Why register? ...To Enhance Your Experience
+ Reply to Thread
Results 1 to 9 of 9
  1. #1
    Forum Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Posts
    10

    Default Safer Justification

    Dept. Background: 80 Career FF's serving 45,000 population and call volume of 9,000+ with EMS. Minimum staffing of 18 per shift puts three on our five Engine Companies and two on our Truck (two extra per group to absorb sick/vac/long term leave). We are asking for four FF positions. Given NFPA 1710 req of four per Engine and Truck, we want to increase minimum staffing on the Truck to three, up from two. Given the emphasis on four on first arriving companies, is this the right angle to go or should we try to up staffing on our centrally located Engine (responds to every fire). We realize it will take upwards to 28 positions to meet NFPA staffing levels, but every little bit helps as we all know. Thanks for any of your input on this!!


  2. #2
    FH Mag/.com Contributor
    Join Date
    Feb 2002
    Location
    Cypress, TX
    Posts
    7,288

    Default

    Just to clarify NFPA is NOT 4 on every truck, hence the downfall of many apps. NFPA is 4 on the initial attack, no requirement that they all ride in on the same horse. Being unable to establish the required lines and roles in the allotted time is the issue. NFPA has 1710 and 1720 available in a shorter (plain English) format on their web site at last check. Yuo can read the whole code if you want, just can't print or save unless you're a member.

  3. #3
    Forum Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Location
    College Station, Texas
    Posts
    57

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by BC79er View Post
    Just to clarify NFPA is NOT 4 on every truck, hence the downfall of many apps. NFPA is 4 on the initial attack, no requirement that they all ride in on the same horse. Being unable to establish the required lines and roles in the allotted time is the issue. NFPA has 1710 and 1720 available in a shorter (plain English) format on their web site at last check. Yuo can read the whole code if you want, just can't print or save unless you're a member.
    I have some confusion about 1710. As to "no requirement that they all ride on the same horse" 5.2.3.1.1 under "Operating Units" and "Fire Companies" in the standard is pretty specific: "These companies shall be staffed by a minimum of four on-duty personnel." And more in some cases.

  4. #4
    FH Mag/.com Contributor
    Join Date
    Feb 2002
    Location
    Cypress, TX
    Posts
    7,288

    Default

    Angle it's taken from is that of a fireground operations perspective, not a sitting in the station perspective. That's why using 2 - 2 person pumpers has been deemed as complying with 4 on the initial attack because they're operating as one company upon arrival.

    Would have been a lot more layoffs and firehouses closed over the past few years if that was held to be 4+ scheduled on every truck on every shift if it wasn't as bodies would have been moved to 1 firehouse instead of operating out of two, and brownouts every time 1 was on vacation/sick/injured off of that crew.

  5. #5
    Forum Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Posts
    10

    Thumbs up

    Thanks Brian for the clarification, with the added 4 guys we will have 15 guys responding in on the first alarm assignment within the 8 minutes. Not going to stress over the 4 per piece. First time our department has applied for SAFER, been very successful in AFG. We're hopeful, but really want to see all the brothers who were laid off get hired back first! Keep up the hard work and Happy Holidays!

  6. #6
    FH Mag/.com Contributor
    Join Date
    Feb 2002
    Location
    Cypress, TX
    Posts
    7,288

    Default

    No problem. Wouldn't be a government recognized regulation if there wasn't gray areas and a way around everything.

    Good luck with the app. Stressed point in review is going to be on how the project isn't going to be just a 2 year hiatus on the layoffs. Still have to have a plan 3rd year and beyond even though it isn't required for rehires or avoidance positions.

  7. #7
    Forum Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Location
    College Station, Texas
    Posts
    57

    Default

    OK. I see the thought process, I think.

    Thanks, Brian.

  8. #8
    Forum Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Posts
    257

    Default

    I have always wondered about that too and based on your comments I have changed my wording to say we will achieve 4 at each station or 4 on the initial attack company instead of 4 on the initial arriving engine.

    If SAFER gives us four more we would have 8 line positions (4 at each station) but would not come close to the 14-15 total 1710 wants.

    Do we still have a good shot if we say we can meet the 4 on the initial attack but not the 14-15 firefighter requirement?

  9. #9
    FH Mag/.com Contributor
    Join Date
    Feb 2002
    Location
    Cypress, TX
    Posts
    7,288

    Default

    Idea is to meet all metrics of 1710/20, through all means possible which includes mutual aid & callbacks. Otherwise they technically can't fund admittedly deficient apps.

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Similar Threads

  1. Bunker Gear Justification Help
    By rdw930 in forum Firefighters Forum
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: 06-23-2008, 09:40 PM
  2. new station justification
    By sklump in forum Volunteer Forum
    Replies: 21
    Last Post: 11-23-2006, 06:22 AM
  3. Color Justification
    By hersheyaztec in forum Apparatus Innovation
    Replies: 21
    Last Post: 10-26-2005, 12:44 AM
  4. Quint Justification
    By BelmontFire in forum Federal FIRE ACT Grants & Funding
    Replies: 6
    Last Post: 02-04-2005, 09:07 AM
  5. Quint Justification
    By 640SATFD in forum Apparatus Innovation
    Replies: 8
    Last Post: 10-20-2004, 01:26 AM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts