By Vance Bennett
Hazmat trainers across the county routinely show a video of a brave cop running into a cloud of anhydrous ammonia to save an unconscious person. They will show it to the class and at the end solemnly intone, “He gave his life to save someone else.” The students sigh and wipe away a tear.
Only one problem, the cop is very much alive.
How can we tell fact from fiction in hazmat training? If someone gives you a copy of a video how can you tell if it’s credible? It’s not difficult, but it takes some effort.
There are three general steps you can follow to verify something like this.
ONE
If it doesn’t look right, it probably isn’t.
I had never seen the video until someone sent me a link to it and asked me what I thought. I watched it and the first thing I noticed was that everything is conveniently within the field of view of the dash cam. How often does this happen? Uh, never.
What else didn’t look right?
The cop runs into a vapor could of ammonia and renders aid to the unconscious person. Ammonia is extremely irritating. Anyone who runs into a cloud of ammonia would immediately experience severe pain.
Also Read: Four Steps for Handling an Ammonia Leak
According to the Agency of Toxic Substances and Disease Registry, “Even low airborne concentrations (100 ppm) of ammonia may produce rapid eye and nose irritation.” If you inhale it the result can be “… nasopharyngeal and tracheal burns, bronchiolar and alveolar edema, and airway destruction resulting in respiratory distress or failure.”
It’s highly unlikely that anyone could stay in a cloud of ammonia vapor for more than a few seconds. Their body will rebel and make them leave.
TWO
The internet is your friend.
Government agencies put all sorts of interesting stuff on their websites. If you poke around a bit you can get answers to your questions. And, you can often find stuff that answers a question you never thought to ask.
In the case of this video, you aren’t quite sure which website to go to. The video says the agency involved is “ISP” but it doesn’t say what that acronym stands for. The “SP” is most likely State Police, but which I are we dealing with here — Iowa, Indiana, Illinois, Idaho? All have large agricultural regions where anhydrous ammonia would be used. How can we narrow it down?
In this case, I asked around online and was told this video was most likely from Illinois. I made a quick trip to the Illinois State Police website and found they had a page listing line of duty deaths. Guess what wasn’t there? Any line of duty death within years of the date of this video.
Also Read: New Tech Converts Ammonia to Hydrogen Fuel
I searched for the video on YouTube. There were several on various channels. I skimmed through the comments and found one that included a copy of a response to a Freedom of Information Act request. The FOIA request basically asked if the video was real.
The ISP response? “Yeah we made it and no it’s not a real incident.” Their academy staff were the creators. It’s a training video. Not a real incident. So sayeth the ISP FOIA officer. Was the comment credible? Yes. It gives some details about the video and includes the name of the ISP FOIA officer. It’s easy to check out something like that.
THREE
Don’t be afraid to make a phone call.
Who should I call at ISP? Again, the internet is your friend. The scene in the video is clearly an agricultural area. The leaking gas is coming from what appears to be a nurse tank. (Actually, it was coming from a smoke generator. But, we’re getting ahead of ourselves.)
That type of tank is commonly used in farm country to transport anhydrous ammonia from a dealer to a field. The anhydrous ammonia is then applied to a field as a fertilizer.
The ISP website has a map showing how they are divided up. In this case, they have 15 troops and each is responsible for a specific geographic area. I took a guess and clicked on the link to the troop that covered what looked to be an agricultural region. I called the contact number listed and hit pay dirt. The person I talked to knew all about the video and told me who made it. The next day I was talking to the “dead” guy.
So what did he tell me? He made the video to train dispatchers. That’s why the audio is so prominent. The first time he showed it to a dispatcher training session they ended up crying and distraught. He couldn’t console them. He told them the guy in the video was standing in front of them and was alive and well.
They didn’t buy it. They were convinced the guy was dead and in the grave. I guess that shows how well the video was made. He said when he would show the video he would intentionally not tell the class that the video wasn’t real. He had fun watching their reactions.
What are the details about how it was made? It cost them a grand total of $500. I suspect much of that was used to rent the smoke generator. The incident scene was his neighbor’s soybean field. The fire engine was from the local volunteer department. One of his buddies was the engineer. His wife (a nurse in real life) was the medic who tried to save him.
I think they got their money’s worth.
That’s the truth about the video, but what about the consequences? Hazmat training should be accurate. If it isn’t, bad things can happen. If an instructor shows videos or passes on war stories that are inaccurate or outright false that can cause responders to do the wrong thing at the wrong time. If an instructor doesn’t get it right then responders may not either.
What are the consequences for an instructor? It’s all about credibility. If you show a video like this and tell the students it’s real, what happens if someone in the class knows it isn’t? Will they believe anything you say after that? Probably not.
About the Author
Vance Bennett is retired from California Specialized Training Institute, the training branch of the Governor’s Office of Emergency Services. During his 30 years at CSTI he was an Emergency Management coordinator and instructor in the Hazardous Materials Section. He was the course manager for several CSTI courses including Hazmat Incident Commander, First Responder Operations and CSTI Instructor Certification. As the CSTI representative to the FIRESCOPE Hazardous Materials Subcommittee, he helped develop hazmat team typing and equipment standards for California hazmat teams. Vance was also a regular presenter at the Hazmat Continuing Challenge Workshop.
Prior to coming to work for CSTI, he was on active duty in the U. S. Coast Guard specializing in marine safety and pollution response. During that time he was involved in responses to hazmat incidents and oil spills including the EXXON Valdez and American Trader spills. He served in a variety of USCG units including the Pacific Strike Team before retiring in 2009.
