Chnages to ISO

[LaFireEducator]

So we should come up with a completely different system that performs the same function as ISO? Do the insurance companies not need to base their premiums on the amount of risk they cover? Grouping like sized communities would not show the actual capability of the individual FD's at all. I'm pretty certain I see three grossly different examples of FD capability in three very closely sized and made up communities in my county.

Modifying the current schedule to better reflect today's fire service is completely appropriate and happening. Individual states can work on the equipment equivalency lists as I understand it. I guess I'm at a loss as to how a Pro-Pak would be a significant benefit at a structure fire, or how multiple piercing nozzles should receive "extra credit"?

If your FD and hopefully community leaders agree that some of these things are BS, then focus on the parts you agree with and take the few point hit on the equipment. I'll bet the $50 hose jacket itself won't make or break a full rating point. If it did it would certainly save your taxpayers it's weight in gold, almost literally.

I take it LA's FD has 64 seating positions or a high number of engines or trucks (yeah right) to require the 4 SCBA minimum per to get to 64? That's a lot of rolling stock for such few responses. My little combo FD only is required to carry 17 SCBA, though we carry 29 with 100+ bottles. Me thinks LA doesn't know ISO from interior firefighting.

We operate 6 stations. We cover close to 170 square miles. By the book, the rating folks say we are supposed to have 7, but it's unlikely it will ever be built.

6 engines x 4 SCBA per engine = 24
6 service trucks x 6 per service truck = 36
1 spare engine x 4 = 4 (required once you hit 6 stations)

Add it together = 64

There's the math.

Very few suburban or rural departments operate trucks in this half of the state. There are 2 in the entire parish, except for the city, and one department is planning on not replacing it in a few years when it gives out. The neighboring parish to our west operates none. The parish to our east operates 2, with both being at least 15 years old.

One of those is a small city with 3 story downtown store fronts and some very large, old 2-story homes and several multi-story commercial buildings and a hospital.

Not a lot of demand for aerials when the vast majority of your housing stock is single story.

[Dickey]

I totally agree that the ISO is severely outdated and needs an enema.

At least update it to the 1990's.





You know it really is a minority of the insurance industry. State Farm Insurances controls roughly 52% of the market and they don't recognize or use ISO, they use their own, more reasonable score system.

[LVFD301]

I totally agree that the ISO is severely outdated and needs an enema.

At least update it to the 1990's.





You know it really is a minority of the insurance industry. State Farm Insurances controls roughly 52% of the market and they don't recognize or use ISO, they use their own, more reasonable score system.

Actually that is not totally correct. Although State Farm does use their own system for risk asessment, it is still tied heavily to information they purchase from ISO.

So they do recognize and use ISO, they simply take that information a bit farther.

State Farm goes primarily by zip code now, which results in much more skewed ratings in many situations. Here in my zip code, we have probably 5 departments - and over 500 square miles. Ranges from very rural (house every 3 miles) to a city of 10k. One size fits all?

[tree68]

Here in my zip code, we have probably 5 departments - and over 500 square miles. Ranges from very rural (house every 3 miles) to a city of 10k. One size fits all?

And we have four zip codes in our district - one for the hamlet (PO Boxes) and three rural delivery areas (each with a different zip code) that virtually intersect at our fire station...

[LaFireEducator]

And we have four zip codes in our district - one for the hamlet (PO Boxes) and three rural delivery areas (each with a different zip code) that virtually intersect at our fire station...

We cover 2 zip codes, one we share with the City of Haughton, which has their own fire department.

[bfd102]

just checking to see if anything new from iso about the proposed changes any one heard anything?

[GTRider245]

The equipment required lists for engine, ladder and service companies have been taken down. Any other earth shattering news?

[spegram]

I attended the NFPA conference over a year ago and a VP from ISO gave a presentation which outlined the changes, almost all were switching to the applicable NFPA standard for equipment, training, response times, communications etc. However at that time he did say they would adopt one response time standard (1710) for the whole country other wise they wouldn't be comparing apple to apples and the standard would have less meaning. If this holds true it will be very interesting for both career and volunteers alike, I know some volunteer departments that can meet 1710 with response times and staffing (duty crews, live-ins etc) and my own combination department could not even though we staff 7 around the clock we cover 30+ square miles and can't meet the response time for the first alarm.

