This publication is available free of charge from http://dx.doi.org/10.6028/NIST.SP.1174

NIST Special Publication 1174

Smart Firefighting

Workshop Summary Report

March 24-25, 2014

Arlington, Virginia

Anthony Hamins

Nelson Bryner

Albert Jones

Galen Koepke

Casey Grant

Anand Raghunathan

http://dx.doi.org/10.6028/NIST.SP.1174
This publication is available free of charge from http://dx.doi.org/10.6028/NIST.SP.1174

NIST Special Publication 1174

Smart Firefighting 

Workshop Summary Report

March 24-25, 2014

Arlington, Virginia

Anthony Hamins

Nelson Bryner

Fire Research Division

Engineering Laboratory

Albert Jones

Systems Integration Division

Engineering Laboratory

Galen Koepke

Electromagnetics Division

Physical Measurement Laboratory

Casey Grant

Fire Protection Research Foundation

Quincy, MA

Anand Raghunathan

Energetics Incorporated

Columbia, MD

This publication is available free of charge from:

http://dx.doi.org/10.6028/NIST.SP.1174

August 2014

U. S. Department of Commerce

Penny Pritzker, Secretary

National Institute of Standards and Technology

Willie May, Acting Under Secretary of Commerce for Standards and Technology and Acting Director 
SMART FIREFIGHTING WORKSHOP SUMMARY REPORT

ii

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 1174

Natl. Inst. Stand. Technol. Spec. Publ. 1174, 102 pages (August 2014) 

CODEN: NSPUE2

This publication is available free of charge from: 

http://dx.doi.org/10.6028/NIST.SP.1174
SMART FIREFIGHTING WORKSHOP SUMMARY REPORT

iii

THIS PAGE LEFT INTENTIONALLY BLANK
SMART FIREFIGHTING WORKSHOP SUMMARY REPORT

iv

Abstract

This report summarizes the results of the Smart Firefighting Workshop held on March 24 and 25, 2014, 

in Arlington, Virginia and sponsored by the National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST). The 

Workshop provided a forum to help identify and understand the R&D needs for implementation of 

smart firefighting, highlighting use of existing technologies, development and deployment of emerging 

technologies including cyber-physical systems (CPS), and use of standards for data collection, exchange, 

and situational awareness tools. The workshop brought together experts from various industry, 

educational, and governmental organizations involved in the cyber physical systems and firefighting areas. 

This report summarizes the workshop findings including prioritization of research needs according to 

those that have the greatest potential to enhance the safety and effectiveness of fire protection and the 

fire service. Small groups in each breakout session selected a high-priority task and completed detailed 

implementation plans for them. 
SMART FIREFIGHTING WORKSHOP SUMMARY REPORT

v

Acknowledgements

This report summarizes the results of the Smart Firefighting Workshop held on March 24 and 25, 2014, in 

Arlington, Virginia. The workshop was sponsored by the National Institute of Standards and Technology

(NIST). Thanks go to Energetics Incorporated’s workshop team members Laurie Aldape, Mauricio 

Justiniano, Rebecca Massello, Shawna McQueen, and Walt Zalis for their assistance in facilitating the 

workshop and preparing this report. The Workshop and this report would not have been possible 

without the specialized knowledge and insight contributed by the participants, representing recognized 

experts in various aspects of firefighting and cyber-physical systems. These experts took time from their 

busy schedules to participate in the Workshop and share their insight, which forms the basis for the 

workshop results. The Workshop participants are listed in Appendix A.
SMART FIREFIGHTING WORKSHOP SUMMARY REPORT

vi

Table of Contents

1 WORKSHOP OVERVIEW....................................................................................................................................1

1.1 CHALLENGES AND OPPORTUNITIES FOR CYBER-PHYSICAL SYSTEMS, THE FIRE SERVICE, AND FIRE PROTECTION .........................1

1.2 WORKSHOP SCOPE, OBJECTIVES, GOALS, AND OUTCOMES ............................................................................................1

1.3 WORKSHOP FORMAT..............................................................................................................................................2

1.4 WORKSHOP REPORT...............................................................................................................................................2

2 INTEGRATING CPS INTO FIRE PROTECTION AND THE FIRE SERVICE...................................................................3

2.1 DATA GATHERING..................................................................................................................................................3

2.1.1 Overview and Importance of CPS for Fire Protection and the Fire Service ...........................................3

2.1.2 State of the Art and Shortcomings........................................................................................................3

2.1.3 Development Areas...............................................................................................................................7

2.1.4 Other Research Needs ..........................................................................................................................9

2.1.5 Priorities..............................................................................................................................................10

2.2 DATA PROCESSING ...............................................................................................................................................10

2.2.1 Overview and Importance for CPS and Fire Service ............................................................................10

2.2.2 State of the Art and Shortcomings......................................................................................................11

2.2.3 Development Areas.............................................................................................................................11

2.2.4 Priorities..............................................................................................................................................13

2.3 DECISION MAKING ...............................................................................................................................................13

2.3.1 Overview and Importance for CPS and Fire Service ............................................................................13

2.3.2 State of the Art and Shortcomings......................................................................................................13

2.3.3 Development Areas.............................................................................................................................14

2.3.4 Other Research Needs ........................................................................................................................15

2.3.5 Priorities..............................................................................................................................................16

3 STRUCTURAL AND NON-STRUCTURAL FIREFIGHTING CROSS-CUTTING TOPICS............................................... 17

3.1 CROSS-CUTTING STRUCTURAL FIREFIGHTING ISSUES ...................................................................................................17

3.1.1 Overview and Importance for CPS and Fire Services in Structure Fires...............................................17

3.1.2 Common CPS Development Needs......................................................................................................17

3.1.3 CPS Integration Needs........................................................................................................................18

3.1.4 Non-Technical Issues...........................................................................................................................20

3.1.5 Priorities..............................................................................................................................................20

3.2 NON-STRUCTURAL FIREFIGHTING CROSS-CUTTING ISSUES ...........................................................................................20

3.2.1 Overview and Importance for CPS and Fire Services...........................................................................20

3.2.2 Common CPS Development Needs......................................................................................................21

3.2.3 CPS Integration Needs........................................................................................................................22

3.2.4 Non-Technical Issues...........................................................................................................................24

3.2.5 Priorities..............................................................................................................................................25

4 PRIORITIZATION WORKSHEETS....................................................................................................................... 26

4.1 DATA GATHERING................................................................................................................................................28

4.2 DATA PROCESSING ...............................................................................................................................................33

4.3 DECISION MAKING ...............................................................................................................................................37

4.4 STRUCTURAL CROSS-CUTTING ................................................................................................................................43

4.5 NON-STRUCTURAL CROSS-CUTTING ........................................................................................................................48

5 SUMMARY...................................................................................................................................................... 53

APPENDIX A: CONTRIBUTORS ..............................................................................................................................A1

APPENDIX B: ACRONYMS.....................................................................................................................................B1
SMART FIREFIGHTING WORKSHOP SUMMARY REPORT

vii

APPENDIX C: WORKSHOP AGENDA......................................................................................................................C1

APPENDIX D: OVERVIEW BRIEFINGS ....................................................................................................................D1

List of Figures

FIGURE 4-1: REAL-TIME SITUATIONAL SENSORS WITH VIDEO....................................................................................................29

FIGURE 4-2: WEARABLE, WIRELESS, ROBUST ENVIRONMENTAL SENSORS ...................................................................................30

FIGURE 4-3: PEOPLE TRACKING AT THE INCIDENT SITE .............................................................................................................31

FIGURE 4-4: ASSET TRACKING.............................................................................................................................................32

FIGURE 4-5: USE CASE MODELS..........................................................................................................................................34

FIGURE 4-6: DATA STANDARDIZATION/ BASE PLATFORM FOR DATA INTEROPERABILITY .................................................................35

FIGURE 4-7: CENTER FOR FIREFIGHTING EXCELLENCE/ FIRE SERVICE CPS INTEGRATION R&D AND SUPPORT CENTER..........................36

FIGURE 4-8: ALL LEVELS OF COMMUNICATION ON THE FIRE GROUND.........................................................................................38

FIGURE 4-9: TIMELY UTILIZATION OF GATHERED DATA/ DATA GATHERING BLACK BOX ................................................................39

FIGURE 4-10: AUTOMATIC UPDATE TO FIRE GROUND AND ON-SITE RESOURCES..........................................................................40

FIGURE 4-11: FIREFIGHTERS PREPARED TO SAFELY PERFORM TASKS ..........................................................................................41

FIGURE 4-12: ENHANCED SCENE AND BUILDING INFORMATION ................................................................................................42

FIGURE 4-13: STANDARD PROTOCOL INTER-CONNECTIVITY OF COMMUNICATION DEVICES AND SYSTEMS.........................................44

FIGURE 4-14: SITUATIONAL AWARENESS TECHNOLOGIES AND TRAINING ....................................................................................45

FIGURE 4-15: SITUATIONAL AWARENESS TECHNOLOGIES EDUCATION AND STANDARDS.................................................................46

FIGURE 4-16: FULL-SCALE TESTBEDS ...................................................................................................................................49

FIGURE 4-17: INTERFACE STANDARDS FOR HARDWARE, SOFTWARE, COMMON DATA MODELS, AND FORMATS ................................50

FIGURE 4-18: NEW ALGORITHMS FOR UNCERTAINTY ..............................................................................................................51

FIGURE 4-19: SIMPLE AND INTUITIVE USER INTERFACE............................................................................................................52

List of Tables

TABLE 2-1: DATA GATHERING TECHNOLOGY STATUS: BEFORE ARRIVING TO THE FIRE GROUND ........................................................4

TABLE 2-2: DATA GATHERING TECHNOLOGY STATUS: BEFORE ENTERING THE FIRE GROUND ............................................................5

TABLE 2-3: DATA GATHERING TECHNOLOGY STATUS: WHILE ON THE FIRE GROUND .......................................................................6

TABLE 2-4: DATA GATHERING TECHNOLOGY STATUS: AFTER LEAVING FIRE GROUND......................................................................6

TABLE 2-5: DATA GATHERING DEVELOPMENT: BEFORE ARRIVING TO THE FIRE GROUND .................................................................8

TABLE 2-6: DATA GATHERING DEVELOPMENT AREAS: BEFORE ENTERING THE FIRE GROUND............................................................8

TABLE 2-7: DATA GATHERING DEVELOPMENT AREAS: WHILE ON THE FIRE GROUND.......................................................................9

TABLE 2-8: DATA GATHERING DEVELOPMENT AREAS: AFTER LEAVING FIRE GROUND .....................................................................9

TABLE 2-9: DATA GATHERING: STANDARDS NEEDS.................................................................................................................10

TABLE 2-10: DATA PROCESSING TECHNOLOGY STATUS: STATE OF THE ART ................................................................................11

TABLE 2-11: DATA PROCESSING DEVELOPMENT NEEDS AND OTHER REQUIREMENTS ....................................................................12

TABLE 2-12: DECISION MAKING ELEMENTS...........................................................................................................................14

TABLE 2-13: DEVELOPMENT NEEDS IN DECISION MAKING FOR FIREFIGHTING..............................................................................15

TABLE 2-14: POST-EVENT DEVELOPMENT NEEDS FOR DECISION MAKING...................................................................................16

TABLE 3-1: CROSS-CUTTING STRUCTURAL ISSUES: CPS DEVELOPMENT NEEDS ACROSS BUILDING STRUCTURES .................................18

TABLE 3-2: CROSS-CUTTING STRUCTURAL ISSUES: CPS INTEGRATION NEEDS...............................................................................19

TABLE 3-3: CROSS-CUTTING STRUCTURAL ISSUES: NON-TECHNICAL CPS NEEDS..........................................................................20

TABLE 3-4: NON-STRUCTURAL CROSS-CUTTING: DEVELOPMENT NEEDS.....................................................................................22

TABLE 3-5: NON-STRUCTURAL CROSS-CUTTING: INTEGRATION NEEDS .......................................................................................23

TABLE 3-6: NON-STRUCTURAL CROSS-CUTTING: NON-TECHNICAL ISSUES...................................................................................24

TABLE 4-1: IDENTIFIED PRIORITIES FOR SMART FIREFIGHTING ...................................................................................................27

TABLE 4-2: DATA NEEDS FOR EACH LEVEL OF FIRE RESPONSE ...................................................................................................47
SMART FIREFIGHTING WORKSHOP SUMMARY REPORT

viii

THIS PAGE LEFT INTENTIONALLY BLANK
SMART FIREFIGHTING WORKSHOP SUMMARY REPORT

1

1 Workshop Overview 

1.1 Challenges and Opportunities for Cyber-Physical Systems, the 

Fire Service, and Fire Protection

In 2012, the fire departments in the United States responded to more than 480,0001 structure fires. 

These fires resulted in approximately 2,470 civilian fatalities, 14,700 injuries, and property losses of 

approximately $10 billion dollars. In addition, more than 31,0002 firefighters were injured on the fire

ground.

3 New opportunities to fuse emerging sensor and computing technologies with building control 

systems and firefighting equipment and apparatus are emerging. The resulting cyber-physical systems will 

revolutionize firefighting by collecting data globally, processing the information centrally, and distributing 

the results locally. Engineering, developing, and deploying these systems will require new measurement 

tools and standards among other technology developments. This project focuses on the needed tools 

and standards in three areas: smart building and robotic sensor technologies, smart firefighter equipment 

and robotic mapping technologies, and smart fire department apparatus and equipment. The results of 

this project will help (1) mitigate total social costs of fires in communities and buildings and (2) integrate 

cyber-physical systems (CPS) to realize innovative fire protection technologies.

Firefighters operate in an ever increasing sensor-rich environment that is generating vast quantities of 

data, the majority of which goes unused. There is ongoing research and development (R&D) to create 

technologies that can better exploit the collected data and relay relevant information to emergency first 

responders. The “smart firefighting” of tomorrow is envisioned as fully processing collected information 

and transmitting germane information in a timely manner to improve the safety and functionality of 

every firefighter. Behind the advances in sensor performance and equipment-enhanced firefighting are 

profound questions of how best to enable effective use of this data deluge. The burgeoning area of CPS

is an area of study that will help bridge this gap and promises to revolutionize fire protection and the 

field of firefighting.

This workshop is part of a collaborative effort between the National Institute of Standards and 

Technology (NIST) and The Fire Protection Research Foundation, (the research affiliate for the National 

Fire Protection Association - NFPA) to develop a research roadmap for smart firefighting. The

workshop focused on addressing the most effective use of the immense quantity of data available from 

buildings, communities, and the fire ground; the computational power to compute and communicate that 

data; the knowledge base and algorithms to most effectively process the data; conversion of data into 

significant knowledge/beneficial decision tools; and effective communication of the information to those 

who need it, when they need it - on the fire ground and elsewhere.

1.2 Workshop Scope, Objectives, Goals, and Outcomes

The Smart Firefighting Workshop was held on March 24 and 25, 2014, in Arlington, Virginia, providing a 

forum to help identify and understand the R&D needs for implementation of smart firefighting.

Implementation shall be achieved through greater use of existing technologies; development and 

deployment of emerging technologies including CPS; and use of standards for data collection, exchange, 

and situational awareness tools. Furthermore, this technical area is consistent with NIST Strategic 

 

1. NFPA, “Fire Loss in the United States During 2012,” M. J. Karter, Jr., Quincy, MA, 02169-7471, September 2012, 

www.nfpa.org.

2. NFPA, “Firefighter Injuries in the United States,” M. J. Karter, Jr. and J. L. Molis, Quincy, MA, 02169-7471, 

October 2013, www.nfpa.org.

3. In 2012, firefighter injuries totaled 69,400, of which 31,490 or 45 % occurred on the fire ground.
SMART FIREFIGHTING WORKSHOP SUMMARY REPORT

2

Roadmap for Innovative Fire Protection4. As a part of that roadmap, NIST identified smart firefighting as 

a research area with significant potential for enhancing the safety and effectiveness of fire protection and 

the fire service. This workshop complements the overarching fire research roadmap. 

