Thread: Grant Amendment

  1. #1
    MembersZone Subscriber

    Join Date
    Dec 2004
    Location
    SE Missouri
    Posts
    105

    Default Grant Amendment

    How long should one expect a grant amendment to take

    I know we are in the holiday season so it could take exceptionally long.

  2. #2
    Forum Member

    Join Date
    Dec 2002
    Location
    Udall, Kansas
    Posts
    440

    Default One in progress

    I applied for my 2nd extension on Thursday and I got a call on Friday from the regional office wanting to discuss why I was applying for a 2nd extension. She was forwarding it on with her approval, she thought I woud know something by the end of this week.

  3. #3
    MembersZone Subscriber

    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Posts
    3,753

    Default

    The number of days for approval on a grant amendment will be determined on what the grant amendment is for and how many layers of approval it must go through.

    Probably the most extensive is the extension. Ours took 8 days to be approved. As mitchkrat pointed out, our FPS contacted us for an explanation, above what was sent. Once approved, it was sent up the chain for additional approvals.

    If you don't recieve an answer within 10-14 days, follow up with them.

  4. #4
    MembersZone Subscriber

    Join Date
    Dec 2004
    Location
    SE Missouri
    Posts
    105

    Default

    Thanks for the information folks, it's only been one week as of yet. Just getting a time frame from some that have applied for them. This amendment will probably have to go all the way to the top, just wish I would have requested some of the funds for equipment that had already been ordered.
    "You cannot submit a payment request while you have an amendment request in progress".

  5. #5
    MembersZone Subscriber

    Join Date
    May 2000
    Location
    SW MO
    Posts
    4,249

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by mitchkrat
    I applied for my 2nd extension on Thursday and I got a call on Friday from the regional office wanting to discuss why I was applying for a 2nd extension. She was forwarding it on with her approval, she thought I woud know something by the end of this week.
    Did you tell her "because another guy I know did it when his truck from the same people was two-and-a-half months overdue."

    Hope you get that thing soon man, I know what a headache they can be.

  6. #6
    MembersZone Subscriber

    Join Date
    Nov 2004
    Location
    Western NY
    Posts
    209

    Question Help!!!!

    Since we were awarded our grant, our deputy chief has been trying to change something, anything, about it. He just can't let it go as is. I think he feels the need to leave his mark on it.

    Anyways, we were awarded SCBA. The proposal includes the buddy breathing system on the packs. Is the buddy breathing system required for standard? Can we take this part off of the packs? How do we go about it?

    Thanks for any input .

  7. #7
    MembersZone Subscriber

    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Posts
    3,753

    Default

    The buddy breathing system is not required under NFPA 1981. Actually, there is an ROP where that question is posed. It states that a buddy breathing system will not recieve NIOSH approval. The SCBA must have NIOSH approval to be NFPA compliant. The document can be found at:

    NFPA 1981 November 2001 ROP Copyright 2001, NFPA
    http://www.nfpa.org/assets/files/PDF...-F2001-rop.pdf

    look at 1981-3


    You need to talk to your FPS on this. Technically, you need to fulfill the scope of the project as written. In this case you would not be NFPA compliant.
    Last edited by onebugle; 12-05-2006 at 08:59 AM.

  8. #8
    FH Mag/.com Contributor

    Join Date
    Feb 2002
    Location
    Cypress, TX
    Posts
    7,288

    Default

    I thought NFPA 1981-2002 required both RIT and buddy breathing connections? At least that's what the paperwork I have laying around said. The only highlighted changes for the 2007ed were the CBRN requirements.

    Either way, I doubt you'll find a pack without the buddy breathers on them. And if you extolled the virtues of the buddy breather in the narrative then they'll have to be there.

  9. #9
    MembersZone Subscriber

    Join Date
    Nov 2004
    Location
    Western NY
    Posts
    209

    Default ???

    Well, then ... where does this leave us? He is having a meeting tonight to discuss this with the officers and I want to be fully prepared when I speak up.

  10. #10
    FH Mag/.com Contributor

    Join Date
    Feb 2002
    Location
    Cypress, TX
    Posts
    7,288

    Default

    Can't make the change if it's in the narrative for one. #2, can't make the change because that would make the SCBA non-NFPA compliant and PG won't allow that. Everything has to meet NFPA guidelines that were in place at the time of application.

  11. #11
    MembersZone Subscriber

    Join Date
    Nov 2004
    Location
    Western NY
    Posts
    209

    Default Thank you

    ... thank you, thank you, thank you!!!!! I'm am printing this out and making copies for everyone who will be in attendance at the meeting. They won't listen to me, but I'm sure they will listen to you.

  12. #12
    FH Mag/.com Contributor

    Join Date
    Feb 2002
    Location
    Cypress, TX
    Posts
    7,288

    Default

    No problem. If all else fails, the Program Guidance rules all.

