It's snowing in hell

by:Mark Fowler

Ahh foam! I can still remember the warm water splashing while Mom poured a capful of that wonderful soapy stuff under the faucet and making the bubbles pile higher and higher. oh, sorry. Wrong blog! Got lost there for a sec.

It's interesting to think that as children we were playing in basically Class A foam. Same basic principles at work there but though it is a bit ironic, we'll revisit that a little later in this article. For our purposes today, we should start at where foam started. Foam has been around for quite some time.

Foam was invented by a Russian scientist, trying to find an effective means of combating large oil fires, in 1902. The original formula was produced by adding dry chemical powders to water and agitating them until they became foam. Now, mind you, this was not the foam that we are accustomed to in this day and age. This concoction had more of a frothy consistency containing carbon dioxide bubbles. This new invention gave way to the chemical engines and, yes you guessed it, the sodium bicarbonate fire extinguisher (which had to be inverted to mix the powder and liquid to activate the reaction). We have ALL seen those "obsolete" extinguishers in flea markets and yard sales. Great timepieces they are. Good for modern firefighting? Not so much. It was found that it took far too much powder agent to fight large fires. This put the practice into history.

Throughout the 1940's, foam began to take a turn away from chemical agents and moved to "natural" products to create the finished foam. Soy-Protein was utilized to create Aerofoam. Animal waste was utilized to construct other foam agents, as well. These were better than their predecessor; however, still had problems with breaking down when exposed to fuels, heat or dry chemicals.

In the early 1960's, Fluoroprotein foam was introduced by National Foam, Inc. This latest development in foam technology had greater heat resistance and blanketing characteristics due to the oil-rejecting, fluorinated surfactant it was produced with. It also worked well when used in conjunction with dry chemicals and would not break down.

During the mid-1960’s, the U.S. Navy developed AFFF (aqueous film-forming foam). The surfactants in this type of agent make it ideal for covering static fuel surfaces. The foam, when aspirated at the nozzle, "bubbles up", rendering the water lighter and capable of floating on the surface of a hydrocarbon fuel. At the same time, the finished foam product drains a film across the liquid surface, sealing it from the air and preventing the fuel vapors from igniting. This is the foam product that most of us have come up using in the fire service. It is still used today and remains carried by most urban fire departments.

In the early 1970's, National Foam made another leap in foam technology by developing "Alcohol-Resistant" AFFF (AR-AFFF). Since alcohol has become so prevalent in fuel mixtures, this is generally the preferred type of foam to be carried by FD's.

While AFFF and FFFP(Film Forming Flouroprotein Foam) had taken care of the issue of fighting fires involving hydrocarbon fuels and other flammable/combustible liquids, nothing had really been done to increase our effectiveness at fighting Class A material fires. Many companies, such as PhosChek, had taken on the burden of creating reliable retardants but little had been done to augment the firefighter's arsenal in regards to the fires we normally deal with.

OKAY, HERE IT IS!! (the "bubble bath" thing)

Then along came Class A foam. Now we had a product to make the job of combating our "daily" fires a little easier. While Class B foams were aimed at making the water"float" on the surface of a liquid (with a lower specific gravity than water itself), Class A foams were designed with a "similar" characteristic.

Class B foams are usually proportioned at 3-6-10 or 20 percent. While in the hose itself, the surfactants mix with water. As this mixture leaves the nozzle, it is aerated (often with an air-aspirating nozzle). The surfactant/water mixture traps the air into bubbles, making the "finished foam" product capable of floating on a liquid surface. Once applied to the intended area, the surfactant drains from the “foamy” mix and creates a “seal” across the liquid surface.

Class A foams are utilized in a much lower concentration of .1-1percent. The goal of such a low concentration is not to make the water float but rather to break the surface-tension of the water, allowing it to "soak" to porous materials making it absorb heat deeper into the burning fuel package. This is basically the "bubble bath". Now, can you make a Class A foam "foam up"? Absolutely. If you aerate the mix it will look very similar to Class B foam. However, it will not last in this state very long. The bubbles of air are very fragile and will quickly burst, creating a milky-appearing mix, which is quite effective on Class A fires but will profit nothing on Class B. It can leave what it is dispensed on with a "slick" coating. This is merely the concentrate sticking to the fuel. We had that same film on us, when crawling out of a bubble bath, as kids.