The following were the workshop goals:

1. Establish dialogue among subject matter experts familiar with the unique characteristics of 

firefighting, fire protection and CPS,

2. Promote a better understanding of data opportunities available for fire protection and the fire 

service, and

3. Begin to galvanize a collective vision among stakeholders for a Smart Firefighting Research 

Roadmap.

1.3 Workshop Format 

The workshop brought together experts from various industry, educational, and governmental 

organizations involved in the cyber physical systems and firefighting areas. The workshop opened with 

several presentations discussing firefighting topics including integrating CPS, addressing state-of-the-art 

technology and techniques, and clarifying challenges. After these general presentations, participants 

moved into one of five smaller breakout groups to discuss various questions specific to each breakout 

topic. Two of the breakout groups were cross-cutting, addressing data gathering, data processing and 

decision making for both structural and non-structural firefighting (e.g., wildland and wildland-urban 

interface firefighting). The five breakout groups were as follows:

 Group I: Data Gathering

 Group II: Data Processing

 Group III: Decision Making

 Group IV: Structural Firefighting (Cross-Cutting)

 Group V: Non-Structural Firefighting (Cross-Cutting)

The specific questions addressed by each breakout session are presented in Sections 2 and 3 of this 

report. After brainstorming sessions, the workshop participants prioritized the previously identified 

research needs according to those that have the greatest potential to enhance the safety and 

effectiveness of fire protection and the fire service. Small groups in each breakout session selected a 

high-priority task and completed detailed implementation plans for them. 

1.4 Workshop Report

This report follows the organization of the workshop. The present section provides an overview; 

Section 2 presents the results of Groups 1, II, and III; and Section 3 presents the results of Groups IV 

and V. Section 4 comprises worksheets that reflect the different questions and topics addressed by each 

group. Section 5 provides a brief summary of the workshop. The appendices provide additional 

information on the workshop, including the list of participants, a list of helpful acronyms, the workshop 

agenda, and copies of the overview briefings provided at the opening of the workshop.

 

4. NIST, “Reduced Risk of Fire in Buildings and Communities: A Strategic Roadmap to Prioritize and Guide 

Research,” NIST Special Publication 1130, April 2012.
SMART FIREFIGHTING WORKSHOP SUMMARY REPORT

3

2 Integrating CPS into Fire Protection and the Fire 

Service

This Section presents the results of Groups 1, II, and III and addresses integrating CPS into fire 

protection and the fire service. The focus is on data with separate subsections on data gathering, data 

processing and data utilization for decision making.

2.1 Data Gathering 

The Data Gathering breakout session focused on issues surrounding the identification, collection, and 

communication of data related to firefighting prediction, detection, and prevention. Discussion topics 

included:

 Current data gathering methodologies

 Additional types of data, data repositories, emerging data collection technologies, novel 

communication modes, media, protocols, and/or information standards needed to enhance 

safety and effectiveness

 Development of research projects and standards related to the ideas identified in the previous 

two bullets

These topics were discussed within the context of the four temporal phases of firefighting:

 Before arriving at the fire ground 

 Before entering the fire ground 

 While on the fire ground 

 After leaving the fire ground

These ideas were then prioritized and fleshed out into development plans provided in Section 4 of this 

report.

2.1.1 Overview and Importance of CPS for Fire Protection and the Fire Service

Data are generated and needed throughout the temporal stages of a fire event. Access to the data could 

provide information to reduce the risk of fire, help firefighters assess the situation before arriving to the 

fire scene, detect vital changes while at the scene, and enable the compilation of lessons learned and 

best practices after leaving the scene. The advancement and integration of CPS can enable critical 

improvements in data gathering for fire protection and firefighters, which should ultimately help save 

lives, minimize damage, and reduce risks to firefighters.

2.1.2 State of the Art and Shortcomings

Many data gathering technologies and approaches are currently in use by firefighters or could be adapted 

for future use by firefighters. However, each technology or approach has its own shortcomings. Group I 

identified data gathering technologies and approaches, and their shortcomings, at the four temporal 

stages of the fire (noted above). For example, before arriving to the fire ground, firefighters might 

respond to a fire alarm or a Good Samaritan call, not knowing whether it is a false alarm or whether

there are any inhabitants in the building. While on the fire ground, radio communications can provide 

information in real time, but they are often hindered by lack of reception and incomplete transmission. 

After leaving the fire ground, loss estimates are carried out, but they are not based on real data and rely 

on subjective information, often rendering them inaccurate. The following tables list the technologies 

and approaches identified during the workshop. 
SMART FIREFIGHTING WORKSHOP SUMMARY REPORT

4

TABLE 2-1: DATA GATHERING TECHNOLOGY STATUS: BEFORE ARRIVING TO THE FIRE 

GROUND

Data Identification Data Collection Data Communication

Home smoke detectors

 Shortcomings:

o Prone to nuisance/false alarms

o Battery replacement needed

o Hard to stop

o Annoying sound

o Retrofit interconnectivity is 

expensive 

Global positioning system 

(GPS)

 Shortcoming: 

o GPS not on all apparatuses

Building real-time occupancy 

information

 Shortcoming: 

o High costs

o Technology available in few 

buildings because of cost

Good Samaritan calls

 Shortcomings:

o Unspecified receiver of 

information

o Information often incomplete or 

difficult to act upon 

False alarm management 

(aligned with environmental 

events)

 Shortcomings

o Response required for all calls

Fire alarm - before entering

 Shortcoming:

o Lack of information about scene

 building occupants inside

 building profile/size/height

 construction hazards

 location of hydrants

Demographic data

 Shortcomings:

o Need to specify number of 

inhabitants

o Need to specify age of inhabitants

o Need to specify disabilities of 

inhabitants

o Undefined source databases that 

are accessible in real time

Google maps

 Advantage:

o Building foot print provided

 Shortcoming:

o Not real-time data

o Resolution limited

Building environment 

data (e.g., temperature, 

CO2, humidity)

 Shortcoming: 

o Available data trapped 

within building systems 

Smoke alarm data

 Shortcomings:

o Difficult to identify location 

of first alarm

o Obstacles in accessing the 

alarm location

Large database 

 Shortcomings:

o Difficult to integrate 

multiple databases

o Expensive to populate

o Difficult to change structure 

once implemented

Information from 911 caller

 Shortcoming:

o Not always coherent or 

accurate

Computer Aided Dispatch 

(CAD) mobile data computer 

(MDC)

 Shortcomings:

o Attention diverted to paper chart

o Pop-up screens

Building fire system data

 Shortcomings:

o Non-standard delivery mechanisms

o Non-standard display formats

Emergency situation user 

training

 Shortcomings:

o Inconsistent quality 

o Non-standard frequency

Vehicle crash data

 Shortcomings:

o Data privacy issues

o Transmit format compatibility
SMART FIREFIGHTING WORKSHOP SUMMARY REPORT

5

TABLE 2-2: DATA GATHERING TECHNOLOGY STATUS: BEFORE ENTERING THE FIRE GROUND

Data Collection Data Identification Data Communication

Building history

 Shortcoming:

o Data usually not current

In situ sensors

 Shortcomings:

o Information versus data

o Undefined performance 

standards

o Common syntax not specified

o Non-existent interface 

standards

Equipment status (e.g., 

condition of communications, 

sensors, and building 

equipment)

 Shortcomings: 

o Building retrofit for enhanced 

CPS not economical

o System overloaded

360o assessment

 Shortcoming: 

o Physical obstruction hazards

Alarm detector data (e.g., 

temperature, carbon monoxide 

[CO], motion, by location)

 Shortcomings:

o Need to protect proprietary data 

and privacy (single family) 

o Undefined means of access

Data hierarchy

 Shortcoming: 

o Unclear how to prioritize

Commercial high-rise

 Shortcomings:

o Lack of fire panel 

integration with building 

management system (i.e., 

cannot be read on route) 

o Data accuracy of alarm 

information (e.g., zone, 

floor, number of alarms)
SMART FIREFIGHTING WORKSHOP SUMMARY REPORT

6

TABLE 2-3: DATA GATHERING TECHNOLOGY STATUS: WHILE ON THE FIRE GROUND

Data Identification Data Collection Data Communication

Visual inspection

 Shortcoming:

o Incomplete information 

collected

o Poor level of accuracy

Threat sensing (e.g., 

smoke/heat detection, 

bio/chemical attack, active 

shooter)

 Shortcomings:

o Difficult to integrate existing 

data 

o Unable to predict

Rapid intervention team 

(RIT)

 Shortcoming: 

o Difficult to locate firefighter

o Lack of tools for personal 

protective equipment (PPE) 

selection and use for multihazard response

Bystanders/victims

 Shortcoming: 

o Difficult to interpret data

Physiological robust sensors 

and wireless communications

 Shortcomings:

o Inadequate sensors

o Unable to determine firefighter 

location

o Need wireless communications

o Need to improve environmental

hazard identification

Web-based data 

communications

 Shortcomings: 

o Access not available in remote 

areas

o Difficult to protect data 

o No access during widespread 

power outage

Command chart 

 Shortcomings: 

o User-generated

o Unit/firefighter accountability

Firefighter physiological 

monitoring

 Shortcomings: 

o High cost

o Need to protect 

information/privacy

Infrared camera and thermal 

imaging

 Shortcomings:

o Limited information provided

o Information often misunderstood

Electronic 

communications

 Shortcomings:

o Lack of interoperability

o Lack of operation 

(reception transmission)

Voice communications

 Advantage: 

o Able to convey information 

in real time

 Shortcomings: 

o Incomplete transmission

TABLE 2-4: DATA GATHERING TECHNOLOGY STATUS: AFTER LEAVING FIRE GROUND

Data Identification Data Collection Data Communication

Loss estimates

 Shortcomings:

o Subjective

o Inaccurate

o Not based on data

Fire reports

 Shortcoming:

o Inconsistent and missing data

Lessons learned in digital 

format

 Shortcomings:

o Limit dissemination

o Not usually a priority 
SMART FIREFIGHTING WORKSHOP SUMMARY REPORT

7

2.1.3 Development Areas

One of the most critical data gathering needs before arriving to the fire ground is the ability to obtain 

more accurate real-time information about the alarm/situation. Critical information could include the 

building’s layout, contents, and number of occupants, as well as standards for fire system data delivery,

information display, data integration, and testing. While standardization increases the likelihood of 

technology adoption, it must be done thoughtfully so as to not restrict innovation and creativity. 

Before entering the fire ground, it would be beneficial to have data from a 360o autonomous situation 

assessment. Various technology applications could address this need including possibly unmanned 

vehicles.

While on the fire ground, key developments could include wireless, wearable, rugged, and robust

environmental sensors. These sensors could be used to track firefighters at the incident site, providing 

real-time locations of responders and critical information during firefighter-down events, including data 

on the building’s thermal environment. 

After leaving the fire ground, there is a need for operational databases that provide automated data 

management and reporting systems such as the National Fire Operations Reporting System (N-FORS), 

which is currently under development. N-FORS is used to manage the National Fire Plan, a mandated 

program begun in 2001 to provide accountability for hazardous fuels reduction, burned area 

rehabilitation projects, and community assistance activities.

5

Additional concepts are presented in Tables 2-5 to 2-8.

 

5 National Fire Plan Operations & Reporting System - http://www.doi.gov/pmb/owf/nfpors.cfm.
SMART FIREFIGHTING WORKSHOP SUMMARY REPORT

8

TABLE 2-5: DATA GATHERING DEVELOPMENT AREAS: BEFORE ARRIVING TO THE FIRE 

GROUND6

Additional Data Needs Desired Data Collection 

Technologies

Desired Novel Collection 

Modes/Information 

Standards

 More real-time information

about situation (e.g., sensors, 

live video) 

 More information about building 

contents 

 Data/sensors in residential 

dwelling units versus

commercial units (e.g., cost, 

privacy)

 Estimates of staffing needs for

large-scale events in terms of 

workload/rehabilitation to 

estimate appropriate 

operational periods

 Improved decision making 

(automatic or assisted) to alleviate 

valuable time lost as data are

gathered (e.g., location of the fire) 

and firefighting strategy is 

developed 

 Development of real-time 

notification of out-of-service 

system (e.g., alarm, sprinkler, 

standpipe, smoke control)

 Development of standards for 

fire system data delivery and 

information display 

 Integration and testing of 

protocols and standards 

 Standard emergency application 

for centralized/standardized 

information gathering (i.e., 

people report from the field 

with text, audio, images, etc.) 

 Ability to quickly identify

vehicle propulsion system (i.e., 

fuel) on scene

 Development of building design 

for fire safety 

 Enforcement of existing 

technology (e.g., sprinklers)

TABLE 2-6: DATA GATHERING DEVELOPMENT AREAS: BEFORE ENTERING THE FIRE GROUND 

Additional Data Needs Desired Data Collection 

Technologies

Desired Novel Collection 

Modes/Information 

Standards

 Develop risk-benefits analysis 

based on occupancy type, 

building age, construction type, 

hazards, fire conditions

 Improve sensor accuracy 

completeness 

o Affordable

o Rugged 

 Build 360o autonomous situation 

assessment with unmanned aerial 

vehicle 

 Improve building occupant sensors 

for residential/ commercial units

 None provided

 

6 Note: In this and subsequent tables, each colored dot represents a participant-identified CPS priority with the greatest potential to 

benefit the fire service.

 Blue represents a CPS participant vote.

 Green represents a firefighter participant vote.

 Orange represents an industry participant vote.

 Red represents a government participant vote.

 Yellow represents a research participant vote.
SMART FIREFIGHTING WORKSHOP SUMMARY REPORT

9

TABLE 2-7: DATA GATHERING DEVELOPMENT AREAS: WHILE ON THE FIRE GROUND

Additional Data Needs Desired Data Collection 

Technologies

Desired Novel Collection 

Modes/Information 

Standards

 People tracking, site incident 

tracking (e.g., real-time location 

of responders, man-down 

events) 

 Vertical and horizontal geolocation for radios to track 

firefighters 

 Sensors for key task, data 

capture 

o Working on fire (WoF)

o Victim requirements

o Vent

 Sensors/data capture 

o Vehicle

o Pump engaged

o Water flowing/not flowing

 Asset tracking (e.g., fire 

respondent equipment)

o Correlation to individual user

o Real-time location

notification

o Open standards base 

 Wireless, wearable, and robust 

environmental sensors 

 Algorithms for translating sensor 

data into useable information, 

validation of data 

 Real-time and recorded knowledge 

of firefighter thermal environment 



 Standards development 

o Allow for innovation before 

premature standardization 

o Define interoperability versus

reliability while considering 

proprietary technology 

 Development of nationwide 

reliable emergency wireless data 

communications infrastructure 



TABLE 2-8: DATA GATHERING DEVELOPMENT AREAS: AFTER LEAVING FIRE GROUND

Additional Data Needs Desired Data Collection 

Technologies

Desired Novel Collection 

Modes/Information 

Standards

 Ability to detect whether

firefighter’s PPE needs attention/ 

cleaning 

 Ability to detect whether PPE is 

contaminant-free after cleaning

 Expand N-FORS approach

o Integrate other systems such as 

Department of Homeland 

Security (DHS)/ Federal 

Emergency Management Agency 

(FEMA)

o Increase automatic capture of 

operational data 

 Appropriate data density

 Improved interoperability of 

data systems 

2.1.4 Other Research Needs 

The integration of data gathering CPS in smart firefighting is hindered by a lack of standards (Table 2-9). 

The most critical standards needs are for data sharing. Other important standards needs include 

wireless sensor protocols to connect wireless sensor networks, operational data about fire department 

performance metrics, and a common fire panel protocol. When arriving at the fire ground, firefighters 

could benefit from information about a building or residence, such as the number of occupants and any 

mobility issues. Standards are also needed to protect the privacy of personal information.
SMART FIREFIGHTING WORKSHOP SUMMARY REPORT

10

TABLE 2-9: DATA GATHERING: STANDARDS NEEDS

Areas of Development

 Data sharing standards 

 Wireless sensor protocols for connecting wireless sensor networks 

 Operational data (e.g., fire department performance metrics) 

 Common fire panel protocol including physical connection 

 Networked sensor performance standards

 Hygiene and structural standards of fire stations to improve response time

 Fire data communications equipment standards

 Privacy of personal/home data and security standards

 Fire department capability standards

2.1.5 Priorities 

Of the identified needs for data gathering in Tables 2-5 to 2-9, the following eight were identified as the 

most important. The items in italics were selected for further elucidation as part of the program plans

discussed in Section 4.

