By Bill Adams
The National Fire Protection Association (NFPA) NFPA 1901 Standard for Automotive Fire Apparatus is being replaced by a new standard – NFPA 1900 Standard for Aircraft Rescue and Firefighting Vehicles, Automotive Fire Apparatus, Wildland Fire Apparatus, and Automotive Ambulances. My understanding from the NFPA website is that public comment on the new 1900 standard is closed and its technical sub-committees have been adjourned.
My personal interpretation is all that remains is for the 30 +/- members of the NFPA 1900 committee to vote to approve or disapprove each proposal for the final draft. I can’t find if or when the final draft will be available for public viewing or when the committee’s final vote will be held.
In my opinion, NFPA committee members are like Fire Apparatus Manufacturers’ Association (FAMA) members. They are very tight-lipped about the internal happenings within their organizations. That can be frustrating, but to its defense, the NFPA always makes available written substantiation for each decision on every proposed change to a standard. That is admirable, however, good luck finding a specific change in the labyrinth of material they make available to the public!
Worthy of mention is a proposal or proposals for the new standard to eliminate the current lists of ancillary equipment NFPA 1901 requires for each of its seven classifications of fire apparatus. Eliminating the equipment lists may jeopardize the collaboration currently existing between the NFPA and the Insurance Services Office (ISO). The dictionary defines collaboration as teamwork, a relationship, or cooperation.
ISO
From the website, “The Insurance Services Office, or ISO for short, is an insurance advisory organization that provides statistical and actuarial information to businesses.” A common misconception is the ISO is still the original non-profit organization that took the place of the former National Board of Fire Underwriters (NBFU) in “rating” a municipality’s fire protection including its fire departments. The ISO is now a for-hire business that among other services still “rates” municipalities and their fire departments for entities such as insurance companies, brokers, and governmental agencies.
The ISO’s Fire Suppression Rating Schedule (FSRS) is used to evaluate municipalities. The current 2012 issue has its own lists—albeit very abbreviated ones—of ancillary equipment each fire apparatus should carry. [Note: My reference copy is stamped “Filed–Not Approved.” Consequently, there may be some changes in it.]
My copy mentions NFPA 1901’s ancillary equipment lists in several places. As an example, FSRS Section 500 Fire Department, 512 Equipment on Existing Engine Companies states: “Evaluate pumper equipment and hose carried for fighting structure fires by referring to NFPA 1901, Standard for Automotive Fire Apparatus, Pumper Fire Apparatus.” The FSRS equipment list for engine companies is in its Appendix A, Table 512A. The list is not as extensive as NFPA 1901 criteria. Which prevails when the ISO evaluates a fire department?
What happens to the inferred ISO/NFPA 1901 collaboration if the NFPA eliminates its equipment lists? It appears—and I stress appears—the ISO allows its inspectors latitude in evaluating ancillary equipment carried on fire apparatus. However, if the new NFPA 1900 eliminates equipment lists or in an appendix it merely “recommends” what equipment should be carried, who monitors or approves how and what an ISO inspector “evaluates?” Is it the equipment the NFPA or the ISO says “shall” be carried, or “should” be carried or “ought to be” carried?
Regulatory Overreach?
Several NFPA 1901 revision cycles ago, this writer proposed multiple changes to NFPA 1901 in regard to ancillary equipment mounting on fire apparatus. At that time, my contention was the NFPA had no business telling fire departments they “shall” mount certain equipment on an apparatus. Whether the equipment was mounted; sitting on a shelf or in a box or tray; or laying on the floor of an equipment compartment was the fire department’s choice.
Today, it could be argued the NFPA and the ISO should not be mandating how much of what type of ancillary equipment each fire department shall carry on their apparatus. How each fire department fights fire (and mitigates hazards) and what equipment is used to accomplish the mission or missions should be the fire department’s responsibility.
The American fire service isn’t “nationalized” yet. I don’t believe it is ready for a “one size fits all” fire truck carrying a nationwide standardized list of equipment. I can accept regulatory and advisory entities establishing the number of apparatus and their general capabilities, however, stipulating items such as how many spanner wrenches, ground ladder sizes, and types of nozzles to carry should be a local decision. It is unknown if the fire service can influence the ISO, however, it certainly can make its wishes known to the voting members of an NFPA committee.