In more recent years, newer foam agents have been developed which work in a different manner than "conventional" foams, such as AFFF. F500 has made a definite impact on the market. While the foams we are used to using require specific application methods (rain down, roll-on, bounce/deflection), F500 and similar products may be applied in these methods OR by plunging into the burning fuel. How is this possible? The action of F500 is to encapsulate the fuel molecule itself, rendering it unable to mix with oxygen and form a flammable mixture. This product has been utilized to clean pipelines out for just that reason. It takes away the fuel! This is a very good product (as I have used it myself for many years) and has won the favor of many departments in lieu of AFFF, for use on flammable liquid fires.

The Problem With Foam

Well I'd like to say that there is only one but,..there is a couple to consider.

First, foam comes as a concentrate and must be mixed with water somehow. To achieve proper proportioning, a proportioner (or eductor) must be utilized to make this happen correctly. Foam may be batch-mixed for some operations but if a specific effect is desired, the correct equipment must be employed. In conjunction with this problem, nozzles and eductors should be properly matched (gpm-gpm) in order to create the desired finished-foam product. The deployment of a standard eductor is an “added” step in the firefighting process, making it time-consuming.

Secondly, once foam has been employed to create a blanket, extreme care must be taken to not operate “clean” water streams near the blanket. Straight water destroys foam! The air bubbles will become burst or the blanket otherwise disrupted.

Thirdly, foam blankets are susceptible to the atmosphere in which it is applied. Naturally, a foam blanket will deteriorate due to drain-down (when the surfactant and water begin to naturally separate and drain away). The loss of a foam blanket may also be caused by wind, rain, or high ambient temperatures.

Fourth in point, is the fact that foam is still a water-based product. While foam products can assist in making the water lighter or decreasing surface-tension, the surfactants themselves are not the primary means of heat absorption. Water is still the means of taking the heat away. Air is a great insulator (as is proven by current PPE technology), however, when air is heated the molecules increase in activity. This is precisely why hotter air rises. As it rises, the molecules begin to take up more space by spreading apart (if enclosed in a container: i.e.- a bubble, this will also increase internal pressure which will eventually lead to rupture of the vessel or container). Therefore, over time (or if exposed to high heat) foam blankets will begin to break down in this fashion.

Closing

Now since we have covered water already, in the first segment of “Changing Gears”, I would be remiss to not mention that even though we may use less water in the total firefight, we must still flow the correct GPM to absorb the heat we are up against. Foams ARE water-based products and water IS the primary means of absorbing heat. If we miss that point and try to rely on the"foam" to do the work, we may be in for a harder fight than should be necessary. Remember, the "bubble bath" may have been fun but it didn't necessarily get us clean! It just made the process of getting there a little more tolerable.

Foams are and will be a part of the Fire Service for many years to come. As technology improves and our understanding of fire increases, newer products will (and have already) be developed to make our task easier. Foam has been a part of our repertoire for over 100 years. It is an enormous milestone in Firefighting History and has earned its place as one of the best advancements in firefighting technology.

My next installment to "Changing Gears" will be on Dry Chemical agents. I hope that you have enjoyed this segment and learned, at least a little more, firefighting history and how it has "changed gears".

I think I'll go have that "bubble bath" now... Be safe out there!

There are many valid and useful points that were made and some great firefighter humor as well. Most published documents on the net and even this forum are not designed to make you an expert on hazardous materials/WMD or on the regulations and standards that govern your response, but to help you become a more informed responder or perhaps make you stop and think. It’s not all about surround and drown or put the wet stuff on the red stuff… Stay Safe! As firefighters, EMS first responders, or law enforcement officers you all may have to respond to a Hazmat or even worse a WMD (Weapons of Mass Destruction) Incident. Being prepared and having the formal training for this type of situation is paramount to everyone’s safety… The first order of business when faced with a Hazmat or WMD incident is to establish scene control zones, implement ICS (Incident Command System), and use the basic reference materials such as the ERG (Emergency Response Guidebook). Scene Control Zones or Control Zones are defined as “Areas at a hazardous materials incident that are designated as HOT, WARM, or COLD, based on the issues and the degree of hazard found there.” Are you familiar with NFPA 472 or 473? If not you need to get acquainted with the Standard for Competence of Responders to Hazardous Materials/Weapons of Mass Destruction Incidents. The ERG is a preliminary action guide containing information regarding over 4,000 chemicals. The ERG should not be used to create a long term action plan. Once an incident goes beyond 15 minutes the ERG is no longer a good source of information and you need to seek additional information regarding the materials involved and have the appropriate agencies notified. With the placards displayed in the photos agencies that should be notified immediately are County, State, and Federal Offices of Emergency Management, State and Federal EPA, State and Federal Centers for Disease Control, Homeland Security, HMRT’s (Hazardous Materials Response Team), and probably others… Get your crew away from the HOT Zone!! Get current weather conditions and a future forecast of weather pattern changes, set up perimeters and EVAC residential neighborhoods. Ensure your crew is wearing PPE’s. Try to identify chemicals involved by getting MSDS info or a site representative. Gather as much information as possible for HMRT and other agencies responding… Turn over command ASAP to someone who has a better working knowledge of these types of incidents.