 Real-time situational sensors with video

 Wearable, wireless, robust environmental sensors

 People tracking efforts at the incident site 

 Asset tracking

 Data sharing standards

 Improvements to N-FORS: DHS/FEMA; operational data

 Standard for fire system data delivery and information display

 Standards development for data gathering

2.2 Data Processing 

The Data Processing session focused on issues surrounding the handling of data collected for firefighting

prediction, detection, and prevention. Discussion topics included:

 Current data processing methodologies for translation, sensor fusion, data preparation, and data 

analytics

 Needs in data translation, sensor fusion, data preparation, and data analytics to augment 

firefighter response to an event

 Development of research projects and standards related to the ideas identified in the previous 

two bullets

The topics above were discussed within the context of the four phases of data processing:

 Protocol translation

 Sensor fusion

 Data preparation 

 Data analytics

These ideas were then prioritized and fleshed out into development plans.

2.2.1 Overview and Importance for CPS and Fire Service

The integration and accurate analysis of data could provide invaluable information to firefighters to 

enhance overall operations, incident response, and safety. Sensor data from equipment (e.g., PPE, 
SMART FIREFIGHTING WORKSHOP SUMMARY REPORT

11

unmanned vehicles, fire trucks) could assist the coordination of manpower and equipment location, 

improve real-time decision making, and simplify operations and maintenance. Comprehensive preplanning could be enhanced with advance information provided to firefighters and incident commanders. 

Detailed analysis of the collected data could also improve predictive abilities (e.g., likely fire events, 

active fire path and spread rate, and medical issues with firefighters).

2.2.2 State of the Art and Shortcomings 

Currently, a significant amount of data are gathered and processed by individual systems/equipment,

creating processing “silos.” Though this works for a specific application, it often presents difficulties

when attempting to communicate/work with disparate systems. This limitation can restrict operations 

on the fire ground where data are usually processed by the firefighter in real time, resulting in many 

dead-end data points. Integrating the data into a data stream could improve decision making, incident 

management, or post-event analysis. 

Equipment interoperability is also complicated by receiving outputs in both digital and analog formats 

within a single firehouse, fire district, or region. Since most firehouse and emergency dispatch 

communications systems grew out of CAD-based systems, CAD is the backbone of most systems and is 

the primary platform for protocol translation. Some issues with the traditional hardware used for data 

processing include filtering out noise in the data and developing devices that are rugged enough to 

reliably transmit data in and out of harsh environments. Both development and enforcement of codes 

and standards heavily influence the technology that is developed and implemented.

Additional state of the art of data processing concepts and their shortcomings are presented in 

Tables 2-10. 

TABLE 2-10: DATA PROCESSING TECHNOLOGY STATUS: STATE OF THE ART

Interoperability Protocol Translation Data Accuracy

 Much of the equipment has limited 

interoperability.

 There are many “dead end” data 

points—useful data that are not 

getting streamed anywhere.

 A combination of both digital and 

analog outputs exists.

 Implementation of technology is 

building-code driven.

 Much of the data are processed at 

the human level (on site at the fire).

 Legacy systems are often used—

CAD is the backbone of most 

systems.

 Data are processed in silos, not 

toward solving a specific 

problem.

 Pre-processing could be done 

ahead of time but is scenariodriven.

 Building information (e.g., interior 

schematics) is often out of date.

 Better data are needed on 

explosive limits and temperatures.

2.2.3 Development Areas 

The primary goal of data processing for smart firefighting should be producing actionable intelligence 

before, during, and after an incident. This means that data must be compiled, processed, and 

communicated in such a way that they are accessible, understandable, and actionable at various 

operating levels (e.g., firefighter, chief, incident commander, dispatchers) and phases (e.g., before the fire, 

on the fire ground, after the fire). Since firefighting events are scenario-driven, this will require the 

development of use case models as a framework for data analysis, providing frameworks to process data 

in the context of solving problems rather than in silos.

Producing meta models that integrate data and provide equipment and system interconnectivity and 

interoperability will require common data communication languages, standard formats for reporting and 

storing data, and a comprehensive data dictionary. While standardization and open-source tools are 
SMART FIREFIGHTING WORKSHOP SUMMARY REPORT

12

desired from a data processing standpoint, care must be taken not to inhibit technology innovation or 

violate data privacy concerns. Data processing frameworks must also incorporate systems to verify the 

validity and authenticity of the data, since the reliability and trustworthiness of the inputs and outputs is 

crucial to firefighting operations. Table 2-11 identifies other development needs. 

TABLE 2-11: DATA PROCESSING DEVELOPMENT NEEDS AND OTHER REQUIREMENTS

Use Case Models 



Data Standardization



Research Other Requirements

 Produce “actionable 

intelligence” 

 Identify key 

indicators for 

dashboards or 

command boards

 Make data 

“consumable” at 

various levels (e.g., 

chief, firefighter)

 Define minimum cut 

sets of data type and 

reliability needed to 

inform IC decisions 

based on scenario

 Develop use models 

as framework for 

data analysis

 Define relevant data 

for event type 

 Explore options and 

consequences

 Define standard data and 

format

 Investigate pre-event 

data needs (e.g., common 

language, reporting, and 

storage protocols)

 Develop data 

management (e.g., data 

dictionaries and 

standards/protocols)

 Define an approach to 

standardize the input and 

output of the data 

protocols and databases

 Define plain text nonproprietary data formats 

 Establish common 

formats to address 

location accuracy (e.g., 

national grid)

 Create a “Center for 

Fire Fighting 

Excellence” as a 

central resource 



o Develop 

standardized, 

shared analytical 

tools

o Conduct analysis of 

post-fire data and 

lessons learned

 Develop models that 

are self-configurable 



 Develop technology 

for tracking and 

allocating assets (e.g., 

across region, state) 

 On fire ground, identify data 

communication improvement areas

(e.g., need for better, more rugged 

on-firefighter devices) 

 Leverage common, open-source 

(e.g., 9-pin, 25-pin) hardware/

software platforms or data analytics 



 Ensure data are accurate and 

trustworthy 

 Incorporate scenario-based preprocessing to fit data streams to 

response actions 

 Develop tools to facilitate collection 

of fuller sets of fire scene 

documentation (photos, video, type 

of construction, etc.) 

 Develop standard models of the 

capabilities of all sensor equipment

and other devices that need to 

communicate 

 Improve access to data 

 Design automated intelligent 

feedback from sensor (model) to 

actuator model to the device 

 Incorporate geo-locating data pieces 



o Develop open data for National 

Fire Incident Reporting System 

(NFIRS)/other systems to enable 

private and academic 

development 

 Consolidate all data sources for 

analysis

 Investigate people consuming data 

versus software using data

 Study computing power/resources

 Examine cloud data versus real-time 

data

 Collect data from firefighters after 

shift
SMART FIREFIGHTING WORKSHOP SUMMARY REPORT

13

2.2.4 Priorities 

Of the identified needs for data processing in Table 2-11, the following six were identified as the most 

important. Those fleshed out into program plans later in Section 4 are in italics.

 Use case models

 Data standardization for data processing

 Center for firefighting excellence

 On fire ground, identify data communication improvement areas (e.g., need for better, more 

rugged on-firefighter devices)

 Leverage common, open-source (e.g., 9-pin, 25-pin) hardware/ software platforms or data 

analytics

 Ensure data is accurate and trustworthy

2.3 Decision Making 

The Decision Making breakout session focused on issues surrounding the people, technology, and data 

involved in executing an action or behavior before and during an incident and in post-incident evaluation. 

Discussion topics included:

 Identification of the types of required decisions, decision makers, and input data for the first 

three temporal phases below

 Decision making development needs to advance firefighting techniques in the first three 

temporal phases below

 Identification of current and future capabilities needed to capture all fire-related events that 

transpired on the fire ground for after-action evaluation and training purposes

Discussion of the topics above was initially intended to cover the four temporal phases of firefighting:

 Before arriving to the fire ground 

 Before entering the fire ground 

 While on the fire ground 

 After leaving the fire ground

However, after considering relevance to the incident commander versus individual firefighters, the 

discussion topics were adjusted to the needs for decision making in firefighting in general. 

The collected ideas were then prioritized and fleshed out into development plans.

2.3.1 Overview and Importance for CPS and Fire Service

Good decision making in firefighting is crucial to safe and effective firefighting efforts—it could be the 

difference between safe and dangerous operations. Decision making is affected by many factors,

including the data available to decision makers, effectiveness of decision protocols, and expertise of 

decision makers. 

2.3.2 State of the Art and Shortcomings 

The crucial elements—the types of decisions that must be made, who makes them, and the data that are

needed to make decisions—currently used in fire-incident decision making were identified (Table 2-12). 

Many of these ideas possess limitation in their ability to contribute to effective decision making during a 

fire event. 
SMART FIREFIGHTING WORKSHOP SUMMARY REPORT

14

TABLE 2-12: DECISION MAKING ELEMENTS

In General Incident Commander Firefighter

 Constant updating of fire ground 

incident information to all 

responding parties

 Natural focus on firefighting activity

o Alarm

o On-scene

o Suppression

o Information overload

 Pre-response planning needs to be 

in place to focus on 

o Preplan

o Demographics

o Construction

o Route

 C.O.A.L. W.A.S. W.E.A.L.T.H. -

majority of fireground 

considerations for each event

o Construction

o Occupancy

o Apparatus

o Life hazard

o Water supply

o Aux appliances

o Street conditions

o Weather

o Exposures

o Area (square feet)/height

o Location / extent of fire

o Time

o Hazardous materials response 

(HAZMAT)

 Who is responding?

 What is the need?

 Fuel load type, amount, location

 Location of fire in structure, likely 

spread

 Resource allocation and

availability, type, capacity

 Hydrant locations

 Means of travel to fireground

 Nature of Emergency - fire, 

emergency medical services

(EMS), HAZMAT

 Path to incident, mapping 

 Location of team(s)

 Reception of sensor-detector 

signals

 Determination of the need for 

additional resources

 Fire spread—characterization 

of the potential for rapid fire 

movement and follow-up 

action

 Training in assessment and 

responses to different fire 

conditions

2.3.3 Development Areas 

The primary goal of decision making is determining needed actions before and during an incident based 

on the collection and analysis of available data. The development needs for improving decision making 

include developing opportunities for providing richer, more comprehensive information to existing data 

collection methods. For example, enhanced capabilities to determine topography or ventilation 

conditions during an incident could enhance safety and effectiveness of firefighting efforts. Table 2-13 

identifies the types of information that needs collection in order to augment decision making during fire 

incidents. 
SMART FIREFIGHTING WORKSHOP SUMMARY REPORT

15

TABLE 2-13: DEVELOPMENT NEEDS IN DECISION MAKING FOR FIREFIGHTING 

General Development Needs

 Accountability 

 Determination of floor 

plan or topography 

 Threat identification

 Education of a new 

generation of firefighters 



 Effective and timely use 

of gathered data 

 Clearly defined

communication 

networks, including 

points of contact 

 Identification of unseen 

hazards 

 Improvement of all 

levels of 

communications on the 

fireground 

 Ventilation conditions



 Performance of risk 

assessments to 

determine what or 

who is at risk

 Safety of firefighters, 

fire team, fire ground 



 Development of

toxicant sensors to 

make a decision when 

to remove selfcontained breathing 

apparatus (SCBA)

during overhaul 

 Establishment of data, 

cues, and expectations

that support offensive 

versus defensive fire 

fighting

 Integrated simplicity 

 Resource management

 Determine the human 

computer interface 

(HCI) to present right 

data at right time in 

right format to make 

right decision 

 Qualification of alarm 

priority (buzzer/lights) 

 Reliability and cost 

 Identification of resources 

to deal with incident 



o Constant re-evaluation 

of the causes

o Automatic updates to 

the fire ground/on-site 

resources 

 Victim location 

 Local and remote 

firefighter current health 

and prediction

 Certainty that firefighters 

are prepared to safely 

perform firefighting tasks



o Medical heath

o Physical heath

o Safety training

 Identify similarities in 

operations requirements 

analysis and geographical

differences

 Communication of scene/

building information to 

responders 

 Use of crowd-sourced 

data reporting for 

prevention and better 

inspection

 Critical factorsbased decision 

making

2.3.4 Other Research Needs 

After a fire event is complete, evaluation of the incident helps to identify lessons learned. Some 

capabilities exist to capture the relevant fire-related events and actions. Yet numerous other ones need 

development to support comprehensive after-action evaluation for incident review and training 

purposes. Table 2-14 identifies those capabilities currently available and development needs for a better

understanding of the fire incident.
SMART FIREFIGHTING WORKSHOP SUMMARY REPORT

16

TABLE 2-14: POST-EVENT DEVELOPMENT NEEDS FOR DECISION MAKING 

Available Now Development Needed

 Google Earth

 Reports from the fire scene

 Log of all alarms, data exchanges, tracker

(current technology needs further 

development) 

 Data gathering black box data 

 Video capabilities for on the ground (incident review) 

 Realistic training simulators 

o Simulation for incident commanders can be designed 

now 

o Simulation for firefighters will take significantly more 

computing power

 Provide feedback from reports (e.g., lessons learned now, 

simulations in the future)

 Current building target hazard

o Occupancy and configuration

o Contents

 Criteria to determine firefighter fitness for service 

o Physical health

o Resource allocation 

o Medical health monitoring post-event

o Physiology

o Safety

 Building and incident-centric data

 Incident simulations 

2.3.5 Priorities

Of the identified needs for decision making in Tables 2-13 to 2-14, the following eight were identified as 

the most important. Those fleshed out into program plans in Section 4 are noted in italics.

 Data gathering black box (like an airplane)

 Effective and timely use of collected data

 All levels of communication on the fire ground

 Automatic updates to fire ground and on-site resources

 Firefighters prepared to safely perform tasks

 Enhanced scene and building information

 Accountability

 Reliability and cost 
SMART FIREFIGHTING WORKSHOP SUMMARY REPORT

17

3 Structural and Non-Structural Cross-Cutting Topics

This Section presents the results of Groups IV and V. These groups considered integrating CPS into fire 

protection and the fire service from a cross-cutting perspective associated with both structural and nonstructural firefighting approaches. 

3.1 Cross-Cutting Structural Firefighting Issues

The Structural Firefighting breakout session focused on the shared CPS requirements to advance 

firefighting effectiveness on buildings and other constructions. The participants discussed and identified 

ideas related to the following focus topics:

 Common CPS development needs for firefighting in commercial versus urban residential 

buildings and new versus retrofitted (existing) buildings

 Issues with CPS integration into structural firefighting techniques with respect to codes and 

standards, software technologies, feasibility demonstration, and implementation strategies

 Non-technical issues (e.g., training, economic issues, standards and codes processes, market 

trends, behavioral issues) that affect successful integration of CPS into structural firefighting 

capabilities 

The collected ideas were then prioritized and fleshed out into development plans provided in Section 4 

of this report.

3.1.1 Overview and Importance for CPS and Fire Services in Structure Fires

Whereas residential structural fires account for 25 % of fires in the United States, 83 % of civilian fire 

deaths are due to fires within a residential structure. In addition, 77 % of fire injuries and 64 % of direct 

dollar losses are also due to fires within residential structures.7 In total, structural fires (both residential 

and commercial) account for only 35 % of reported U.S. fires,

8 but the human and property losses 

associated with these events make development of smart firefighting techniques in building structures an 

important area of attention. As firefighting and CPS leaders determine how best to effectively use the 

immense quantity of data available concerning and from building structures, a focus must be given to 

enriching such a typically information-poor environment as a structural fire. Through targeted CPS 

technologies, firefighters can take advantage of previously non-existent opportunities, tracking data on 

characteristics such as thermal and smoke conditions within a structure during a fire, to better inform 

the firefighting decision making process. While significant research issues remain, exploiting CPS in 

structural firefighting strategies remains a major focus of upcoming research and practice. 

