NIST Special Publication 1051

Real-Time Particulate Monitoring –

Detecting Respiratory Threats

 for First Responders:

Workshop Proceedings

Rodney A. Bryant 

Kathryn M. Butler 

Robert L. Vettori 

Paul S. Greenberg 

NIST Special Publication 1051

Real-Time Particulate Monitoring –

Detecting Respiratory Threats for 

First Responders:

Workshop Proceedings

Rodney A. Bryant 

Kathryn M. Butler 

Robert L. Vettori 

Fire Research Division 

Building and Fire Research Laboratory 

National Institute of Standards and Technology

Paul S. Greenberg 

 Glenn Research Center 

National Aeronautics and Space Administration 

December 2007 

U.S. Department of Commerce 

Carlos M. Gutierrez, Secretary 

National Institute of Standards and Technology 

 James M. Turner, Acting Director 
Certain commercial entities, equipment, or materials may be identified in this 

document in order to describe an experimental procedure or concept adequately. Such 

identification is not intended to imply recommendation or endorsement by the 

National Institute of Standards and Technology, nor is it intended to imply that the 

entities, materials, or equipment are necessarily the best available for the purpose. 

National Institute of Standards and Technology Special Publication 1051 

Natl. Inst. Stand. Technol. Spec. Publ. 1051, 90 pages (December 2007) 

CODEN: NSPUE2 
ABSTRACT 

The overhaul of a fire scene is a stage of firefighting where respiratory protection is often 

disregarded due to the perception of low risk and the desire to remove the heavy and 

cumbersome self-contained breathing apparatus. The need for alternative options for respiratory 

protection that are fitted to the task and environment has been voiced by the firefighter 

community. Choosing the appropriate respiratory protection for individual events can only be 

accomplished with real-time information about the exposure hazards. Hand-held direct-reading 

particulate detectors have been used in other environmental monitoring applications, and it may 

be possible to transfer the technology to meet the needs of the firefighter. 

The workshop on Real-Time Particulate Monitoring held at the National Institute of Standards 

and Technology (NIST) on 3-4 May 2007 brought together members of the fire service, 

particulate detector manufacturers, public health professionals, airborne particulate researchers, 

and standards organizations to discuss the need for better technology to assess the level of 

respiratory protection that is required for environments encountered by first responders. The 

program included invited speakers who presented information on characterization of respiratory 

threats during fire overhaul and the need for respiratory protection, performance needs and 

priorities for the fire service application, and state-of-the-art and recent developments in 

particulate detection. After the presentations, attendees divided into three breakout sessions, and 

each group responded to a predetermined set of questions related to the following topics: 

Research Needs, Performance Criteria, Standards, and Technological Advances. 

The consensus of the workshop participants was that future research is needed to better 

understand the health effects of particulates on firefighters, to better characterize the particulates 

present during overhaul, and to better characterize the response of particulate detectors to the 

overhaul environment. Defining performance criteria to address first responder needs regarding 

data telemetry and logging, instrument operation and data interpretation, and the physical 

performance of the instrument were also areas of consensus. The group also felt that developing 

standards for the physical performance of the instrument was important and that data telemetry 

and logging would benefit from developing technology. 

The consensus resulting from workshop discussions is expected to provide a strong foundation 

for the development of new tools to aid firefighters in selecting the appropriate respiratory 

protection, standard testing protocols to insure that equipment meets the needs of first 

responders, and performance criteria that allow industry to adapt the technology to the specific 

need and improve where necessary. 

Keywords: particulate detector, overhaul environment, evaluation, performance metrics, fire 

fighting, first responder 

i
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS 

The success of any workshop is dependent on the hard work of the individual speakers, 

facilitators, and participants. These proceedings are an assimilation of the contributions from 

everyone involved in the workshop; copies of the presentations are included in Appendix 3. 

Thanks to all who made presentations and to those who participated in the workshop. 

We appreciate the assistance of Ms. Barbie Huff of NIST, who helped with logistics. We 

express thanks to Mr. Thomas Cleary, Ms. Michelle Donnelly, and Mr. Alexander Maranghides 

for providing tours of Fire Research Facilities at NIST. We also appreciate the assistance of Mr. 

William Haskell of NIOSH/NPPTL for helping to identify those interested in the topic. This 

project was funded by the Department of Homeland Security. 

ii
TABLE OF CONTENTS

ABSTRACT i 

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS ii 

INTRODUCTION 1 

Respiratory Threats – Particulates 2 

Real-time Detectors – Particulate/Dust 6 

Technical Issues 8 

User Needs 10 

WORKSHOP OBJECTIVES AND ORGANIZATION 12 

Presentations 12 

Breakout group procedures 13 

BREAKOUT GROUP RESULTS 16 

SUMMARY 21 

REFERENCES 23 

APPENDICES 

1. Workshop Agenda 25 

2. Workshop Attendees 26 

3. Workshop Presentations 29 

 A. Workshop Objectives 29 

 B. Firefighter Health Effects: Overhaul and Beyond 32 

 C. Fire Overhaul Characterization and Exposure Assessment 38 

 D. No Smoke, No Fire, No Hazard: A Firefighter’s Perspective on 

 the Hazards of Fire Overhaul and How to Protect Against Them 44 

 E. Detecting Particulates in Real-Time: Optical Techniques 49 

 F. What We Know About Particulates Resulting from Fires 54 

 G. The Ideal Detector for the Fire Service 59 

 H. NIST Fire Fighter Technology Program Overview 63 

 I. DHS Standards Development Program Overview 76 

 J. Guidelines for Breakout Sessions 83 

4. Breakout Group Discussions 84 

iii

INTRODUCTION 

The construction and contents of both commercial and residential buildings incorporate a variety 

of materials with a wide range of chemical compositions. A fire within a building will result in 

an uncontrolled release of gaseous vapors and aerosolized matter. Many of the gases are toxic, 

and exposure to them by inhalation may be an immediate danger to life and health (IDLH). 

During fire suppression or knockdown, firefighters are required to wear a SCBA (self-contained 

breathing apparatus) due to the IDLH environment. The SCBA is designed to protect against 

gaseous toxins and respirable particulates. However, not every stage of the fire fighting event is 

an IDLH situation. The overhaul operation, which occurs after the knockdown of the visible fire, 

involves searching for and exposing hidden pockets of fire to ensure that the fire is completely 

extinguished. If it has been determined that toxic vapors no longer exist, firefighters are often 

allowed to remove their SCBA units; thereby losing their protection against any remaining 

respiratory threats, such as dust and particulate matter. The overhaul operation resembles a 

structural demolition, with the added presence of smoldering debris. Limited information exists 

on what respiratory threats remain during this stage of firefighting, but studies have 

recommended that some level of respiratory protection should be implemented. [1,2] 

The need for alternative options for respiratory protection that are fitted to the task and 

environment has been voiced by the firefighter community. [3] Choosing the appropriate 

respiratory protection for individual events can only be accomplished with real-time information 

about the exposure hazards. The need for such real-time environmental monitoring was 

identified as a specific issue of the present technology gap in the Fire Service. [4] Although, 

hand-held gas monitors have been routinely used by some departments to aid in incident 

command decisions, similar devices to detect particulates are not routinely used. Hand-held 

direct-reading particulate detectors were first designed for use in mining environments [5], and 

since then have been used in many environmental monitoring applications. If the direct-reading 

particulate detector technology can be transferred to meet the needs of the first responder, the 

first responder will be aided by a new tool to increase their personal protection. However this 

technology transfer must proceed as a deliberate effort. 

The workshop on Real-Time Particulate Monitoring held at the National Institute of Standards 

and Technology (NIST) on 3-4 May 2007 was convened as part of the effort to explore the use of 

hand-held direct-reading particulate detectors to provide real-time information to first responders 

and event commanders. The workshop brought together members of the fire service, particulate 

detector manufacturers, public health professionals, airborne particulate researchers, and 

standards organizations to discuss the need for better technology to assess the level of respiratory 

protection that is required for environments encountered by first responders. The goal of the 

workshop was to identify first responder needs, understand current state-of-the-art technology, 

appreciate where new technology may help, and prioritize research needs. The consensus 

resulting from workshop discussions is expected to provide a strong foundation for the 

development of new tools to aid firefighters in selecting the appropriate respiratory protection, 

standard testing protocols to insure that equipment meets the needs of first responders, and 

performance criteria that allow industry to adapt the technology to the specific need and improve 

where necessary. 

1
This report describes the preparation, content, and outcomes of the workshop. First, a brief 

summary is provided on possible respiratory threats in the fire overhaul environment and on 

direct-reading particulate detectors. Potential technical issues that may hinder their application 

and the potential needs of the fire service are also outlined. This information was provided to 

attendees as a White Paper in advance of the workshop as a starting point for discussions. The 

next section describes the organization and procedures followed by the workshop, with the 

workshop agenda, list of attendees, speaker guidance, and workshop presentations given in 

Appendices 1 through 4 respectively. The results of breakout group discussions are given in the 

following section and are based on the discussion responses listed in Appendix 5. Final sections 

present the workshop conclusions and current plans for future work. 

Respiratory Threats – Particulates 

Particulates are tiny solid particles or liquid droplets. In the case of an aerosol, they are 

suspended in air. They range in size from about 0.002 μm to 100 μm and can be further 

classified as smoke, dust, fumes, fogs, or sprays depending upon their origin and composition. 

Inhalation of particulate matter may result in serious lung injury. The American Conference of 

Governmental Industrial Hygienists (ACGIH) “believes that even biologically inert, insoluble, or 

poorly soluble particles may have adverse effects and recommends that airborne concentrations 

should be kept below 3 mg/m3 for respirable particles, and 10 mg/m3, for inhalable particles....” 

[6] Respirable particles are defined as particulate material that is hazardous when deposited in 

the alveoli region of the lungs, while inhalable particles refer to particulate matter that is 

hazardous when deposited anywhere within the respiratory tract. [6] The U.S. Department of 

Labor Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) suggest that 8-hour timeweighted average (TWA) exposures be kept below 5 mg/m3

 for respirable dust and 15 mg/m3 for 

total suspended (inhalable) dust. 

