Bedford Fire 10-8-08

[fsw1970 0]

Rekindle is not a term that should be utilized. Let's consider this:

If fire is discovered after the FD has left it is due to one of the follwing:

1) The arsonest came back to finish the job (and this is a new fire not a rekindle)

2) The FD did not put the fire out in the 1st place, because they could not get to the seat of the fire (due to collapse or some other issue) and felt it was safe to leave or just leave a fire watch. If this were the case it would not be a rekindle since it was never out.

3) The term rekindle implies that the FD screwed up and left without doing proper overhaul and did not know that it was still burning.

I hate to break it to you, but #3 IS entirely possible. No one's perfect.

[ja3kfd 34]

Just a little info I received from a friend of mine on the call was that the excavator was held off from getting into the fire building until after the C&O team finished up, which was not until the following day after 3:00 pm. I am sure that is part of the Fire Departments going back up there that next day.

[Bnechis 3,961]

I hate to break it to you, but #3 IS entirely possible. No one's perfect.

Very true, but if it were true it should be determined by the C&O team after investigating it and not as the dispatch to go back to the scene. Its presumptive on everyones part to say a dept "screwed up" (and I'm in no way implying that anyone did) before the facts are in. Most recalls to the scene can be explained, but only after the fact.

[Fire24 1]

A little info to help explain it all, and alleviate any potential second guessing.

The C&O Team was there on the day of the fire and, after consultation with the IC, had the scene held by Bedford PD all night and through the next day when the Team returned to continue the investigation. There were some pockets of fire that could not be accessed without heavy machinery due to the nature of the steel framed building. This was known by the IC and C&O and all concurred to leave the scene as is until the investigation was completed. Due to the collapse of the structure, the fire was not going anywhere and there were no significant exposures to worry about. Also, you should not demolish any portion of the building prior to the investigation commencing and the C&O Team giving the okay to do things. Otherwise you would compromise the integrity of the investigation.

The FD was requested back to the scene by C&O to extinguish these hot spots while C&O was in the nearing end of their investigation. The term "rekindle" was how the call was dispatched by 60, I'm guessing because there is no other accepted terms to utilize to dispatch this out. It certainly wasn't a matter that anyone goofed and didn't do their jobs. It was all an informed decision made by those on scene.

All in all, a good job on a stubborn fire that had a large head start on the FD before it was reported.

[Bnechis 3,961]

The term "rekindle" was how the call was dispatched by 60, I'm guessing because there is no other accepted terms to utilize to dispatch this out. It certainly wasn't a matter that anyone goofed and didn't do their jobs. It was all an informed decision made by those on scene.

Dispatch for additional overhaul....or dispatch to extingushed additional pockets of fire

[corporal 6]

somers sent U-88 rac unit, tanker 16, engine 180 went to Katonah.

[IFCO3080 26]

Has anybody in the fire service ever hear of 10 tankers and one fire. Especially when all ten were filling and being used???

[Guest]

Back in 2004 my depaerment had a huge fire at the Peekskill Shopping Center we used about 10 tankers that night to put out the fire all of them u doing tanker relays to the scene

[SRS131EMTFF 471]

I think 13 tankers were used for the lumber yard fire in Vista a year or two ago.