Robert Tutterow

Fire departments have many measures to determine their competency. There are the Insurance Services Office (ISO) Fire Suppression Rating Schedule, the Commission on Fire Accreditation International (CFAI), and various National Fire Protection Association (NFPA) standards. NFPA 1500, Standard on Fire Department Occupational Safety and Health Program, is the most comprehensive standard.

None of the above provides a pathway to total competency. ISO ratings are only relevant because many communities rely on them to determine insurance rates. Fire departments that have achieved an ISO rating of 1 are rightly proud of their distinction and usually display the rating on the side of their apparatus, their letterheads, their business cards, and various signage. Likewise, for the approximately 200 accredited fire departments, the accreditation logo is prominent on their fleets and published materials. Both of these measurements are "verified" by an outside agency, although accreditation involves a lot of trust by the Accreditation Commission on what the fire department reports.

The third measurement listed is NFPA 1500. No outside agency arrives at a department's front door and "raises the hood" to determine the viability of its health and safety program. There is no lettering, decal, logo or visible signage to showcase if a department is NFPA 1500 compliant. Perhaps if there was, we would see more of a focus on firefighter health and safety. Yet year in and year out, the leading cause of firefighter deaths is medically related. Total compliance with Chapter 10 of the standard, "Medical and Physical Requirements," would likely cut the annual line-of-duty deaths (LODDs) more than any other single measure the fire service could take. Amazingly, a fire department can be accredited, have a Class 1 ISO rating, and still not provide medical examinations as prescribed in NFPA standards. Where is the missing link?

NFPA 1500 Compliance

If every fire department were totally NFPA 1500 compliant, LODDs would be as rare as they are in other countries. The standard provides fire departments with a roadmap for total quality improvement.

In the early 1990s, NFPA 1500 was on the tip of almost every firefighter's tongue because of controversies surrounding the standard. The primary battle was over minimum staffing, and the battle lines were clearly drawn. In the end, minimum staffing did not become a part of the standard. Since then, NFPA 1500 has been a "back-burner" issue. This phenomenon defies logic, at least from a legal perspective. For example, firefighter deaths and injuries are susceptible to litigation against the fire department, its command staff, and the governing body (municipality, county, tax district). Yet a fire department has nothing to fear for failing to be accredited or for having a lesser ISO rating.

Fire departments are not required to be compliant with NFPA 1500 or any other NFPA standard unless the authority having jurisdiction (AHJ) adopts the standard. Nonetheless, fire departments have been held accountable for failing to adhere to nationally recognized standards even if the AHJ adopted them. If you are in Texas, you are aware that the Texas Commission on Fire Protection has adopted several NFPA standards, and it performs occasional fire department inspections to check for compliance.

Annex B

Fire departments should do everything possible to meet the requirements of the standard. Admittedly, very few, if any, fire departments are 100 percent NFPA 1500 compliant. Nonetheless, a wise fire department should have a "working&q

By Alan M. Petrillo

Fire departments around the country, but especially in the West, Southwest, and Midwest, are fitting out small, easy-to-maneuver vehicles with skid units that are useful not only for wildland fires but also in urban interface situations.

Skid Unit Evolution

Jerry Halpin, vice president of sales and marketing for CET Fire Pumps, says that skid units have come a long way in the past 40 years. "Most of the innovation today is found in the pump and its capacity, both in pounds per square inch (psi) and gallons per minute (gpm), and in the application of different agents such as foam and other types of wet water that might not have been available even 15 years ago," he says.

Such units, called both skids and drop-ins, are not terribly large in terms of size or weight, Halpin observes. "They are much more efficient than ever before, can be put on a wider variety of vehicles that only carry a limited amount of weight, and have more firepower and gpm available," he points out.

CET Fire Pumps makes a series of what Halpin calls "quick-delivery skid unit models," from the basic Econo Pac with a pump capacity of 20 gpm at 125 psi and 60-gallon water tank to the Attack Pac, carrying a 20-horsepower midrange fire pump that delivers 265 gpm at 50 psi, 190 gpm at 100 psi, 115 gpm at 150 psi, and 45 gpm at 200 psi. The Attack Pac also has a 200-gallon fully baffled polypropylene water tank. Other CET skid units are the Ready Pac, Skeeter Space Pac, and Ultra Power Pac.

Typically, CET skid units are powered by six-, nine-, 11-, or 20-horsepower (hp) gasoline engines, although diesels are available for some skid unit models. The skids are most often mounted on Ford chassis, Halpin says, from F-150 to F-550 models.