The health effect of particulate exposure is a function of the size, shape, and chemical 

composition. A particle’s size is often given in terms of its aerodynamic diameter, defined as the 

diameter of a sphere with 1 g/cm3 density that has the same settling velocity of the particle of 

interest. Particles up to 100 μm can be inhaled into the respiratory system, although only 

particles less than 10 μm penetrate into the pulmonary region of the lung. Fine particles smaller 

than 4.0 μm may enter the alveoli, where only a thin layer of cells separate the respired air from 

blood in the circulatory system. These small particles that deposit into the alveoli may transfer 

out of the lungs and into the blood, where they are transported to and may affect other organs. 

Within the lung itself, high concentrations of deposited particles may exceed the natural ability 

of the lung to clear particles; when this happens, particles may become imbedded in the lung 

tissue itself and cause chronic pulmonary inflammation and cancer. Fibrous particles that are 

long and thin may also penetrate deeply into the lungs. Finally, the chemical composition of the 

particle and any gases that adsorb onto the particle may transport irritants or carcinogens to the 

lung tissue. 

During overhaul of a structural fire, firefighters are exposed to products of combustion. Gases, 

vapors, and airborne particulates are generated by the destruction of plastics, carpeting, foams, 

fabrics, and wood. Fibers may be present from materials containing asbestos or fiberglass. As 

2
firefighters open walls and ceilings to search for hidden combustion sources, more gases and 

respirable particles are released into the environment. 

Soot particles resulting from flaming combustion are agglomerates of several to millions of 

spherical primary particles that are each a few tens of nanometers in diameter. The inertial 

properties of the entire soot particle are characterized by its aerodynamic diameter. The particles 

given off by the fire have a log-normal size distribution, meaning that the number of smaller 

particles is much greater than the number of larger ones. Typically, their mass median 

aerodynamic diameter ranges from 0.2 μm to 2 μm. [7] Thus fires generate many fine particles 

that are capable of deep penetration into the lungs and that settle out of the environment very 

slowly. 

The particles produced by smoldering combustion resemble tar, forming nearly spherical 

microdroplets with both solid and liquid organic components. They tend to be somewhat larger 

than soot particles, with a mass median aerodynamic diameter generally between 0.8 μm to 2 

μm, again falling under the classification of fine particles. [8] The smoke from smoldering 

materials tends to be light in color, compared to the black smoke from flaming. During 

overhaul, this may be an active source of respirable particulates. 

In addition to size, the composition of particles may affect the health outcome. Other toxic 

components of particulates that may be present during overhaul [2] include: 

• Asbestos – Fine fibers that can cause scarring of lung tissue leading to asbestosis and lung 

cancer may be present in insulation and fire retardant building materials. [9] 

• Lead – A neurotoxic metal that damages the central nervous system and can cause kidney 

and reproductive system damage is found in video and computer monitors. [9] 

• Other metals – Smoke particles can incorporate metals such as chromium, cadmium, copper 

and mercury from electrical equipment, wiring, and other sources. Effects vary and can 

include cancer, damage to liver and kidneys, and nervous system damage. [9] 

• PCBs – Polychlorinated biphenyls are carcinogenic. They are found in older transformers 

and other electrical equipment. [9] 

• PAHs – Polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons are semivolatile and nonvolatile organic 

compounds, many of which are carcinogenic and mutagenic. They are products of 

incomplete combustion of plastics, wood, and fossil fuels (e.g. diesel generators). [10,11] 

• VOCs – Volatile organic compounds generated in fires include toxic gases such as acrolein, 

hydrogen cyanide, benzene, and toluene. They can cause irritation or asphyxia, and some are 

carcinogenic. They are produced from combustion of wood products and various types of 

plastic, and can be transported into the lungs as adsorbents on particles. [7] 

• Alkalinity – In a building collapse, highly alkaline dust may result from pulverized building 

materials such as concrete. High alkalinity can cause persistent cough and bronchial 

hyperreactivity. [12] 

Several studies have been conducted to characterize the respiratory exposure hazards during the 

stages of fire fighting: suppression [13,14,15], overhaul [1,2,13,14], and investigation of cause 

and origin [16]. Air monitoring was performed with area (static) sampling and some personal 

sampling measurements to detect toxic gases such as CO (carbon monoxide), hydrogen cyanide, 

benzene, total and respirable dust, and particulates such as asbestos and metals. During the fire 

3
suppression stage, concentrations such as that of CO, hydrogen chloride and acrolein often 

exceeded published exposure limits. Concentrations measured during overhaul and investigation 

of cause and origin were below published exposure limits, except for a few cases. However, the 

studies warn that adverse health effects may still result from multiple low-level exposures and 

therefore respiratory protection should be worn during the latter stages of fire fighting. Even in 

the absence of visible smoke or alarming concentrations of toxic gases, particulates are still 

present. One study suggests that these particulates may absorb harmful chemical reactive species 

and serve as an entry mechanism to the lungs. [14] 

An extreme case of exposure to dust and smoke was encountered after the collapse of the World 

Trade Center. While overhaul of a standard house fire takes on the order of 30 minutes, the 

rescue and cleanup operations after the World Trade Center collapse lasted for several months. 

Respiratory protection equipment was not widely available at first, and proper use was never 

enforced. Many rescue and cleanup workers spent days at the site with infrequent or no 

respiratory protection. Chronic respiratory symptoms including persistent cough, shortness of 

breath, and chest tightness are common among this group, and some have suffered permanent 

lung scarring leading to disability and, for a few, death. A relationship between exposure and 

reduced pulmonary function has been established. [17,18] Some particulate-related respiratory 

hazards measured during fire overhaul and at the World Trade Center site are listed in Table 1. 

4
Table 1. Particulate Sampling Results from Some Fire Overhaul and WTC Studies 

Event Description Particulates Concentration* Collection/Analysis 

Method 

Overhaul[1] Air sample Respirable dust 

(personal sample) 6.18 mg/m3 Filter/Gravimetric 

Total dust 1.82 mg/m3 Filter/Gravimetric (area sample) 

Respirable dust 

(personal sample) 8.01 mg/m3 Overhaul[2] Air sample Filter/Gravimetric 

Asbestos 0.073 fibers/cc 

Lead 0.03 mg/m3

Smoke - Impinger/ Chemiluminescence 

Fire/ 

Overhaul[14] 

Filter/Electron Spin Resonance Air sample 

Aerosol - Impinger/ Chemiluminescence 

Filter/Electron Spin Resonance 

World Trade 

Center[19] 

Air sample, middle 

of pile, Oct 2001 

Total dust 

(area sample) 1.401mg/m3 Filter/Gravimetric 

Fine particles

(10/4/01) 0.4 mg/m3

 (max.) Saturation samplers 

0.0055 mg/m3

(max.) Air samples, Lead (9/22/01) X-ray Fluorescent Analysis 

World Trade 

Center[20] 

WTC 5 + three 

perimeter sites, 

Sept - Nov 2001 

High-Volume PU Foam and 

Glass Fiber Filter Sampler PCBs (10/2/01) 153 ng/m3

 (max.) 

Phase Contrast Light 

Microscopy/ Transmission 

Electronic Microscopy 

Asbestos (0.04 to 0.08) 

(Sept-Oct 2001) fibers/cm3

 

(0.88 to 1.98) % of 

total mass 

Gravimetric Sieving/ 

Aerodynamic Sizing Fine particles 

(1.2 to 2.4) % of 

total mass 

Gravimetric Sieving/ 

Aerodynamic Sizing Respirable dust 

Lead (101 to 625) μg/g X-ray Fluorescent Analysis 

Dust samples 

collected east of 

WTC, 16-17 Sept 

2001 

PCBs (0.59 to 0.75) μg/g Gas Chromatography/ Mass 

Spectrometry World Trade 

Center[21] > 0.1 % of total 

mass 

Gas Chromatography/ Mass 

Spectrometry PAHs 

(0.8 to 3.0) % of 

total mass Asbestos Microscopic Analysis 

Glass and other 

fibers 

Morphologic Analysis/ 

Gravimetric Sieving 40 % of total mass 

pH (9.2 to 11.5) Ion Chromatography 

Prediction of PAH 

levels in air after 

9/11/01 

World Trade 

Center[10] 

(1.3 to 15) ng/m3 

PAHs (9/14/01) Sample Assays/ Trend Analysis est.

*Mean values and ranges unless otherwise stated. 

5
Real-Time Detectors – Particulate/Dust 

Traditionally, particulate exposure limits have been quoted as mass concentration (mg/m3

). The 

mass concentration of aerosolized matter is most reliably determined by passing a known volume 

of gas through a filter and determining the increase in mass of the filter due to the amount of 

particulates deposited on the filter. Determining particulate mass concentration by accurately 

weighing the filter before and after sampling is simple, accurate and widely used. However, 

analysis requires a substantial amount of time since it requires the use of a sensitive 

microbalance, typically at a location different from the sample location. Direct-reading 

instruments can provide almost real-time results, within seconds to minutes depending on the 

sampling time and the nature of the instrument. The class of direct-reading instruments that will 

be considered here are optical instruments that measure particle mass, size, or occurrence 

indirectly from light scattering. In terms of mass response, these instruments tend to be less 

accurate than gravimetric filter measurements, but their rapid delivery of results allows one to 

measure environments that are changing, and to correlate the change with the measurements. 

The detection and characterization of aerosol particles can be accomplished by exploiting their 

optical properties. Because the particles' optical properties differ from that of the surrounding 

air, incident light is both scattered and absorbed by the particles. In principle, both the scattering 

and absorption effects can be utilized for particle measurements. However, because many 

particles of interest absorb very weakly, optical scattering provides a more practical basis for 

measurement instruments. Two properties of the light scattered by particles are generally used to 

measure their size and concentration: i) the total amount of light that is scattered, and ii) the 

geometry, or pattern exhibited by the scattered light. Both properties carry information 

regarding the size and the concentration of the aerosol. The recent advent of extremely compact, 

low cost, and reliable solid-state laser sources (laser diodes) and optical detectors (PIN diodes) 

similar to those used in Compact Disc (CD) and Digital Video Disc (DVD) players has led to the 

availability of a wide array of portable field devices to measure the size and concentration of 

aerosol particles. 