3.1.2 Common CPS Development Needs

Table 3-1 displays the CPS needs across different types of building structures during a fire event. The 

requirements for a specific building type are also presented. 

 

7 U.S. Fire Administration, “Residential Structure and Building Fires,” October 2008,

https://www.usfa.fema.gov/downloads/pdf/statistics/Residential_Structure_and_Building_Fires.pdf.

8 NFPA, “Fire Loss in the United States During 2012,” M. J. Karter, Jr., Quincy, MA, September 2013, 

http://www.nfpa.org/~/media/Files/Research/NFPA%20reports/Overall%20Fire%20Statistics/osfireloss.pdf.
SMART FIREFIGHTING WORKSHOP SUMMARY REPORT

18

TABLE 3-1: CROSS-CUTTING STRUCTURAL ISSUES: CPS DEVELOPMENT NEEDS ACROSS 

BUILDING STRUCTURES

Building 

Type CPS Development Needs

Structural 

Cross-Cutting 

Needs

 Improve the understanding of structures and fire

 Gather data to rectify the lack of existing information available in older infrastructure 

 Establish communications networks between firefighter and building

 Enhance the limited ability for building owners to invest in new systems 

 Increase knowledge on building populations

 Build models to predict fires in structures based on their conditions

 Develop a building information model with easy access via mobile devices

 Eliminate barriers to indoor communication and location determination (lack of connection)

 Improve sensors in PPE to sense environment 

 Remove reliance on human uploading data to network database infrastructure

 Develop software to help people see through smoke to egress paths

 Develop method to monitor exits - all aspects

 Provide real-time access to private or protected information within building structure 

 Improve interoperability of different systems

 Present and disseminate clear information 

 Integrate sensor electronics/hardware in firefighter PPE, considering sensor weight and cost

 Develop tampered/unbiased sensors

 Piggyback communications and standalone network

 Develop self-learning networks to provide reliable data after an incident and provide 

redundancy

 Provide rapid, sufficient data download for firefighter incident communication

 Update training and education using CPS in firefighting strategies 

Commercial 

Building Needs

 Evacuation (residential) versus relocation (commercial)

 Provide simultaneous location and mapping

 Design radios that work to support commercial infrastructure 

Residential 

Building Needs

 Resolve privacy and monitoring requirements, which vary per building, especially in 

residential structures

 Address the lack of oversight or maintenance requirements

New Building 

Needs

 Advance sustainable design for safety monitoring of new buildings

 Implement smart size-up from the start

Retrofitted 

Building Needs

 Address the lack of buy-in on sprinkler retrofit side

 Document capabilities of additional sensor and CPS systems

 Close off areas for retrofit adaptation

 Provide consistent building information updates

3.1.3 CPS Integration Needs

Even if the common CPS needs identified in Table 3-1 are designed and fully developed, the technology 

will need technical integration with existing operations equipment to ensure that the enhanced 

firefighting techniques are effective. Specific integration challenges are detailed below in Table 3-2.
SMART FIREFIGHTING WORKSHOP SUMMARY REPORT

19

TABLE 3-2: CROSS-CUTTING STRUCTURAL ISSUES: CPS INTEGRATION NEEDS

Codes and Standards Software and Hardware 

Technologies

Feasibility 

Demonstration

Implementation 

Strategies

 Develop standard 

protocol interconnective of 

communication devices 

and systems 

 Define code and 

standard characteristics: 



o Communication open 

and interpretable 

o Data representation

o Data exchange 

 Develop integrated and 

automated life safety 

systems and building

management 

 Require buildings to 

have integrated systems

 Improve speed of 

code/standards 

development 

 Develop standards to 

improve firefighter 

education to provide 

redundancy to the 

system

 Identify protocol for 

human-robot interaction

 Define common 

concepts across all fire 

departments

 Develop communication 

protocols

 Pass telemetry data 

standards 

 Develop interoperable 

equipment

 Select hardware and 

software for optimized 

architecture that can 

command, compile, and 

communicate fire ground 

intelligence 

 Develop situational 

awareness technologies at 

all levels 

 Understand dynamic 

software upgrades and 

differences between 

upgrades

 Develop platforms and 

software

o Middleware platforms 

on- and off-site 

o Cloud computing 

(scalable platform)

o Mobile applications

o Open-source platforms 

to minimize cost

 Broaden technology and 

user input in constrained 

input environment 

 Identify data needed for 

human location 

technologies including 

those in wearable mobile 

devices

 Widen mass notification 

systems that inform public 

at large

 Generate formulas and 

software regulations 

 Perform maintenance and 

development from within

 Provide certification for 

equipment and firefighters

 Manage software quality 

measures including 

sustainability and reliability

 Provide real-time access to 

private or protected 

information

 Enrich formal methods of 

software building

 Develop fast models to 

predict fires based on 

conditions

 Measure performance 

(e.g., acceptable return 

on investment) 

 Demonstrate credible 

proof of concept (test 

beds) using the National 

Incident Management 

System (NIMS) 

 Use interconnected test 

beds 

 Ensure validation 

metrics are true/real 

 Evaluate human 

cognition under stress



 Understand 

characteristic current 

fire environment to 

ensure appropriate 

hazards for demo

 Identify user needs/use 

characteristics 

 Integrate CPS into 

firefighter training to 

enhance human trust in

CPS 

 Foster trusted sharing 

with dynamic, evolving 

organizations

 Initiate technology 

challenge shout-outs

(crowd sourcing for 

concepts and 

prototype)

 Develop fire prevention

“intelligence” (e.g., 

Department of Defense

(DOD) lessons learned 

in IC?)

 Estimate use of CPS

technologies and 

capacity

 Implement training 

and education



 Initiate technology 

implementation 

challenge

 Develop virtual 

environments and 

serious games for 

firefighting

 Develop ad hoc 

network versus

full coverage

 Encourage 

insurance 

incentives to 

perform building 

mapping and add

new sensors
SMART FIREFIGHTING WORKSHOP SUMMARY REPORT

20

3.1.4 Non-Technical Issues

In addition to the shared CPS needs and the integration challenges previously identified, there are

general issues that should be taken into consideration to successfully implement the CPS technologies

into the fire service. The non-technical needs—policy issues, economic issues, vendor issues, market 

trends, and cultural/behavioral issues—are detailed in Table 3-3.

TABLE 3-3: CROSS-CUTTING STRUCTURAL ISSUES: NON-TECHNICAL CPS NEEDS 

General Needs

 Develop methods to evaluate the measurement of performance 

 Address cost savings concerns of elected officials and executives 

 Answer “What is in it for me?” question for users and decision makers 

 Broadcast positive media support

 Leverage DHS, law enforcement, and military databases

 Provide more event analysis post-incident

 Include evaluation of adaptability to CPS/smart firefighting strategies in recruitment process of future firefighters

 Address issues with proprietary data 

 Determine liability issues for CPS 

3.1.5 Priorities 

Of the identified needs for data processing in Tables 3-2 to 3-3, the following six were identified as the 

most important. Those fleshed out into program plans in Section 4 are noted in italics.

 Standard protocol inter-connectivity of communication devices and systems

 Situational awareness technologies at all levels

 Training and education

 Program architecture allowing easy transition of data

 Performance measurement 

 Interconnected test beds for smart structural firefighting pilots

3.2 Non-Structural Cross-Cutting Issues

The Non-structural Firefighting breakout session focused on the shared CPS requirements to advance 

the effectiveness of firefighting in all situations that do not involve structures (e.g., vehicles; emergency 

services, EMS; wildland-urban interface, WUI; hazardous materials, HAZMAT). The topics discussed 

focused on:

 CPS development needs for firefighting in the WUI, EMS, HAZMAT, or other first responder 

applications

 CPS integration in WUI or EMS/HAZMAT/first responder applications with respect to codes 

and standards, software technologies, feasibility demonstrations, and implementation strategies

 Non-technical issues (e.g., training, economic issues, standards and codes processes, market 

trends, behavioral issues) that affect successful integration of CPS into WUI and EMS/HAZMAT/

first responder applications

The collected ideas were then prioritized and fleshed out into development plans.

3.2.1 Overview and Importance for CPS and Fire Services

The WUI encompasses housing and other structures that are either collocated with or abut wildland 

vegetation and forest. Communities in these areas are susceptible to fires, which may be caused by the 
SMART FIREFIGHTING WORKSHOP SUMMARY REPORT

21

increasing number of structures, long-term drought, climate change, or build-up of wildland fuel. When 

a fire or emergency occurs, first responders, EMS, and HAZMAT personnel are on the scene to address 

the incident and ensure public safety. The more information that these responders have available for a 

given situation, the better they can assess and respond. However, responders often may not have all the 

information for a particular incident until they arrive on scene, requiring quick assessment, decision, and 

response.

New and existing technologies are providing benefits to the fire service in this area and will continue to 

provide benefits as CPS offers more data with the increased use of sensors, as well as new capabilities. 

These data could potentially help first responders, EMS, and HAZMAT personnel assess a situation 

before they arrive on scene, better make decisions on how to address a situation, and keep firefighters 

and the public safe from harm.9

3.2.2 Common CPS Development Needs 

As CPS continues to develop and be integrated into WUI, EMS, HAZMAT, and first responder 

applications, a number of issues and developmental needs must be considered. Information provided by 

CPS can help the fire service dynamically track fires, incidents, and firefighting personnel, as well as 

improve prioritization of risks and responses. However, new CPS tools and techniques should have 

minimal impact on existing capabilities and functions and should provide for interoperability and ease of 

use. Additional developmental needs and considerations are provided in the Table 3-4.

 

9 NIST, “Wildland-Urban Interface Fire Research Needs: Workshop Summary Report,” NIST Special Publication 

1150, May 2013.
SMART FIREFIGHTING WORKSHOP SUMMARY REPORT

22

TABLE 3-4: NON-STRUCTURAL CROSS-CUTTING: DEVELOPMENT NEEDS 

WUI Both WUI- and EMS-Related 

Needs

EMS/HAZMAT/

First Responder

 Consider how to implement using 

current radio technology without 

affecting communications capability

 Organize the data into higher-level 

concepts for human system 

interaction

 Develop better, more efficient and

effective/cost-effective 

communications and technologies

 Adopt Blue Force Tracking:

o Support firefighting personnel 

safety by employing cheap, simple, 

effective tracking technology to 

locate active firefighters at all times

o Design more effective/robust 

communications to provide needed 

safety information

 Provide evacuation notification

 Develop weather models

 Improve situational awareness 

resource allocation

 Use autonomous field-deployed forest 

fire sensors

 Update mapping of wildland-urban 

incidents dynamically

 Organize data according to operational 

and safety risks

 Account for distributed sensing and 

uncertain inputs for processing and data 

management

 Integrate data from multiple sensors to 

support on-scene decision making

 Integrate existing information and 

guidance into new products (i.e., 

Department of Transportation

guidebook on 16 lifesaving initiatives)

 Develop architecture standards to allow 

open access and transmission of data

 Develop data sharing and 

interoperability standards:

o Develop standard information models

o Integrate with existing standards

o Ensure PPE applications are the same

 Develop consistent interface standards 

to improve interoperability for data and

hardware

 Develop common training and standards

 Improve situational awareness with 

unmanned aerial vehicle (UAVs)/ 

unmanned aircraft system (UASs)/ 

unmanned ground vehicle (UGV) 

support

 Integrate information from social media

 Develop new and improved fire 

behavior modelling

 Deploy autonomous field personnel and 

equipment tracking systems (e.g., spot 

messenger)

 Identify HAZMAT 

location, type (i.e., 

materials), and vehicle 

needed for accident 

response

 Embed analysis in 

current PPE and tools

 Use through-the-wall 

sensing to identify 

personnel on the 

ground

3.2.3 CPS Integration Needs

As noted above, a number of technical developmental needs must be considered in CPS development 

and integration. For example, new technologies should provide for interoperability and common data 

models and platforms, while providing simple and easy-to-use interfaces. Testbeds and metrics will be 

needed to demonstrate the feasibility of new technologies and applications. Additionally, the fire service

will need appropriate training for these technologies. Table 3-5 below provides a list of technical 

developmental needs and considerations.
SMART FIREFIGHTING WORKSHOP SUMMARY REPORT

23

TABLE 3-5: NON-STRUCTURAL CROSS-CUTTING: INTEGRATION NEEDS

Topic Area WUI Both WUI- and EMS-Related Needs

EMS/ HAZMAT/

First 

Responders

Codes and 

Standards

 None 

provided

 Interface standard and hardware/software common data 

models and formats 

 Aim for open standard, interoperable, non-proprietary 

 Keep expectations realistic during the preliminary stages 

 Define data type, format, quality 

 Consider local systems’ need for technology that integrates 

with larger systems without interfering with operations

 Integrate standards into the decision making process to 

reduce human error

 Address privacy standards and concerns

 Support remote sensing for WUI standards compliance, 

insurance as driver

 None provided

Software 

Technologies

 Ensure 

models are 

realistic and 

have feasible 

expectations 

while being 

validated 

 Develop new algorithms with artificial intelligence that are 

capable of dealing with uncertainty 

 Build simple and intuitive user interface/user experience

(UI/UX) 

 Adapt to future use of cloud computing 

 Develop adaptive algorithms for dynamic situations

 Address security, reliability, and robustness

 Incorporate scalability of users and system

 Develop new data model for modeling the emergency scene

 None provided

Feasibility 

Demonstrations

 None 

provided

 Develop full-scale testbed for sensor integration through 

user demonstration and testing

o Develop realistic testbeds and scenario for feasibility 

demonstration 

 Define metrics to determine success or failure in feasibility 

demonstrations 

 Focus on pre-demonstration training to ensure effective 

CPS deployment

 Introduce a level of complexity that will be helpful in 

determining feasibility 

 Establish better forums to demonstrate new capabilities, 

bringing users together with vendors/ government/academia

 Implement comparative analysis strategy (control versus 

test)

 None provided

Implementation 

Strategies

 None 

provided

 Remember the work environment and available resources 



 Link implementation to incident complexity 

 Integrate into tools and equipment without degradation of 

capabilities 

 Improve approach to technology transfer in the Forest 

Service (no roadmap)

 Provide consistency with some flexibility

 Define training requirements and models, including who

needs training and how and when it should be delivered

 Provide ongoing support for sustainability and upgradeability 

 Make a 

compelling 

case/value-add to 

both the agency 

and the public 

about the value 

of these action 

items

 Obtain 

stakeholder buyin, do public 

outreach 

Other  None 

provided

 Deploy training for use of systems and quality assurance 

(QA) standards for data input into systems

 Better connections between relevant research fields and 

industry 

 Determine how data quality is evaluated

 Determine deployment methods, including who carries 

specific equipment along with its priority needs 

 Integrate systems 

into the decision 

making process

 Reduce human 

error
SMART FIREFIGHTING WORKSHOP SUMMARY REPORT

24

3.2.4 Non-Technical Issues

Non-technical needs also arise when attempting to integrate new CPS technology into existing WUI, 

EMS, HAZMAT, and first responder applications (e.g., determining funding organization and technology 

owner, developing new cost-effective technologies, and convincing the fire service of the advantages and

dependability of the technologies). Additional non-technical developmental needs and considerations are 

provided in Table 3-6.

TABLE 3-6: NON-STRUCTURAL CROSS-CUTTING: NON-TECHNICAL ISSUES 

Policy Economics Cultural and Behavioral

 Obtain policymaker buy-in



 Address resource constraints

 Address budget and competing 

priorities 

 Consider affordability of 

software/hardware 

 Improve the business case for 

integrating CPS into firefighting 

equipment 

 Consider cost-effectiveness of

implementations

 Determine funding source and 

owner of technology (e.g., 

local, federal, county, state, 

public-private) 

 Consider behavioral issues, 

i.e., how do you improve the 

human factor? 

