Fire on Ice: Analysis of a Social Media-Focused Hydraulic System Failure
What do Zamboni, Kleenex, and Google all have in common? They are category-defining brands that people convert into verbs and nouns. For example, a person does not just search the internet, they Google it. This is referred to as "sticky brands." Zamboni is the brand name and an "ice resurfacing machine" is the product being sold by the Zamboni Company and its competitors. On Oct. 14, 2020, another ice resurfacer caught fire. This time it was at the Bill Gray’s Regional Iceplex at the Monroe Community College’s campus in upstate New York. Incredibly, watching the video, no one was injured, including those on the ice and the operator who headed off the surface completely engulfed in flames. Once again, ice resurfacer manufacturers acted as a shield to facility staff and the industry as social and traditional media raced to get the story to air using a brand name as the headline regarding the failure and outcome. However, it was not the brand of equipment that failed – it is an industry operational failure that can and must be addressed.
As a profession, if we are prepared to take the accolades of hosting a significant skating event by our users, we also have to accept blame when we fail to provide a safe ice environment. Although this article may directly use references to the facility and its operation on that October night, it is not an isolated event. The reality is that many other operations today are at the same level of risk to a similar emergency occurring. Today, we are analyzing this event; tomorrow it could be any other operation we are learning from.
The Ontario Recreation Facilities Association (ORFA) Certified Ice Technician (CIT) professional designation celebrates more than 25 years of existence. The root of its creation can be traced back to ice operation-related events the association was either directly involved with through the court proceedings or identified in final legal outcomes as having a role in worker or public safety. It should be expected that the video along with these known contributing factors will live on in training courses for years to come.
Examining the known facts from this most recent event quickly identifies a familiar pattern of contributing factors:
Inadequately maintained aged equipment operated by a worker who may not have received proper training to deal with the unplanned emergency.
An event that most likely could have been avoided through asset management and operator education.
Before you stop reading thinking this is becoming an infomercial for CIT training, it’s not. Everything the facility needed to avoid the situation that October evening was available to them at no cost. It merely required an investment by staff to understand one of the most critical components to providing quality skating ice. The owner’s manual, manufacturer web site and/or direct contact with a manufacturer representative to evaluate the overall condition of the equipment were, and are, all available to anyone interested in seeking them out.
It is always easier to sit back in the comfort of an office to review an emergency situation and critique the action or lack of action by those involved. And every operator should take time to do just that. Many would never even consider such a possibility on their shift. If you have learned that it can happen when you are in care and control of a flood, it has already accomplished some benefit as you consider how you would have responded under similar circumstances. Training is occurring. Now, let’s dive a little deeper into matters that can further assist you in being better prepared.
Industry standard for upgrading an ice resurfacer is 5,000 hours and/or eight years of age. There are many units in operation that far exceed these two benchmarks. There is nothing wrong with that as long as there has been investment in equipment maintenance. Referring to the "right to know" as one of the three rights of health and safety law, you can request an overview of how and who is maintaining this equipment. Service records should be available to confirm that the equipment has been maintained to the manufacturer’s recommendations. If unavailable or incomplete, the risk of failure increases.
The operator that October evening raced off the ice engulfed in flames. Lessons learned from past similar events included immediately shutting the unit off to stop the supply of oil to the fire which would then reduce the flame. Using the required on-board fire extinguisher would most likely have completed the extinguishing process and ended the event. Consider what might have been stored in the ice resurfacer room that may have presented additional risk under the condition of the unit.
The event video was short but did include several operational factors that need to be considered. The skaters on the ice while the operator was about to flood and then erupted into flames is an unsafe practice. It has been an industry standard to not have anyone on the ice during the reconditioning process for more than 25 years. No one in the building actually pulled the fire alarm in the video – it could have and should have happened after the recording device was shut off.
Post-event, facility staff needed to attend to the hydraulic fluid that was spread over the ice and determine how it would be cleaned up and disposed of in an environmentally friendly manner. It should not have been sent through the community sanitary sewer system. To confirm that the ice was in fact safe to use, ice depth checks should have been performed with one-quarter to half an inch of ice removed and replaced with fresh ice. Once installed, an additional ice depth check should be conducted and recorded.
The last lesson to be learned is respect for all manufacturers directives of having "no riders." Anytime an ice resurfacer is engineered post sale to allow a passenger it has been designed and installed without permission of the manufacturer and liability will rest with the equipment’s owner.
In closing, hydraulic systems are under extreme pressure and will fail if not properly maintained. Even new hoses have been known to fail. The manufacturers will offer direction as to the life cycle of not only hydraulic systems but all other key elements to their equipment. Facility management must factor in the amount of lost revenue from cancelled ice rentals when calculating the cost of such equipment failures. The commitment of all ice resurfacer manufacturers to provide the safest equipment possible must be matched by facility staff’s commitment in maintaining the unit to its original level of design. When you hire a worker with a CIT or provide them with the same level of education you are reducing the risk of failure based on their knowledge and competence. There is at least one guaranteed outcome from that October night and that is all involved at the Bill Gray’s Regional Iceplex are wiser, more informed and better prepared as they focus on learning from this event. Here is hoping that all members learn from their experience.