The basic construction of an optical particle detector is shown in Figure 1. An aerosol sample is 

first drawn into the instrument, at a specific volume flow rate, by way of an internal pump. The 

flow is continuous and typically set at several liters per minute. The sampled aerosol stream is 

then illuminated by an optical source located within the instrument. Suitable optics are used to 

focus the light from the source onto the sample. One or more detectors are then used to collect 

the light scattered by the particles. The scattered light provides information about both the size 

and number of particles. Depending on the sophistication of the instrument, a number of 

detectors may be employed, to increase its accuracy or range. The output of the detector(s) is 

then processed by an internal computer, which computes the concentration of the sample, and in 

some cases, by particle size. This information is then logged into the instrument's memory. In 

many devices, the logged information includes the volume of the sample that is collected and the 

time of collection. 

6
Figure 1. Schematic of the basic construction of a hand-held particle detector. 

One class of instrument is the aerosol or dust monitor, typically reporting concentration as 

mass/volume. It is designed to measure the total mass of the aerosol particles, since mass is 

often used as a measure for exposure. In a dust monitor, the light scattered from a sample of 

particles is collected. The total mass of the sample is proportional to how many particles the 

sample contains, so a dust monitor measures mass by adding up the scattered light contributed by 

all of the particles together. Thinking more about how the mass of a group of spheres is 

determined, it is possible to understand that the total mass in the sample not only depends on 

how many spheres (particles) there are, but it depends on how big they are as well (the mass of 

each sphere being proportional to the cube of its diameter). In reality, the amount of light 

scattered by a particle is not exactly proportional to the cube of its diameter, so this aspect affects 

the ability of a dust monitor to measure mass accurately. Commercially available instruments 

are capable of measuring mass concentration over the range of (0.001 to 400) mg/m3

 over a 

particle size range of (0.1 to 10) μm. Most instruments are calibrated by comparing the 

instrument response to a standard dust, such as the ISO Test Dust, with standard gravimetric 

measurements. Because the light scatter depends on the physical and optical properties of the 

aerosol, the calibration does not guarantee that the instrument will respond accurately to other 

aerosols. Therefore, when the properties of the aerosol are unknown, which is likely the case for 

field measurements, filter sample gravimetric measurements are recommended for direct 

comparison to calibrate the instrument to the specific aerosols in the environment. 

A separate class of instrument is the Laser Particle Counter (LPC) or Optical Particle Counter 

(OPC), typically reporting concentration as number of particles/volume. As the names imply, 

this device is configured to literally count or detect the occurrence of single particles. This 

differs from the dust monitor which measures a group of particles. In the case of the LPC, the 

incoming aerosol sample must be diluted with particle-free air to ensure that particles are 

7
counted one at a time. Some LPCs simply display the total number of particles counted in a 

certain amount of time. However, most LPCs also display the size of the counted particles. This 

is possible because the light scattered by a particle carries information related to its size. The 

output of a LPC is generally broken down and displayed in ranges or bins, i.e. the number of 

measured particles occurring from (0.1 to 0.5) μm, (0.5 to 1.0) μm, (1.0 to 5.0) μm, etc. 

Generally, LPCs have an upper size limit for detection on the order of (20 to 35) μm. Upper 

limits of particle concentration usually occur in the range of (18 to 71) particles/cm3

. Because 

exposure limit guidelines are not expressed as number of particles/volume, interpreting the 

output of LPCs with regard to exposure limits poses difficulties. 

The instruments described above are portable hand-held instruments. They are designed for the 

purpose of collecting information in the field and workplace environments. Most instruments are 

capable of logging data to memory for one to two hours or more, and many are capable of 

transferring data to a portable computer so that near-real-time analysis of the data can occur. 

The applications of these instruments range from indoor air quality, HVAC (Heating Ventilation 

and Air Conditioning) inspections and filter efficiency testing, clean room contamination and 

monitoring, and workplace exposure monitoring such as construction, demolition, 

manufacturing, industrial processing, and mining. A few instruments such as the dust monitors 

have been adapted for use as personal exposure monitors. 

Technical Issues 

For a direct-reading particulate detector to be useful to the firefighter, it must provide 

information that accurately describes the environment of the firefighter. This list of potential 

technical issues and related questions is intended to serve as a starting point for discussions 

aimed toward providing sound technical guidance on using these instruments for the specific 

applications of the fire service. 

Tools at Hand

Direct-reading instruments to monitor harmful gases, such as CO, are routinely used by some fire 

departments to aid in incident command decisions. Many of the direct-reading particulate 

counters and dust monitors are designed for field applications where conditions are less 

controlled. In principle, these instruments could be used immediately by firefighters to provide 

some information about the respiratory threats present during overhaul. Ultimately the 

firefighter needs the instrument to provide a “Go” or “No Go” output. Lessons learned from the 

immediate use of off-the-shelf instruments can provide guidance on future device development. 

Issue: What guidance should be applied to interpreting the measurements of the direct-reading 

particulate counters or aerosol monitors? 

Issue: Are there simple modifications to the current off-the-shelf devices that can improve the 

usefulness to the firefighter? 

Issue: Should the current off-the-shelf devices incorporate size-selective features (and which are 

most important) to mimic particle deposition? (Examples are the personal samplers that make 

us of aerodynamic diameter size cuts.)

8
Measurement Fouling

Fire suppression will introduce large amounts of water to the structure. Combined with the high 

heat from the fire, a high humidity environment can exist during overhaul. 

Issue: Will high humidity foul the measurement? 

Issue: Should water droplets be removed from the measurement or included? Are there harmful 

gases produced by the fire that can be absorbed by water droplets? 

In some jurisdictions it is standard procedure to actively ventilate enclosed spaces that are being 

overhauled. Large fans are typically used which can produce significant wind speeds.

Issue: What are the effects of wind speed on the measurements? 

Issue: Will temperature extremes foul the measurement? 

Issue: What are other sources of measurement fouling? 

Monitoring the Unknown

Direct-reading particle counters and dust monitors produce the best results when they can be 

applied to detect particulates that are spherical, have a known refractive index, and a known size 

distribution. This set of conditions is not likely to occur during field measurements, and it is 

only achieved in a controlled laboratory setting with a great degree of difficulty. The present 

applications of these instruments are largely to monitor respiratory threats in environments where 

engineered controls are the first level of protection. Generally in these cases, the optical 

properties of the particulates are known or at least enough information is known to estimate the 

properties from similar particulates. The fire overhaul environment exists only after an 

uncontrolled release of respiratory threats from an array of burning sources and activities 

associated with the firefighting response. It is safe to classify it as an uncontrolled environment 

and one for which the particulate respiratory hazards are not well characterized. 

Issue: Because no two fires or their fire responses are exactly alike, how is the overhaul 

environment best characterized to promote increased respiratory protection through improved 

monitoring equipment and operating procedures? 

The measurement from the direct-reading devices should correlate well with some adverse health 

effect or preliminary markers. Current exposure limits for nuisance dust or particulates not 

otherwise characterized (PNOC) are expressed as mass concentration, respirable and inhalable. 

Since the total mass of any distribution of particles is dominated by the larger particles, size 

selective measurements are most appropriate. Very little information exists on the particle size 

distribution during overhaul. Since the fine particulate matter produced by the fire has longer 

settling times compared to the large particles, assumptions about how much of the particulate 

matter is respirable need to be considered. Therefore, more data is required to develop a better 

understanding of the actual respiratory hazards that are encountered. 

9
Issue: Are particulates serving as vehicles for exposure to other more toxic substances? 

Issue: If so, can adverse health effects be correlated with particulate concentrations? 

Issue: Which measurement, particulate mass concentration, particulate number concentration, 

or particulate surface area, most reflects the hazard caused by the unique conditions of 

particulate exposure during fire overhaul? 

Optical Properties of Particulates

A number of considerations must be factored into the design of a LPC. In virtually all 

commercial devices, the particles are treated as equivalent spheres, i.e., the calculated particle 

size is that of an ideal sphere that most closely matches the observed signal. Particles that 

radically deviate from this assumption can provide misleading results. In addition, a value for 

the particle refractive index must be assumed. For cases when this value is not accurately 

known, or when the sample consists of a combination of materials with differing refractive 

indices, the resulting measurement accuracy is also affected. 

Issue: Can the particulates found during fire overhaul be accurately measured using a generic 

set of optical properties? 

Issue: How appropriate is ISO dust as a standard particulate set for the fire overhaul 

measurements? 

Issue: Will it be necessary to develop a standard particulate set for the fire overhaul 

measurements? 

How Small is Small Enough?

A shortcoming of LPCs is their inability to detect nanometer sized particles. This is because 

light scattered from particles of this size is extremely weak. One class of instruments capable of 

extending this lower size limit down to (10 to 20) nm are called Condensation Particle Counters 

(CPC), also referred to as Condensation Nucleus Counters (CNC). These devices amplify the 

light scatter from the particle by condensing a solvent around it and growing the particle to a 

micrometer sized droplet, similar to the process that forms clouds in the atmosphere. The 

micrometer sized droplets are easily detected but the measurement is independent of the particle 

size. Therefore size information is lost. 

Issue: For the fire overhaul scenario, what is the lower limit of particle size that should be 

considered? 

User Needs 

For a firefighter to find particle monitoring equipment useful in their work, many needs must be 

met. This list of potential requirements and issues is intended as a starting point for discussions. 

1. Ruggedness in overhaul environment 

10
a. Lightweight 

b. Impact from dropping 

c. Impact from falling debris 

d. Direct water spray 

e. Heavy soot conditions 

2. Ruggedness in fire environment (if permanently attached to firefighter's turnout gear) 

a. Lightweight 

b. High temperatures 

c. Heavy soot conditions from fire 

d. High humidity of firefighting operation 

3. Simple operation 

a. Turn the instrument on and it begins to take readings 

b. No navigation through multiple levels of menu displays 

c. Any buttons, dials, or switches must be capable of manipulation by the gloved 

hand of a firefighter 

d. Large display with its own backlight 

e. Sufficient display lighting for viewing under all lighting conditions 

4. Firefighter training 

a. Instrument operation 

b. Instrument output: “Go” or “No Go” (no time to interpret the output) 

5. Sufficient warning for a variety of particulates 

a. Accurate output 

b. Standard criteria for what constitutes a hazard 

c. Audible / discernable alarm 

d. Distinguishable from other alarms in the environment (e.g. PASS (Personal Alert 

Safety System) device, low pressure air alert on SCBA) 

6. Monitoring and Recording 

a. Remote transmission to external command post, using a variety of electronic 

incident command board systems 

b. Type of information – received and sent 

c. Method of transmission 

11
WORKSHOP OBJECTIVES AND ORGANIZATION 

The workshop provided a forum to discuss the strategies, technologies, research needs, 

performance criteria, and potential standards for particulate monitoring, in order to inform the 

provision of respiratory protection in environments encountered by first responders. The 

participants included members of the fire service, particulate detector manufacturers, public 

health professionals, airborne particulate researchers, and members of standards organizations. 