 Consider turf, competing 

priorities, and agenda 

 Incorporate fire prevention 

into issues 

 Consider privacy concerns

 Convince users that the 

technology can be trusted

Education/Training Sustainability Other

 Provide education on benefit and 

outreach to firefighting community 

 Understand the learning curve of new 

technology

 Provide tiered training (e.g., user, 

manager, administrator)

 Define clearly the range of application

 Provide support that is easy to access 

and understand

 Ensure training includes common

sense approaches and does not rely 

solely on technologies and 

experience

 Incorporate sustainability (e.g., 

life cycle cost) 

 Provide contingency solutions 

should technology fail 

 Ensure flexibility for equipment 

updates and retrofits. 

 Provide continuous training or 

validation (i.e., educational 

sustainability)

 Consider need to sustain data 

accuracy

 Ensure operation and 

interpretation of technology is

intuitive 

 Provide firefighters with 

appropriate and timely 

information during a fire 

event

 Ensure seamless integration of 

CPS with firefighters

 Demonstrate benefits and 

develop strategy to support 

technology transfer 

 Develop strategy to 

implement technology in 

remote areas

 Generate and document 

uncertainty/accuracy of 

output
SMART FIREFIGHTING WORKSHOP SUMMARY REPORT

25

3.2.5 Priorities 

Of the identified needs for data processing in Tables 3-4 to 3-6, the following eight were identified as 

the most important. Those fleshed out into possible program plans in Section 4 are noted in italics.

 Feasibility demonstrations and testbeds

 Interface standards for hardware, software, and data exchange models

 User interface 

 Algorithms for uncertainty

 Policymaker buy-in

 Metrics that determine success or failure in feasibility demonstrations

 Budgets (i.e., who pays for and owns the technologies: local, federal, county, state, publicprivate)

 Address budget and competing priorities
SMART FIREFIGHTING WORKSHOP SUMMARY REPORT

26

4 Prioritization Worksheets 

The previous sections provided a list of the priority topics for smart firefighting from each breakout 

session. Of those topics, specific priorities that have the greatest potential in enhancing fire service

safety and effectiveness were expanded into development plans by identifying specific tasks, milestones, 

performance targets, challenges, and potential stakeholders. A summary of all the priority topics from 

each breakout are presented in Table 4-1. Figures 4-1 through 4-19 provide the results of the expansion 

of selected topics (in bold text).

10

 

10 Text generated during the workshop sessions was formatted and placed within Figure 4-1 through Figure 4-19 

within Section 4. The text, which describes possible implementation plans, was a product of workshop participants 

working in small groups. Text was not edited for consistency between different breakout groups.
SMART FIREFIGHTING WORKSHOP SUMMARY REPORT

27

TABLE 4-1: IDENTIFIED PRIORITIES FOR SMART FIREFIGHTING

Breakout Priority Votes

Data 

Gathering

Real-time situational sensors with video (Figure 4-1)  (11)

Wearable, wireless, robust environmental sensors (Figure 4-2)  (10)

Data-sharing standards  (9)

Improvements to N-FORS: DHS/FEMA; operational data  (7)

Standard for fire system data delivery and information display  (6)

People tracking efforts at the incident site (Figure 4-3)  (6)

Standards development for data gathering  (6)

Asset tracking (Figure 4-4)  (3)

Data 

Processing

Use case models (Figure 4-5)  (12)

Data standardization for data processing (Figure 4-6)  (11)

Identification of data communication improvement areas on fire ground (e.g., 

need for better, more rugged on-firefighter devices) 

 (10)

Leveraging of common, open-source (e.g., 9-pin, 25-pin) hardware/software 

platforms or data analytics 

 (8)

Accurate and trustworthy data  (7)

Center for firefighting excellence (Figure 4-7)  (7)

Decision 

Making

All levels of communication on the fire ground (Figure 4-8)  (12)

Data gathering black box11 (Figure 4-9)  (7)

Effective and timely use of collected data10 (Figure 4-9)  (6)

Automatic update to fire ground and on-site resources (Figure 4-10)  (7)

Firefighters prepared to safely perform tasks (Figure 4-11)  (6)

Accountability  (6)

Cost and reliability  (6)

Enhanced scene and building information (Figure 4-12)  (5)

Crosscutting:

Structural

Firefighting

Standard protocol inter-connectivity of communications devices and 

systems (Figure 4-13)

 (10)

Implement training and education (Figure 4-14)  (8)

Program architecture allowing easy transition of data  (7)

Performance measurement  (6)

Interconnected testbeds for smart structural firefighting pilots  (5)

Develop situational awareness technologies at all levels (Figure 4-14 

and Figure 4-15)

 (5)

Crosscutting:

NonStructural

Firefighting

Policy maker buy-in  (11)

Defined metrics to determine success or failure in feasibility demonstrations  (7)

Develop full-scale testbed for sensor integration through user 

demonstration and testing (Figure 4-16)

 (6)

Interface standards for hardware, software, common data models, 

and formats (Figure 4-17)

 (5)

Determination of funding source and owner of technology (e.g., local, federal, 

county, state, public-private) 

 (5)

Consideration of budget and competing priorities  (4)

New algorithms, with artificial intelligence, that are capable of 

dealing with uncertainty and change (Figure 4-18)

 (3)

Simple and intuitive user interface (Figure 4-19)  (3)

 

11 These two topics were combined into one prioritization worksheet. 
SMART FIREFIGHTING WORKSHOP SUMMARY REPORT

28

4.1 Data Gathering 

The Data Gathering topics selected for program development is presented below and expanded in 

Figures 4-1 to 4-4.

 Figure 4-1: Real-time situational sensors with video

 Figure 4-2: Wearable, wireless, robust environmental sensors

 Figure 4-3: People tracking efforts at the incident site

 Figure 4-4: Asset tracking
SMART FIREFIGHTING WORKSHOP SUMMARY REPORT

29

Major Tasks

 Gather qualitative information 

on sensor specifics and 

environmental thresholds for 

operation

 Coordinate stakeholders for 

development of plan and 

timeline

 Develop prototype, field test 

product, and validate 

production/implementation

Major Milestones

 0-3 years: Gather 

qualitative information 

and plan with timeline

 3-5 years: Develop 

prototype and perform 

lab and field tests

 5+ years: Produce and 

implement sensors

Performance Targets

 Accuracy prioritized over 

precision 

 Must operate in IDLH 

(immediately dangerous 

to life and health) 

environment 

 Must operate in high

thermal environment

 Wireless operation must 

work

 Must operate when wet

Limits

 Incident commander 

and firefighter still need 

to think and reason 

through situation

 Acceptance by fire 

service, training and 

implementation 

required

 May only work in 

newer built 

environments

Future Changes

 Continuous updates in accordance with technology

 Apply a visionary mindset - What is possible?

Future Operations or CPS Issues

 Cost

 Different needs for keeping current for each building

 Fire service training 

 Maintenance of system, including testing

 Communications technology: Feasibility of wireless 

technology; new environments could be wired; selection 

of radio spectrum; interoperability

 Sensor: High costs; severe environments; must be 

reliable; must be easy to deploy, use, and replace

 Data collection: Concerns with buy-in and privacy 

issues; need to determine who collects data and data 

storage location (e.g., cloud); need simple format for 

information and video

 Existing databases: Incompatibility with new 

technology; coordination of upgrades; inconsistent data 

elements collected (currently consistent for monitoring 

company)

 Fire Service: Meet requirements generated from 

firefighters and officers; provide continuous input and 

testing

 Government: Provide funding (e.g., science and 

technology grants, NIST, DHS)

 CPS experts: Develop user-friendly products;

continuously improve products consistent with

technology

 Vendors/manufacturers: Produce product

PROGRAM APPROACH

FUTURE

CHALLENGES

Brief Description:

Remote control devices or drone robots could be used to collect additional situational information, including 

video, prior to human intervention in an incident. The building data, electronically transferred to the incident 

commander (IC) at an electronic control board, could include the number of occupants, location of 

occupants, structural status, and IC 

STAKEHOLDER ROLES AND RESPONSIBILITIES

FIGURE 4-1: REAL-TIME SITUATIONAL SENSORS WITH VIDEO
SMART FIREFIGHTING WORKSHOP SUMMARY REPORT

30

Major Tasks

 Develop sensors

 Develop algorithms

 Integrate sensors with PPE

 Ensure stakeholders have input in 

the development of CPS 

components during the entire 

design cycle

 Develop standards for the sensors

Major Milestones

 0-3 years: Define 

existing sensor 

technologies 

 3-5 years:

o Demonstrate 

wearable system 

o Conduct field 

trials/testing

Performance Targets

 Meets defined criteria for 

durability and reliability 

 Provides accuracy while 

being cost-effective 

 Is easy to maintain

 Is ergonomic/lightweight

Limits

 None provided

Future Changes

 Quantification of exposure environment

 Adaptation to future medical research, PPE, and other 

equipment

Future Operations or CPS Issues

 Privacy/confidentiality of data generated

 Cost

 Maintenance

 Communications technology: Must function in and 

out of structures

 Sensor: Must have high thermal and chemical particulate 

tolerances; must tolerate radioactive flux; must measure 

metabolic/physiological changes

 Data collection: Determine the longevity need of the 

data during the fire incident 

 Fire Service: Perform trial testing

 R&D: Apply existing technology 

 Standards: Establish NFPA/Underwriters Laboratory

certifications

PROGRAM APPROACH

FUTURE

CHALLENGES

Brief Description:

Environmental sensors should be developed and integrated in firefighting PPE. Sensors would provide 

firefighters and IC with real-time data indicating environmental conditions and potential hazards faced by a 

firefighter.

STAKEHOLDER ROLES AND RESPONSIBILITIES

FIGURE 4-2: WEARABLE, WIRELESS, ROBUST ENVIRONMENTAL SENSORS
SMART FIREFIGHTING WORKSHOP SUMMARY REPORT

31

Major Tasks

 Determine state-of-the-art

tracking technology and 

methodology

 Review requirements and

further develop business 

models

 Develop technology in order 

of prioritized use cases 

 Iteratively test technology

 Pilot and deploy technology 

and methodology

Major Milestones

 Establish steering 

committee and working 

groups

 List state-of-the-art 

technology and

additional requirements 

 Define viable business 

model

 Demonstrate progress 

for each technical 

element via component 

testing in relevant 

environment

 Draft standards

 Integrate testing and

piloting

Performance Targets

 Locate personnel within 

established tolerances as 

defined by incident 

commanders

 Achieve minimal 

deployment latency 

 Display minimal data 

latency 

 Meet cost requirements 

and document value 

added 

Limits

 Must be cost-affordable

 Limited fire ground size

Future Changes

 Indoor location technology breakthroughs

 Mandates for product use 

Future Operations or CPS Issues

 A means of preventing overwhelming the incident 

commander during large-scale events

 Data delivery mechanisms in radio frequency-challenged

environments

 Communications technology: Compliance with 

standard formats; functioning in a fire environment;

structures where radio frequency has difficulty

 Sensors: Functioning in a fire environment; adapting to 

human needs (e.g., sensor weight, comfort)

 Data collection: Transmitting large-scale fire event 

telemetry data volume

 Existing databases: Possible need for new data formats

 Major city Fire Service: Provide user requirements 

and testbed (International Association of Fire Chiefs

[IAFC], International Association of Fire Fighters [IAFF], 

and National Volunteer Fire Council [NVFC])

 Manufacturers: Develop tracking technology display

and situation awareness technology

 International Code Council (ICC) / International 

Building Code (IBC), NFPA: Develop standards and 

regulations

 Government: Provide funding

PROGRAM APPROACH

FUTURE

CHALLENGES

Brief Description:

Location and tracking of responders will enable better situational awareness for IC. Incident commanders can 

then see whether resources are deployed as expected and respond rapidly in the event of rescue need.

STAKEHOLDER ROLES AND RESPONSIBILITIES

FIGURE 4-3: PEOPLE TRACKING AT THE INCIDENT SITE 
SMART FIREFIGHTING WORKSHOP SUMMARY REPORT

32

Major Tasks

 Identify current program for 

tracking (e.g., manual or automated 

process, time and cost expended 

currently)

 Identify profile of assets, listing

relationship to individuals

 Develop a scalable program based 

on department and size

 Develop an easy and intuitive 

process for deleting or adding new 

assets and monitoring battery life 

replacement (mobile console)

 Build robust sensors that last a 

minimum of five years and manage 

water intrusion, vibration/shock, 

abrasion, and chemical and thermal

extremes

 Identify costs per site

Major Milestones

 0-3 years:

o Test current wireless 

sensor network radio 

frequency performance

o Test durability in fire 

environments

o Identify beta test sites

(e.g., small, medium, 

large)

o Conduct voice-ofcustomer interviews

Performance 

Targets

 Accuracy of device 

sensors (i.e., they always 

work)

 Self-test and check-in of 

devices once movement 

is detected (e.g., sleep 

state depending on use 

case)

 Fault tolerance

diagnostics

 Radio frequency

performance in fire 

environments

 Implementation of voiceof-customer changes

Limits

 Radio frequency

range limits

 Temperature

limits

 Robust sensors 

that last a

minimum of five

years and manage 

water intrusion, 

vibration/shock, 

abrasion, and 

chemical and

thermal extremes

Future Changes

 Asset tracking enables new software and workflow 

management

Future Operations or CPS Issues

 Security (ensuring encryption)

 Training

 Maintenance

 Communications technology: Ensuring radio

frequency bands are not saturated

 Sensors: Connecting to a personal area network (PAN)

or local area network (LAN) environment

 Data collection: Managing and setting up the business 

rules for data collection and storage over time

 Existing Databases: Addressing need for a cloud 

integration, which entails support for a wireless (cellular) 

device for monitoring assets in the field

 Resource management/logistics organizations

 Individual firefighters

PROGRAM APPROACH

FUTURE

CHALLENGES

Brief Description:

Asset and compliance tracking is enabled by placing small button-sized sensors, battery-operated or energyharvested, on assets. The sensors enable digital recordkeeping for compliance and automation of particular 

equipment before, during, and after a fire event. Asset tracking enables geo-location of fire fighter assets, age 

tracking, maintenance, repair tracking, and pairing of assets.

STAKEHOLDER ROLES AND RESPONSIBILITIES

FIGURE 4-4: ASSET TRACKING 
SMART FIREFIGHTING WORKSHOP SUMMARY REPORT

33

4.2 Data Processing

The Data Processing topics selected for program development is presented below and expanded in 

Figures 4-5 to 4-7. 

 Figure 4-5: Use case models

 Figure 4-6: Data standardization/ Base platform for data interoperability

 Figure 4-7: Center for firefighting excellence/ Fire Service CPS Integration R&D 

and Support Center 
SMART FIREFIGHTING WORKSHOP SUMMARY REPORT

34

Major Tasks

 Provide guidance for abstraction of 

actionable intelligence needs for 

development of design scenario (e.g., use 

cases, test cases, risk profiling)

 Develop base case scenarios for decision

making and response (e.g., determine the 

information needed for each set of 

conditions)

 Define the environments for expected device 

behavior (i.e., behavior in the set of 

conditions defined above)

 Build a set of actionable intelligence engines 

based on data and processing needs (e.g., 

Fire Department City of New York 

[FDNY]-type analytics, fire ground decision 

making, event scenarios for compacting/ 

deciding data needs)

 Expand to multi-platform interaction and 

communication

 Conduct verification and validation

Major 

Milestones

 None provided

Performance 

Targets

 Develop scenario 

guidelines within 3

years

 Develop and test 

realistic scenarios (e.g., 

10 each emergency and 

non-emergency) within 

5 years

 Develop actionable 

intelligence engines 

within 10 years

 Expand to multiplatform within 15 

years

 Wide-scale rollout 

within 20 years

Limits

 Amount of data that 

firefighter can 

process during an 

event

 Reliability of data 

relative to informing 

reliable/intelligent 

decisions

 Getting all 

stakeholders to 

work well together 

for the common 

good (e.g., business, 

technology)

Future Changes

 None provided

Future Operations or CPS Issues

 None provided

 Hardware: Ensuring interoperability; 

filtering of noise/ transmission of data; 

communications network reliability

 Software: Defining a common language; 

ensuring software heterogeneity; defining 

engine and model semantics; performing 

verification/validation; interpreting results

 Overall: Satisfying compatibility, 

integration, and interoperability needs

 Operational firefighter: End of hose and IC - to provide knowledge 

of actions and data needs

 FF analytics personnel: Knowledgeable in fire, building, other data

 Data processing expertise

 Human-machine interface expertise

 Textual and environmental context expertise

 Building owner/manager

 Technology developers

 Modeling/simulation expertise

PROGRAM APPROACH

FUTURE

CHALLENGES

Brief Description:

A technical framework is needed for delivering “actionable intelligence,” including risk-based profiles, 

predictive scenarios, and use and test cases. The framework will facilitate smart firefighting across a broad 

spectrum of activities, from analysis of building data for pre-event planning and response to post-event 

processing. The framework should extract patterns, allow for machine learning, and learn from device 

behavior. (For example, the system accepts the firefighter’s verbal input, provides instantaneous feedback 

from multiple sensors, and provides actionable intelligence for firefighter’s decisions.)

