippin 26 E None Present
Pippin 26 E None Present
Barthas 26 E None Present
Clara 26 E None Present
Pippin 26 E None Present
Galbraith 26 E Operated
Rock Acre 26 E Operated
Gila 26 E Operated
Regal 26 E Operated
McGill 26 E Undetermined
Colerain 26 E Undetermined
Bluelark 26 F Undetermined
Total Function Total Zone
6 Failed 2 102 A
9 Not Present 1 102 C25 Operated 1 103 A
5 Too Small to Activate 1 103 C
13 Undetermined 2 103 D
4 109 A
2 109 B
2 109 C
5 25 A
8 25 D
1 25 E
4 25 G1 26 A
4 26 B
5 26 C
2 26 D
12 26 E
1 26 F
8/9/2019 Developing a Smoke Alarm Program for Colerain Township
73/87
Smoke Alarm Program 73
Appendix G
2008 Smoke Alarm Activation Summary
Street Zone Detector Activation
Squirrelsnest 102 C OperatedBlue Rock 103 A Too small to activate
Country View 103 A Undetermined
Austin Ridge 103 C Too small to activate
Daleview 103 C Too small to activate
Overdale 109 A Undetermined
Retford 109 B None Present
Hazelcrest 109 B Operated
Crest 109 B Undetermined
Ontario 25 A Failed
Aries 25 A Failed
Marino 25 A Failed
Arborwood 25 A None Present
Marino 25 A None Present
Springdale 25 A None Present
Colerain 25 A None Present
Niagara 25 A None Present
Rumford 25 A Operated
Arborwood 25 A Operated
Niagara 25 A Operated
Manhatten 25 A Operated
Pippin 25 A Too small to activate
Niagara 25 A Too small to activate
Springdale 25 A Undetermined
Niagara 25 A Undetermined
Colerain 25 B Operated
October 25 D Failed
October 25 D Failed
Jackfrost 25 D Failed
October 25 D None Present
Moonflower 25 D Operated
Bentbrook 25 D Operated
Seasons 25 D Undetermined
Capstan 25 D Undetermined
Pippin 25 F Operated
Paprika 25 F Too small to activate
Schon 25 G Too small to activate
Sacremento 25 G Undetermined
8/9/2019 Developing a Smoke Alarm Program for Colerain Township
74/87
Smoke Alarm Program 74
Roppelt 25 J Undetermined
Banning 26 C None Present
Grange 26 C Operated
Hillary 26 C Too small to activate
Boleyn 26 C Undetermined
Pippin 26 E None Present
Windy Way 26 E None Present
Blanchetta 26 E None Present
Trelawney 26 E Too small to activate
Total Function Total Zone
6 Failed 1 102 C
11 None Present 2 103 A
11 Operated 2 103 C
9 Too small to activate 1 109 A
10 Undetermined 3 109 B
16 25 A
1 25 B
8 25 D
2 25F
2 25 G
1 25 J
4 26 C
4 26 E
8/9/2019 Developing a Smoke Alarm Program for Colerain Township
75/87
Smoke Alarm Program 75
Appendix H
8/9/2019 Developing a Smoke Alarm Program for Colerain Township
76/87
Smoke Alarm Program 76
8/9/2019 Developing a Smoke Alarm Program for Colerain Township
77/87
Smoke Alarm Program 77
8/9/2019 Developing a Smoke Alarm Program for Colerain Township
78/87
Smoke Alarm Program 78
8/9/2019 Developing a Smoke Alarm Program for Colerain Township
79/87
Smoke Alarm Program 79
8/9/2019 Developing a Smoke Alarm Program for Colerain Township
80/87
Smoke Alarm Program 80
8/9/2019 Developing a Smoke Alarm Program for Colerain Township
81/87
Smoke Alarm Program 81
Appendix J
Ohio
Smoke detectors don't save lives, at least not the most
commonly used detectors
By Darian Edwards Correspondent 1st Responder Newspaper Story Number 102710102 Disclaimer: This article is a direct street report from our correspondent and has not been edited by the
1st Responder newsroom.
Smoke detectors don't save lives, at least not the most commonly used detectors.
In the early 1970's less than 10% of the homes had smoke detectors, back then 8 people died forevery 1,000 fires that occurred. Today 95% of homes have smoke detectors, however 8 people stilldie for every 1,000 fires that occur. 70% of fire-related fatalities, in Hamilton County, are due tosmoke inhalation, not the heat or flames. 75% of fatalities occur during sleeping hours.
