HOW DO YOU VOTE?
EDITOR’S OPINION
“Engine or ladder companies shall assemble crews of at least four members before conducting interior structural firefighting operations. The fire department shall develop, train, apply and review standard operating procedures that specify how four member crews will be assembled and managed within actual local conditions, resources, and circumstances. The fire department’s response plan shall include the response time of members arriving on the incident scene. The fire deportment shall identify the period of initiol operations and shall develop a response plan that produces four member engine or ladder companies for interior structural fire fighting operations during this initial period and that provides for their safe operation.”
Amidst the commotion of our presidential primaries, some members of the fire service are casting ballots of their own. At stake is a national consensus standard for on-scene minimum staffing levels—a proposed addition to NFPA 1500 requiring that both engine and truck companies assemble at least four personnel on the fireground prior to conducting interior firefighting operations The language of the proposed addition is in the box above.
This is a serious issue that demands sober debate. It seems, on the surface, to be cut-and-dry: Many, too many fire companies are understaffed, and as we well know, that does not bode well for firefighter safety and maximum fireground effectiveness. Why, then, at a time when the American firefighter needs most to lean on the guidance of responsible leadership, has civil debate among various groups given way to an atmosphere of a political circus, replete with acts of divisive one-upmanship and vicious personal attacks madepublic? The sides have been drawn such to the effect that a “nav” vote makes you a bitter enemy of firefighter safety and a “yea” vote qualifies you as a usurper of fire department/community autonomy.
For those who value objectivity and don’t cave in to political agendas, it may not be quite that easy. Following is an offering of some unattributed comments, opinions, and arguments from around the country to help you see the issue for what it is and make a personal and perhaps a departmentwide decision on how you stand.
- Countless engine and truck companies are understaffed.
- Companies improperly staffed to deal with potential fire hazards are at greater risk of injury and death
- Currently the appendix for 1500 recommends fourmember engine and truck companies at minimum, with fivemember engine companies and six-member truck companies for fires in “high-risk areas.”
- Studies of fire department operations have documented that companies of four or greater increase performance and safety. There is a significant difference in performance and safety between four and three
- The proposal, if ratified, would provide an excellent union bargaining chip for four-member companies. However, experience shows tli.tt city management reaction to understaffed companies in the paid sector is to close down stations and relocate personnel in lieu of hiring new firefighters. In some cases it has meant trimming inspection and investigation functions of the department, usually lean to begin with.
- No policy is without trade-offs in slender economic times.
- Fire departments serve the citizens—people more concerned with fire station locations and response times than with crew size. How do they figure into the equation?
- With daytime firefighter populations dwindling, some volunteer departments are hard-pressed to assemble eight firefighters on the scene to initiate a coordinated interior attack of a well-involved structure.
- Some firefighter-depleted volunteer municipalities may be forced to consider full-time staffing of one or more key positions, but even then, this does not necessarily ensure that you’ll have your four or eight.
- Firefighter safety standards cannot differentiate between paid and volunteer firefighters. The fire won’t know the difference.
- Regardless of whether NFPA standards are adopted by a department, they carry considerable weight in the courts. Numerous cases have been cited in which departments have been held liable for NFPA “consensus” standards merely because they exist. The department/municipality could face a Catch-22 situation: a lawsuit from the homeowner for failure to act with less than four members and from an injured firefighter because a decision was made to enter the structure with less than four.
- National standards cannot be compromised because a department may not be able to live up to them —it’s a dcpartment/municipality responsibility come hell or high water.
- The proposed standard as written requires four membercompanies whether it’s a pot-on-the-stove or a fully involved room-and-contents fire.
- Individual fire departments are in the best position to determine the resources required for their community fire hazards. Minimum staffing levels are a local issue.
- While three firefighters can wait on the front lawn for the fourth crew member, the fire inside the structure will not wait to overcome trapped occupants. Nor will a garbage firewait to take possession of a greater portion of the structure.
- As important as numbers in structure firefighting safety are training; experience; accurate size-up; knowledge of firebehavior. building construction, and collapse warning signs; fireground discipline; and a gut-level feel for the fine line between danger and recklessness and between what is risk for rescue and recklessness for body recovery.
It’s time for a vote.
If you arc IN FAVOR of the proposed addition to NFPA 1 500. circle number 66 on the reader service card on page 19 of this issue.
If you are OPPOSED to the addition, circle number 92.
We will tally the responses and publish the results in a future issue. Be sure to fill out the card completely beforedropping it in the mail. Thanks.