STAKEHOLDER ROLES AND RESPONSIBILITIES

FIGURE 4-5: USE CASE MODELS
SMART FIREFIGHTING WORKSHOP SUMMARY REPORT

35

Major Tasks

 Define data interoperability goals and 

scope

 Analyze data source and streams and 

identify applicable industry and 

related standards

 Identify and evaluate existing best 

practices from other fields

 Synthesize and specify best practices 

as applied to smart firefighting

Major 

Milestones

 None provided

Performance Targets

 Early industry involvement in 

working groups

 Early industry adoption 

 Availability of devices and systems 

to enable comprehensive preplanning, real-time incident 

management, and efficient postincident analysis

Limits

 None provided

Future Changes

 The Internet of Things (IOT) will heavily influence CPS 

and smart firefighting direction

Future Operations or CPS Issues

 None provided

 Business case for civic authorities, insurance industry, and 

manufacturers 

 Privacy concerns 

 Ownership of standards development; cross-cutting 

concerns from communications to data format to 

equipment certification

 Expense and adoption by the fire protection services

 Intellectual property rights

 Technology hurdles: hardware, software, compatibility

and integration for new and existing systems

 Fire Service

 Standards development organizations 

 Industry 

 Academia and research centers

PROGRAM APPROACH

FUTURE

CHALLENGES

Brief Description:

Interoperability is important for the smart data usage for pre-planning, fire incident management, and postincident analysis. Interoperability in this worksheet focuses on common interfaces for accessing the payload 

data and formats for the data to be universally read, manipulated, and stored.

STAKEHOLDER ROLES AND RESPONSIBILITIES

FIGURE 4-6: DATA STANDARDIZATION/ BASE PLATFORM FOR DATA 

INTEROPERABILITY
SMART FIREFIGHTING WORKSHOP SUMMARY REPORT

36

Major Tasks

 Develop a business model and structure for 

establishing a center for shared knowledge 

and information

 Strategize methods for increased integration 

of CPS into fire services

 Establish interoperability and data standards, 

guidelines, and recommendations

 Identify common data utilization requirements 

and needs across fire services

 Develop a repository of use scenarios and 

models

 Develop lessons learned and best practices 

globally

 Act as first point of contact for fire services 

for CPS components and use models

Major Milestones

 0-1 years: Develop a 

business model and 

budget 

 2-3 years: Establish 

funding and governance

 3-5 years: Build the 

center

 5-6 years: Collect 

practices and build a 

resource base of 

information and 

standards for fire 

services 

Performance 

Targets

 Baseline of costs and 

sources of income for 

the organization

 Maximize reach of 

the center to fire 

services— target 

number of members,

number of fire 

services affected

Limits

 None 

provided

Future Changes

 None provided

Future Operations or CPS Issues

 None provided

 Organizational: Securing funding, developing the 

center, securing leadership, and developing the 

organization 

 Costs: Ensuring data and resource access are costneutral to the fire services

 Integration: Identifying a strategy for integrating with 

other services (e.g., police, military, EMS, public works); 

obtaining early stakeholder buy-in to lessen disruption to 

current practices

 Fire Services

 Industry members

 CPS experts

 Academic partners

 Standards organizations 

 Government and non-government organization 

(NGO) entities (the National Institute of Standards 

and Technology, National Fire Protection Association, 

Institution of Fire Engineers, Center for Public Safety 

Excellence, Inc., etc.)

PROGRAM APPROACH

FUTURE

CHALLENGES

Brief Description:

The center will become an entity for establishing and sharing information, guidelines, and recommendations 

for smart firefighting. It will be accessible to all fire services and industry members seeking to learn and 

develop CPS solutions for smart firefighting. This resource center would establish guidelines, 

recommendations, industry standards, etc. for areas related to data processing, utilization, and evaluation.

STAKEHOLDER ROLES AND RESPONSIBILITIES

FIGURE 4-7: CENTER FOR FIREFIGHTING EXCELLENCE/ FIRE SERVICE CPS

INTEGRATION R&D AND SUPPORT CENTER
SMART FIREFIGHTING WORKSHOP SUMMARY REPORT

37

4.3 Decision Making

The Decision Making topics selected for program development is presented below and expanded in 

Figures 4-8 to 4-12. 

 Figure 4-8: All levels of communication on the fire ground

 Figure 4-9: Timely utilization of gathered data / Data Gathering Block Box/

 Figure 4-10: Automatic updates to fire ground and on-site resources

 Figure 4-11: Firefighters prepared to safely perform tasks

 Figure 4-12: Enhanced scene and building information
SMART FIREFIGHTING WORKSHOP SUMMARY REPORT

38

Major Tasks

 Develop methods to gather 

and filter all data elements to 

ensure functionality to the fire 

service at all levels

 Investigate building history and 

floor plans

 Provide constantly updated 

incident information (verbal or 

electronic)

o Responding: traffic, weather

o On-scene: conditions, 

actions, needs, 

accountability, progress, 

biometric sensing

o Post-incident reporting

Major Milestones

 3-5 years:

o Periodic evaluation

and rework to 

improve the 

constantly evolving 

process

Performance Targets

 Develop a usable product 

for the fire service

 Develop customizable 

solutions

Limits

 One size does not fit all 

 Every municipality is 

unique

Future Changes

 Technology developed as the application becomes more 

widely accepted 

 Standards developed to regulate technology without 

restricting advancements in technology

Future Operations or CPS Issues

 Functionality and cost leading to cultural acceptance

 Pre-emergency and post-event: Gathering 

appropriate information to use as a resource

 During event: Transmitting and receiving the 

information in a timely fashion with good quality 

 Non-firefighter data user applications: Handling 

applicability of building information to all public service 

agencies (e.g., EMS, police, building and core 

enforcement)

 User interface delivery methods: Ease of information 

delivery to communications devices (e.g., radios, data 

terminals)

 Fire service: Identify needs and process

 Technology developers: Develop and deliver the 

information in a functional format via a usable medium

PROGRAM APPROACH

FUTURE

CHALLENGES

Brief Description:

Communications can be described as the fundamental core of the fire service, starting with building inspection 

and pre-planning to fire ground operations through post-fire critiques and investigations. Communication is 

accomplished through several vehicles: hand, verbal, electronic (e.g., wireless), and written.

STAKEHOLDER ROLES AND RESPONSIBILITIES

FIGURE 4-8: ALL LEVELS OF COMMUNICATION ON THE FIRE GROUND
SMART FIREFIGHTING WORKSHOP SUMMARY REPORT

39

Major Tasks

 Identify fire departments that 

are interested in participating 

in pilots

 Inventory and integrate

existing technology

 Explore sensor, 

communications, and imaging 

technology in other industries

 Share results with planners and

builders

 Through pilots, identify the 

most essential and effective 

ways to improve situational 

awareness

 Break down best practices 

along the axes of data type (or 

data source), data 

prioritization, and data usage 

(or type of analysis)

Major Milestones

 0-1 year: Establish a 

data integration pilot

 3-5 years: Complete 

end-to-end 

demonstration with 

data integration, black 

box, etc. for variety of 

situations

 5+ years: Build a set of 

recommendations for 

best practices for fire 

departments to 

implement, partially or 

fully, for data 

management

Performance Targets

 Integration of existing 

alarm systems, building 

information, SCBA, PPE

 Measureable impact on 

reducing firefighter and

civilian injury over an 

established period of time

Limits

 Fire departments

should not need to 

implement a full

integrated system to 

get value from these 

recommendations and

technology

Future Changes

 None provided

Future Operations or CPS Issues

 None provided

 Pre-emergency and post-event: None provided

 During event: None provided

 Non-fire fighter data user applications: None 

provided

 User interface delivery methods: None provided

 Firefighters: Identifying critical data for tactical 

responses and personal safety

 Incident commanders: Identifying data needed for 

strategy, post-analysis, and situational awareness of 

entire scene

 Technology developers: Hardware and software 

experts to define what is feasible and develop analytical 

algorithms

PROGRAM APPROACH

FUTURE

CHALLENGES

Brief Description:

A key challenge for smart firefighting is ensuring that all the data being generated are actually used. This 

requires best practices and technology for data integration that respect the real day-to-day needs of 

firefighters, across multiple dimensions. Solutions must be sensitive to limited fire service budgets, which may 

not be able to implement an all-or-nothing approach.

STAKEHOLDER ROLES AND RESPONSIBILITIES

FIGURE 4-9: TIMELY UTILIZATION OF GATHERED DATA/ DATA GATHERING 

BLACK BOX 
SMART FIREFIGHTING WORKSHOP SUMMARY REPORT

40

Major Tasks

 Identity needs, system of 

priorities, and 

alerts/prompts points

 Develop sensors and

communications networks 

for fire ground informationgathering from apparatus, 

firefighters, building, 

weather, and equipment

 Develop analytical and 

verification modules for

information processing

 Develop interface to display 

processed information

 Conduct full-scale testing 

under fire conditions or 

actual operational use

Major Milestones

 0-3 years:

o Needs, priorities, and 

alerts/prompts established 

through consensus process

o Current sensor technologies 

identified and adapted to needs 

 3-5 years:

o Future needs for specific 

sensor technologies identified 

and associated research 

initiated

o Prototype analytical and 

verification modules and 

display interfaces available for 

testing 

 5+ years: Prototype systems 

evaluated during field burns

Performance 

Targets

 Collection of

temperature, thermal 

flux, and gas 

concentrations to 

identify IDLH for 

firefighter and fire 

teams

 Personal tracking of 

firefighters and fire 

teams on scene

 IDLH and location 

information available 

to incident 

commander as needed 

and in response to 

alerts/prompts

Limits

 Data/sensory 

overload potential 

for incident 

commander—may 

not be able to 

process all data

 Compressed 

window decision 

making ability to 

prioritize/filter 

information

Future Changes

 Equipment needs to be smaller and lighter than current 

technology

 Information needs to be targeted to specific fire teams

Future Operations or CPS Issues

 Security - possibility of someone else looking at data

 System reliability - more important than security

 Pre-emergency and post-event: Getting all the fire 

service on same page and buy-in

 During event: Compressed window for decision 

making reliability of data, communication and display of 

information

 Non-fire fighter data user applications: Many law 

enforcement agencies (more important for security),

military

 User interface delivery methods: Visual (limited 

audible applications), intermediate hand-held display for 

officer, monitor touch screen 15”-19” for incident 

command firefighter, series of lights (e.g., red, yellow, 

green)

 Fire service (IC/operational personnel): Develop 

priority alerts/prompts and ensure project maintains 

focus on fire service needs (e.g., cost-effective, simple, 

reliable)

 Engineers: Identify reliable measurement science to 

collect required information from fire ground including 

from apparatus, firefighters, building, weather and 

equipment

 CPS: Develop methodologies to collect, verify, process, 

report, and display information; develop interfaces, 

software, and analytics

PROGRAM APPROACH

FUTURE

CHALLENGES

Brief Description:

Fire scenes are fluid environments where conditions, personnel, and resources are constantly changing. In 

order to respond to the dynamic nature of the fire scene, incident commanders require continuous 

information updates to make informed decisions and re-evaluate incident action plans (IAPs). CPS would 

gather, organize, and prioritize information in the background. The incident commander could access 

information, alerts, and prompts at any time, and/or the system could provide hazardous condition alerts.

STAKEHOLDER ROLES AND RESPONSIBILITIES

FIGURE 4-10: AUTOMATIC UPDATE TO FIRE GROUND AND ON-SITE RESOURCES
SMART FIREFIGHTING WORKSHOP SUMMARY REPORT

41

Major Tasks

 Assemble, coordinate, and 

adopt current technology

 Human-computer interface

must be emphasized with 

firefighters and be deeply 

involved in design

 Explore additional sensors

(e.g., physiological or 

exposure) for relevant 

parameters (e.g., 

electrocardiogram, blood 

pressure, carbon monoxide, 

toxins) 

Major Milestones

 Offer commercially

available methodology

 Document adoption

 Develop use model/ 

competition to draw in 

large participation. 

Performance Targets

 Seamless technology to 

support excellent medical, 

physical, cognitive, and 

behavioral performance

 Foster competition and 

collaboration within and

between departments and 

stations

Limits

 Appropriate feedback 

provided on key 

hazards

 Not a stand-alone 

technology, will require 

human analysis and 

decision making

Future Changes

 Vitals monitoring provides enormous potential for data 

mining to supplement on-going research

 Technology would support/enhance adoption or 

implementation of standard

Future Operations or CPS Issues

 Union/administration issue

 Privacy issue (e.g., Health Insurance Portability and 

Accountability Act [HIPAA])

 What information when/where/to whom

 Pre-emergency and post-event: model for 

Americans (e.g., heroes); Compatibility with advances in 

medical and fitness 

 During event: Most challenging time; some data may be 

useful to collect (e.g., exposure, events) for post-event 

(e.g., rehabilitation); most data are not actionable during 

events; at the scene, firefighter assumed to be medically 

and physically fit to do job; connects with current 

telemedicine - widely applicable

 Non-fire fighter data user applications: Many law 

enforcement agencies, military

 User interface: Delivery methods

 Fire service: Firefighters, firefighters’ families, and fire 

departments 

 Medical providers

 Commercial partners: FitBit, Zepher

PROGRAM APPROACH

FUTURE

CHALLENGES

Brief Description:

Physiological monitoring should connect, interface, or supplement medical and fitness programs to ensure 

firefighters can safely perform work (i.e., they are medically fit). Data can be collected at baseline fitness

training and during past incidents to monitor and improve health and safety.

STAKEHOLDER ROLES AND RESPONSIBILITIES

FIGURE 4-11: FIREFIGHTERS PREPARED TO SAFELY PERFORM TASKS
SMART FIREFIGHTING WORKSHOP SUMMARY REPORT

42

Major Tasks

 Develop approach for 

digitizing, archiving, uploading, 

and retrieving building floor 

plans of publicly occupied/

inspected properties

 Develop the ability to retrieve 

current and expected weather 

data as geographic information 

system (GIS) layer

 Expand the ability to retrieve 

video feeds from public 

cameras

 Assimilate real-time WUI fire 

prediction data as GIS layer

Major Milestones

 Create a repository 

housing the digital 

layout of all commercial 

and inspected 

structures

 Generate topographical 

maps for all response 

areas

 Design user interface 

layers for digitized data

Performance Targets

 Standardized format of 

digitized GIS layer data 

based on open 

architecture

 Appropriate client side 

mobile data computer 

(MDC) display

Limits

 Indication of 

uncertainty in accuracy 

of data

Future Changes

 Increased investment in real-time data

Future Operations or CPS Issues

 None provided

 Pre-emergency and post-event: None provided

 During event: None provided

 Non-firefighter data user applications: None 

provided

 User interface delivery methods: None provided

 GIS professionals

 Building officials

 Transportation departments

PROGRAM APPROACH

FUTURE

CHALLENGES

Brief Description:

There are several critical factors that must be identified in order to determine an IAP. These include physical 

layout (e.g., occupancy, configuration, contents), topography, weather, and visual data.

