NFPA Passes All Quint Fire Service

The National Fire Protection Association(NFPA) has long been known to mandate innovation and design requirements. In proper fashion they’ve just passed
???????????????????????????????????? the 2017 revision of NFPA 1901, which on the surface might seem pretty mundane. NFPA 1901 is kind of a boring standard mostly written to provide guidance to apparatus manufacturers, although this revision gives us something a little different and WE ALL SHOULD BE PAYING ATTENTION.  The 2017 revision to NFPA 1901 mandates that all Class A Pumpers be Quints. Let that sink in for a moment. An all quint fire service nationwide? What’s really going on here?

According to an American LaFrance spokesperson, the idea behind this drastic change is to standardize the nation into utilizing one firefighting platform nationwide in order to further the goals of the National Incident Management System’s (NIMS) requirement for interoperability. We’ve long imagined a fire service where we knew exactly what was showing up for mutual aid. Now every apparatus can arrive on scene as an engine or a ladder or both leaving the initial size-up and tactics up to the officer. Furthermore any and all mutual aid requests will no longer be a mystery. All apparatus will be the same so there is less guessing involved.
This is not a new concept Great Britain, Europe, Japan, Philippines and many other countries run a standardized apparatus fire service. If you really think about it the U.S. is just catching up.
The long debated topic within the NFPA wasn’t an easy decision to digest for fire apparatus manufacturers who strongly opposed the measure due to the end of the custom chassis market and possible loss in profits until they realized Quints could start at $750,000 thus doubling the price of current class A pumpers.
Stay tuned for more information on the 2017 revision. The date currently set for nationwide compliance is 2025 giving departments a mere 9 years to gather the funding necessary.
This article is satire. We sure hope you’re not emailing the NFPA 1971 committee chairman and complaining.

Stay Classy Fire Service

Have we lost our class? 

There was a time not very long ago, about one-hundred years or so, when leaving the house meant looking your best.  It was rare to walk the public streets of America and not see men and boys dressed in full suits with dress hats and women and girls outfitted to the nines. Back then, it was never considered dressing up, it was just merely getting dressed. There was a respectable classiness about that era. Your grandparents likely lived this life and witnessed it’s decline.
This era of dapper public dress began with the earliest English settlers in what is now Massachusetts. A year after arriving from to the “New World” there was a clothing crisis. The earlier settlers didn’t have clothing stores or the means to make fabric. The only clothing items they had was what they packed on the ship. They would use blankets and garments to patch torn clothes, all they had is what they brought. A year or so after landing, an emergency order for clothing was made to England. They ordered a few hundred suits and a few hundred dresses. One defining reason for the classiness of yester-year’s clothing was that the fabric was very stiff. It didn’t have any kind of stretching characteristic like clothes today. The static nature of the material made buttons the logical fastening choice. There was a cultural expectation of how people should appear in public.
The U.S. Navy actually gets the credit for Canadians_on_strike_1920inventing the T-Shirt as an undergarment around the time of the Spanish-American War. Before then…T-Shirts didn’t even exist. In similar fashion, Tennis Champion Rene LaCoste invented the polo shirt in Europe in 1927. The T-Shirt slowly began to gain popularity until an art explosion occurred in the 60’s. T-Shirts were blasted with painted logos and sayings.
Fast Forward to today and it’s hard to walk through Walmart without seeing a part of someone’s body that you’ll never be able to erase from your mind.  It’s almost as if by choosing to shop at Walmart it’s expected that you’re going to see something horrible and unforgiving. But this highlights the extreme swing in what’s culturally acceptable attire. If you think about it, the people in the 1920’s were far more poverty stricken than anyone living in America today. They knew 100 years ago that the key to success in any socioeconomic level was leaving the house looking your best. The poorest kid on the street still owned a suit.
If you’ve made it to this point you’re probably thinking.. WTH man… What’s with the history lesson, I thought this was a fire service article?
It is and I’ll prove it.
The Fire Service has been no exception to this historical downward trend in public-dress fashion. What used to be the every day fire station uniform has become our special-event “Class A” dress uniform and what used to be our under-garments, are now our outer-garments.  In an era when the entire general population wore suits and dresses in public, the fire department had to maintain a step above simply because they were public servants and we have an image to uphold. It’s important for public servants to always be dress professionally and in a manner where they stand out from the general public. Proper uniforms give the impression of the ability to restore order. A commanding presence among what might be a chaotic mess.