One of the great things about a blog is that you have the ability to create so many different types of content. We have had tremendous success with our FireIce Academy feature on facebook, so it seemed natural to give the academy a home on our blog. We hope you enjoy it as much as our facebook fans do. Assess the scene and leave a comment on how you would handle the situation. We will post the results tomorrow. Its 1900 hrs and you receive a report of a structure fire in a small industrial area that is centered in the middle of a residential neighborhood. As you approach the scene you see what is pictured in the upper left photo… What are your initial thoughts? Once you arrive on scene you see what is pictured in the upper right photo… What are your thoughts? As you approach the gate you see the placards that are pictured in the lower left and right photos… What are your thoughts and concerns? How do your deploy your crew? How and what do you advise to the other responding units? Stay Safe!

“What’s in the water?” Mark B. Fowler

No discussion on Fire Suppression would be complete without delving into water. As I stated in the intro to this blog series, it is somewhat of an irony that good-ole H2O has maintained its place in the forefront of the Fire Service arsenal amidst all the other changes that have taken place. We will take a look at that and how it does what it does for us, so well. Comprised of 2 parts Hydrogen and 1 part Oxygen, water is the most common medium for combating fire. It has a multitude of properties which make it a firefighter’s choice for the job. First, it is very easily transported. The “bucket brigades” were our first “real” water delivery system for fighting fires of all sizes. Later, of course, it was learned that water could be easily forced through a conduit (i.e.- piping, hose, etc.) and sprayed, much easier than carrying bucket after bucket to the fire. We went through the era of hand-pumps, then steam-driven engines and finally came to rest on centrifugal pumps (which are still in use today). Although, many tried to find something better, nothing could replace the portability of water with another product. Second, water is available almost everywhere. Although our World (and even our body) is comprised primarily of H2O, I must concede that not “every” location has a good source of water (or at least plentiful enough to advantageous in a large firefight). We all understand that problem and many have adapted by employing Water Tenders as part of our fleet. However, notwithstanding, the availability (or lack thereof) of this precious commodity: water does not have to be “made” or “manufactured”. It is here for us already. It is not a “product” that we will have to “order” if/when we run out, while fighting a large fire. Command will simply call for more Tenders or an increase in the municipal water pressure/volume to a particular area. We can circumvent the problem of running out of water. It can be daunting, but it can be done. If you run out of foam, gel, dry chemical, etc., you are just out of luck until it can be shipped in from, oftentimes, a very distant location (and more often than not, not when you “need” it). So, we must still be proficient in the use of water for daily operations (no matter what additives we may choose to employ). Third, although, not often thought of in these terms, water it a great medium for the delivery of other products. Water can be used in a variety of ways to combat different types and classes of fire. However, the addition of Gel-producing agents, Foam surfactant or even dry chemicals can increase the effectiveness of water on Class A, B and D type fuels. (We will cover these additives in greater detail in later parts of the column.) By adding a foam concentrate to water and aerating the mixture, we can break the surface-tension of water and make it “lighter”, allowing it to float on products with a lower specific gravity than water itself. By adding Gelling products to water, we are able to produce medium retardants or suppressants with high-heat absorption capabilities. Due to the “anti-wetting” agents present in dry chemical powders, water can used as a delivery vehicle to provide more reach for the application of these products at a greater distance. Our constant friend, H2O, has made it readily available to work with other suppressant and protectant agents and thus has remained a valuable, irreplaceable resource. Lastly, the most desirable attribute that water has provided the Fire Service for hundreds of years, is its inherent ability to readily absorb heat. Air will only be heated by high heat and can, in fact, contribute to flame spread and intensity. Dirt, while being a natural product that can absorb “some” heat, can only effectively smother a burning product. With all of the aforementioned attributes considered, water is the