Larry Haftl's Place

Larry Haftl.com
PRODUCT REVIEW: Hot Shield Face Mask

by Larry Haftl
First published in Wildland Firefighter Magazine, July, 1997

While few can argue with the quality and practicality of White's boots and the Nimrod Pack System, another product designed by firefighters specifically for wildland firefighters finds itself the center of an increasing controversy. The Hot Shield wildland firefighter face mask, made by Hot Shield USA, Inc. in Victorville, Calif., is either the best thing to come along since Nomex or - depending on who you talk to - an unsafe piece of personal protective equipment.

The mask was designed by Cordell Harges and Bert Rivera, two firefighters in Glendale, Calif., after the 1993 firestorms raged through Malibu and Altadena. "Everybody was just getting hammered by the smoke and burning embers," said Harges, "so we tried to find some type of respiratory protection. But there was nothing out there except paint respirators and other rubber-type masks."

After seeing the damage done to the faces of fellow firefighters who had been burned over, Harges and Rivera believed that any type of rubber mask was out of the question. They looked at combinations of shrouds and rubber respirators, but none appeared safe enough to use, so they eventually developed a fabric mask and called it the Hot Shield.

The Hot Shield has an outer fabric shell made of Kevlar and Nomex IIIA, several layers of insulating material, and an inner lining of a knit Nomex IIIA material. It covers the nose, lower face, throat and neck, but leaves the ears uncovered coves uncoves uncoveaired. The front of the mask has an opening covered with a PBI- blend fabric, and behind that is a pocket to hold an optional particulate filter. The mask is designed to hang loosely around the neck by a strap, but when needed it can be brought quickly up to the face and fastened securely without removing a helmet or hard hat.

The mask's protection from flame and radiant heat is so effective that the company offers a demonstration video showing the mask, worn by Rivera, subjected to the direct flame of a torch for more than 20 seconds - with no harm to either the mask or Rivera.

Certified laboratory tests confirm that the mask could be subjected to a 1,000-degree flame for up to 60 seconds before the wearer would feel pain.

So why all the controversy?

Because the mask also offers some respiratory protection.

"If the mask was designed just to provide face protection, and not designed to breathe through and to provide respiratory protection, we would not be so concerned," said Matt Silva, safety officer for the California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection (CDF). To fully understand concerns over the respiratory protection of the Hot Shield mask, it's necessary to look at the issues surrounding respiratory protection of any type for wildland firefighters.

The most common threats to the respiratory tracts of wildland firefighters are high heat, gases, and particulate components of smoke. The gases include organic acid vapors and carbon monoxide. "Carbon monoxide is a real problem," said Silva. "It's not too difficult for us to find respirators with filtering elements that work for the toxics in the smoke, but there is nothing we can do to filter carbon monoxide short of a self-contained breathing apparatus [SCBA]." SCBAs are not practical for wildland fire fighting, because the tanks do not provide an adequate amount of air, they restrict breathing, and because they reduce necessary mobility. Carbon monoxide impairs respiratory function, judgment, coordination, and attention - and can be fatal in high concentrations.

Using respiratory protection of any type also increases consumption of carbon monoxide. In 1991 and 1992 CDF and the Lawrence Livermore Laboratories conducted a study on current respirator technology for use in wildland fire fighting. None of the respirators were found suitable, but the tests also demonstrated that wearing respirators changes firefighter behavior. The firefighters consistently remained in dense smoke longer than they would have without respirators.

There are properties in smoke that are irritating, which encourages firefighters to get out of the smoke as much as they can. "When we tested the respirators," said Silva, "we found that because they were filtering out all those irritant properties, the firefighters were staying in the smoke longer, staying in heavier concentrations of smoke, and going places they would never have gone without the respirators. That probably means their exposure to carbon monoxide was going up significantly."

Reducing irritants through fitants titants teases potential risk from particulates. Larger particulates tend to get trapped in the throat and nose, forming the black ooze and phlegm that firefighters hate so much. The resultant coughing, sore throat, ooze, and phlegm are called short-term acute effects, and are the hazards most firefighters are concerned about. Smaller particulates, however, may contribute to long-term health problems, because they make their way into the lungs and tend to coat the walls of the little sacs the lungs use to reoxygenate the blood. Research is being done to determine how much long-term damage occurs from breathing the various components of smoke, but results are not yet conclusive. Unless the filter is capable of preventing these smaller particles from entering the lungs - and most filters are not - then increased exposure caused by reducing irritants may increase long-term damage to the respiratory system.

Another concern with the Hot Shield is that the fabric of the mask can trap toxic vapors, and unless the mask is detoxed, the vapors could be inhaled long after the initial source of the vapors is gone. However, the manufacturer provides easy-to-use cleaning instructions.

By law, all respirator systems must be approved for specific uses by the National Institute of Occupational Safety and Health (NIOSH). There are currently no NIOSH-approved respirator systems for use by wildland firefighters. NIOSH also states that in order to use any form of respirator, it must be part of an 11-point program that includes fit testing, medical surveillance, annual medical evaluations, and other costly components. Such programs take time to develop and demonstrate that they are effective. That is the bind that all federal, state, and local fire management agencies are currently in when it comes to supplying or recommending any form of respirator.

While there is no standard for wildland firefighter respiratory protection, there is work being done on developing a standard for facial protection.