Several participants represented more than one type of organization, enabling them to discuss 

respiratory protection issues from multiple perspectives. The workshop agenda and list of 

attendees are provided in Appendices 1 and 2 respectively. The slides and summaries for each 

presentation are provided in Appendix 3. Appendix 4 presents the results from the discussions of 

three breakout groups. 

Presentations 

The objectives of the workshop were explained in the first presentation, provided in Appendix 

3A. The most important of these objectives were to draft performance criteria for direct-reading 

particulate detectors that address the needs of the firefighting community. This presentation also 

demonstrated the analogous use of these devices in industrial work environments while 

recognizing the challenges of transferring the application to the work environment of the 

firefighter. To prepare the participants for discussions on the priorities for research and 

performance criteria, the remaining presentations explored: 

• Fire Overhaul Characterization 

• Particulate Detection Equipment 

• Firefighter Needs 

• Federal Agency Activity 

The first three presentations (Appendices 3B, 3C, 3D) were given by public health professionals 

who have studied firefighter exposure to respiratory hazards. They were asked to address some 

specific issues such as the following in their presentations: 

• Important sources and/or activities that generate respiratory hazards in the fire overhaul 

environment 

• The effectiveness of standard methods of environmental monitoring and personal 

sampling for respiratory threats in the fire overhaul environment 

• Correlating the long term health of firefighters to multiple low level exposures to 

hazardous substances 

• Firefighter training regarding respiratory protection and the actual use of protective 

equipment 

• Procedural changes that can reduce exposure during fire overhaul and the factors that 

impede the change 

The presentations point out the challenges of characterizing the respiratory hazards during fire 

overhaul and of establishing a link to the long term health of firefighters, as well as the challenge 

to convince firefighters to follow recommended safety procedures regarding respiratory 

protection even when the perceived risks are low. 

12
The next two presentations (Appendices 3E and 3F) were given by researchers in the field of 

airborne particle detection. They were asked to address some specific topics such as the 

following: 

• The physical characteristics of particulates generated by a fire 

• The physical properties of the particulates that may be measured by direct-reading 

particulate detectors 

• The basic theory of operation of the detectors 

• The advantages and general limitations of direct-reading particulate detectors 

These presentations describe the nature of the particulates to be found in the environment 

encountered by the firefighter, particularly during overhaul, and methods by which particulate 

properties, such as mass, size, and concentration, may be measured. 

The presentation in Appendix 3G was given by a Hazardous Materials Team Leader for the fire 

service. The speaker was asked to address topics regarding the needs of the fire service such as 

the following: 

• Instrument operation, output, accuracy, power requirements and durability 

• Cost of instrumentation – initial and lifetime 

• Training, instrument maintenance, and service 

The presentation describes the characteristics of an ideal particulate detector for the firefighter 

community, as seen by a member of the fire service. In addition to expectations of accuracy and 

sensitivity that would be required from any measuring device, the design of this detector should 

consider ease of use, minimal weight, and durability under conditions of extremes in 

temperature, high humidity (including steam), and physical abuse. 

The final two presentations (Appendices 3H and 3I) describe the research and standards 

development activities related to firefighter technology at two U.S. government agencies: NIST 

and the Department of Homeland Security (DHS). The Advanced Fire Service Technologies 

Program at NIST provides the science and performance metrics for development and 

implementation of new technology. DHS identifies and adopts standards and creates 

mechanisms to accelerate standards development. 

During the workshop, participants were given tours of some NIST Fire Research testing facilities 

in order to provide further stimulation for the breakout group discussions. Tours of the Fire 

Emulator/Detector Evaluator (FE/DE), Firefighter Equipment Evaluator, and the Large Fire 

Research Facility (LFRF) were given. The FE/DE tests fire detector response to various gas and 

particulate mixtures, and the Firefighter Equipment Evaluator tests the performance of firefighter 

equipment such as PASS devices under a variety of conditions, including high temperatures. 

The LFRF provides NIST with the capability to construct and measure fires in configurations 

from stovetops and chairs to full rooms and small buildings. 

Breakout group procedures 

To determine priorities for actions after the workshop, the workshop participants were split into 

three breakout groups. The members of each group were determined before the workshop so that 

the composition of each group would represent a mix of fire service members, detector 

manufacturers, regulators, and researchers. Facilitators assigned to the three breakout groups 

13
were Robert Vettori and Kathryn Butler from NIST and Paul Greenberg from NASA (National 

Aeronautics and Space Administration), all of whom had been involved in the organization of 

this workshop. Rodney Bryant, the fourth workshop organizer, visited each group to monitor 

progress and document results. The facilitators directed the brainstorming and ranking processes 

for the groups but did not take part in the voting to determine the final set of priorities. 

The groups were asked to respond to the following list of questions: 

• What are the prioritized research needs for direct-reading particulate detectors for 

first responders? 

- What are the prioritized research needs for assessing firefighter exposures during 

overhaul? 

• What are the prioritized performance criteria that are suitable for the first responder 

application? 

- How do they differ from current performance criteria? 

• What standards will be necessary? 

• What technological advances are necessary? 

These questions were categorized as Research Needs, Performance Criteria, Standards, and 

Technological Advances. The tables in Appendix 4 present the results from the brainstorming 

sessions of each breakout group. 

The next task after brainstorming was for each group to determine and rank their top five 

priorities in each category. In two of the groups (2-Blue and 3-Green), each participant was 

asked to vote on their top five choices. From these votes, further discussion identified and 

ranked the top five priorities for the group. In one group (1-Red), consensus to identify the top 

five priorities was achieved through open discussion but rankings were not assigned. During the 

discussion of the top five priorities, each group discovered commonalities among the responses 

that allowed multiple responses to be combined. 

After the breakout group sessions on the first day, all three groups had determined a set of five 

priorities from each of the four categories. Rankings had also been determined by two of the 

three groups. The four workshop organizers met to identify commonalities among the three 

groups, which were assembled and labeled. These common responses became the tentative 

priorities from the workshop as a whole. The responses in each group that did not overlap other 

responses were identified as outliers. 

A difficulty in this analysis resulted from differences in the definition of Technological 

Advances. Two groups set a short time horizon for their discussion and one group (2-Blue) set a 

long time horizon. Group 1 (Red) discussed longer term development but did not rank these 

responses. As a result, there was less overlap among ranked responses in this category. 

On the morning of the second day of the workshop, the breakout groups were assigned the task 

of clarification for the responses identified as outliers. Each group was allowed to bring two 

outliers back to the full body of workshop participants along with arguments for retaining them 

as workshop priorities. During this process, some outliers were found to belong to the common 

14
responses forming the tentative set of workshop priorities. This final set of sessions allowed 

each group to complete the task of setting group rankings of their top five responses in each 

category, along with descriptions of why each priority was important. The top five responses in 

each breakout group are presented first in each list in Appendix 4. 

In a final meeting of the organizers, the breakout group conclusions were assimilated into the 

tentative list of workshop priorities. This list was presented to the full body of workshop 

attendees, and a final discussion determined the conclusions of the workshop. 

The results of this final discussion are presented in the following section. 

15
BREAKOUT GROUP RESULTS 

The concluding list of priorities from the workshop on Real-Time Particulate Monitoring was 

determined in a final discussion by the entire workshop. Tables 2 through 5 present those 

priorities in each of the four categories of Research Needs, Performance Requirements, 

Standards, and Technological Advances. Each priority is classified under the heading of 

Priority, with the specific issues needing to be addressed assembled under the heading of Scope. 

The number of breakout groups that initially raised each priority as a group response is also 

listed in the final column. No attempt was made to further rank the priorities identified under 

each category. 

Under Research Needs, the priorities identified by this workshop are: 

• Health Effects for Firefighters from Overhaul 

• Particulate Characterization in Overhaul 

• Detector Response in Overhaul 

• Demonstration of Benefits 

• Hazard of Overhaul 

• New Filter Cartridge 

This workshop strongly supports the need for a better understanding of the health effects of 

particulates on firefighters, more comprehensive data on what the firefighter actually encounters 

during overhaul, and better understanding of the response of the detector to the overhaul 

environment. If air-purifying respirators are acceptable for firefighter use during overhaul, a 

new filter cartridge specifically designed for that environment is needed. In addition, this 

workshop recognizes the need to convince members of the fire service of the necessity of proper 

protection, based on good science. 

The priorities for Performance Criteria resulting from this workshop are: 

• Data Telemetry and Data Logging 

• Interpretation of Output and Instrument Operation 

• Physical Performance in the Environment 

• Types of Particulates 

• Cost of Ownership 

• Form and Function 

For good decision-making, a particle detector for the fire service needs to collect accurate data 

and transmit it to both the command post and the firefighter. It needs to indicate Hazard or No 

Hazard clearly and be easy to use, calibrate, and maintain. It must operate under the physically 

challenging conditions inherent to the firefighting environment (extremes of temperature, steam, 

shock, etc.). The types of particulates and procedures for use need to be well specified and will 

ultimately dictate the form of the device. 

The workshop priorities for developing Standards are: 

• Physical Performance in the Environment 

• Calibration and Maintenance 

• Standard Material and Testing Methods 

• Exposure Limits 

16
17

Some of the priorities for Performance Criteria are also reflected in this category. In order to 

give good measurements in the overhaul environment, standards that reflect the physical 

challenges must be established. Maintenance and calibration standards must be set. A standard 

material that reflects the composition (smoke/dust/droplets) of the aerosol in the overhaul 

environment is needed. Detectors should be tested against this standard material. Exposure 

limits need to be established for the workplace conditions inherent to firefighting. 