As our culture of public dress has become less than respectable, the fire department has followed suit.  Of course every department has it’s own uniform standard or policy. When I worked a fire season in San Diego County it was every fire department’s policy to wear Class B (Button down) shirts when in public especially when eating meals.

My issue here is that as time passes, we start seeing the normalization of substandard uniform dress within the firehouse. In the last 100 hundred years, firemen-sliderfirefighters started with full Class A uniform and bell crown uniform hats for daily station wear and slowly trickled our way down to uniform T-shirts in some departments. Uniform pants with a tucked in T-Shirt does not readily scream professionalism. The more Fire Chief’s who issue T-Shirts as an acceptable firefighter uniform, the more comfortable we all become with seeing it. And the more comfortable we become seeing it, the more normal it will be to have our professional public servants showing up to assist the public(customer) in T-Shirts.

What appears to be an effort to save ourselves from the normalization of the T-Shirt uniform has brought about the uniform polo shirt. Sure, the polo has a collar and the attempt of being a buttoned shirt, but it’s really just a graduated T-Shirt, or in some circles leisure-wear for Ivy League-rs. We should not be fooling ourselves here. T-Shirts and Polo Shirts are not professional attire. Are they acceptable to wear under your fire gear? Of course. Out in public? No way man.

It’s the difference between showing up on scene looking like this    


or showing up like this.




And the difference between a bunch of folks in T-Shirts


And a bunch of professionals in uniform


The price difference between an NFPA compliant polo and an NFPA compliant uniform short sleeve shirt is $10. But the image factor takes that $10  and makes your firefighters look like a million bucks.  The UPS delivery driver and the pizza delivery man should not be making a delivery to the firehouse looking more professional than your firefighters.

Fire department image is just as important as everything else we do.  Our trucks are giant billboards and our people are agents of customer service. A good majority of the time, it’s the public’s perception of our image that makes or breaks an interaction. I urge all the chief’s out there to think next time you make a uniform purchase or policy. Class B uniforms should be the national standard. It should also be the public’s expectation of their public services.  Taking pride in our image and realizing that every trip out of the fire station is an opportunity to leave a lasting impression on the people we serve.  Perhaps we can be the driving force behind what’s acceptable to wear in public…Probably not.. but a guy can dream.




The NFPA Police

  QUESTION: Is it possible for a fire department to be fully, 100% NFPA (National Fire Protection Association) Compliant?

Let’s start off with declaring that there is no such organized entity as the NFPA Police. However, there ARE a select number of our kind who take it upon themselves to verbally wave the sword in defense of the NFPA. These fire service warriors of the internet like to take judgmental swipes at fire porn videos and images. From a recent video of a fire truck parading through town with two celebrating volunteers on the bumper to  John Wayne style structure fire situations, these virtual tactical response teams ensure the rest of us are staying in line with NFPA.

Everyone is a non-credentialed critic. Except the Fire Critic, I suppose he’s the only legit one.

police-badge-clipart-9 copyMy point here is that I have yet to find, observe, or even hear of a fully NFPA compliant fire department. I often, jokingly,  liken the NFPA Standards to the Holy Bible. It’s nearly impossible to follow all of it without sinning.

Before I continue, we need to get a few things straight. The NFPA is not the law. It does not carry the same regulatory meat cleaver as the Occupational Safety and Health Administration(OSHA). OSHA is a government regulatory agency that enforces occupational safety and health laws passed by Congress. When OSHA laws are broken, organizations and companies can be fined or even sued by the government for non-compliance, they are usually sued on behalf of the offended party.

NFPA codes, standards, and recommended practices are written as an attempt to self-regulate our industry. The standards are written to give a benchmark of performance for the manufacturers who make all of our awesome stuff as well as providing minimum competency standards we “should” meet as firefighters and officers. The NFPA standards are created by committees consisting of fire officers, chiefs, manufacturers and technical folks. The main reason why manufacturers are on the NFPA is so there is collaboration between the people who need firefighting equipment and the people who make firefighting equipment.