only natural medium available that can absorb high heat and bring a burning fuel below its inherent ignition temperature. It can expand into steam, enveloping an enclosure, excluding the available oxygen required for open combustion. It can cool surfaces or the atmosphere equally well. For this reason, if not any other, water is still a firefighter’s greatest tool for Fire Control and extinguishment. While the bulk of the above points can hardly be argued, there is still one issue that is still debated on almost a daily basis (worldwide). How do you get the wet stuff on the red stuff? While I have my own opinion on this matter, I will attempt to be more objective and general in nature regarding this topic. It is not my intention to begin a war of the “nozzleheads” here but rather to educate and incite thought. Whether your department is using the latest, greatest, super-sonic TurboJet automatic nozzle, a variable-flow with a pistol grip, or a 15/16” smooth-bore; you are still putting the wet stuff on the red stuff! You can change nozzles. You can change what pattern you operate the knob in. You can do direct attack or indirect. We can go for reach and knockdown with a smooth-bore (or straight stream from a fog tip) or we can get up close and personal with a fog pattern. Everybody out there has a preference on how to attack a fire and an opinion on what method works best. I know I do and I stand by it! All of these variables can be changed but we need to consider what cannot be changed. We began this discussion on water and to water we shall return. No matter which method we choose to satiate our madness, there is one constant that cannot be ignored. The game is still “water vs. fuel”! Why is it that pump operators, DO’s, and MPO’s, or whatever your department choses to call them, have to be so proficient in what they do? Answer: They have to ensure the proper GPM is provided to effectively fight the fire! It’s not enough to merely make wet stuff come out of the end of the hose. It has to be in the correct volume to be able to absorb the heat that the fire is producing. If you provide a fog nozzle with the pressure that it requires to operate optimally (usually between 50-100psi) and then do not set the GPM flow high enough to provide adequate heat-absorption capability, then you are fighting an uphill battle and the fire will maintain the high ground. We have all learned, in Rookie school, what a BTU is and that it takes a defined amount of water to absorb a defined amount of heat, right? Well, that principle has not changed. What HAS changed is the fuel package. Instead of the natural product fires we fought, through most of the last century, we are now fighting synthetic product fires. The difference from 8000btu’s/lb. vs. 21000btu’s/lb. is the reason we have changed our nozzle designs and capabilities. The properties of water have never changed. We still require it to absorb heat, only now we have to dispense more of it to accomplish the same end-result. We could spend hours debating whether small droplets of water or large streams extinguish fires. It has been debated (heatedly) for years. Can a fog stream absorb heat? Absolutely. Can a solid stream absorb heat? Yes, Sir. Can we go into a half-involved warehouse fire with a 1.75” hand-line, just because we have a smooth-tip and good technique? Only if you want to either be embarrassed or die young. We still have to choose the correct size line and appropriate flow to combat the fire, whatever it may be. In making the calculation of what will work the best or what flow to use, you just have to remember the basics of “water vs. fuel”. When heated past 212oF, it will begin to turn to steam. The higher the heat level is, the faster the water will break down. The smaller the droplet, the faster it will reach its maximum heat absorption capability. Knowing that some of our water will not make it to the seat of the fire (which is where the “real” problem is), we need to make certain we are flowing the necessary GPM to defeat the fuel. Am I saying that a smooth-bore is the only way to fly? Absolutely not. What I am saying is this: You have to plan your tactics well and ensure that you do not allow that allure of the newest toy to detract from what you know is needed to fight the fire at hand. Smooth-bore nozzles have their own limitations as well. However, that being stated, I do not wish to get into a debate on the topic of nozzle choice. It’s all about the water! Hopefully, this has been a mind-jogger for you and has made you think of how much of a valuable player water still is. No matter how much technology changes or what advances we make in the way of water additives, we still have to be very savvy in the use of our oldest ally. My next topic of discussion will be Foams. Until then take care of yourselves and your brothers and sisters on the fireline.

