BY BILL ADAMS

The Rush (NY) Fire District operates three pumpers, a heavy rescue, an ambulance, a combination brush and utility vehicle, an all-terrain vehicle, and two trailer-towed boats out of two stations covering about 40 square miles in western New York. Staffing is about 50 strong-all volunteer and provided by the Rush Fire Department, Inc. Sixty percent of the district's 392 calls in 2014 were emergency medical services-related.

In early 2012, the district's apparatus purchasing committee (APC) began planning the purchase of a replacement pumper. In mid April, the committee recommended that the district retain an outside (third party) spec writer to "interact with apparatus manufacturers to coordinate preparing purchase specifications" for the new pumper.

The district did not retain the spec writer as a professional consultant. The objective was to consolidate the APC's ideas and coordinate with apparatus manufacturers (OEMs) in preparing an "open" specification. It was agreed the spec writer could challenge the APC and make suggestions only to improve the purchasing process-not the committee's decisions on content. As an example, the quantity of hard suctions specified by the APC was not subject to debate; how and where to store them was open to suggestions and recommendations.

Articles describing new purchases usually heap praise on the manufacturer and the local dealership describing how helpful both were. APCs receive equal accolades for their work. Seldom heard from is the local salesperson who directly interacts with a purchaser. 4 Guys Fire Apparatus was the successful bidder for the Rush pumper. Frank Riccobono is a salesperson for Firehouse Apparatus, Incorporated, the local 4 Guys dealer. He agreed to be interviewed for this article. His answers below are very interesting.

Initial Design and Layout

Did you feel isolated from the apparatus purchasing committee?

To a degree, yes. When you see the spec for the first time, you try to imagine exactly what they are trying to build. With most customers, we'll meet several times before the truck goes out to bid, so even if the customer publishes another manufacturer's specification, you have a good handle on what they are trying to build. If a purchaser elects to use a spec writer or a consultant, the APC needs to remember to allow sufficient time for the bidders, as we are starting with a blank sheet of paper. With Rush, it was not an issue. Sometimes it is.

Did you think anything was missed by not working directly with the APC?

The one thing that was missing is you don't get a chance to build a good rapport beforehand. Normally, when you work directly with an APC, you have the opportunity to showcase your product. You also get a feel for whether you have a chance selling the truck. You get to meet each committee member before the bid. In this particular case, I didn't have a good feeling until the APC invited me to sit down and discuss our proposal. This first sit-down is where I was introduced to each committee member.

Did working with a third party via e-mail and telephone save you physical time?

I think it saves some time when questions arise about the intent of a particular item in the spec. If the spec writer has a good understanding of fire apparatus, I don't have to spend a lot of time trying to explain an issue to the APC. The spec writer has to do that. The concern that we have on our end is we have no idea if the spec writer is using due diligence. In this particular case, I knew the spec writer and I knew he had an extensive background in fire apparatus, so that made it easier. That is not always the case.

Was it beneficial to