NEW NFPA APPARATUS STANDARDS & HELMET WEARING/USE

[Jeff Turner - QEM Fire]

The following is in the new revision of NFPA 1901, effective for apparatus contracted on and after January 1, 2009. "14.1.8.4* The following statement shall be included in the operator\'s manual: \'Fire helmets shall not be worn by persons riding in enclosed driving and crew areas. Fire helmets are not designed for crash protection and they will interfere with the protection provided by head rests The use of seat belts is essential to protecting fire fighters during driving.\' 14.1.8.4.1 A location for helmet storage shall be provided. 14.1.8.4.2 If helmets are to be stored in the driving or crew compartment, the helmets shall be secured in compliance to section 14.1.11.2. (This relates to the gforce restraints.) 14.1.8.4.3 A label stating \'DO NOT WEAR HELMET WHILE SEATED\' shall be visible form each seating position. A.14.1.8.4 The minimum seat head height values in this standard assume that the occupants are not wearing helmets. The use of helmets puts the occupant at greater risk of neck or back injury during a rollover or during a severe road event.

 

 

Jeff Turner

Probationary FireFighter

QEM Fire Protection District

Jersey County, Illinois

www.qemfire.com

 

 

[Jeff Turner - QEM Fire]

In addition to this rule, It’s interesting that some other new standards for NFPA are that any apparatus over 15 years old is be set as a reserve piece only and anything over 25 years must be taken out of service…

 

While of course since the NFPA is a consensus standard organization and it’s not a law, it’s still interesting for us…

 

Jeff

 

 

 

 

---

[Capt Gerry New - QEM Fire]

Very good point, just 1 thing to ponder. While understanding the possible
safety aspect and the changes in technology, new(er) trucks is a fantastic
idea every 15 years.Now comes the small, rural fire district or the small
town with a yet smaller fire dept. Also comes the small budget(if any) to
add to the problem. These are the folks who have to figure out just where
the tank of fuel is coming from at over $4.00 a gallon. These are the
people who are lucky to have turn out gear of any shape to do the job.
These are the folks who consider themselves fortunate just to have the
truck start to do what is needed, let alone be brand new..or even brand
used. These are the folks who do operate under equipped, under manned, yet
never utter a word about what they don't have. These are the people and
dept's. who stand tall and are proud of what they have, and are thankful
for it. These are the every day people doing every day things, who will
drop there every day tasks to run when someone has their "crisis". True
story... When I was in Texas a few years ago, there was a small dept.
nearby whose members took turns filling up the truck with gas..out of
their pocket. Notice I said gas. These folks were driving a truck that was
25 years old then. Yet they always were there. Anyway, now that I have
rambled on. Again, the idea and theory is wonderful, no question, no
debate. The question is...who is going to pay for this when the feds say
it's time to jump? Are they.....not hardly. The typical response is you
make it work. As you folks are aware, even we are having a problem with
this, and we have a fairly decent budget. As long as it works, I'll drive
the old truck. Fire is fire, water is water. Whether the water comes from
a new truck or an old one, the stuff still works. Thanks for letting me
voice an opinion on this new NFPA ruling. Please take nothing out of
context, no negative thoughts are implied.
Be safe,

Capt. Gerry New, NREMTP
QEM Fire Protection District
Jersey County IL.

> In addition to this rule, It's interesting that some other new standards
> for
> NFPA are that any apparatus over 15 years old is be set as a reserve piece

> only and anything over 25 years must be taken out of service.

>
>
>
> While of course since the NFPA is a consensus standard organization and
> it's

> not a law, it's still interesting for us.
>
>
>
> Jeff