STAKEHOLDER ROLES AND RESPONSIBILITIES

FIGURE 4-12: ENHANCED SCENE AND BUILDING INFORMATION
SMART FIREFIGHTING WORKSHOP SUMMARY REPORT

43

4.4 Structural Cross-Cutting 

The Structural Cross-Cutting topics selected for program development is presented below and 

expanded in Figures 4-13 to 4-15.

 Figure 4-13: Standard protocol inter-connectivity of communication devices and 

systems

 Figure 4-14: Situational awareness technologies and training

 Figure 4-15: Situational awareness technologies education and standards

Additional information was provided about the needs for situational awareness technologies and related 

training, education, and standards (Table 4-2). This additional information is applicable to Figure 4-15. 
SMART FIREFIGHTING WORKSHOP SUMMARY REPORT

44

Major Tasks

 Identify data sets that are most 

important for fire service

 Detail data sets and key 

metrics 

 Develop the sensor(s) needed 

and standardize output

 Deliver strategy

Major Milestones

 List top 10 data sets

 Develop standardsbased sensors to 

stream data in real time

 Build testbeds that can 

test interoperability 

 Standardize protocol

Performance Targets

 Deploy first of 5 data sets 

within 2 years

Limits

 Sensor detection to

response deployment

time is less than 60 

seconds

 Reliability within +/- 5%

Future Changes

 None provided

Future Operations or CPS Issues

 Trust of data

 Communications: Accessing sensor data

 Computation: Determining data storage and processing 

location

 Targeted decision making: Preventing overload of 

information for the users

 Technology limitations: Ensuring serviceability of 

equipment

 Pre-emergency: Identifying appropriate level of 

monitoring 

 During event: Developing ability to interpret, receive, 

and rely on data

 Post-event: Analyzing systems’ performance, feeding 

outcomes back into the process

 Fire service: Define data sets or points 

 Manufacturers: Provide solutions

 Third parties: Test and certify

PROGRAM APPROACH

FUTURE

CHALLENGES

Brief Description:

Intelligent interoperable systems are needed to most efficiently use resources and effectively respond to 

incidents. The ideal system would include many features: clear voice communication in all conditions, 

resistance to different environmental conditions, local thresholding for digital data, and a standardized 

dashboard.

STAKEHOLDER ROLES AND RESPONSIBILITIES

FIGURE 4-13: STANDARD PROTOCOL INTER-CONNECTIVITY OF COMMUNICATION 

DEVICES AND SYSTEMS
SMART FIREFIGHTING WORKSHOP SUMMARY REPORT

45

Major Tasks

 Identify gaps in training 

and close them

 Develop trusted means

to identify and locate live 

occupants

 Develop trusted means 

to identify and locate fire 

ground responders

 Develop/identify key 

environmental data to 

measure and means to 

aggregate and analyze 

those data to make them

actionable

Major Milestones

 0-3 years:

o Conduct proof-of-concept 

demonstration of training exercises 

o Investigate/support locator for 

Americans with Disabilities Act 

(ADA) occupants

o Create/support technology 

challenges/demonstrations 

o Workshop with FF/developers to 

identify environmental data 

 3-5 years:

o Create/support technology 

challenges for civilian locator 

o Review existing DOD technologies

o Identify performance metrics

o Use developed sensor technology 

in demonstration 

Performance Targets

 General acceptance/test/

openness to new 

technology 

 Pre/past measurement of 

unoccupied entry/

occupant recovery

 Integration/fielding of 

sensors in a percentage of 

targeted users

Limits

 None provided

Future Changes

 None provided

Future Operations or CPS Issues

 Privacy issues

 Communications: Data gathering

 Computation: Identifying best methods to analyze data 

to extract useful information

 Targeted decision making: Reaching all participants of 

fire grade 

 Technology Limitations: Facilitating location (e.g.,

ability to reliably locate humans within a structure)

 Communications pipeline

 NIMS experts: Slice data to appropriate levels (of fire 

grade personnel) 

 Training and cognition experts: Pre-event planning

 Fire service: Post-event feedback

PROGRAM APPROACH

FUTURE

CHALLENGES

Brief Description:

For effective and safe firefighting, it is essential to know the occupation, location, and health of firefighters; 

understand the dynamic fire environment; and receive an individualized information flow according to the 

role.

STAKEHOLDER ROLES AND RESPONSIBILITIES

FIGURE 4-14: SITUATIONAL AWARENESS TECHNOLOGIES AND TRAINING
SMART FIREFIGHTING WORKSHOP SUMMARY REPORT

46

Major Tasks

 Develop curricula that reflect the 

current understanding of fire 

dynamics, building construction, 

suppression and ventilation, and 

technology’s caps and limitations

 Develop a national/public-private 

partnership for disseminating the 

educational information 

 Develop a current or new 

standard information package for 

sensing/communication 

technologies 

 Develop data needs for each level 

of fire response (see Table 4-2)

Major Milestones

 Revision of NFPA 1001 standard 

with respect to development of 

new firefighting educational 

standards

 Size-up decision making enabled 

by situational awareness

technology

 Integration of physics-based 

situational awareness with

situational awareness

technology-based sensor data

 Reduced cost in collecting and 

maintaining pre-plan data, risk 

reduction, reduced incident 

costs 

Performance 

Targets

 Recertification of 

firefighters/fire 

officers with 5-year 

standard program 

 Adoption by local 

government to 

deliver situational 

awareness 

technology 

infrastructure 

(within 10 years)

Limits

 Cost and timing 

constraints

 Reliability,

sustainability, and 

maintainability

Future Changes

 Research- and service-based firefighter education to 

provide a foundation for the use of situational awareness

technology

 Design data delivery protocol and system based on needs 

(e.g., firefighter versus fire officer versus fire chief)

Future Operations or CPS Issues

 Lack of desire to adopt

 Data overload of incident commander

 Recognition of CPS failure or damage

 Communications: Getting data out of the building to 

the apparatus

 Computation: Maintaining or increasing speed (key en

route to the incident and onsite)

 Targeted decision making: Integrating situational 

awareness sensor 

 Technology limitations: Meeting need for 

national/local networks or simulators and technology 

testbeds

 Pre-emergency: Addressing limited time and funding to 

support education

 During event: Developing an automatic and prioritized 

method to recognize system failure and data overload

 Post-event: Developing and sharing post-event reports 

as another data set

 Primary emergency responder organizations

PROGRAM APPROACH

FUTURE

CHALLENGES

Brief Description:

Enhanced situational awareness could improve the ability of the fire service at all levels (e.g., firefighter, 

incident commander) to understand the structural fire environment. Greater understanding would enable 

these personnel to use a wide range of sensor data to increase FF effectiveness and safety.

STAKEHOLDER ROLES AND RESPONSIBILITIES

FIGURE 4-15: SITUATIONAL AWARENESS TECHNOLOGIES EDUCATION AND 

STANDARDS
SMART FIREFIGHTING WORKSHOP SUMMARY REPORT

47

TABLE 4-2: DATA NEEDS FOR EACH LEVEL OF FIRE RESPONSE

Pre-Incident Priority 1

En Route During Incident Post-Incident

Situational 

Awareness 

Needs

Duration: months to 

days

(standards exist, easy 

to implement)

Duration: 3-5 minutes

(maximum impact)

Duration: 30 minutes to 

many hours

(improve operation)

Duration: days

Firefighter  Pre-plans for built 

infrastructure

 Drills and 

education

 Material safety data 

sheet (MSDS)

information

 Apparatus

 Check of personnel 

monitoring systems

(operational)

 Equipment for 

HAZMAT 

 Current localized 

sensor information

 Entry/egress 

information

 Live personal data (e.g., 

biometrics, location, 

proximity)

 Ongoing hazard 

information in structure

 Level of 

exposure

Company 

Officer

(first arriving 

captain, initial 

incident 

commander)

 Pre-plans for built 

infrastructure

 Access to CPS 

information

 Define entry and 

access to incident

 MSDS information

 Site specifics of 

indent (e.g.,

HAZMAT)

 Building real-time 

systems data to 

truck (e.g., alarm 

panel data)

 Current occupancy 

and usage

 Existing data

 Contact information

 Ongoing hazard in and 

near structure

 Severity assessment

 Technology assessment

 Crew integrity (i.e., 

group cohesiveness)

 Localized sensor 

information and special 

360-degree view for fire 

fighters (e.g., alerts for 

those in danger)

 Location of fire and rate 

of change

 Perimeter set-up

 Command post set-up 

(e.g., building and event 

data)

 Recognition failure 

levels of CPS system

 Ongoing hazard 

information around 

incident

 Determination of

additional monitoring to 

be done (e.g., facilitate 

set-up for new sensing)

 Identification 

of the 

characteristics

of arson and

provision of 

evidence to 

law 

enforcement 

for 

investigation

Chief Officer

(for larger 

incidents)

 Pre-plans for built 

infrastructure

 Access to CPS info

 Occupancy and 

usage

 MSDS information

 Evaluation status 

 Site specifics of 

incident (e.g. 

HAZMAT)

 Building real-time 

systems data to 

truck (alarm panel 

data)

 Current occupancy 

and usage

 Existing data

 Contact information

Offsite 

Entities

(emergency 

operations 

center, 

dispatch, 

department of 

operations 

center)

 Emergency 

contacts for offsite 

consequences (e.g., 

city, county,

officials)

 MSDS information

 External data 

sources (e.g.,

weather)

 Occupancy and 

usage

 CPS-related 

information for 

region

 Building-specific 

CPS information

gathered and 

assimilated at 

dispatch time for

delivery to 

responders,

company officers,

and chief officers

 Volumes of 911 calls

 Determination of

provenance of data 

 Status monitoring and 

determination of

incident support needs

 Mutual aid specialty 

resources

 Notifications to public 

and other entities 

 Status

monitoring
SMART FIREFIGHTING WORKSHOP SUMMARY REPORT

48

4.5 Non-Structural Cross-Cutting 

The Non-structural Cross-cutting topics selected for program development is presented below and 

expanded in Figures 4-16 to 4-19. 

 Figure 4-16: Full-scale testbeds

 Figure 4-17: Interface standards in hardware, software, common data models, and 

formats

 Figure 4-18: New algorithms for uncertainty

 Figure 4-19: Simple and intuitive user interface
SMART FIREFIGHTING WORKSHOP SUMMARY REPORT

49

Major Tasks

 Establish CPS advisory group 

to “own” the process

 Perform gap/needs analysis

 Identify key federal agencies 

and funding

 Solicit R&D proposals from 

industry

Major Milestones

 0-3 years:

o Conduct gap/needs 

analysis

o Identify current best 

practices in military 

and other industry

 3-5 years:

o Develop prototype 

and beta test

o Develop standard 

and guidance for 

manufacturers and 

users

 5+ years:

o Develop user 

community support 

system to sustain the 

process

Performance Targets

 Consensus on standards

 Scalable product that 

addresses rural, suburban, 

and urban fire service 

needs

Limits

 Tools not a

replacement for

common sense and 

experience

 Interoperability in 

multi-vendor 

environment

Future Changes

 Field deployment and user feedback

 Active R&D program

 Increased R&D and decreased costs as capabilities move 

to market

Future Operations or CPS Issues

 Information overloads for users

 Security and privacy

 Communications: None provided

 Computation: None provided

 Targeted decision making: None provided

 Technology limitations: None provided

 Pre-emergency: None provided

 During event: None provided

 Post-event: None provided

 Researchers: Provide gap analysis of existing standards 

and community stakeholder needs

 Standards developer: Produce industry standards

 Responder community: Develop awareness and 

provide testbed and demonstration sites

 Manufacturers: Commence R&D activities

PROGRAM APPROACH

FUTURE

CHALLENGES

Brief Description:

The application of new technologies to the fire service mission requires a process to demonstrate the 

application and the benefits derived from the technology. Having clear metrics and testbeds for feasibility 

demonstrations allows end users to make accurate comparisons between products, communicate their needs, 

influence industry-recognized criteria, and measure operational improvements.

STAKEHOLDER ROLES AND RESPONSIBILITIES

FIGURE 4-16: FULL-SCALE TESTBEDS
SMART FIREFIGHTING WORKSHOP SUMMARY REPORT

50

Major Tasks

 Develop universal standards 

for data exchange through 

interconnection nodes through 

the CPS

 Develop interoperability and 

scalability standards for 

universal hardware application

 Develop software standards 

that meet data exchange 

interoperability standards

 Develop standards for the HMI

experience

Major Milestones

 0-3 years:

o Human interface 

standard for fire 

service

 3-5 years:

o Interconnection 

standards

o Software standards 

data exchange

 5-7 years:

o Interoperability and 

scalability standards

Performance Targets

 Standards adoption by 

consensus among 

manufacturers and endusers

Limits

 Budget constraints 

(cost performance)

 Perceived cost/benefit 

for new technology

Future Changes

 Improved training standards

 Interoperable equipment

 Paradigm shift from conventional to smart firefighting

Future Operations or CPS Issues

 Culture

 Trust

 System dependency

 Communications: Identifying the useful data and types 

of data

 Computation: Developing capability to handle data 

volume and speed

 Targeted decision making: Managing reliability and 

trustworthiness (uncertainty)

 Technology limitations: Managing interoperability and 

scalability

 Pre-emergency: None provided

 During event: Prioritizing information to complement 

decision making

 Post-event: Using lessons learned to revise and 

improve standards

 Standards developing organizations

 Policymaking organizations/agencies

 Manufacturers

 End users (e.g., emergency response community)

PROGRAM APPROACH

FUTURE

CHALLENGES

Brief Description:

Interoperability standards for firefighting CPS need to be developed to improve efficiency of the systems and 

firefighting efforts.

STAKEHOLDER ROLES AND RESPONSIBILITIES

FIGURE 4-17: INTERFACE STANDARDS FOR HARDWARE, SOFTWARE,

COMMON DATA MODELS, AND FORMATS
SMART FIREFIGHTING WORKSHOP SUMMARY REPORT

51

Major Tasks

 Create knowledge base by 

adequately describing the 

firefighting domain

 Identify past events that could 

be used as training

 Assemble ideas into a decision 

support tool incorporating

human factors

 Develop user interface

Major Milestones

 Conduct critical review 

of past incidents and 

technology (1-2 years)

 Identify needs and gaps 

that create uncertainty

 Invent coding adaptive 

algorithms

 Complete field testing

Performance Targets

 A critical review of 

models and incidents to 

better understand factors 

that affect fire behavior

 Development of software

Limits

 Ability to quantify 

uncertainty

 Limited by number of 

inputs from existing 

technology

Future Changes

 Framework to account for uncertainty

Future Operations or CPS Issues

 Culture of integrating decision support tool

 Trust of technology over human decision making

 Communications: Only as good as data input

 Computation: Importance of speed (scalability)

 Computer scientists

 Fire subject matter experts

 Funding agency: e.g., FEMA, FISP, Joint Fire Sciences 

Working Group

PROGRAM APPROACH

FUTURE

CHALLENGES

Brief Description:

In the non-structural firefighter response environment, multiple unknown variables exist that would affect 

accuracy of CPS solutions. Algorithms must be developed to account for these unknowns.

STAKEHOLDER ROLES AND RESPONSIBILITIES

FIGURE 4-18: NEW ALGORITHMS FOR UNCERTAINTY
SMART FIREFIGHTING WORKSHOP SUMMARY REPORT

52

Major Tasks

 Go through development 

process (e.g., testing, beta

release, final release)

 Work with users to determine 

final product

 Use successful products as 

examples

 Involve the experts (e.g., 

Google, Apple, etc.)

