gfd89

So if Im reading this correctly, if your in turnouts on a Federally funded highway you dont NEED the vest? You could argue that with a PIAA, you could be exposed to bodily fluids (hazardous materials) and be OK with turnout gear"

"Firefighters or other emergency responders working within the right-of-way of a Federal-aid highway and engaged in emergency operations that directly expose them to

flame, fire, heat, and/or hazardous materials may wear retro reflective turn-out gear that is specified and regulated by other organizations, such as the National Fire Protection Association. Firefighters or other emergency

responders working within the right-of-way of a Federal-aid highway and engaged in any other types of operations

shall wear high-visibility safety apparel.""

Im not saying it not a good idea to have it..

If you are operating at a motor vehicle accident with out fire or hazmat you should be wearing a vest. The key word is directly expose them. If you are not directly involved with fire suppression or hazmat mitigation you are required to have a vest on. Command officers, equipment operators and other support personnel should have vests on.

Most of the companies that did the survey conducted them with traffic, with out lights and siren. Others did them while enroute to calls. There may have been a few companies that followed the chiefs request. The paper is making it out to be a lot more than it was. Don't get me wrong responding with lights and siren to a call is dangerous enough. So to ask for a study to be done with them is a bad choice.