Robert Tutterow

This is on OSHA's radar. From July 30 to 31, 2014, OSHA conducted a stakeholders meeting at the Department of Labor in Washington, D.C. To attend the meeting, an interested person had to submit an application. The applicant had to choose whether to attend as a participant or as an observer. From the applications, OSHA determined who attended and limited attendance to one day only, stating that the subject areas would be repeated on the second day. I applied as an observer and was invited to attend the first day.

In September 2007, OSHA issued a "Request for Information" to solicit comments from the public to evaluate what action, if any, it should take to address the issue of OSHA regulations. Then, almost six years later, it decided to call the stakeholders meeting based on 9/11 World Trade Center surviving responder illness and the deaths and injuries from the West Fertilizer Company explosion and fire in April 2013 in West, Texas. OSHA indicated these two events highlighted the extremely high rate of emergency responder workplace deaths, injuries, and illnesses.

It was clear from the beginning of the meeting that OSHA thinks it should become more involved in developing workplace standards. The participants (approximately 30) came from diverse backgrounds including fire, utilities, rail, towing, construction workers, flight attendants, the FBI, and other government personnel. OSHA noted, "Skilled support employees are not emergency responders but nonetheless have specialized training that can be important to the safe and successful resolution of an emergency incident." The meeting was divided into four focus areas: preparedness, incident scenarios, emergency categorization, and flexibility. The comments during each of the four focus areas often overlapped. There was no doubt that the majority of the stakeholders believed there should be more OSHA involvement. The overarching question was not if but what and how?

Preparedness

Both the International Association of Fire Fighters (IAFF) and International Association of Fire Chiefs (IAFC) representatives stressed the importance of National Fire Protection Association (NFPA) standards, especially the health and wellness standards. In fact, "NFPA" was easily the most used acronym throughout the meeting. OSHA indicated that it is seriously considering enforcing NFPA standards but thinks some are not written to be enforceable. There was considerable discussion about the level of service an emergency response agency provides. For example, is a fire department an incipient, interior, or exterior fire department? There was general consensus that if an organization provided the service, it should meet an applicable standard. As in all of the focus areas, the idea of "typing" emergency response organizations was a common theme. There were no specific number of "types" suggested, but an organization's "type" would be based on the level of service provided.

Incident Scenarios

One of the questions about incident scene requirements was, "Should the focus be on high risk or more comprehensive?" The overwhelming answer was "comprehensive." The group stated that the "800-pound gorilla in the room" was carcinogen exposure at fire scenes. The group identified wellness and fitness as key points in the ability of emergency responders to safely handle incidents. The issue of age also came up, since the average age of firefighter line-of-duty deaths (LOD

Click here to view the image gallery.

By Chris Mc Loone

As firefighters, we know we will be exposed to products of combustion when we respond to working structure fires.

The personal protective equipment we wear protects us from these products of combustion, but we know we must regularly clean and sanitize our turnout gear to ensure we remove all traces of the carcinogens that are part of these products. We know that these carcinogens can enter our bodies through skin absorption if not removed from our gear. It's the reason we shower as soon as possible after a structure fire. We don't want any smoke residue on our bodies.

Exposure to smoke is an obvious cancer threat. Back at the station, where we often spend most of our time when on duty, there is another cancer threat that is easily controllable: diesel exhaust. There are various products on the market to help remove this known carcinogen from fire stations and, when it comes to firefighter health and safety, that are wise investments.

Health Issues

Diesel exhaust has long been suspected of being a human carcinogen, but in June 2012, the World Health Organization (WHO) classified it as carcinogenic to humans. "The National Fire Protection Association has said for the last 10 years that removal of exhaust in the fire station is important for the health and safety of firefighters," says John Koris, regional sales manager, Air Vacuum Corporation. "But, probably the biggest change took place in 2012 when the WHO declared diesel a known carcinogen. Prior to that, it was listed as probable."

Scott Beecher, president, Ward Diesel, adds that the International Agency for Research on Cancer has classified diesel exhaust (DE) and diesel particulate matter (DPM) as known human carcinogens (Group 1). "When diesel fire trucks idle inside the fire station, exhaust generated can spread throughout the entire station, where it can darken walls and settle on food and clothing," he says. "Short-term exposure to high concentrations of DE/DPM can cause headaches, dizziness, and irritation of the eye, nose, and throat severe enough to distract or disable personnel. Prolonged DE/DPM exposure can increase the risk of cardiovascular, cardiopulmonary, or respiratory disease and lung and other cancers."