Major Milestones

 Upgrade and improve

existing user interfaces

 Evaluate feedback on 

beta and final releases

Performance Targets

 Broad use and added 

value to fire service 

groups

 Mode of user interface

utilization by fire service 

groups

 Functions with existing 

and new technology

Limits

 Well-defined (and 

realistic) tool required

 Realistic goals defined

Future Changes

 Safer, more effective work

 Better use of resources

Future Operations or CPS Issues

 Loss of “hands-on” experience and problem-solving skills 

 Overreliance on the technology

 Communications: Additional use on the job for

feedback without interrupting or distracting firefighters

 Computation: Decision needed regarding client/server 

or client-only cloud

 Targeted decision making: Creation of a well-defined 

application scope 

 Technology limitations: Inoperable touch screen with 

gloves; interference of background noise with voice 

interface 

 Pre-emergency: Undefined data needs during an event

 During event: User interface may or may not be 

different; undefined method to provide relevant 

information in a timely manner

 Post event: Undefined beginning of post event; afteraction review

 Software vendors

 Users

 Industry regulatory bodies

PROGRAM APPROACH

FUTURE

CHALLENGES

Brief Description:

A well-designed user interface should provide the user with access to relevant technology and data using 

appropriate PPE.

STAKEHOLDER ROLES AND RESPONSIBILITIES

FIGURE 4-19: SIMPLE AND INTUITIVE USER INTERFACE
SMART FIREFIGHTING WORKSHOP SUMMARY REPORT

53

5 Summary 

Incorporation of CPS capabilities into the fire service could provide significant enhancements to improve 

the safety and effectiveness of fire protection and firefighting. In an effort to galvanize stakeholder 

attention on this topic the Smart Firefighting Workshop was held on March 24-25, 2014, in Arlington, 

Virginia. This meeting assembled members of the fire service, CPS, and fire protection communities to 

identify key development areas—technical and non-technical—that are needed to take advantage of the 

volumes of data generated during all phases of a fire incident. The most beneficial concepts as identified 

by the workshop participants were prioritized and then expanded into potential program plans. Several 

common themes emerged including the following:

 Use of sensors on the fire ground to assist in situational awareness and personnel location

 Increased collection and utilization of data before the incident to aid in effective use of 

personnel and equipment

 Enhance interoperability between data systems 

 Develop intelligent systems to assist with decision making

This report summarizes the results of the workshop and will serve to guide the development of a 

research roadmap on smart firefighting providing guidance for the research community as they consider 

developing programs focused on providing the science and standards needed to enable safer and more 

effective fire protection and firefighting. The material contained in this report will aid both the public and 

private sectors in development of policy, R&D, and other firefighting related decision making.
SMART FIREFIGHTING WORKSHOP SUMMARY REPORT

A-1

Appendix A: Contributors

Contributors listed alphabetically

Robert Athanas

Fire Department City of New York

Roger Barker

North Carolina State University

Andrew Berezowski

Honeywell Fire Systems

Steve Bridgewater

Siemens

Keith Bryant

Metro Chiefs Representative

Nelson Bryner

NIST

Brett Butler

Missoula Fire Sciences Laboratory, U.S. Forest 

Service

Corey Butler

National Institute for Occupational Safety and 

Health

Alan Butsch

Montgomery County Fire Rescue Service

Jeff Chen

Fire Department City of New York - Analytics Unit

John Cunningham

New Jersey Firefighter School/North American Fire 

Training Directors

DK Ezekoye

University of Texas

Simon Frechette

NIST

Wendy Gifford

NestLabs

Nada Golmie

NIST

Jay Gore

Purdue University

Casey Grant

Fire Protection Research Foundation

Paul Greenberg

NASA

Kristen Greene

NIST

Anthony Hamins

NIST

Howard Harary

NIST

Bill Haskell

National Institute for Occupational Safety and 

Health

Hylton Haynes

National Fire Protection Association

Everett Hinkley

U.S. Forest Service

Gavin Horn

University of Illinois

Art Hsu

United Technologies

Patrick Jackson

Rocky Mount Fire Department (NC)

Ashish Jain

Applied Communication Sciences

Al Jones

NIST

David Kerr

IFMA Representative

Clare King

Propell/Globe

Danny Kistner

McKinney Fire TX

Galen Koepke

NIST

Adam Krasuski

Main School of Fire Service Warsaw (Poland)

Amit Kulkarni

Honeywell Research Lab
SMART FIREFIGHTING WORKSHOP SUMMARY REPORT

A-2

Neil Lakomiak

Underwriters Laboratories Inc.

Brian Lattimer

Virginia Tech

David M. Lewis

National Volunteer Fire Council Representative

Dan Madrzykowski

NIST

A.W Marshall

University of Maryland

Brian Martens

Harris Corporation

Eric Matson

Purdue University

Michael May

U.S. Department of Defense 

Brian Meacham

Worcester Polytechnic Institute

Mark Micire

Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency

Richard Miller

International Association of Fire Chiefs 

Lori Moore-Merrell

International Association of Fire Fighters

Eric Nickel

Palo Alto Fire Department

Philip Oakes

National Association of State Fire Marshals

Kristopher Overholt

NIST

Matt Paiss

San Jose Fire Department

Isaac Papier

Honeywell

Jason Pelski

Tyco

Dean Pickering

Harris

Edward Plaugher

International Association of Fire Chiefs

Jeff Roth

Fire Department City of New York

Deuir Smith

Skidmore College

Fumiaki Takahashi

Case Western Reserve University

Mary Theofanos

NIST

Steve Townsend

Carrolton Fire TX

Robert Tutterow

F.I.E.R.O.

Nalini Venkatasubramanian

University of California, Irvine

Peter Wang

Continuum Analytics

Ken Willette

National Fire Protection Association

Joseph Woznica

Fire Department City of New York- Bureau of Fire 

Prevention

Jiann Yang

NIST

Justyna Zander

MathWorks

Robin Zevoter

Underwriters Laboratories Inc.
SMART FIREFIGHTING WORKSHOP SUMMARY REPORT

B-1

Appendix B: Acronyms

CAD Computer Aided Dispatch 

CPS cyber-physical system

DHS Department of Homeland Security

DOD Department of Defense

EL Engineering Laboratory

EMS Emergency Medical Service

FDNY Fire Department City of New York

FEMA Federal Emergency Management Agency

FF firefighter

FIERO Fire Industry Equipment Research Organization

FPRF Fire Protection Research Foundation

GPS Global Positioning System

GIS geographic information system

HAZMAT Hazardous Materials Response 

HCI human-computer interface

HIPAA Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act of 1996

IAFC International Association of Fire Chiefs

IAFF International Association of Fire Fighters

IAP incident action plan

IBC International Building Code

IC Incident Commander

ICC International Code Council

IDLH immediately dangerous to life or health

IFMA International Fire Marshals Association

IOT internet of things

LAN local area network

MDC mobile data computer

MSDS Material Safety Data Sheet

NFIRS National Fire Incident Reporting System

N-FORS National Fire Operations Reporting System 

NFPA National Fire Protection Association

NGO non-government organization
SMART FIREFIGHTING WORKSHOP SUMMARY REPORT

B-2

NIMS National Incident Management System

NIST National Institute of Standards and Technology

NVFC National Volunteer Fire Council

PAN personal area network

PPE personal protective equipment

QA quality assurance

SCBA self-contained breathing apparatus

UAS unmanned aircraft system

UAV unmanned aerial vehicle

UGV unmanned ground vehicle

UI/UX user interface/user experience

WoF working on fire

WUI Wildland-Urban Interface
SMART FIREFIGHTING WORKSHOP SUMMARY REPORT

C-1

Appendix C: Workshop Agenda

Monday - Tuesday, 24-25 March 2014

Sheraton Crystal City Hotel

1800 Jefferson Davis Hwy, Arlington, VA (Phone: 703-486-1111)

Agenda last updated: 12 March 2014

A one and one-half-day interactive workshop in support of the project to 

”Develop a Research Roadmap for Smart Fire Fighting”

BACKGROUND:

The fire service and other emergency first responders are currently benefiting from enhancedexisting and newly-developed electronic technologies. Firefighters are now operating in an ever 

increasing sensor rich environment that is creating vast amounts of potentially useful data. The 

“Smart” firefighting of tomorrow is envisioned as being able to fully exploit select data to perform 

work tasks in a highly effective and efficient manner. Behind the advances of the new sensor and 

tool enhanced firefighter of tomorrow are profound questions of how to best enable effective use 

of this deluge of valuable information. This is an area that is informed by the field of “cyber-physical 

systems” and which promises to change the world of firefighting as we know it.

This workshop is being held to support a NIST funded research project to develop a “Research 

Roadmap for Smart Fire Fighting”. This is focused on addressing how best to effectively use the 

immense quantity of data available from buildings, communities and on the fire ground, the 

computational power to compute and communicate that data, the knowledge base and algorithms 

to most effectively process the data, converting it into significant knowledge/beneficial decision 

tools, and effectively communicate the information to those who need it, when they need it --- on 

the fire ground and elsewhere. 

WORKSHOP GOALS AND ANTICIPATED OUTCOMES:

The goals and outcomes from this workshop are:

(a) Establish dialogue among subject matter experts familiar with the unique characteristics of 

firefighting and cyber physical systems.

(b) Promote a better understanding of data opportunities available to the fire service.

(c) Clarify the collective vision of the ultimate research roadmap expected as deliverables for 

this project.
SMART FIREFIGHTING WORKSHOP SUMMARY REPORT

C-2

PLANNED AGENDA (24-25 MARCH 2014):

8:00 am Introductory Remarks: Workshop Overview Casey Grant, FPRF

8:10 am Welcoming Remarks: The NIST Vision Howard Harary, NIST

8:20 am

Welcoming Remarks: Overview of Smart Fire Fighting and 

Cyber Physical Systems Anthony Hamins, NIST

8:30 am

Presentation: Federal Government Vision for Integrating 

Cyber Physical Systems with the Fire Service Richard Voyles, OSTP

8:50 am

Presentation: Our Changing World from a Fire Fighting 

Perspective:

(a) Addressing State-of-the-Art; (b) Defining the Problem; (c) 

Clarifying the Challenges; (d) Prioritizing the Details

Glenn Gaines, USFA

9:10 am

Presentation: Our Changing World from a Cyber Physical 

Systems Perspective: (a) Addressing State-of-the-Art; (b) 

Defining the Problem; (c) Clarifying the Challenges; (d) 

Prioritizing the Details

Sokwoo Rhee, NIST

9:30 am Presentation: Cyber Physical Systems and the Fire Service -

the FDNY Perspective

Jeff Roth & Jeff Chen, FDNY 

Analytics

9:50 am Networking Break

10:10 am

Panel Discussion:

Bringing Cyber Physical Systems to the Fire Service - Review 

of Experience, Applications and Opportunities

Moderator: Al Jones (NIST);

Panelists: 

Glenn Gaines (USFA), 

Eric Nickel (Palo Alto FD), 

Patrick Jackson 

(Rocky Mount FD), 

Michael May (DoD), 

Jeff Chen (FDNY Analytics),

Nalini Venkatasubramanian 

(UC-Irvine)

11:40 am Presentation: Road mapping Vision and Chapter Outline Nelson Bryner, NIST

12:00 pm

Breakout Group Introduction: Breakout Group Assignment 

Review

● Breakout Group I: Data Gathering

● Breakout Group II: Data Processing

● Breakout Group III: Decision Making

● Breakout Group IV: Cross-Cutting (Structural)

● Breakout Group V: Cross-Cutting (Non-Structural)

Casey Grant, FPRF

12:10 pm Working Lunch

1:10 pm Breakout Session Preview: Introductions and Agenda 

Review Energetics- Plenary

1:25 pm Breakout Session 1: State of the Art Workshop Groups
SMART FIREFIGHTING WORKSHOP SUMMARY REPORT

C-3

2:10 pm Breakout Session 2: Development Needs Workshop Groups

3:00 pm Breakout Session 3: Other Requirements Workshop Groups

3:30 pm Breakout Session Prioritization Workshop Groups

3:45 pm Break

4:00 pm Breakout Group Presentations Plenary

4:50 pm Day One Closing Remarks and Day Two Instructions NIST & Energetics

5:00 pm Adjourn Day One

8:30 am Day Two Opening and Review of Day One Priorities Plenary

9:00 am Breakout Session 4: Small Group Work Workshop Groups

10:30 am Break

10:45 am Break-out Group Reports and Plenary Discussion Plenary

11:35 am Closing Remarks

11:45 am Adjournment
SMART FIREFIGHTING WORKSHOP SUMMARY REPORT

D-1

Appendix D: Overview Briefings

Several presentations were given at the beginning of the workshop to set the stage for the discussions. 

Those presentations, provided in this appendix, are as follows: 

 Introductory Remarks: Workshop Overview, Casey Grant, FPRF

 Welcoming Remarks: The NIST Vision, Howard Harary, NIST

 Welcoming Remarks: Overview of Smart Fire Fighting and Cyber Physical Systems, Anthony 

Hamins, NIST

 Federal Government Vision for Integrating Cyber Physical Systems with the Fire Service, Richard 

Voyles, OSTP

 Our Changing World from a Fire Fighting Perspective, Glenn Gaines, USFA

 Our Changing World from a Cyber Physical Systems Perspective, Sokwoo Rhee, NIST

 Cyber Physical Systems and the Fire Service - the FDNY Perspective, Jeff Roth & Jeff Chen, FDNY 

Analytics
SMART FIREFIGHTING WORKSHOP SUMMARY REPORT

D-2
SMART FIREFIGHTING WORKSHOP SUMMARY REPORT

D-3
SMART FIREFIGHTING WORKSHOP SUMMARY REPORT

D-4
SMART FIREFIGHTING WORKSHOP SUMMARY REPORT

D-5
SMART FIREFIGHTING WORKSHOP SUMMARY REPORT

D-6
SMART FIREFIGHTING WORKSHOP SUMMARY REPORT

D-7
SMART FIREFIGHTING WORKSHOP SUMMARY REPORT

D-8
SMART FIREFIGHTING WORKSHOP SUMMARY REPORT

D-9
SMART FIREFIGHTING WORKSHOP SUMMARY REPORT

D-10
SMART FIREFIGHTING WORKSHOP SUMMARY REPORT

D-11
SMART FIREFIGHTING WORKSHOP SUMMARY REPORT

D-12
SMART FIREFIGHTING WORKSHOP SUMMARY REPORT

D-13
SMART FIREFIGHTING WORKSHOP SUMMARY REPORT

D-14
SMART FIREFIGHTING WORKSHOP SUMMARY REPORT

D-15
SMART FIREFIGHTING WORKSHOP SUMMARY REPORT

D-16
SMART FIREFIGHTING WORKSHOP SUMMARY REPORT

D-17
SMART FIREFIGHTING WORKSHOP SUMMARY REPORT

D-18
SMART FIREFIGHTING WORKSHOP SUMMARY REPORT

D-19
SMART FIREFIGHTING WORKSHOP SUMMARY REPORT

D-20
SMART FIREFIGHTING WORKSHOP SUMMARY REPORT

D-21
SMART FIREFIGHTING WORKSHOP SUMMARY REPORT

D-22
SMART FIREFIGHTING WORKSHOP SUMMARY REPORT

D-23
SMART FIREFIGHTING WORKSHOP SUMMARY REPORT

D-24
SMART FIREFIGHTING WORKSHOP SUMMARY REPORT

D-25
SMART FIREFIGHTING WORKSHOP SUMMARY REPORT

D-26
SMART FIREFIGHTING WORKSHOP SUMMARY REPORT

D-27
SMART FIREFIGHTING WORKSHOP SUMMARY REPORT

D-28
SMART FIREFIGHTING WORKSHOP SUMMARY REPORT

D-29
SMART FIREFIGHTING WORKSHOP SUMMARY REPORT

D-30
SMART FIREFIGHTING WORKSHOP SUMMARY REPORT

D-31
SMART FIREFIGHTING WORKSHOP SUMMARY REPORT

D-32
SMART FIREFIGHTING WORKSHOP SUMMARY REPORT

D-33
SMART FIREFIGHTING WORKSHOP SUMMARY REPORT

D-34