1 W.S. Darley Company makes the Fast Attack 2 skid unit, available with a variety of Darley pumps and water tank sizes and with the Foam Flurry around-the-pump-foam system. (Photo courtesy of W.S. Darley Company.)

In using skid units, Halpin notes, the issue continues to be "applying the right amount of water at the right psi." He continues, "And especially in forestry work, it is getting into remote places to create a fire stop where the fire won't be able to burn through or to use a skid unit to extinguish hot spots."

Skid Pumps

Jason Nawrocki, OEM sales manager for Waterous, says his company has been seeing an increase in both inquiries and purchases for pumps being used in skid unit applications on smaller fire apparatus. "There are so many different styles of apparatus in how you fight a fire, particularly a wildland fire, that require a more tactical response with 4x4 vehicles, often with pump-and-roll capability," Nawrocki says. "In many of those cases, the slide-in skid unit is the way to go because it allows the fire department to be more agile and tactical in its response."

Nawrocki says that the increased interest in Waterous pumps for skid units "comes from all around the country but is pretty dense in the western United States and Canada, likely because of the drought."

For skid units, Waterous makes the PB series pumps, with an 18-hp gasoline-powered Briggs & Stratton engine, in both volume and pressure versions. Its diesel series, the E300, is an end-suction 300-gpm-capable pump powered by a Kubota engine.

"Our most popular skid unit is the E500 series, a 24.8-hp Kubota diesel with an electronically controlled throttle," Nawrocki says. "We sell a lot of the high-pressure E501 wildland models in the western United States."

By Chris Mc Loone

There are so many things occurring in the fire service that it's hard to keep track sometimes. Ongoing scientific studies continue to challenge fire service leadership to reevaluate certain tactics that departments nationwide have employed for decades.

Manufacturers continue to work at frantic paces to provide solutions to departments fraught with budget cuts, personnel reduction, and mounting fleet maintenance costs. Standards continue to evolve to address the equipment firefighters carry as well as components found back at the truck. One such component that is expected in a future revision of National Fire Protection Association (NFPA) 1901, Standard on Automotive Fire Apparatus, is the ultra-high-pressure (UHP) system. A variety of apparatus and equipment manufacturers offer these firefighting systems, but many in the fire service may not have a good understanding of what they are, how they are used, or whether they are even necessary tools to carry.

Not So New

UHP is not new. In fact, Bill Carroll, general manager, HMA Fire, dates its use prior to World War II. "High-pressure firefighting is not a new concept in fire suppression," he says. "The use of John Bean pumps, which ran at 800 pounds per square inch (psi) at the pump and 600 psi at the nozzle, predates World War II, when John Bean Company started making fire apparatus for the United States military." It's the military, again, that has brought renewed interest in UHP. "Changes in technology have allowed for increases in pressure and the safe use of that higher pressure," Carroll adds. "The more recent interest in UHP has been initiated by the United States military as it searches for alternatives to Halon-based fire suppression systems and more efficient use of water and staffing."

1 This HMA Fire UHP system is part of this United States Navy unit manufactured by E-ONE. (Photo courtesy of HMA Fire.)

Jason Darley, account manager, Pump Division, W.S. Darley, says, "Ultra-high-pressure firefighting is, by no means, a new technology. We, like many other industries, are a cyclical industry, and the UHP attack method has come back around." He also refers to John Bean high-pressure pumps and Darley pump models, which are similar to today's UHP products. "Today's UHP pumps are typically developing slightly higher pressures, which, during studies by the United States Air Force and others, actually affect the molecular structure of the water, allowing for rapid cooling of the gases that induce flashover." He adds that this molecular change and cooling capability is significantly enhanced with the addition of Class A foam.

Mike Laskaris, P.E., chief engineer, Hale Products, Fire Suppression Group, cites the military and maritime origins of UHP. "Ultra-high-pressure systems have been around for a really long time in submarines and ships," he says. "High-pressure mist firefighting of compartment fires in those types of marine environments, where you don't want to add a lot of water, has existed in place of standard sprinkler systems for many years," he says. "If you go on a cruise ship nowadays, chances are most of the ship is protected by ultra-high-pressure water mist systems."

