Vehicle Program Priorities

[ccmongo]

Yet another vehicle question. We are a suburban community. We have some wildland interface problems, and we provide a tanker/tender (3000 gal) as part of the county wildland task force. Our tanker is 25 years old and is quite frankly a rolling turd but it is the only real tanker/tender in the county.

The problem is according to the priority list tanker/tender is priority 2 for suburban communities. We also need another pumper for our station (we have only one pumper and a quint with a 24,000 population), so can I ask for a pumper/tanker and still hit the priority list?

I think it gives us more bang for the buck (cost benefit) as it fills two needs. Your thoughts anyone?

Onward,
Mongo

[onebugle]

Per the 2007 PG:

DHS assesses all vehicles with similar functions when assessing the number of vehicles a department possesses within a particular type. For example, the “pumper ” category includes: pumpers, engines, pumper/tankers (apparatus that carries a minimum of 300 gallons of water and has a pump with a capacity to pump a minimum of 750 gallons per minute), rescue-pumpers, quints (with aerials less than 76 feet in length), and urban interface vehicles (Type I). Apparatus that has water capacity in excess of 1,000 gallons and a pump with pumping capacity of less than 750 gallons per minute are considered to be a tanker/tender.

Based on the above a pumper/tanker would be the way to go, because it falls within the "pumper" catergory=priority one.

On the flip side your current pumper and quint fall into the "pumper" catergory when assessing the number of vehicles a department has within that particular type. The average age of your fleet will have an impact also.

The PG states:

DHS will evaluate the marginal value derived from an additional vehicle of any given type on the basis of call volume. As a result, departments with fewer vehicles of a given type than other departments who service comparable call volumes are more likely to score competitively than departments with more vehicles of that type and comparable call volume unless the need for an additional vehicle of such type is made apparent in the application.

With the changes this year for multiple applications you lose nothing for applying.

[firechief47]

Did I hear someone say that if you submit two apps (PPE & Vehicle) they would NOT be scored against each other. I want to be sure before I hit the button(s).

[BC79er_OLDDELETE]

They're in different categories competing for different money. Regionals and equipment will won't be against each other per se, just competing for the same dough. Vehicles are scored and ranked separate from equipment apps.

[onebugle]

The only issue is that you do not exceed the award limits for your population for the projects.

Applicants that serve a jurisdiction with a population of 500,000 people or less may not receive grant funds in excess of $1 million in any program year.

Applicants that serve a jurisdiction with more than 500,000,but not more than one million,people may not receive grant funds in excess of $1.75 million in any program year.

Applicants that serve a jurisdiction of more than one million people may not
receive grant funds in excess of $2.735 million in any program year.

[firechief47]

Thanks BC and onebugle. I won't have a problem with the funding limits (we're rural by the way). Only about $350-400K for truck and gear. The gear app is pretty solid, but the truck is a longshot and I didn't want the truck app to cost me the PPE.

[ccmongo]

Thanks Onebugle. We are going to go for the pumper/tanker then, but we are probably going to get hammered because our oldest pumper is only 12 years old and the quint is only 6 years old. We also have a twenty two-year-old brush truck, and a bunch of Ambulances to help pay the bills. Not that I'm crying I know there are departments that are a lot worse off than we are.

We need a pumper and we have our obligation to the county to keep bringing our tanker so... pumper/tanker it is. All the city money is going to go to parks and public works this year so this is my only option anyway. And like you said with the changes this year for multiple applications we lose nothing for applying.
Mongo

[wtfd2940]

We are a fire department that runs full time EMS BLS transport for two towns. Looking at the funding priorities ambulances for fire departments seem to be way down on the food chain. Under non-afiliated EMS organizations they are number one. To me it doesn't make much sense to place ambulances in the lowest of categories for fire departments that are the only provider of EMS services for your town. I'm looking at our run totals that are roughly 60%-70% EMS service, we need an ambulance, but we are an "affiliated" EMS organization. I've started to write our grant and it kind of makes it feel hopeless, even though I know vehicles are an uphill battle. Does anyone have any insight on fire departments that are in our shoes or any tips in somehow showing that even though our EMS service is affiliated that we have a much greater need for an ambulance than an engine, etc. Just sort of frustrated with the setup.

[BC79er_OLDDELETE]

If you run EMS transport in a fire department setting then it's a local issue about choosing to buy new fire apparatus or ambulances, that's why it's a priority 3 vehicle. The department should be making that decision on what to do, and normally more EMS runs, ambulances should get replaced more often. If not, then that's an internal thing because if you have the money to replace the pumpers and whatnot every X number of years and since ambulances cost less and get used more often they should be replaced more often, ie, no need for a grant if the money is there. Doesn't mean it's being spent in the right spot, but the money exists. That's why they're Priority 3.

They're P1 for EMS-only because that's all they have in the fleet so if they can't afford any new vehicles and all they have is ambulances, then that's a major funding issue.

We've gone to rechassis only on ours, no sense in paying for a new box when it's the truck that has the high mileage. Done the last 4 that way and spent $120K on 4 new chassis versus 1 whole new truck.

Not to kick you when you're down, but it is a longer shot than getting $1mil for a tower. Priority 3 vehicle apps will not see Peer Review. Neither will Priority 2 for that matter. I know I say in the articles, PodCasts, and in here it's free to apply, but when you're that low in the priority table on project it had better be the highest priority vehicle need for the entire organization. If it is, then you had better go overboard in bullet-proofing it just in case it does sneak into Peer with a low computer score they'll have no choice but to give it a 100 in Peer to bring it into the winner's circle.