[DeputyMarshal]

I know some volunteer departments that can meet 1710 with response times and staffing (duty crews, live-ins etc) and my own combination department could not even though we staff 7 around the clock we cover 30+ square miles and can't meet the response time for the first alarm.

Every volunteer and combination department in the country meets every part of 1710 that applies to them because 1710 doesn't apply to them at all.

[RFDACM02]

Every volunteer and combination department in the country meets every part of 1710 that applies to them because 1710 doesn't apply to them at all.

I think you'll find he was referring to ISO using the numbers from 1710 across the board regardless of career or volunteer. Not to mention that given the Application of 1720 states that it is for fire departments that are significantly or predominantly (I forget the exact term) volunteer, they imply FD's who are mostly career staffed with some POC's or volunteers are to be covered under 1710. One must also check to see what they mean by volunteer? Is this the strict definition by which no one may be paid anything for their services and the FD not get any taxpayer funding? Or are they speaking of those who are not career staffed?

[firepundit]

The ghost has risen.

http://www.isomitigation.com/ppc/0000/ppc0001.html

Key sentence: "ISO has extensive information on more than 47,000 fire-response jurisdictions."

That is what they do. Collect information. That information is used to establish rates of insurance. Since ISO is funded by insurance companies to supply data to them, they answer to the insurance companies that fund them.

Whatever changes they make to the system will be relevant to their reason for existence, supplying solid and reliable data that the insurance companies want.

If you don't want to buy a distributing nozzle or the equivalent piercing nozzle, that is your prerogative. It is miniscule in the final count. You can do whatever you want. Just don't complain when the manufacturing plant moves into the town down the road with a better rating because it might save them $100,000.00 each and every year. Also, don't complain when the neighboring department gets new equipment from their increased tax base.

Actuaries establish what is relevant and what is not, in the eyes of the insurance industry. They do not represent the fire service industry.

[DeputyMarshal]

Not to mention that given the Application of 1720 states that it is for fire departments that are significantly or predominantly (I forget the exact term) volunteer, they imply FD's who are mostly career staffed with some POC's or volunteers are to be covered under 1710.

Not to quibble, but here are their respective scopes:

NFPA 1710: Document Scope

1.1* Scope. This standard contains minimum requirements relating to the organization and deployment of fire suppression operations, emergency medical operations, and special operations to the public by substantially all career fire departments.

NFPA 1720: Document Scope

1.1* Scope. This standard contains minimum requirements relating to the organization and deployment of fire suppression operations, emergency medical operations, and special operations to the public by volunteer and combination fire departments.

There's very little wiggle room in there. The only ambiguous term is "substantially" in 1710's scope and several proposals have been made to remove it. It remains at the direction of the NFPA Standards Council presumably to provide for cases of clearly career departments that might have some non-career members. (Aren't there still a dozen or so volunteer companies in NYC? I'd hesitate to call FDNY a "combination" department on their account... )

[FireMedic049]

There's very little wiggle room in there. The only ambiguous term is "substantially" in 1710's scope and several proposals have been made to remove it. It remains at the direction of the NFPA Standards Council presumably to provide for cases of clearly career departments that might have some non-career members. (Aren't there still a dozen or so volunteer companies in NYC? I'd hesitate to call FDNY a "combination" department on their account... )

You should hesitate to call FDNY a combination department on those grounds. There are still a handful or so of volunteer departments operating in NYC, however they are separate entities from FDNY.

A better example of what you are referring to, even though you may not be familiar, would be Harrisburg, PA. Technically, they are a combination department, but for the most part the volunteer component is no longer present in any substantial sense - response/operations wise.

[DeputyMarshal]

Technically, they are a combination department, but for the most part the volunteer component is no longer present in any substantial sense - response/operations wise.

I agree, that's a better example and illustrates the point well. Such a department clearly falls under the intent of 1710 but, without the word "substantial", it would be relegated to 1720.

[Seagravesstick]

you do realize that ISO DOES use actual fire losses for all of their data..... World wide company they are known for the LARGEST database in the world of statistics and actual loss records, of not only fire, but natural disater, job related injuries, you name it they got it..... I will try and answer more as these posts go on.... so stand by (ISO Slayer)