    Shoot me an email if you run into any other roadblocks.

  13. #13
    MembersZone Subscriber

    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Posts
    3,753

    Default

    Brian,

    Correct me if I'm wrong. I've been through the standard whith no mention of a "buddy breathing system". What is required is the RIC/UAC. This allows the replenishment of breathing air to the SCBA air cylinder. This is not a buddy breathing system. This allows the RIC or RIT with a RIT pack to supply a downed firefighter with an air supply regardless of the manufacturer. Scott RIT pack can fill an MSA SCBA etc.

    The buddy breathing system appears to be an option (not an NFPA requirement) with manufacturers. The key is that the SCBA is NFPA compliant with the buddy breathing system.

    Irregardless they need to fulfill the scope of their grant as written.

  14. #14
    FH Mag/.com Contributor

    Join Date
    Feb 2002
    Location
    Cypress, TX
    Posts
    7,288

    Default

    I haven't had a chance to go back and check it, but it was my understanding that oru Scotts have said connection that fulfills both purposes. We have the quick disconnects on both masks and SCBA so we can either connect into someone else's pack if one runs low, or hook into a pack for RIT purposes.

    Maybe it is an option but my old department had those on our early 90s ISIs, and haven't seen too many without it here recently so I thought they were standard. Wouldn't be the first time I was off.

    If they have the money for both, and it is an option no sense in not getting them. Especially since they can't use the money for anything else, it has to go to the SCBA. If it wasn't included in the price quote and they'd be out of pocket for it, can maybe see a financial argument against it. But tactically, give me the buddy breather JIC.

  15. #15
    MembersZone Subscriber

    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Posts
    3,753

    Default

    The Scott quick disconnects are an option. This was brought to our attention after we recieved the grant to upgrade our Scotts to the current standard. Obviously we did not go with the option due to cost. The other selling point (more $$$ for them) was individual facepieces with individual regulators. Less expensive to clean them properly.

    I agree with you on that they must spend the $$$$$$ on SCBA and for what they asked for. No getting around that.

  16. #16
    MembersZone Subscriber

    Join Date
    Nov 2004
    Location
    Western NY
    Posts
    209

    Default Okay ....

    Now I'm confused again. Do we have to spend the money on the buddy breathing, yes it was specified in the narrative and budget, or can we use the funds for them for more packs or bottles? I didn't think we could. The way it was written is exactly this (literally copied and pasted from the grant application):

    Scott 4.5 Air-Pak NXG2 w/ standard harness, EZ Flo II Quick Connect Regulator, Pak-Alert SE+, Dual EBSS and CBRN Certified, Scott 4500 psi 45 minute Carbon cylinder with valve, spare Scott 4500 psi 45 minute Carbon cylinder with valve, Scott AV3000 facepiece and facepiece bag



    Kelly

  17. #17
    MembersZone Subscriber

    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Posts
    3,753

    Default

    Sorry for the confusion. You need to purchase the SCBA as written.

  18. #18
    FH Mag/.com Contributor

    Join Date
    Feb 2002
    Location
    Cypress, TX
    Posts
    7,288

    Default

    Name brands and model numbers don't mean anything in the application, just the basics. So 4500psi, w/integrated PASS, CBRN certified, 2-45min bottles, facepiece & bag is your base. Now if you mentioned somewhere else in the narrative that the buddy breathing connections would increase FF safety, then they must be included in the purchase because they were specifically asked for. As long as you meet that DHS is happy.

    Now if each unit costs less than requested then you can only spend another $4999 in fed funds buying extra anything whether it's bottles masks, or whatever.

  19. #19
    FH Mag/.com Contributor

    Join Date
    Feb 2002
    Location
    Cypress, TX
    Posts
    7,288

    Default

    Exception on purchasing certain name brands is if it's needed for full interoperability purposes.

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

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

Similar Threads

  1. Grant Funding Amendment Question
    By weezride in forum Federal FIRE ACT Grants & Funding
    Replies: 4
    Last Post: 06-10-2006, 02:18 PM
  2. Grant Amendment Response Time
    By andersonch in forum Federal FIRE ACT Grants & Funding
    Replies: 16
    Last Post: 10-22-2005, 07:05 PM
  3. World Of Fire Report: 03-17-05
    By PaulBrown in forum World of Fire Daily Report
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 03-20-2005, 11:29 AM
  4. Grant Amendment
    By E15FF2 in forum Federal FIRE ACT Grants & Funding
    Replies: 2
    Last Post: 12-28-2003, 09:57 AM
  5. Grant Amendment
    By wbgofd in forum Federal FIRE ACT Grants & Funding
    Replies: 4
    Last Post: 12-17-2003, 09:14 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

Log in

Click here to log in or register