For Technological Advances, the workshop priorities are: 

• Real-Time Analysis 

• Data Telemetry and Data Logging 

• Device Packaging 

• Multi-Hazard Detection 

• Miniaturization 

Decision-making on proper respiratory protection requires real-time measurement analysis, 

display, and transmission to the firefighter and the command post. Exceptional events such as 

low battery signals and ceiling value alarms should be logged along with the measurements. 

Current technology particulate detectors need to be repackaged for use in the firefighter 

environment. And, over the long term, a small, lightweight, integrated all-in-one device 

containing detectors for both particulates and gases and other instruments such as a GPS (Global 

Positioning System) would be easier to carry and capture a richer set of information to guide 

decisions regarding firefighter safety. 

Further ranking of the priority issues was not a task of the workshop. However the issues that 

were agreed upon by all three groups or that occur in multiple categories deserve to be 

recognized as important among this group of participants. Those issues of priority were the 

following: 

• Health Effects for Firefighters from Overhaul (Research Needs) 

• Particulate Characterization in Overhaul (Research Needs) 

• Detector Response in Overhaul (Research Needs) 

• Data Telemetry and Data Logging (Performance Criteria and Technological Advances) 

• Interpretation of Output and Instrument Operation (Performance Criteria) 

• Physical Performance in the Environment (Performance Criteria and Standards) 

In addition, common themes occur in the context of the scope of the priority issues. Two of 

these occur in at least three categories and they are the need to characterize the particulates 

generated during a fire and firefighting activities (Research Needs: Particulate Characterization 

in Overhaul, Hazard of Overhaul, Performance Criteria: Types of Particulates, Standards: 

Standard Material and Testing Methods) and the need to develop an instrument that can stand up 

to the physical insults of firefighting while delivering credible results (Performance Criteria: 

Physical Performance in the Environment, Standards: Physical Performance in the 

Environment, Technological Advances: Device Packaging). 
Table 2. Responses to: “What are the prioritized research needs for direct-reading particulate detectors f

and “What are the prioritized research needs for assessing firefighter exposures during overhaul?” 

Priority Scope 

The exposure risks of firefighters need to be better understood. This includes an enhanced understanding of dosimetry metrics, including ways to distinguish between chronic and acuexposure, correlations with firefighter activities or procedures and other environmental factdependence on particulate size and composition. Specific questions include: What is the toxicological response to different sizes and compositions of particulates? Considering thaparticulates may also carry adsorbed gases, how should the hazard be defined with respect particulates and gases? Do water particles play a role in health effects? What about confousuch as contaminated turnout gear and exposure to truck exhaust that may also affect firefighealth? What are the procedures for overhaul, and how do they affect the timeline for safe 

Health Effects for Firefighters from Overhaul 

More comprehensive data are needed on the particle environment associated with real overenvironments, such as particle size distribution (PSD), number density, and particle compodatabase of what fires actually generate should be developed. The data should address issustatistical sufficiency and local vs. global measurements. 

Particulate Characterization in Overhaul 

Improved characterization of the instrument response function is needed to address complicinherent in mixtures, such as variations and combinations of composition and interference wgas-phase constituents or nuisance backgrounds. For example, how does water affect the measurement and should water droplets be included in the measurement? Instrument sampefficiency and biases as functions of environmental conditions need to be understood. Mulmethods of evaluating performance should be developed to account for the range of particle and particle sizes (ultrafines to 10 

μm particles). The procedures of overhaul (including tim

should be defined to guide the development of sampling/measurement strategies that are representative of the activity of the firefighters. 

Detector Response in Overhaul 

Firefighters need to be convinced that it is beneficial to wear a respirator mask or SCBA duoverhaul. Demonstration of the benefits that will result from the use of particle detector tecis necessary. Is it worthwhile to do the research? Consider the evidence of adverse health from scenarios that are analogous to overhaul, such as events of repeated low-level exposurpublished threshold exposure limits, to hazardous airborne matter. 

Demonstration of Benefits 

Quantify the respiratory hazard from particulates (and gases) found in the overhaul environmass, number concentration, size. This information is necessary to predict the exposures atoxicological response. 

Hazard of Overhaul 

Due to a range of multiple respiratory hazards found in overhaul, a new filter cartridge shoudesigned for optional respiratory protection for firefighters during overhaul. Features such of-service indicator should be included. New Filter Cartridge 

18
Table 3. Responses to: “What are the prioritized performance criteria that are suitable for the first resp

and “How do they differ from current performance criteria?” 

Priority Scope 

A particulate detector should collect measurements through data logging. In ato the firefighter or safety officer taking the measurements, the information shbe transmitted to the incident commander / command post. This provides a resystem for safety. 

Data Telemetry and Data Logging Interpretation of Output and Instrument Operation 

The instrument should provide a simple indication of Hazard or No Hazard (““No Go”). It should be simple to use, easy to calibrate, and have a simple dispThe instrument should take credible measurements throughout the range of environmental exposures. It should handle extremes of temperature and be wvibration-proof, and shock-proof. It should not create a new hazard. Other phconsiderations include size, power, weight, and display visibility. Criteria neeset for performance under a range of environmental conditions. 

Physical Performance in the Environment 

The hazards to be measured, including size range, concentration range, and acneed to be determined in order to build the device. Types of Particulates The burdens placed on the user (first responder) of particulate detectors, such maintenance and calibration, should be low. Cost of Ownership A sampling/measurement strategy that is representative of the activity will dicform of the device. Therefore the procedures of overhaul need to be defined. questions include: Where should the particulate measurement be taken? Shousafety officer perform an area sample of the overhaul site or should a personal 

be assigned to each firefighter? 

Form and Function 

19
20

Table 4. Responses to: “What standards will be necessary?” 

Priority Scope 

Physical Performance in the Environment 

The instrument needs to maintain its performance over the full range of enviroinsults, including humidity, temperature, and shock. Standard methods of evathe performance will be necessary. 

Calibration and Maintenance 

Maintenance and calibration standards must ensure that the unit performs to thmanufacturer’s specifications. There should be a calibration artifact (availabluser) that is used to perform field calibrations. 

Standard Material and Testing Methods 

A standard material that can be aerosolized needs to be defined that is reflectivoverhaul-specific particulates. Testing protocols and performance criteria needefined with regard to the standard material. 

Exposure Limits 

Firefighter exposures need to be quantified against the accepted workplace exstandards. Exposure limits need to be defined for the overhaul-specific standamaterial. Guidelines that establish the action to take when limits are reached nspecified. 

Table 5. Responses to: “What technological advances are necessary? 

Priority Scope 

Real-Time Analysis 

Decisions on alternative respiratory protection must be made in the field, therereal-time analysis (1 sec to 5 sec) is necessary. Quick turn-around on the analparticulate composition should be a targeted goal. 

Data Telemetry and Data Logging 

In addition to measurements, exceptional events such as low battery and ceilinalarms should be logged. Correlating measurements with specific firefighting during overhaul (localized demolition, forced ventilation, accelerometer, etc.) be attempted. 

Device Packaging The equipment needs to be repackaged for firefighter use. This will involve ruggedization, environmental tolerance, and improvements to expand device lMulti-Hazard Detection 

Develop a device with integrated functionality, such that it can measure particand gaseous species, physical location using GPS, sampling volumetric flow rhumidity, etc. (long term goal) Shrink equipment (including battery and pump) to make a smaller and lighter that would be better accepted by users (long term goal) Miniaturization 
SUMMARY 

Fire overhaul is a stage of firefighting where respiratory protection is often disregarded. 

However it is an occupational environment and appropriate respiratory protection should be 

worn when warranted. The combination of a vast amount of research and development in the 

fields of aerosol science, optical technology, environmental monitoring, and industrial hygiene, 

to name a few, has led to the existence of hand-held direct-reading particle counters and dust 

monitors. Making use of these devices to provide information to aid firefighters in selecting the 

appropriate respiratory protection should be explored. Exploring this potential application 

requires a better understanding of the respiratory hazards of overhaul, the needs of the firefighter, 

the current state-of-the-art technology, and the benefits of recent developments in particulate 

detection. 

The effort to explore this potential use of hand-held direct-reading particulate detectors began as 

a workshop. The workshop brought together members of the fire service, particulate detector 

manufacturers, public health professionals, airborne particulate researchers, and standards 

organizations to discuss the need for better technology to assess the level of respiratory 

protection that is required for environments encountered by first responders. The goal of the 

workshop was to identify instrument performance criteria based on first responder needs, 

prioritize issues in need of more research, identify necessary standards, and appreciate where 

new technology may help. 

The consensus of the workshop participants was that the following issues were important. 

• Conducting future research in the areas of 

o Health effects for firefighters from overhaul 

o Particulate characterization in overhaul 

o Detector response in the overhaul environment 

• Defining performance criteria for 

o Data telemetry and data logging 

o Instrument operation and interpretation of instrument output 

o Physical performance of the instrument in the overhaul environment 

• Defining standards with respect to the 

o Physical performance of the instrument in the overhaul environment 

• Developing new technology to benefit 

o Data telemetry and data logging 

This list of priorities provides guidance toward selecting the next steps forward. It also provides 

a foundation of research needs to further refine and to build upon. 

This workshop was a first attempt to define the needs of the firefighter community for 

monitoring particulates in overhaul environments and to prioritize areas of research and 

development to meet those needs. The consensus resulting from workshop discussions is 

21
expected to provide a strong foundation for the development of new tools to aid firefighters in 

selecting the appropriate respiratory protection, standard testing protocols to insure that 

equipment meets the needs of first responders, and performance criteria that allow industry to 

adapt the technology to the specific need and improve where necessary. 

 

22
REFERENCES

 [1] J. L. Burgess, C. J. Nanson, D. M. Bolstad-Johnson, R. Gerkin, T. A. Hysong, R. C. Lantz, 

D. L. Sherrill, C. D. Crutchfield, S. F. Quan, A. M. Bernard, and M. L. Witten, Adverse 

Respiratory Effects Following Overhaul in Firefighters, Journal of Occupational and 

Environmental Medicine 43 (5), 467-473 (2001). 

 [2] D. M. Bolstad-Johnson, J. L. Burgess, C. D. Crutchfield, S. Storment, R. Gerkin, and J. R. 

Wilson, Characterization of Firefighter Exposures During Fire Overhaul, AIHAJ 61 (5), 

636-641 (2000). 