(And how we think about fire suppression) By: Mark B. Fowler

 

The fire service has gone through a myriad of changes in the last two centuries. We have gone from buckets to steam engines to motorized “super pumpers”. No longer do we use a long beard to filter smoke, but rather, a self-contained breathing apparatus. Even “modern” technology has changed. FR Cotton gave way to Nomex, which was followed by PBI and a plethora of other fabrics in our turnout gear. Your nose is not the tool of choice for a gas leak anymore. Hand-held multi-gas monitors now have found their place onto first-due apparatus and not just on the HazMat Unit. The list goes on and on and on….. Seems like a lot, huh? Now, take this into consideration: With all the advancements we have made in the Fire Service and how we operate, we are STILL throwing water at the red stuff. I find that to be somewhat ironic. No matter how much technology we have, water is still the most available, most portable/easily moved, most heat absorbent method of fire extinguishment still today. Of course we have seen the coming and going of the “chemical engine”. We have seen the advent of dry chemicals, halogenated and other “clean” agents, Class A and B foam products and now fire gels. Some were an attempt to replace water as the primary extinguishment agent and others were meant to enhance its effectiveness or range of use. All of these agents have their place in the Fire Service, even if it is merely their place in our history. Different fires require different methods of attack and extinguishment and I don’t think that anyone can argue that any “one” agent can everything equally well. Over the course of a few articles, we will discuss some of the properties of each of the aforementioned extinguishing agents and their usage. We will attempt to give our readers a better understanding of how these products work and how to choose the agent which is “best” for your organizations’ daily use and unusual circumstances as well. We will focus greatly on Class A foams and gels to give the reader a better contrast between the two, as well as the contrast between “like” products.

By: Rob Rosovich, FPE, CFEI (Ret.)

 

Over the last decade fire retardant gels have been at the forefront of exposure protection in the WUI. Often called fire blocking gel, wildland gel, and medium retardants, no matter what they are called they all have one thing in common…they work. Names such as Barricade, Thermo-Gel, AFG Firewall, Phos-Chek, and FireIce have been used by the Fire Service and homeowners alike, and many media outlets both print and electronic have done many news stories on the success of these products. Barricade, Thermo-Gel, and AFG Firewall are all liquid concentrates. These concentrates consist of additives, surfactants, and polymers suspended in oil based liquid and are educted at the end of hose lines. Phos-Chek is a dry granular polymer that is batch mixed in a tank for aerial attacks. FireIce (the newest technology) is a dry baby fine powder that can be batch mixed or educted into the tanks of apparatus and discharged through standard hoses and nozzles. Several white papers have been published and many studies have been conducted on the subject matter. The NFPA Committee on Forest and Rural Fire Protection has proposed NFPA 1151, Standard for Gels Used in Wildland and Structural Fire Fighting. One white paper authored by Chief Cary Coleman with Intermountain Fire Rescue states: “In the wake of the destruction caused by the 'Witch' Fire of 2007, which started just two mile east of the Intermountain Fire Station and resulted in the fire destroying over 150 structures in our area, we embarked on a project to find a protecting gel product that could be easily employed by any assisting agency without needing costly equipment or extensive training that would act as a “force multiplier” allowing the scarce resources available to be more effective in both protecting structures and suppressing fire. After reviewing and testing several gels, including Thermo gel, Barricade, Flame guard and FireIce, we have concluded that FireIce is the most overall qualified and effective product of those tests.” Chief Coleman Summarizes: “Based on 14 years of firefighting in the California Urban Interface environment and having used and tested numerous products for suppressing fires and protecting structures we believe that FireIce fire gel creates ability for any fire suppression apparatus to protect structures and suppress a variety of fires without requiring costly equipment, training and maintenance. It provides for increased firefighter safety and allows for more efficient use equipment and personnel in a resource limited situation. It enhances effectiveness and efficient use of water. It is non-corrosive, non-toxic and easy to clean up. It is our opinion is an exceptional product and delivers upon it promise to suppress fire in a multitude of situations. We look forward to implementing it as another tool in our arsenal to combat fire, save live and property.” Another respected member of the Fire Service that has seen the capabilities of FireIce is Captain Tony Tricarico a 27 year veteran of the FDNY Special Operation Command. Recently in New York a motor vehicle live fire demonstration once again showed the knockdown and suppression capabilities of FireIce. Captain Tricarico stated: “First they gave a power point and show the things this stuff can do and then he mixes up a batch and shows you. He takes a hand full of the FireIce and puts a propane torch to his own hand without any consequence. No burns, nothing. Of course I had to try it and the same results, no injury. Then he tells you its non-toxic, environmentally friendly and takes himself a mouthful.” “Now we all go outside and he lights off a car tire and puts it out with the can, big deal. Now he pulls off his glove and lays his bare hand on the still smoking tire. The FireIce has displaced the heat and he can, seconds later, place his bare hand on the tire. Not bad. Now they light off a small SUV. Again he knocks down the fire quickly with water can mix with FireIce.” ”My thoughts on this new gel are that it’s a pretty good item. It suppresses vapors, cools the burning material, displaces the heat and coats it to prevent re-ignition.” “As I think about it I can come up with a dozen scenarios that this can be used for. I like it. It will not clog any of the pumper or hose or nozzle parts. It will not corrode any parts, because, unlike foam, it does not dry up and cleans up with very little water. I can see this as a useful tool in our arsenal.” FireIce has caught the attention of municipal, county, state, and federal agencies throughout the country as well as the international community. The Florida State Fire Marshal’s Office requested samples of FireIce to be evaluated by the forensics lab to ensure that FireIce would not contaminate a fire scene investigation. The labs reports conclude that FireIce does not impede the detection of accelerants. These same results were found when accelerant K-9s are used to detect accelerants mixed with FireIce. The new age of firefighting is here from RIT to Rehab to the 16 Life Safety Initiatives to ensure “Everyone Goes Home” we all must have the newest technology, tools, gear, and suppression products to continue to serve our communities effectively. When we become more efficient in the way we do our jobs, we reduce firefighter stress and fatigue, thus reducing the risk of injuries or death. The US Fire Administration reports that 44% of LODDs are due to stress and overexertion. These numbers are unacceptable; we must work smarter not harder. Today’s economic climate has left many departments in financial dire straits; FireIce has the ability to conserve on water usage, as well as reducing the time and manpower required on a single fire scene. This benefit equates to reduced firefighter stress, reduced overtime costs, reduced fuel costs and leaves other units to remain in service for better response times for other emergencies. Chief Officers are facing increased pressure to slash budgets any where possible. The dark clouds are looming with words of layoffs, station closures, reducing the manpower on first due engines. This is a recipe for disaster and compromises firefighter safety.