There is a lot of sentiment regarding NFPA being a profit driven entity. I have a hard time seeing it that way. The creation of all of these things takes financing. You can’t print books and create content and expect everything to be free. Also, there are legalities involved with the construction, testing, and selling of safety equipment. All of our stuff has to meet certain requirements so we can all go home to our families. It’s important to have fire service manufacturers a party to the standards creation so we’re on the same page of self-governance. After-all, manufacturers would know whether or not it’s even possible to design equipment that can meet the standard being created. It’d be sweet to re-write NFPA 1901 so all fire trucks had to have hovering capability and an endless on-board water supply… But common sense would dictate that engineering has not yet figured out how to make that work yet.M-SWAT-Blog-LCOA copy

With 7000 thousand volunteers comprising 250 technical committees, creating over  300 codes and standards(, writing tens of thousands of lines of text; is it possible to be 100% compliant?  I’m not so sure. It would be great if one of our readers could chime in here and name a department that is fully provable 100% compliant.  I’ve spent years assisting departments with becoming as complaint as they can be. The real fact of the matter is funding.

Bringing a fire department to 100% compliance with NFPA is incredibly expensive. Not to mention master level planning and auditing. Most fire department budgets won’t allow for it. 447 copyI know departments that don’t provide an annual physical, annual fit testing, annual SCBA flow testing and the like. That’s a tiny fraction of what needs to happen.

For budgetary reasons and perhaps even ideological reasons fire departments will adopt chunks of NFPA or individual standards while disregarding others. Some of the largest fire departments in our nation pick and choose which NFPA codes they will follow because they know they just can’t pull some of them off completely.

I don’t believe the NFPA is intended to be a buffet of options, it’s intended to regulate the way we do everything, so we’re all on the same page. The fact is, we’re not, and as a fire service I’m not so sure we’ll ever be on the same page. But we have a lighthouse and a beacon to follow and that’s not bad, in fact it’s pretty great.

I bring all of this up for the social media warriors who call people out on their NFPA violations. It really needs to stop. It’s more than highly probable that your department has or does a few things of their own that don’t meet the NFPA standards.  I want to say something about glass houses here but I’ve never been good with cliché sayings.

Do you know of a fire department that is fully NFPA compliant? Please comment below. If you find a legitimate one I will write an article on that department and eat my own words. I hope this is an educational moment for me.

[polldaddy poll=8877312]


All NFPA stats & information provided by:



Q & A with an Overseas Fire Service Instructor

As this is my first article for the Station Pride movement, I thought it would be fun to write an article in a question and answer format. I’ll leave it open for people to ask more questions. Anyone who has aspirations of becoming an instructor, working overseas in the fire service, or wanting to know more about how things are done in other parts of the world may find this interesting. Anyone who has worked as a firefighter or  an instructor “ on this side of the pond”, will likely be shaking their heads, laughing and/or experience PTSD flashbacks.

What is it like to train firefighters overseas?    IMG_4475

Instructing outside of the United States is certainly as educational for the Instructor, as it is for many students. Moving so far away from home is never easy, and leaving the majority of your own culture behind is even more difficult. Factor in the differences in fire service culture, mindset and language or translation barriers and you’ve got a little better idea of just the tip of the proverbial iceberg regarding issues that you can run into.

The issue of communication is certainly a big one. While almost all of my students here are well versed in the English language, qatar-mapdespite coming from Qatar, Saudi Arabia, India, Bangladesh, Pakistan, Sri Lanka, Tunisia, Egypt or Morroco, their version of English, or the true comprehension of it, can be lacking. What gets fun is having guys from Canada, South Africa, Australia or the U.K. and then trying to get on the same page with them. Either way, it is rare that you find someone who doesn’t speak even the most basic English. What gets difficult is putting things in technical fire service terms and getting non-english speakers to understand it.

For example: Ever had the debate with another fireman from the other side of the country about what a pike pole is called? To some, it’s exactly that, to others is called a hook. However, in South Africa it’s called a Preventor. As in, it prevents the ceiling from collapsing when you use it to remove the ceiling from above you. Imagine if you will, three firemen standing around arguing about what the name of the tool is and what it’s design is for, only to discover that it is used for the same tasks in all three countries…just called something different. We all immediately started laughing at how silly the whole thing is. Jacket vs. Tunic, Nozzle vs. Branch, Apparatus vs. Appliance, Vest vs. Tabbard. Needless to say, we all learn a lot from each other, have a few laughs and give each other a good ribbing, just to pass the time.

