1. #1
    MembersZone Subscriber

    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Location
    Olive Branch, MS
    Posts
    78

    Default I dont understand

    We applied for a tanker grant to replace our 1978 ford tanker the problem that i have is that this truck used to be a pumper tanker it has a 1250 gpm 3,000 gallon tank on it but has not been able to pass a pump test since 1996. We are guessing that the pump auctually flows at around 500 gpm now due to some expensive mechanical issues that the local mechanics told us it would not be wise to invest the money in that old of a truck. Most of the time when we use it we let it free flow out of the tank but according to the guidance it must be classified as a pumper because that was its rating at one time. The help desk and the area rep told me to list it as a pumper and explain it in the narrative, my problem is that if by us having three trucks in the pumper category a 1978,1981 and a 2000 model trucks im worried that we will not make it out of the computer round. If that happens then they will not get to see our explanation. We applied the same way pretty much last year and did not make it past the computer the only differance was we only had the 78 and 2000 model trucks im hopin that the 81 will actually help us out by lowering our age some. We need a tanker bad and i feel that our need is valid but due to the process we will get overlooked.

  2. #2
    MembersZone Subscriber

    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Location
    Olive Branch, MS
    Posts
    78

    Default

    btw the cost of repairs to the truck would be around $20k that would get us back pumping again but we would still have the issues of steel tank(alot of rust), no seatbelts, no front to back baffeling, drives like a brick, and old 10 speed tranny which have you tried to train any younger guys on these 10 speeds its preety much impossible. There are many other issues with the truck so it would not be feasible to continue using it however we need the water. We have stopped training new people to drive it now but only have three that can drive it

  3. #3
    Forum Member

    Join Date
    Jul 2004
    Posts
    14

    Default

    send me an email jmonroe12342002@yahoo.com

  4. #4
    Forum Member
    SLY4420's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2004
    Posts
    1,974

    Default

    If you do want to beat that computer score, you'd need to list is as a Tanker. The application states "pumping capacity of less than 750 gallons per minute (gpm)" -- Doesn't ask for what the pump was rated at time of manufacture. If it currently has a pumping capacity of 500gpm, you're not lying.

    Be cautious to explain it in your narrative exactly as you have here. If you explain why you listed as such, no one can fault you saying you were trying to be fraudulent. This is one of those unique situations, and it sounds as if you have a real need.

    It's not something everyone can do, but in my opinion you do have a case in this situation.

    Program guidance definitions:

    • Pumper (an apparatus that carries a minimum of 300 gallons of water and has a pump with the capacity to pump a minimum of 750 gallons per minute)
    • Tanker-Tender (an apparatus that has water capacity in excess of 1,000 gallons and a pump with a pumping capacity of less than 750 gallons per minute)
    Last edited by SLY4420; 06-28-2012 at 09:09 PM.

  5. #5
    Forum Member

    Join Date
    Feb 2002
    Location
    Cypress, TX
    Posts
    1,716

    Default

    I'm with Sly on this one, documentation beats all so if the last test showed a capacity of 500gpm, it ain't a pumper. Also if it doesn't have the full NFPA 1901 equipment on it, it's not a pumper. We list stuff all the time like that, explaining that it's a tanker with a big pump because the SOP is dump and draft/relay. Has no crosslays, ladders, nothing. If that's the case of course tanker. Custom war wagon? Not a tanker, that makes it pumper.

  6. #6
    Forum Member

    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Location
    Lehigh County, PA
    Posts
    46

    Default

    Sly, BC79er et al...

    I have the same issue with our application for our tanker. It is a 77 tanker - 4000 gallons but has a 1000gpm pump, 2 door cab, vacuum assist steering, no cross lays, no ladders, etc. I have been reading the guidance and listing it as an engine - so now based on Brian's comments above - can I list it as a tanker in the vehicle summary and explain it in the narrative? I was planning to try again as an engine - but with a 1986 engine already in station - I don't think I get by the computer either. I want to be honest and do what is right - but we use it as a tanker - and that is its job.

    One more question - is the age of fleet question or the question about how long you have owned a vehicle part of the computer scoring based on your knowledge. Just curious.

    Thanks - now back to more writing.

  7. #7
    MembersZone Subscriber

    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Posts
    3,745

    Default

    The issue with the PG is that the AFG has made a determination on what a pumper and tanker are. When we deal with the grants NFPA standards are what we are going to meet. The definition of a tanker in the PG is conflict with NFPA 1901. Unlike the pumper which requires a minimum of 750 GPM, a tanker is not required to have a pump; if it does it has to meet Chapter 16 requirements.There is no minimum or max size. So based on the info, you have a tanker.

    As for computer scoring all info provided has some type of impact on the overall score. The overall fleet age will not have as big an impact as the average age of the type you are trying to replace (tanker).

  8. #8
    Forum Member

    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Location
    Lehigh County, PA
    Posts
    46

    Default

    Thanks onebugle. I do have one more question.

    We are looking at a tanker replacement. We originally had thought about just doing a re-chassis to keep the costs lower. The tank and rest of the truck is in good condition - the chassis and everything associated with it is not. We had multiple vendors look at it and tell us that it was worth saving the money.