FireIce and its patent pending fire suppression product was recently added to the USFS QPL list and renowned artist Paul Combs produced a new cartoon to celebrate the momentous occasion.

How does FireIce work? When FireIce® is added to water it produces a fire fighting water enhancing gel. FireIce® breaks the fire triangle by suffocating the oxygen from the fuel by cooling the heat source, thus breaking the thermal barriers of fire. This prevents rekindles, which reduces property damage and increases firefighter safety.

Is FireIce toxic? FireIce® has been tested to the United States Forest Service Specifications 5100-306A and is non toxic to mammals. Is

FireIce corrosive? FireIce® is non-corrosive to fire apparatus and aircraft as tested by the United States Forest Service and 3rd party laboratories.

What the shelf life of FireIce? FireIce® has a shelf life in excess of 5 years.

Do I need an eductor to use FireIce? Yes, the FireIce® Eductor was engineered to draw a dry powder into the water stream, where as current foam eductors were designed to draw a liquid concentrate into the water stream.

How does the FireIce Eductor work? The FireIce® Eductor works on the same venturi principle as foam eductors do.

What the minimum water pressure required for eductor usage? The FireIce® Eductor will operate with a minimum pressure of 35psi.

How does FireIce compare to Class A foam? Firefighters worldwide say that FireIce’s® suffocation and cooling ability is far superior to foam.

Who is using FireIce today? Municipal, County, State, and Wildland Fire Service personnel currently use FireIce®.

What are the applications? FireIce® has been proven on structure fires, motor vehicle fires, wildland fires, and also in creating a fire break in front of an advancing fire. FireIce ® can be used in water canisters, ground apparatus (i.e. Fire Trucks), and aerial operations (all aircraft).

What sizes does FireIce; ship in? FireIce® is available for purchase in premeasured bottles (for use in your Pressurized Water Cans), and 25 lb buckets (for use in Fire Apparatus).

What type of fires does FireIce extinguish? FireIce® is rated for Class “A” fires, although FireIce® has been used by the Fire Service to extinguish other classifications as well.

What happens to the FireIce after the fire? FireIce® prevents rekindles which reduces property damage and increases firefighter safety. The FireIce® used in the pumpers and tanks can easily be rinsed out of the equipment with water.

Is FireIce UL tested? Yes, FireIce® has been tested to ANSI/UL 711 Specifications and is NFPA compliant.

Is FireIce USFS-QPL approved? FireIce is currently being evaluated under the United States Forest Service Specification 5100-306A.