What’s up with that “euro gear”?                                        Formation

Without a doubt, it is nothing like anything we would use in the NFPA system. It has its benefits and its drawbacks. I’ll start at the helmet and work down.

The helmet style, often referred to as a “space helmet” or “helicopter helmet” is produced by several manufacturers that include MSA, Rosenbauer and others. It is thermoplastic, like some of our NFPA helmets, but has no brim off the rear. It has a neck curtain that attaches at the bottom to help protect the neck. f1eIt also has two separate eye/face shields that stow inside the helmet. My experience with it has not been positive, as it is extremely hard to hear anything except the sound f your own voice, and it retains an incredible amount of heat inside the helmet. It should also be noted that many of our students are fascinated with our U.S. traditional style helmets, and agree that they are of a much better design.

The nomex flash hoods are very similar, if not identical to ours.

The bunker jacket (often referred to as a tunic) is very light weight. In fact, I own North Face jackets that are heavier. It is extremely thin, and offers minimal thermal protection and even less water resistance.

The bunker pants ( referred to as trousers) is made of identical material. However, there are no pockets on the trousers, and they fit a bit like I suspect skinny jeans do on European men.

The boots are actually quite good, and offer a lot of support and have an athletic quality to them.

Finally, the SCBA ( referred only as a BA) is manufactured by Drager or Scott, but is to European standard. There is no gauge on the cylinder, and there is no way to tel externally if the cylinder is full, or empty. There is no integrated PASS alarm, and the external PASS systems are very quiet in comparison to even our older NFPA rated stand-alone systems. All of the buckles are thermoplastic. The cylinders are not much different in construction than ours, but there are some differelogo_nfpa_400x400nces.

All of this being said, before you find yourself shaking your head with a triumphant smile on your face that NFPA is superior to our neighbors across the pond, you have to bear some things in mind.

Like their fire apparatus (referred to as a fire appliance) their PPE is constructed to mirror their tactics. Yes, contrary to popular belief that European firefighters do not make interior attacks in structure fires, they do. They just do it under a different set of 91483658guidelines than we do. And why shouldn’t they? They’ve been fighting fire for a lot longer than we have. Also keep in mind that their building construction is a lot older and heavier, and that the fuel load is of the legacy type. Something that we in the US are just beginning to understand with the help of NIST/UL.


What type of fire apparatus do you use?


The local fire departments use a variety of equipment, and span nearly a dozen or more manufacturers. Currently they operate Metz, Rosenbauer and Bronto aerials. For engines they primarily use Scania or Mercedes commercial chassis with Metz, BAI or Rosenbauer boxes. ARFF is exclusively Rosenbauer Panther crash rigs. However, our training facility uses new Oshkosh Global Strikers. The ruler of the country here has mandated that all fire equipment and tactics start to convert to NFPA. It is a slow process. As Qatar, as well as much of the region has only had it’s independence from Britain for a relatively short period of time, it’s very difficult to get them to change over. But it is happening. Some other Arab countries are already doing it. In fact, Saudi Arabia is roughly 95% NFPA compliant as of January 2015.


 What are the strategy/tactics like?    IMG_4407

What our NIST and UL research has taught us in cooling the environment before making entry, is not exactly cutting edge tactics. Many European departments began doing this a long time ago. The concept of “hitting it hard from the yard” has long been the tactics of departments outside of the US. What makes the NIST/UL research unique is that it PROVES it to be beneficial with science. I know, I know. I can hear some of you groaning already. But you simply cannot argue science, provided that the scientific evidence gathering is, well, scientific. Read that word as valid or sound.