 [3] T. LaTourrette, D. J. Peterson, J. T. Bartis, B. A. Jackson, and A. Houser, Protecting 

Emergency Responders: Community Views of Safety and Health Risks and Personal 

Protection Needs, MR-1646 (2), RAND Corporation, Arlington, VA, (2003). 

 [4] Report of the National Fire Service Research Agenda Symposium, (2005). 

 [5] B. K. Cantrell, K. L. Williams, W. F. Watss, Jr., and R. A. Jankowski, Aerosol 

Measurement: Principles, Techniques, and Applications, Van Nostrand Reinhold, New 

York, K. Willeke and P. A. Baron, eds., 591-611 (1993). 

 [6] 2006 TLVs and BEIs, American Conference of Governmental Industrial hygienists, 

Cincinnati, OH, (2006). 

 [7] K. M. Butler and G. W. Mulholland, Generation and Transport of Smoke Components, Fire 

Technol. 40 (2), 149-176 (2004). 

 [8] R. G. Gann, J. D. Averill, K. M. Butler, W. W. Jones, G. W. Mulholland, J. L. Neviaser, T. 

J. Ohlemiller, R. D. Peacock, P. A. Reneke, and J. R. Hall, International Study of the 

Sublethal Effects of Fire Smoke on Survivability and Health: Phase I Final Report, NIST 

TN 1439 National Institute of Standards and Technology, Gaithersburg, MD, (2001). 

 [9] L. Claudio, Environmental Aftermath, Environ. Health Perspect. 109 (11), A528-A536 

(2001). 

[10] J. D. Pleil, A. F. Vette, B. A. Johnson, and S. M. Rappaport, Air Levels of Carcinogenic 

Polycyclic Aromatic Hydrocarbons After the World Trade Center Disaster, Proc. Natl. 

Acad. Sci. U. S. A 101 (32), 11685-11688 (8-10-2004). 

[11] E. Swartz, L. Stockburger, and D. A. Vallero, Polycyclic Aromatic Hydrocarbons and 

Other Semivolatile Organic Compounds Collected in New York City in Response to the 

Events of 9/11, Environ. Sci. Technol. 37 (16), 3537-3546 (8-15-2003). 

[12] P. J. Landrigan, P. J. Lioy, G. Thurston, G. Berkowitz, L. C. Chen, S. N. Chillrud, S. H. 

Gavett, P. G. Georgopoulos, A. S. Geyh, S. Levin, F. Perera, S. M. Rappaport, and C. 

Small, Health and Environmental Consequences of the World Trade Center Disaster, 

Environ. Health Perspect. 112 (6), 731-739 (2004). 

23
[13] J. Jankovic, W. Jones, J. Burkhart, and G. Noonan, Environmental-Study of Firefighters, 

Annals of Occupational Hygiene 35 (6), 581-602 (1991). 

[14] J. Jankovic, W. Jones, V. Castranova, and N. Dalal, Measurement of Short-Lived Reactive 

Species and Long-Lived Free Radicals in Air Samples From Structural Fires, Applied 

Occupational and Environmental Hygiene 8 (7), 650-654 (1993). 

[15] P. W. Brandtrauf, L. F. Fallon, T. Tarantini, C. Idema, and L. Andrews, Health-Hazards of 

Fire Fighters - Exposure Assessment, British Journal of Industrial Medicine 45 (9), 606-

612 (1988). 

[16] G. M. Kinnes and G. A. Hine, Health Hazard Evaluation Report 96-0171-2692 Bureau of 

Alcohol, Tobacco, and Firearms Washington, D.C., HETA-96-0171-2692 NIOSH, 

Cincinnati, Ohio, (1998). 

[17] D. M. Feldman, S. L. Baron, B. P. Bernard, B. D. Lushniak, G. Banauch, N. Arcentales, K. 

J. Kelly, and D. J. Prezant, Symptoms, Respirator Use, and Pulmonary Function Changes 

Among New York City Firefighters Responding to the World Trade Center Disaster, Chest 

125 (4), 1256-1264 (2004). 

[18] G. I. Banauch, C. Hall, M. Weiden, H. W. Cohen, T. K. Aldrich, V. Christodoulou, N. 

Arcentales, K. J. Kelly, and D. J. Prezant, Pulmonary Function After Exposure to the 

World Trade Center Collapse in the New York City Fire Department, Am. J. Respir. Crit 

Care Med. 174 (3), 312-319 (8-1-2006). 

[19] A. S. Geyh, S. Chillrud, D. L. Williams, J. Herbstman, J. M. Symons, K. Rees, J. Ross, S. 

R. Kim, H. J. Lim, B. Turpin, and P. Breysse, Assessing Truck Driver Exposure at the 

World Trade Center Disaster Site: Personal and Area Monitoring for Particulate Matter and 

Volatile Organic Compounds During October 2001 and April 2002, J. Occup. Environ. 

Hyg. 2 (3), 179-193 (2005). 

[20] Exposure and Human Health Evaluation of Airborne Pollution From the World Trade 

Center Disaster (External Review Draft), EPA/600/R-02/002A Washington, D.C., 

U.S.Environmental Protection Agency, ed., (2002). 

[21] P. J. Lioy, C. P. Weisel, J. R. Millette, S. Eisenreich, D. Vallero, J. Offenberg, B. Buckley, 

B. Turpin, M. Zhong, M. D. Cohen, C. Prophete, I. Yang, R. Stiles, G. Chee, W. Johnson, 

R. Porcja, S. Alimokhtari, R. C. Hale, C. Weschler, and L. C. Chen, Characterization of the 

Dust/Smoke Aerosol That Settled East of the World Trade Center (WTC) in Lower 

Manhattan After the Collapse of the WTC 11 September 2001, Environ. Health Perspect. 

110 (7), 703-714 (2002). 

24
APPENDIX 1 - WORKSHOP AGENDA 

Thursday, May 3, 2007

7:40 am NIST Shuttle Pick-up From Holiday Inn 

8:00 am Registration - Coffee and Refreshments 

8:30 am Welcome William Grosshandler

NIST Fire Research Division Chief

8:45 am Workshop Objectives R. Bryant

NIST

9:00 am Firefighter Health Effects: Overhaul and Beyond J. Burgess

University of Arizona

9:20 am Fire Overhaul Characterization and Exposure Assessment R. Anthony

University of Arizona

No Smoke, No Fire, No Hazard: A Firefighter's Perspective on the Hazards of 

Fire Overhaul and How to Protect Against Them D. Bolstad-Johnson

9:40 am 

City of Phoenix Fire Department

10:00 am Detecting Particulates in Real-Time: Optical Techniques D. Chen

Washington University in St. Louis

10:20 am Break/Coffee and Refreshments 

10:30 am What We Know About Particulates Resulting From Fires G. Mulholland

NIST

10:50 am The Ideal Detector for the Fire Service R. Stephan

Montgomery County Maryland HazMat

11:10 am NIST Fire Fighter Technology Program Overview N. Bryner

NIST Program Manager

11:30 am DHS Standards Development Program Overview P. Mattson

NIST Program Manager

12:00 pm Lunch/NIST Cafeteria 

1:00 pm Tours: Fire Emulator/Detector Evaluator, Firefighter Equipment 

Evaluator 

1:30 pm Guidelines for Breakout Sessions R. Bryant

1:50 pm Breakout Sessions Begin 

3:30 pm Break/Coffee and Refreshments 

3:40 pm Breakout Sessions Resume 

4:30 pm Each Group Wraps Up Session with Summary 

5:00 pm Adjourn for the Day/NIST Shuttle to Holiday Inn 

Friday, May 4, 2007

7:40 am NIST Shuttle Pick-up From Holiday Inn 

8:00 am Coffee and Refreshments 

8:30 am Reconvene Working Groups 

9:30 am Tour: Large Fire Research Facility 

10:00 am Break/Coffee and Refreshments

10:20 am Reconvene Workshop (All Participants) 