    Is a re-chassis still an option for AFG? I was looking through the vehicle details section and I am not sure if I was doing a re-chassis how I would answer this question:
    Is the vehicle you propose to buy a refurbished, used or new response vehicle to meet current standards?

    My thinking is new - because the chassis will be new and that is what is titled. Am I overthinking this?

    Thanks in advance for anyone's help.
    Last edited by WVFD; 06-30-2012 at 02:55 PM.

  9. #9
    Forum Member

    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Posts
    271

    Default

    Folks,

    I tend to disagree with Brian and Onebugle. As Sly pointed out, the program guidance is very clear on what it considers a pumper v. tanker. NFPA 1901 has nothing to do with AFG's classification of a pumper v. tanker. Of course, the PG mandates that vehicles ultimately purchased with AFG funding must be NFPA 1901 compliant for the type of vehicle, but that's a post award requirement.

    From the guidance: "By submitting the application, you are certifying
    all of the information contained therein is true and an accurate reflection of your organization." In my opinion, classifying your trucks in a way that is inconsistent with the guidance would be untruthful and inaccurate.

    Feel free to clarify with the help desk, regional reps, or the program specialists. I think they will all quote you the PG.

    -dave

  10. #10
    Forum Member

    Join Date
    Feb 2002
    Location
    Cypress, TX
    Posts
    1,716

    Default

    Already have, that's why there's always the intent that has to be clarified behind their statement, not just the statement. The intent is for those requesting trucks to avoid requesting war wagons when they don't need them which cost a lot more than what is really needed. I've used that to pare down a lot of people who were asking for too much truck. But also have put larger pumps on tanker, put the request in as a tanker, identified older vehicles like the one mentioned above as a tanker even with a larger pump explaining fully in the narrative that it was meant to dump and then draft/relay in certain spots and isn't a Class A pumper by design even with the larger GPM.

    Haven't had an issue yet because all the cards were on the table and FULLY EXPLAINED in the application what each truck in the fleet was that was in a gray area by the GPM definition.

    So this: http://www.ustanker.com/Deliveries/D...px?OrderId=126

    I'd call a pumper because it's set up to be an attack truck with a 1000gpm and hose bed, etc.

    This: http://www.ustanker.com/Deliveries/D...px?OrderId=109

    is a tanker because the only stuff on it is "oh cr--" stuff. 1 handline and a booster reel is not pumper stuff and there's no compartments for anything. This is a water supply truck with a small bonus of being able to fill and draft/relay if needed.

    Haven't had a rep for the program have a problem with it yet, either before applying or while inspecting an award. Now you can't get a truck delivered with 1000gpm after asking for a tanker, don't take it to mean I'm saying that. Still have to abide by the 750gpm ruling there, that there is no flexibility on that UNLESS you specify the need in the narrative for more GPM. But the fleet listing does. Already confirmed, awarded, still not in jail for fraud since it was spelled out in the narrative. If they didn't like the answer in the narrative, wouldn't have given the award after going through Tech Review.

    Same reason that if someone not familiar with the program would read the PG and say that only the host of a regional can't ask for the same thing on their own Ops app, like hosting a regional radio grant and then asking for more radios on their own Ops. Some that didn't know what they were doing and wouldn't think to ask DHS first what the intent of the PG is, would think that everyone else in the regional could ask for radios on their Ops grants and double dip while the host takes one for the team. Double-dipping for the same items hasn't been allowed since they opened it up, been clarified every year since. Using the English language provides gray areas which is why those of us that do it for a living and like to avoid jail ensure we have the answers prior to advising anyone.

    Not telling WVFD to do anything that I haven't done in the past and been cleared on it, or doing this year either. In the vehicle inventory, that truck would be marked Tanker, with 1000gpm and 4000gal. Not lying about anything, it's a water supply truck with a big pump.

    Now if someone posted this: http://www.ustanker.com/Deliveries/D...px?OrderId=124

    as a tanker? Yeah, not buying it. That's a pumper.

    Oh and not endorsing US Tanker, just an easy site to find samples off of. Not saying they don't build good trucks either, don't want anyone to misunderstand my intent by saying that....
    Last edited by BC79er; 06-30-2012 at 05:28 PM.

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

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

Similar Threads

  1. Help please, I dont understand this.
    By cclark108 in forum Federal & Military Firehouse Forum
    Replies: 5
    Last Post: 08-09-2008, 02:16 AM
  2. Policy: Dont Ask - Dont Tell
    By MalahatTwo7 in forum News Center
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 07-23-2008, 11:05 AM
  3. Please help me understand ....
    By Trafficjockey93 in forum Firefighters Forum
    Replies: 47
    Last Post: 11-30-2004, 08:33 AM
  4. I just don't understand this one!
    By Assistant16 in forum Firefighters Forum
    Replies: 24
    Last Post: 06-15-2003, 10:00 PM
  5. Try and get me to understand this one!!
    By LTJOHN2001 in forum Firefighters Forum
    Replies: 12
    Last Post: 04-21-2002, 03:32 PM

Posting Permissions

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

Log in

Click here to log in or register