Mike Johnson, vice president of sales, Clean Air Concepts/MagneGrip Group, says that effectively removing diesel exhaust fumes is something that no longer can be overlooked when designing a station. In addition to firefighter health and wellness, he says there are other reasons to address diesel exhaust at the station. "To maintain vehicle preparedness, firefighters often will test vehicles indoors, especially during inclement weather," he says. "To meet the International Mechanical Code, a hose must be connected directly to the tailpipe when running vehicles indoors for maintenance and testing purposes."

Removal Solutions

According to Beecher, there are three main types of solutions and advantages and disadvantages associated with each. "You have a hanging solution where a hose physically attaches to the tailpipe. Another system would be a ceiling-mounted system, and the third technology is vehicle-mounted."

Beecher points out that newer diesel vehicles that use urea still need to be handled

Richard Marinucci

In the real world, this probably occurs mostly in metro departments. Smaller organizations-i.e., suburban and rural-operate with some hybrid of this structure. This is the result of staffing and funding-big surprise here. Some departments may make a conscious decision to create a different response system. Regardless, this system has placed a great deal of responsibility on the engine to carry additional equipment to respond to an ever-increasing variety of emergencies. The traditional engine has become the "jack of all trades" for many fire departments.

Fire engines are significant investments for any department, and there is a tendency to maximize the functionality to the point that it creates additional challenges for departments. There is nothing wrong with doing as much as you can with what you have. But, this cannot come at the expense of trying to do too much with what you have or failing to plan to accommodate additional operations. Many remember the term "triple combination pumper." This referred to having a pump, water tank, and hose. This is a misnomer because these vehicles now carry truck company equipment, ladders, emergency medical service (EMS) supplies, special rescue tools, and more. The EMS equipment can be significant if the engines are used for paramedic response. All of this has an impact on performance and service.

Define the Mission

Departments must decide what functions they expect from their engines. They must consciously plan how their operations will go-not only for fire response but for other emergencies that are within their organizations' responsibilities. This is critical in that it helps decide the type of vehicles fire departments need. If they do not do this, it can add too much to a vehicle, which can make it more difficult to use, more expensive to operate, and less reliable. It can also lead to a shorter life expectancy because the mileage can add up faster than expected and lead to earlier replacement.

No matter what you have, there are limitations on what can be carried. This is often limited by the gross vehicle weight rating (GVWR), which establishes the overall weight that the frame and axles can safely carry. There is a finite amount of compartment space, and only so much can be jammed into a compartment. Too often, departments add to vehicles as they acquire more equipment to address expanding roles. The added weight will create a safety issue if it exceeds the vehicle's GVWR and can impact warranty and vehicle durability. It adds to liability should something go wrong. Overcrowded compartments can slow operations as firefighters look for equipment for the job at hand or need to remove unneeded equipment to get to what they really need.

Comprehensive Approach

Fire departments need a comprehensive approach when acquiring apparatus or making modifications to current apparatus. They need to consider specifications when ordering or making adjustments to an apparatus that significantly change it from its original intent and design. Investing in a planning process that looks at the end goals in totality will benefit all organizations.

Establishing the proper specifications before the purchase is the first step in making sure you get the vehicle that can handle the workload you expect it to. Realistically anticipate the expected equipment to be carried based on the jobs assigned to the engine companies. Besides the usual triple combination pumper duties, will you

Click here to view the image gallery.

By Alan M. Petrillo

Apparatus manufacturers install some of these systems while departments sometimes handle the installs.

Fire Apparatus Use

Christopher Gray, chief of the San Rafael (CA) Fire Department, says his department has experienced problems with its fleet's batteries, replacing both batteries and alternators at significant cost. "In 2007, we converted one engine to use a solar system that functioned by charging the vehicle's batteries and augmented the normal electrical use by the engine," Gray says. "We found that it extended the battery and alternator life of that engine."

The department then decided to outfit its entire fleet with solar systems, which at the time consisted of six engines, two ladder trucks, four medic units, and three command vehicles. Gray notes the most recent pumpers San Rafael purchased, two new KME-built vehicles, were prewired by KME to the department's specs for the solar systems. San Rafael also is purchasing an aerial ladder from Pierce Manufacturing that will be set up to accept solar panels, he adds.