10:30 am Deliberation on Results from Breakout Sessions 

11:40 am Summarize the Results 

12:00 pm Lunch/NIST Cafeteria: Discuss Collaboration Opportunities 

1:00 pm Tours: SCBA Leak Experiments 

1:30 pm Adjourn the Workshop 

25
APPENDIX 2 - WORKSHOP ATTENDEES

T. Renee Anthony Jeff Burgess 

University of Arizona University of Arizona 

Mel and Enid Zuckerman College of Public 

Health 

Mel and Enid Zuckerman College of Public 

Health 

1295 N. Martin Ave. 1295 N. Martin Ave. 

Tucson, AZ 85725 Tucson, AZ 85724-5210 

520-626-3591 520-626-4918 

tra@email.arizona.edu jburgess@u.arizona.edu 

Don Birou Kathy Butler 

New Orleans Fire Department NIST 

13721 Grace Avenue 100 Bureau Dr., Stop 8665 

Walker, LA 70785 Gaithersburg, MD 20899 

225-791-6595 301-975-6673 

mith424@aol.com kathryn.butler@nist.gov 

Dawn Bolstad-Johnson Da-Ren Chen 

Phoenix Fire Department Washington University in St. Louis 

150 S. 12th St. Cupple II 214 

Phoenix, AZ 85034 One Brookings Drive 

602-534-6222 St. Louis, MO 63130 

dawn.bolstad@phoenix.gov 314-935-7924 

chen@seas.wustl.edu 

Rodney Bryant 

NIST Thomas Cleary 

100 Bureau Dr., Stop 8662 NIST 

Gaithersburg, MD 20899 100 Bureau Dr., Stop 8664 

301-975-6487 Gaithersburg, MD 20899 

rodney.bryant@nist.gov 301-975-6858 

thomas.cleary@nist.gov 

Nelson Bryner 

NIST Michelle Donnelly 

100 Bureau Dr., Stop 8661 NIST 

Gaithersburg, MD 20899 100 Bureau Dr., Stop 8662 

301-975-6868 Gaithersburg, MD 20899 

nelson.bryner@nist.gov 301-975-6480 

michelle.donnelly@nist.gov 

26
Nathan Dower Alan Matta 

Dallas Fire-Rescue Department Thermo Fisher Scientific 

5000 Dolphin Rd. 27 Forge Parkway 

Building A Franklin, MA 02038 

Dallas, TX 75223 617-899-3627 

214-437-9812 alan.matta@thermofisher.com 

nathan.dower@dallascityhall.com 

Philip Mattson 

Frank Fitzpatrick NIST 

Federal Occupational Health 100 Bureau Dr., Stop 8102 

6309 Huntover Lane Gaithersburg, MD 20899 

Rockville, MD 20852 301-975-3396 

301-873-6137 philip.mattson@nist.gov 

fgfitz@aol.com 

Michael Meyer 

Casey Grant Climatronics Corporation 

NFPA Research Foundation 140 Wilbur Place 

One Batterymarch Park Bohemia, NY 11716 

Quincy, MA 02169-7471 518-280-8733 

617-984-7284 mbmeyer@metone.com 

cgrant@nfpa.org 

Mitchell Molenof 

Paul Greenberg District of Columbia Fire and EMS 

NASA-Glenn Research Center Department 

21000 Brookpark Road, MS 110-3 2531 Sherman Ave. NW 

Cleveland, OH 44136 Washington, DC 20001 

216-433-3621 202-673-6432 

Paul.S.Greenberg@nasa.gov mitchell.molenof@dc.gov 

William Grosshandler George Mulholland 

NIST NIST 

100 Bureau Dr., Stop 8660 100 Bureau Dr., Stop 8662 

Gaithersburg, MD 20899 Gaithersburg, MD 20899 

301-975-2310 301-257-8722 

william.grosshandler@nist.gov georgewm@umd.edu 

Nathan Marsh Greg Olson 

NIST TSI Incorporated 

100 Bureau Dr., Stop 8664 500 Cardigan Road 

Gaithersburg, MD 20899 Shoreview, MN 55126 

301-975-5441 651-490-4042 

nathan.marsh@nist.gov greg.olson@tsi.com 

27
28

Robert Stephan 

Montgomery Co. Fire and Rescue Service 

8001 Conneticut Ave 

Fire Station #7 

Chevy Chase, MD 20815 

240-773-4707 

Robert.Stephan@montgomerycountymd.gov 

Mark Sullivan 

Environmental Devices Corporation 

Fieldstone Industrial Park 4 Wilder Drive 

Building 15 

Plasitow, NH O3865 

603-378-2112 

mark@hazdust.com 

John Szalajda 

NIOSH/NPPTL 

626 Cochrans Mill Road 

PO Box 18070 

Pittsburgh, PA 15236 

412-386-6627 

zfx1@cdc.gov 

Robert Vettori 

NIST 

100 Bureau Dr., Stop 8661 

Gaithersburg, MD 20899 

301-975-6577 

robert.vettori@nist.gov 

Jiann Yang 

NIST 

100 Bureau Dr., Stop 8662 

Gaithersburg, MD 20899 

301-975-6662 

jiann.yang@nist.gov 
APPENDIX 3 - WORKSHOP PRESENTATIONS 

APPENDIX 3.A – Workshop Objectives 

Rodney Bryant, Building and Fire Research Laboratory, NIST 

There is a need for real-time identification of hazards to enable selection of appropriate respiratory protection challenge is to transfer the protocols and technology used in industrial environments where the respiratocharacterized to the fire environment where the threats are less characterized. This can be accomplished by firdevices that can be applied for read-time particulate detection during fire overhaul, then determining perstandards that modify these devices to better suit the application. The workshop is intended to bring membertogether to begin this process. In addition to the production of a report that lays out priorities for research and 

the workshop is anticipated to expose attendees to new tools and methods to improve safety, provide opporapplications of available technology, and present opportunities for new research, new focus, and future collabora

29
30
31
APPENDIX 3.B – Firefighter Health Effects: Overhaul and Beyond 

Jeffrey Burgess, University of Arizona 

This presentation addresses the question of whether it is possible to establish a link between long-term health efflow-level exposure to multiple hazardous substances, and if so, what further research is needed. Annual pulperformed on firefighters indicate accelerated rates of decline in pulmonary function. Although SCBAs providprotection in hazardous environments, they are heavy and impede communication, so there is resistance overhaul. Air purifying respirators (APRs) are lighter and more comfortable, but there is evidence of breakmaterials. A comparison of biomarkers for Phoenix firefighters wearing APRs during overhaul operations that t

after fire extinguishment and Tucson firefighters with no protection during slower overhaul operations shows th

meaningful conclusions from data in the absence of good controls. The respiratory function of Phoenix firefigthe use of protective gear, raising the issue of whether the difference is due to possible breakthrough and poor foverhaul procedures. Exposure studies need to consider different types of fires, such as dumpster fires and occur outdoors, where firefighters may not use respiratory protection.

32
33
34
35
36
37
APPENDIX 3.C – Fire Overhaul Characterization and Exposure Assessment 

T. Renee Anthony, University of Arizona 

Effects of various contaminants found in overhaul environments are presented along with a comparison exposures with short term exposure limits. Particulates may be classified as PAH (polycyclic aromatic hydrocar

are carcinogenic, and PNOR (particulates not otherwise regulated), for which size is an important factor. Mparticulates include pump-filter and direct-reading monitors. Environmental studies correlate cardiovascuparticulates. Monitoring free radicals is a new effort to find a measurement that indicates levels of many contnot a good predictor. PAHs are expensive to analyze and difficult to analyze when sampling from fires. The includes the respirable mass of particulates along with gas concentrations of HCHO (formaldehyde) and acroleiquantify multiple exposures. Measurements indicate that the irritant index is much greater than unity durin

respirator cartridge breakthrough test, other materials such as metals were found riding on the particulates.

38
39
40
41
42
43
APPENDIX 3.D – No Smoke, No Fire, No Hazard: A Firefighter’s Perspective on the 

 Hazards of Fire Overhaul and How to Protect Against Them 

Dawn Bolstad-Johnson, City of Phoenix Fire Department 

Firefighters know that the SCBA provides the best respiratory protection available in known or unknown hazard

high level of training attempts to endow the new recruit with an appreciation for the need for respiratory protectrespirator training is given annually. The training does not instill permanent habits, however, and when the smoverhaul the sense of danger disappears as well. The use of respiratory protection depends on the insistencofficer, and is highly variable within a fire department and from one fire department to another. Overhau

discuss/review what transpired in fighting the fire, and the SCBA masks are often removed for better communwide enforcement and education based on scientific evidence are needed to keep SCBAs on during overhaucomfortable with using four-gas meters, which monitor oxygen, hydrogen sulfide, carbon monoxide, and combuassess for flammable conditions or conditions of respiratory hazards.

44
45
46
47
48
APPENDIX 3.E – Detecting Particulates in Real-Time: Optical Techniques 

Da-Ren Chen, Washington University in St. Louis 

Optical techniques for detecting particulates take advantage of the changes to an incident light beam causeparticles. Refraction, reflection and diffraction are the three types of elastic scattering mechanisms, which rediwithout changing its wavelength. Refraction is the bending of light within a particle; reflection redirects the surface; and diffraction bends light external to the particle. Diffraction works best for large particles. Sin

requires the sensing volume to be small compared to the inverse of the particle number concentration. Detect

count individual particles and may measure particle size distribution. Multiple particle detection works for la

Photometers are simple, inexpensive, and robust but need to be carefully calibrated. For measurements of mass, on the particulate size distribution.

49
50
51
52
53
APPENDIX 3.F – What We Know About Particulates Resulting from Fires 

George Mulholland, Building and Fire Research Laboratory, NIST 

The smoke aerosol is described in more detail in this presentation. Particulates may be either solid particFlaming results in large agglomerates of primary spheres that are roughly 30 nm in diameter, and smoldering reabout 2 μm in diameter. Information on smoke yield and particle size from various fuels is presented. Deposstrong function of particle diameter. Non-flaming smoke scatters more than 90 % of light. Its composition is rgases may adsorb to its surface. This raises the question of what materials would be appropriate for a standard sm

54
55
56
57
58
APPENDIX 3.G – The Ideal Detector for the Fire Service 

Robert Stephan, Montgomery County Maryland Fire and Rescue Service 

The fire environment is a highly hazardous environment that contains hundreds of unknown vapors and gunknown size distribution and toxic composition. The ideal detector for the fire service must be functional 

temperature extremes. It must be lightweight and durable, and must be operable by a user wearing heavy glov

should not need frequent cleaning or be easily clogged. The detector must be able to function in the significproduced by firefighting. The most dangerous compounds should be detectable in real time. The device msamples for analysis after the fire. Skin samples and nose swabs are alternative methods for getting morfirefighting. Particles can affect the respiratory tract, skin, eyes, and digestive system, although absor

contaminants through the skin is not currently considered by the fire service.

59
60
61
62
APPENDIX 3.H – NIST Fire Fighter Technology Program Overview 

Nelson Bryner, Building and Fire Research Laboratory, NIST 

The Advanced Fire Service Technologies (AFST) Program objectives are to 

• Provide the science and performance metrics for development and implementation of new technology, • Enable an information-rich environment, firefighter training tools, and application of innovative new techn• Improve effectiveness and safety of first responders, and • Support Fire Loss Reduction Goal and facilitate the development and transfer of BFRL research to the fire 

Funding is prioritized to improve equipment where no current metrics or standards exist and to improve standards, to integrate emerging technology with the biggest impact, and to transfer technology to the fire servicsimulators and training programs. Projects in this program include the characterization of firefighter respir

modeling and experiments, hose stream effectiveness, standards for thermal imaging cameras, PASS device collapse prediction, emergency responder and occupant locator technology, and tactical decision aids, among ma

63
64
65
66
67
68
69
70
71
72
73
74
75
APPENDIX 3.I – DHS Standards Development Program Overview 

Philip Mattson, Office of Law Enforcement Standards, NIST 

The DHS Standards Development Program identifies and adopts standards and creates mechanisms to 

development. Although DHS does not have the statutory authority to issue or enforce standards, with a few legapromote the development of voluntary consensus standards. For the public safety community, the interaction wi

Office of Law Enforcement Standards (OLES). The Interagency Board for Equipment Standardization and Intedeveloped a Standardized Equipment List (SEL) containing items essential for responding to Chemical, BioNuclear, and Explosive (CBRNE) incidents. The objective is to provide manufacturers with guidance in requirements. The program concentrates on the tools needed to protect people and to identify the hazard. purchase whatever they want with their own funds, but to use DHS funding, equipment must conform to appStandards Development Process involves the following steps in a continuous loop: 

• Solicit user guidance • Analyze the hazard and identify operational factors (Requirements Development) • Identify existing standards, establish performance levels, and draft new standard and test methods (Stan

Research) 

• Review & validate standard and test methods (Test Method Validation) • Issue and adopt the standard • Develop assessment model and conduct conformity testing (Conformity Assessment Program) 

76
77
78
79
80
81
82
83

APPENDIX 3.J – Guidelines for Breakout Sessions 

Rodney Bryant, Building and Fire Research Laboratory, NIST 
84

APPENDIX 4 –BREAKOUT GROUP DISCUSSIONS 

The tables in this appendix present the results from the brainstorming sessions of each breakout 

group. The groups were asked to respond to the following list of questions: 

• What are the prioritized research needs for direct-reading particulate detectors for 

first responders? 