The National Fire Protection Association (NFPA) is preparing a draft for a new facial protection standard. After the wildfires of 1988, the NFPA developed several standards for personal protective gear. Today there are standards for shirts, trousers, jackets, hard hats, gloves, and fire shelters. This new proposal covers facial protection and other accessories, but not respiratory systems. The draft will go out for public comment and may be modified based on those comments before it comes up for a vote by NFPA membership in May 1998.

The Hot Shield mask offers outstanding facial protection from radiant heat and direct flame. It does not protect the ears, but the manufacturer is working on an insulated shroud to solve that problem.

Several firefighters who have used the mask in burnovers and other extreme fire conditions swear by it. Captain Jim dark and his crew from the Larkspur, Calif., Fire Department were trapped and overrun August 15, 1996 in a fire in Lake County, California. "When the firestorm hit us," said Clark, "I put the Hot Shield on, and it definitely prevented me from sucking down a lot of hot embers and getting possible burns to my face. We all used the Hot Shield and it helped, especially with ash reduction."

Captain Curt Cunningham of the Merced, Calif., Fire Department had a similar situation. "We had a spot fire turn into a raging fire in a matter of seconds," he said. "The heat and smoke were so intense that at one point I could not see the engine or my personnel, who were three feet away from me. I would not have been able to hold my ground to protect my engine and personnel if it had not been for the Hot Shield. The other two firefighters with me did not have a Hot Shield. They were forced to retreat behind the engine and suffered sore throats for several days after the incident. I had no ill effects at all."

Dave Webb, U.S. Forest Service assistant fire management officer at the Spring Mountains National Recreation Area near Las Vegas, Nev., was trapped and overrun in a northern Nevada wildfire on August 31, 1996. He suffered second- and third-degree burns to several parts of his body, but did not suffer respiratory or facial burns. "I firmly believe the Hot Shield saved my life," he said. One of the surgeons who attended Webb, Dr. James V. Lovett of the Las Vegas University Medical Center Burn Unit, said he believes that if Webb had not been wearing the Hot Shield, his face and respiratory tract would have suffered at least second- degree burns.

Hot Shield, Inc. also has testimonials from several other firefighters who believe the mask saved their lives.

So what is a firefighter to do? On the one hand, there are no legally approved respirators. Because of the time and cost involved in setting up an approved 11-point respirator program, it does not look like any will be approved in the near future.

Compounding the problem is that most wildland firefighters are never exposed to smoke hazards that exceed cus that es that endards. Studies done by the National Wildfire Coordinating Group (NWCG) have demonstrated that less than 10 percent of all exposure to smoke from wildland fire exceeds safety limits. It should be noted that these studies were done on firefighters working on forest and grassland fires, not on fires in the wildland/urban interface. Fires in the interface create conditions that magnify the problems. These fires may contain toxics not normally found in wildland fires, and the need to protect structures and lives can force firefighters into greater exposure to fire and smoke than would occur in other wildland fires.

There is also a reduced risk of entrapment and burnover in regular wildland fires. Over the years the federal government has issued more than 900,000 fire shelters. Less than 1,000 have ever been deployed in an emergency, according to the Missoula Technology and Development Center (MTDC) in Missoula, Mont.

But what if you fight interface fires on a regular basis? Based on the studies, your risk of entrapment or burnover is greater, and so is your exposure to smoke. If you use any form of respirator, you should recognize that it is not approved by NIOSH unless it is part of an approved 11-part program. If you are still willing to use a product such as the Hot Shield, then you should also be using a carbon monoxide monitor to gauge your exposure levels. Even if you don't use a respirator, you should be using a monitor. A data-logging monitor costs about $600 and can give you detailed information about what you are being exposed to. When this information is used in a medical surveillance program, it can significantly reduce long-term health risks.

Harges maintains that even though Hot Shield is not approved by NIOSH it is, at least in California, legal to use. He cites a memo from Dr. John Howard, Chief of the California Division of Occupational Safety and Health (Cal-OSHA) to support his argument. The memo states that it is not necessary for employers to comply with Section 5144 - the section of Cal-OSHA code dealing with respiratory protective equipment - "when disposable paper mask respirators:
1. are used by employees primarily for nose and mouth protection;
2. are not used for any other purpose;
3. are disposed of after each use; and
4. are not required by Cal-OSH/ regulation."

Michael Mason, attorney for Cal-OSHA, confirmed that there is no Cal-OSHA regulation that requires respiratory protection for wildland firefighters. There is one for structural firefighters.

Both Mason and a safety engineer at Cal-OSHA's standards office were surprised to learn that no respiratory protection requirement existed and neither could explain why not.

In the absence of an approved standard, individual employers can apply to Cal-OSHA's standards board for a variance that would allow them to legally use the Hot Shield product, according to a Cal-OSHA attorney. Whether they would get one is not certain. Why CDF asserts that using the Hot Shield mask is illegal is also unclear, even to the CDF officials responsible for evaluating the Hot Shield.

If you consider the respirator function of Hot Shield as primarily for nose and mouth protection, and if you dispose of the replaceable filter after each use, then perhaps Harges is right, at least in California. If the Hot Shield is going to be used as a tool that allows more aggressive fire fighting, you should recognize that it may actually increase long-term respiratory problems. If, on the other hand, it is considered emergency facial protection similar to the full-body protection provided by a fire shelter, then it actually may turn out to be the best thing to come along since Nomex.

Current Contact Information:
Hotshield USA, Inc.
214 Main St. Unit 289
El Segundo, CA 90245
(310) 297-2624
www.hotshield.com

Contact

Product Reviews