Smoke detectors are built with one of two sensors in them. One sensor, Ionization, is designed torecognize and alarm in the presence of a flaming fire. It detects the small particles that aresuspended in the air (ionized electrons), these particles are so small you may not even be able to seeor smell them. The Ionization detectors utilize a very small amount of a radioactive isotope thatemits Alpha radiation. (Don’t worry, unless you are playing with the detector or inhaling the airdirectly off of it, the radiation is harmless) The second sensor, Photoelectric, is designed to recognizeand alarm in the presence of a smoldering fire. The Photoelectric senses the smoke that is producedfrom smoldering fires or from items such as synthetic materials. The smoke disrupts a light sensorinside the detector and activates the alarm.
In a flaming fire, such as a kitchen fire, an Ionization detector goes off about 10 seconds prior to aPhotoelectric detector. In a smoldering fire, such as electrical or careless smoking, the Photoelectricdetector can activate 10, 15, 20, even 30 minutes before the Ionization detector goes off, if it evenactivates at all. Studies have been done by the National Institute of Standards and Testing, National
Fire Protection Association, and Texas A&M University, all of which confirm similar findings thatIonization smoke detectors are failing us. Their test results have been shown on multiple televisionshows and posted on various websites such as Youtube. Many states have banned, or are currentlydebating the banning of, detectors that use Ionization technology. Many of the courts have passed judgment against the detector manufacturers for faulty Ionization detectors.
The overwhelming majority of the population has Ionization detectors in their home. Why?, because
it is the cheapest in cost. A Photoelectric detector costs about twice what the Ionization sells for.Therefore the Ionization detector is the cheaper and more economical choice. How do you knowwhich one you have? Look on the back of the detector, if you see an "I" or "radioactive" then its anIonization detector. A Photoelectric detector will have a "P" on it.
Please provide your family with the proper safety equipment. We buckle our kids into child seats andseat belts; our cars have airbags and bicycle helmets are in common use now. So why not provide
your family with the proper smoke detector? Replace your ineffective Ionization detectors with thePhotoelectric detectors.
Call your local fire department for more information.Colerain Township Fire & EMS 513-825-6143
http://www.1rwn.com/
8/9/2019 Developing a Smoke Alarm Program for Colerain Township
82/87
Smoke Alarm Program 82
8/9/2019 Developing a Smoke Alarm Program for Colerain Township
83/87
Smoke Alarm Program 83
Appendix K
8/9/2019 Developing a Smoke Alarm Program for Colerain Township
84/87
Smoke Alarm Program 84
8/9/2019 Developing a Smoke Alarm Program for Colerain Township
85/87
Smoke Alarm Program 85
8/9/2019 Developing a Smoke Alarm Program for Colerain Township
86/87
Smoke Alarm Program 86
Appendix L
ORDINANCE PROPOSAL OF PHOTOELECTRIC SMOKE ALARMS AND DEVICES
FOR HEARING IMPAIRED PERSONS
Owners of all dwellings shall install a minimum of one smoke alarm in each sleeping area and
adjacent to a sleeping area in each dwelling unit. At least one additional smoke alarm shall be
installed on each additional story of the dwelling, including the basement, but excluding any
crawl space or unfinished attic. In multifamily dwellings and two-family dwellings, smoke
alarms shall be installed in all stairwells on each level, in all common space and hallways, and
wherever else the Colerain Township Fire Department deems necessary. Smoke alarms shall be
listed with an approved testing agency and shall be installed in a manner and location consistent
with the manufacturer's instructions.
Where a dwelling is occupied by a person who is deaf or hearing impaired, a smoke
alarm shall be installed by the owner which provides a visual or vibrating signal sufficient to
warn the deaf or hearing impaired individual when activated.
Any newly constructed dwelling shall have hard-wired smoke detectors, with battery
backup, installed as required by the Ohio Building Code and the Ohio Fire Code. When
alterations, repairs or additions requiring a building permit occur and the value of such work is
more than 50% of the assessed valuation or when all or most of the electrical wiring is being
replaced, hard-wired smoke alarms, with battery backup, shall be installed. Wiring shall be
permanent and without a disconnection switch, other than those required for over current
protection.
Rental properties, be they residential, condominium, townhouse, or apartments shall
replace the older smoke alarms with new photoelectric smoke alarms. When a rentable unit is
vacated, prior to renting this unit again, photoelectric smoke alarms must be installed. In
properties that have 12 or less units, the owner has one year from date of notice of this ordinanceto have all photoelectric smoke alarms. Properties that have more than 12 units have two years
from notice of ordinance to have all photoelectric smoke alarms.
Existing single and multi-family dwellings with hard-wired smoke alarms mus