Gray notes that the solar panels on his emergency vehicles capture both sunlight and fluorescent light and even work under skylights in the vehicle bays. "You don't need all that much light to generate electricity with these units," he points out. "We also developed a really good mounting system for the panels that holds up to lengthy trips when our vehicles go out of the county and on mutual aid." Gray says San Rafael has found great success by gluing the thin solar panels directly to sheets of aluminum that it can then attach to a cab roof.

San Rafael's first solar panel installations provided about 7.5 amps from two panels on an engine when it was parked outside, Gray says. "The normal draw for all the equipment when the engine is not running or plugged into a charger is usually less than 10 amps, so we were able to cover that nicely with two panels that put out 3.75 amps each. The solar panels we're installing now are putting out 10 amps per panel. The newer panels are much more efficient and also are smaller and thinner."

Departments must make one accommodation in the vehicle's design if it is destined to have a solar system, Gray says. "You have to ensure there is enough space available on the top of the cab for a solar panel," he observes. "Our solar systems have made a big difference in operational efficiency for our department, and their use also falls in line with the climate change action plan our city has in place."

In terms of cost, Gray says that the equipment has more than paid for itself in less than two years by saving batteries and alternators and keeping the air cleaner by reducing idling time.

Brian Brown, bureau chief, fleet services, South Metro (CO) Fire Rescue Authority, says South Metro has had problems with batteries going dead in medic units as far back as 2004. "We replaced a lot of batteries in our units and investigated the causes, looking for

1 One tactic for fighting fine-fuels fires involves a firefighter riding on the apparatus exterior aiming a water stream directly at the base of the fire. Apparatus used for this tactic typically include a platform behind the cab where a firefighter can stand. (Photo courtesy of Blanchat Mfg. Inc.)

By Roger Lackore

Every three to five years, the National Fire Protection Association (NFPA) Apparatus Committee considers revisions to NFPA 1906, Standard for Wildland Fire Apparatus. This document sets minimum standards for the design of apparatus intended mainly for fighting wildland fires.

The Fire Apparatus Manufacturers' Association (FAMA) participates in this process with one representative on the committee and several more representatives from FAMA member companies.

Differing Tactics

A major challenge to setting wildland apparatus design standards is the tremendously varied environments where wildfires can occur. The tactics used in sparsely populated mountainous regions may be very different from those used in flat forest lands and different again in the fine-fuels areas of the plains states. As with most things in life, the one-size-fits-all approach is likely to be a compromise that leaves nobody happy.

One example of this is a tactic that departments in fine-fuels regions employ where a firefighter rides on the apparatus exterior while it is in motion. The apparatus drives along the fire line and a firefighter aims a water stream directly at the base of the fire. Usually a second or third apparatus follows to mop up. Departments that employ this tactic argue that it is both a safe and essential method where the terrain is flat, the fuel is fine, and the fire line moves quickly. In some cases, such fires can be allowed to burn out on their own; in other cases, they may threaten populated areas.

Fine-Fuels Apparatus Design

Apparatus used for this tactic typically include a platform behind the cab where a firefighter can sit or stand and manually direct a water stream. These apparatus may be offered by smaller apparatus manufacturers or created by modifying existing apparatus. Military surplus vehicles are favorite starting points for some departments. The lack of any design guidance has left no assurance that departments are meeting minimum safety standards or that a vehicle's size or tank capacity makes it appropriate for traveling on uneven terrain.

For decades, the NFPA approach has been to simply prohibit riding on an apparatus unless all occupants are in a seated and belted position inside an enclosed cab. Both NFPA design standards and NFPA health and safety standards emphasize this. As such, departments convinced that the external riding method is necessary have been purchasing or creating their own apparatus that fall outside of NFPA standards.

Incorporating the Tactic

The NFPA 1906 committee exhaustively discussed the merits and hazards of this approach. There was no argument that the safest place for a firefighter is in a seated and belted position inside an enclosed cab, but given the fact that the practice is so prevalent in certain regions, the committee's consensus was that it needed to do something. The compromise was to provide an apparatus specification that would increase the safety of an already established practice rather than continue to leave the safety of the apparatus t