2 Each HMA Fire self-contained HYDRUS™ mobile skid unit includes the company's UHP handline nozzle with brass high-pressure inserts to deliver 20 gpm Read more 645 0 Article rating: No rating Posted: Jul 1, 2014 To Foam or Not To Foam? That Is the Question!   Richard Marinucci Since the beginning of time, almost, water has been the choice for extinguishing fire. Even with the advent of foam, most departments have not deviated too far from the most basic extinguishing agent. Even though the use of foam has demonstrated improved extinguishing power, it has not yet established itself as a "must-have" tool to put in the toolbox. Still, fire departments must continue to evaluate foam's benefits compared with the cost of adding another option for fire attack. Foam Usage There are many types of foam to choose from, but they essentially break down into use on either Class A or B fires or both. I believe a majority of departments have access to Class B foams for use on flammable liquid fires. They may have only a minimal amount or perhaps enough for a more significant fire. There seems to be a need for at least some basic capabilities to address flammable liquid fires regardless of where a fire department is. Fires involving liquids are possible wherever you are, so most departments anticipate the need and opt for this resource. In a bit of a contrast, many departments have not chosen to adopt Class A foam as a component of their extinguishing capabilities. This could be for various reasons, including cost issues, adequate water supply such that a department does not feel compelled to add foam, or an organization does not fully understand what foam adds to its capabilities. Regardless, it is prudent to regularly evaluate an organization's needs and make a conscious decision regarding the cost/benefit appraisal of whether the time is right to add foam to the repertoire. Justifying Enhancement There is no doubt that using foam can enhance a department's capabilities. This does not always justify the costs and additional training and maintenance required. Departments must make their own decisions but should do so based on the latest information and their own specific circumstances. Like so many things, foam products and technology are changing rapidly. As such, departments should visit this issue frequently and make an informed decision. Research into foam and its capabilities is essential. There are many types of foam, and they have different uses. A quick review of even the most basic information available will reveal many options. Internet searches will provide much information. There is also much to be learned from trade magazines and also from manufacturers and suppliers. Although much information is available, some misinformation exists. Learning as much as possible allows departments and end users to make informed decisions. This may be a topic to assign a suppression officer who can continually monitor the available information. Departments must know the various options for foam available to them. Obviously there are foams for Class A and B fires. Foam can be low-, mid-, or high-expansion. Compressed air foam systems (CAFS) are an option. There are protein foams, fluoroprotein concentrates, film forming and aqueous film forming, alcohol-resistant, and synthetic detergent foams. Each has a purpose, benefit, and some features that are not as good for certain fires. There are physical characteristics to consider such as flow and knockdown speed, heat, fuel, and alcohol resistance, along with vapor suppression. The more an organization knows about its choices the more likely it will make the best choice for the department. Equipment Considerations Using foam requires additional equipment including a proportioner-either an inline eductor or an around-the-pump system. Departments will need to make that decisi Read more 775 0 Article rating: No rating RSS FirstPrevious4637463846394640464146424643464446454646NextLast Theme picker Section Quick Links   Fire Mechanics Documents EVT Discussion Forum Fire Mechanic Photo Gallery Training & Testing 2019 Scholarship Logo Wear Store Upcoming Events Theme picker Sponsors Fire Mechanics Section Board Chair Posted: Oct 21, 2015 Chair Elliot Courage North Whatcom Fire & Rescue Read more 0 0 Article rating: No rating Vice Chair Posted: Oct 21, 2015 Vice Chair Mike Smith  Pierce County Fire District #5 Read more 0 0 Article rating: No rating Secretary Posted: Oct 21, 2015 Secretary Greg Bach South Snohomish County Fire & Rescue Read more 0 0 Article rating: No rating Director #1 Posted: Oct 21, 2015 Director #1 Doug Jones South Kitsap Fire & Rescue Read more 0 0 Article rating: No rating Director #2 Posted: Oct 21, 2015 Director #2 Paul Spencer  Fire Fleet Maintenance LLC Read more 0 0 Article rating: No rating Director #3 Posted: Oct 21, 2015 Director #3 Jim Morris Mountain View Fire Department Read more 0 0 Article rating: No rating Director #4 Posted: Oct 21, 2015 Director #4 Arnie Kuchta Clark County Fire District 6 Read more 0 0 Article rating: No rating Director #6 Posted: Oct 21, 2015 Director #6 Brett Annear Kitsap County Fire District 18 Read more 0 0 Article rating: No rating Director #5 Posted: Oct 21, 2015 Director #5 Jay Jacks Camano Island Fire & Rescue Read more 0 0 Article rating: No rating Legislative Representative Posted: Oct 21, 2015 Legislative Representative TBD TBD Read more 3345 0 Article rating: No rating Immediate Past Chair Posted: Oct 20, 2015 Immediate Past Chair Brian Fortner Graham Fire & Rescue Read more 0 0 Article rating: No rating RSS Theme picker 2020 CAR SHOW Terms Of Use | Privacy Statement - Copyright 2024 by Washington Fire Chiefs Home Members About Us News Calendar Resources Documents Sections County Fire Chiefs FRWC WSAFM