What makes a lot of US firefighters groan about it, is that it’s not as “manly” or “aggressive” as how we are accustomed to doing things. We prefer to “take the hit” or “make the push” and “go for the grab”. (Insert your choice of catchy FDNY wannabe fireman speak here). Please don’t misread that last statement. Before you lose your collective minds over it, I mean no disrespect to the phrases, the FDNY or to our US fire heritage. I AM referring to the firefighters who like to simply use the catch phrases to sound more like a fireman. The bottom line is this boys and girls: it’s 2015. It’s time (and long over due ) to take a serious look at how we do things.

All of my students here wonder how and why we kill as many firefighters every year in the US. The fact is, it is truly amazing when you stack up the amount of firefighter LODD deaths from the US Screen Shot 2015-03-09 at 10.40.20 PMcompared to that the rest of the global fire community. Now before you techies out there take to the internet to try to either validate or invalidate this comment, bear in mind that we have many more firefighters in the US than other countries. Statistically speaking, this is not hard to understand. But the way that we are dying at incidents (not including cardiovascular emergencies, which we all know is the highest cause) is still much higher than the global average.

NFFF, NFA, IAFF and IAFC (among many others) have amazing and effective initiatives to help bring the average number of yearly LODD’s down from 100.

We have made incredible strides in firefighter safety. But we still need to continue to take a hard look at our tactics, our PPE, and our overall effectiveness to get the job done. Notice that I didn’t say to make the job safer. I have heard too much of that my entire career, and am sick to death of it. I found myself screaming in my bunk room at Lt. Ray McCormacks FDIC speech in complete agreement. I had colleagues coming in to see what had me so worked up. I admired his courage to finally say it in a public forum!

Truth be told though, we are finding that the way that we used to do it, in some circumstances, was actually the right way, even way back then. The 2 ½” line, the smooth bore nozzle, the tactics of “making that push”. But we’re also finding out the hard way, that we’ve been wrong in a lot of areas as well. And our brothers and sisters have paid for it in blood.

But NFPA is really better than British Standard, Right?

Here’s the bottom line: Throw 100 firemen from 20 different countries in the same room together. Assuming that they can all communicate with each other, I would bet a years salary that they would all agree that there should be only one standard for firefighters to follow. They all would agree that there are too many standards that govern equipment, apparatus, PPE and tactics. Where the fist fight would start, is determining whose system to adopt globally. We all know how stubborn firemen can be when it comes to change. And how impossibly stubborn we get when wimagese’re told that we have to relearn something that we learned 10 years ago…or 10 days ago.

Truthfully, the British Standard way is not as crazy as it all appears. NFPA could learn a thing or two from that way of doing things. And we  have. Know where the NFPA 1901 reflective chevron requirements came from? That’s’ right… departments all over the world were using this to bring higher visibility to their apparatus decades ago. That NFPA 1500 requirement to use high visibility safety vests on highway incidents? Yep… you guessed it. They’brandman800_1017338ave been doing that across Europe for years too.

So what is the best way?

In my humble opinion, the Brothers (and Sisters) in South Africa, Australia, New Zealand, and other countries like Japan, Singapore and the Philippines have got it pegged. They have waded into the quagmire that one can easily find themselves in regarding these two standards, have extracted the best of both worlds, and finally used some good common sense to apply it to the areas that they serve. I am in constant amazement from these firefighters who really research what is going to be best for them. They have a healthy respect for both standards, and their respective places in fire service history.

All of that being said though, the entire world is watching our NIST/UL research. No one else on the planet is conducting scientific research like this. And they are learning as much from the data and research as we are in the US. If you don’t hear Bob Dylan’s voice singing “the times, they are a changin’” then you simply aren’t paying attention.

What is your biggest challenge as an instructor over there?

 There are two big ones:

  1. Fire Service Culture
  2. Cultural Values and Differences

This is sure to make for an interesting topic for my next piece, but to simplify it for now, you must understand that the fire service in many other parts of the world is not looked upon favorably. In many ways, there are a lot of similarities in how the culture here treats it’s firemen, and emergency services in general, to how the US treated it’s firemen and police officers around 120 years ago. It does give me hope, that one day, hopefully with the introduction of the NFPA system, that one day soon, the overall culture here will realize that these men should be respected for the oath that is so similar to ours in the US.

So, that concludes the question and answer article. If you have any more follow up questions about any of the above, or you have new questions, feel free to post them in the comments and I’ll get to you just as soon as I can.

Stay safe!