- What are the prioritized research needs for assessing firefighter exposures during 

overhaul? 

• What are the prioritized performance criteria that are suitable for the first responder 

application? 

- How do they differ from current performance criteria? 

• What standards will be necessary? 

• What technological advances are necessary? 

These questions are categorized in the tables as Research Needs, Performance Criteria, 

Standards, and Technological Advances. 

The next task after brainstorming was for each group to determine and rank their top five 

priorities in each category. In two groups (2-Blue and 3-Green), each participant was asked to 

vote on their top five choices. From these votes, further discussion identified and ranked the top 

five priorities for the group. In one group (1-Red), consensus to identify the top five priorities 

was achieved through open discussion but rankings were not assigned. During the discussion of 

the top five priorities, each group discovered commonalities among the responses that allowed 

multiple responses to be combined. The responses are listed in Tables 6 through 8, with the top 

five priorities listed first. 
Table 6. Group 1 (Red) – Paul Greenberg, facilitator 

Research Needs Performance Crite

1) More comprehensive data on particle environment associated with real 1) Form factor 

overhaul environments, including particle size distribution (PSD), number density, composition, other moments; statistical sufficiency (local vs global micro-environment); scenarios (wildland vs residential, vehicular, dumpster, vegetative, industrial) 

- Size, power, weight - Durability (temperature, moisture, sho- Operability, visibility 

2) Measurement performance 

2) Enhanced understanding of dosimetry metrics: distinguish between - Size range (emphasis on ultrafines) 

acute/chronic exposure, toxicity correlations with other environmental factors (are particulates a suitable proxy for toxicity assessment?), human/animal testing, leverage off existing environmental standards 

- Concentration range - Accuracy 

3) Cost of ownership 

3) Improved characterization of instrument response function: PSD, - Calibration requirements 

number density, mixtures (variations/combinations in composition, interference with other gas-phase constituents or nuisance backgrounds e.g. H

- Lifetime - Clogging and clearance 

2O vapor) - Maintenance protocol 

4) Comparative understanding of overhaul environment, procedures, and 4) Other 

timeline - Battery type/charging method, schedu

5) Instrument sampling efficiency and biases as a function of environmental - Ancillary collection membrane 

conditions - Drift, correlation, interference, etc. wi

Conceptual studies for miniaturization and/or enhanced tolerance or environment 

performance - Logging vs instantaneous 

Materials characteristics (mixtures of materials, scaling and interrelation of - Complexity of data display (Go/No G

various “test” facilities) 5) Ability to resolve particle size distribution 

measurements 

Cost / availability Desorption vs composition analysis Local information vs transmitted 

85
Table 6 (cont.). Group 1 (Red) – Paul Greenberg, facilitator 

Standards Technological Advan

1) Need for a standard reflective of combustion/pyrolysis-specific materials Near-term perspective: 1-3 year horizon: 2) Testing standard: materials, protocols, interactions, instrument response 1) Ruggedness, lifetime, environmental tolera

(to what quantities or moments) and accuracy 2) Display visibility and information content/

3) Specification of operational environment requirements 3) Self calibration and internal diagnostics (i.e4) Instrument configuration and operability validation) 5) Linkage, buy-in, or uniformity with other certifying standards and 4) Emphasis on detection sensitivity in ultrafi

organizations (e.g. OSHA, NIOSH, EPA, ACGIH, NFPA) 5) Data telemetry 

Longer term development – not ranked: - Ability to resolve particle size distribution- Cost reduction per delivered and maintain- Improvements in demands and procedures - Integrated functionality (e.g. other sensors 

GPS, volumetric flow measurement) 

- Immunity to interferences (both species e.

gases; and environmental e.g. RFI – Radio acoustic) 

- “Intelligent” processing (e.g. multiple mom

dosage vs. standard, correlations with othe

- Reduction in false positives - Reduction in size, power, mass 

86
Table 7. Group 2 (Blue) – Kathryn Butler, facilitator 

Research Needs Performance Crite

1) Better definition of the hazard 1) What is to be measured? Need to define w

- Relative danger of particulates and gases order to build the device. - Is gas riding on particulates? (carbon is a great absorber) 2) Where should it be measured? Personal vs- There is an incomplete understanding of exposure risks of outside, etc. This will dictate the form of t

firefighters, including risks over a range of activities (wildland vs. structural fires, search & rescue vs. overhaul vs. investigation) and effects of nanoparticle exposure on health 

3) Environment 

- Temperature extremes (both hot and co- Vibration-proof, shockproof, waterpro

- What is the timeline for safe operation? - Credible measurements throughout the 

2) Database for what fires actually generate experienced by the firefighter 3) Confounders – other exposures affecting firefighter health (e.g. 

contaminated turnout gear, exposure to truck exhaust) 

- Should not create new hazard 

4) Go/no-go display – simplicity 

4) Water particles – are they important? How do they affect measurements? 

Should water be measured as a particle? Does it play a role in health effects? 

5) Data collection and logging, and distributio

firefighter and incident commander; redun

No interference with communications 

5) Benefit analysis – is it worth it to do the research? At what point do you 

tell firefighters that they must wear the SCBA? 

1-button / heavy glove operation Cost benefit analysis 

When is it safe to downgrade PPE? All-in-one meter for gas and particle identificaIs there an indicator gas or particulate? particle) Is the respiratory track the only route of entry to consider? (e.g. skin, eyes, 

ingestion) 

Small Service life > 1 year 

Product distribution or representative sampling – should every firefighter 

have a detector? 

Minimal training If batteries, make them regular alkaline 

How must a 40-year-old technology be hardened for firefighter use? Size distribution or total mass Should all fires be treated the same? (wildland vs. home vs. big box) All-inone or specific? Measure temperature 

87
Table 7 (cont.). Group 2 (Blue) – Kathryn Butler, facilitator 

Standards Technological Advan

1) Instrument must maintain performance over the full range of Long term development (5-10 years): 

environmental insults (humidity, temperature, shock) 1) Detection of multiple hazards 

2) Wider dynamic response to meet challenge

concentrations and maximum concentratioenvironment 

2) Size range of particle measurement 3) Need to quantify against accepted exposure standards (REL – 

Recommended Exposure Limits, TLV – Threshold Limit Values, PEL – Permissible Exposure Limits) 3) Shrink equipment (including battery and pu

4) Maintenance and calibration to ensure the unit performs to device that would be better accepted by us

manufacturer’s specifications 4) Knowledge of exposure in real-time (1-5 s

5) Training to assure uniformity of use decisions 

Electrical safety 5) Data logging – event (alarm, low battery, eRadio frequency interference Battery performance and pump efficiency Reliability Improved reliability 

Wireless link to incident commander Calibration – how to do this 

88
Table 8. Group 3 (Green) – Robert Vettori, facilitator 

Research Needs Performance Crite

1) What is physiological response to different sizes of particles? Prove to 

me that I need a mask or SCBA. Need to show that it is worthwhile. 

1) Want it to data log 

 2) Hazard or No Hazard – Go or No Go for fi

2) Multi-metric method – (particle source, exposure) 3) Simple and easy to calibrate 3) Identify hazard of overhaul – What is the level of hazard in terms of ppm, 

risk, g/m

4) Transmit to command post 

3 5) What will NFPA criteria be for physical pe

temperature, humidity)? – this is mainly fo

, size 

4) Design new cartridge 5) Determine composition of aerosol Where is the hazard? Location of emissions – find it, identify source – what is it? Small for everyone Use TIC to find hot spots Color or flashing – no more sound Is APR or SCBA the right mask? Attach to helmet Powered APR – is it better? Must mean something Different cartridges – which cartridge is best? Reliable – no false positive Put cartridges in series Physical performance What is coming from wood? On/off unless HazMat/Urban Search And RescCombustion particles from overhaul Interest in other than overhaul Skin, dermal absorption All routes of exposure How do detectors respond to smoke/mass concentration? If higher than ambient or background, call it an action level; if measurement 

exceeds 5 mg/m3 (current standard), some action is taken 

What is size distribution of non-flaming smoke aerosol? Equipment calibration for particles Who do we protect – all incidents or 80 % of normal stuff? Baseline of toxicity Correlation between vapor and particle 

Smart ticket for particles – make turnout gear of this material

89
Table 8 (cont.). Group 3 (Green) – Robert Vettori, facilitator 

Standards Technological Advan

1) Guidelines for what actions you take when the device hits a certain level Near-term perspective: 1-3 year horizon: 

(mass, number, size distribution). This is a risk management practice since we don’t have a standard yet – proactive approach. 

1) End of service life indicators for cartridges 2) Improvements to Air Purifying Respirators 

2) Standard exposure limit 3) Real time analysis for Fire Department use

with a sample and have apparatus on scene instrument vs. lots of instruments, need to sample 

3) Physical performance standards 4) Standard for calibration – calibration artifact 5) Standard smoke NIOSH guidelines 4) From aerosol arena – What should the wavOSHA best practices what should be the detection angle, how mNeed to establish limits for the firefighter workplace, e.g. 5 mg/m3 5) The technology is there to do what we wan

be repackaged and we need to know what 

 for 8 

hours for respirable dust, 15 mg/m3 for total dust – Time Weighted 

Average (TWA) Money is needed 

Standard communication protocol for data logging Standard medical checks for annual physical – HazMat teams do this already 

90