Should 2 Sets Of Turnout Gear Be Standard?

[x635 4,066]

I know some departments already do this.

But, should two sets of turnout gear be standard?

With today's gear, it really is a custom fit. If gear gets wet, it can take a while to dry. If you have to wash it, that can take a while. And if it sustains thermal damage, that can take weeks to fix.

Should having two sets of gear be standard for each firefighter???

[TAPSJ 30]

Well it is a good idea, but some companies or districts cant pay for two seats per firefighter. I could see getting them for active members for the volunteer service, people that show up more then once or twice a month. Or should have a couple of spare sets and you have to go threw Chief to use it.

Thomas

[Guest bigal8]

From a policy standpoint, there are many better ways to use that money.

[JetPhoto 626]

From a policy standpoint, there are many better ways to use that money.

I disagree. If your gets damaged on a call, Hazmat exsposure, high heat damage, ripped at an accident, ect or just plane dirty or frozen at a fire. you should have a 2nd set that you can use at a moments notice otherwise thier might not be a spare set to keep you in service.

Now unfortunitly most separtments can't afford this (like mine) so this would be on the wish list

[rfd63l12 2]

I agree with Jetphoto, it is very nice to have a "back up set" however my dept has approx 100 members and there would be no way to fit that in the budget. I am one of the few that is lucky enough to have a personal set of gear that I found on ebay for the right price, so after any incident i can have my stuff washed or dry properly without being out of service for that time. But that is a double edged sword, while my dept allows us to wear personal gear, if it gets damaged or destroyed they are not responsible to replace it....

[Ladder44 73]

From a budget perspective that would never work in my dept. were lucky to get a maximum of 3-4 NEW sets a year

Edited August 9, 2009 by Ladder44

[FiftyOnePride 100]

Previous to receiving a grant for 40 something sets, we didn't really have second sets issued. But it obviously created a surplus of the older gear which for the most part have been retained as second sets. I leave my set in my fiance's car for while we are out and about.

As far as money well spent, I would argue that it is almost essential if possible, to have a second set available to at least your active members.

Edited August 9, 2009 by FiftyOnePride

[FFPCogs 863]

A great idea, but as has been said repeatedly not financially possible for many dept.s What may work for some as a stopgap would be to have dept's or municipalities help defer the cost of a "personal" set by contributing a portion of the purchase price. If I were to enact such a policy (from a volunteer standpoint), it would be incumbent on a few factors such as active performance, training, certification and need.

Just my POV.

Cogs

[Bnechis 3,961]

From a policy standpoint, there are many better ways to use that money.

From an opertional standpoint there are very few better ways to use that money.

How many ff's have been taught that wet turnouts can cause you to have steam burns when you go on the next fire call?

We have had simple calls that gear was contaminated and the gear had to be removed from service, without 2nd sets, those members would not have had gear for weeks.

I'm sorry we can't go on any calls for the next few hours (till it drys) or weeks till the new gear comes in is not good policy.

[Bnechis 3,961]

From a budget perspective that would never work in my dept. were lucky to get a maximum of 3-4 NEW sets a year

The law (29CFR1910.132) requires the employeer (your FD) to provide your gear. And the standards require the gear to be no older than 10 years old I must assume your dept has 40 or fewer members or they are not meeting their obligations.

Maybe a review of the budget is needed.

[Bnechis 3,961]

I agree with Jetphoto, it is very nice to have a "back up set" however my dept has approx 100 members and there would be no way to fit that in the budget.

New gear cost between $2,000 and $5,000 so with 100 members (how many are interior?) you are talking about $200,000 to $500,000 or the cost of defering an engine purchase for a year or two.

I am one of the few that is lucky enough to have a personal set of gear that I found on ebay for the right price, so after any incident i can have my stuff washed or dry properly without being out of service for that time. But that is a double edged sword, while my dept allows us to wear personal gear, if it gets damaged or destroyed they are not responsible to replace it....

1910.132 (b ) - Employee-owned equipment. Where employees provide their own protective equipment, the employer shall be responsible to assure its adequacy, including proper maintenance, and sanitation of such equipment.

1910.132(h)(1) - Except as provided by paragraphs (h)(2) through (h)(6) of this section, the protective equipment, including personal protective equipment (PPE), used to comply with this part, shall be provided by the employer at no cost to employees.

1910.132(h)(5) - The employer must pay for replacement PPE, except when the employee has lost or intentionally damaged the PPE.

What may work for some as a stopgap would be to have dept's or municipalities help defer the cost of a "personal" set by contributing a portion of the purchase price. If I were to enact such a policy (from a volunteer standpoint), it would be incumbent on a few factors such as active performance, training, certification and need.

The dept. needs to pay and not just help defer the cost, see 1910.132(h)(1)

Edited August 9, 2009 by Bnechis

[helicopper 1,050]

Wouldn't those forced air drying racks be a more economical option that would reduce the time it takes to dry?

[markmets415 524]

Most of our "active" firefighters have two sets of gear issued, as Josh stated we were lucky enough to get a grant to achieve this as well.

[IzzyEng4 427]

Two sets of gear especially in a busy department should be a standard issue. Or even if say a department is financially strapped, there should be enough sets of "spare" gear to be issued to a member in case his / her gear is compromised, needs to be sent out for alterations, needs to be dried out, ect.

[Guest bigal8]

I agree that there is really no limit on the number of things that can put turnout gear out of service. However this does not necessarily warrant spare sets of gear for every member. Perhaps there should be a few communal sets of spare gear of varying sizes.

It's not fair to simply say that because turnout gear can get damaged, every member should have a second set. Should we have spare engines too? Ones that only get used if the regular engine is damaged at a fire? Essential equipment can always break, whether it's a firefighter's turnout gear, a Secret Service officer's sidearm, or even a teacher's blackboard. There can't be a spare for everything - that's why we take risks.

If you advocate buying spare gear, you have to ask for often and for how long the regular gear is put out of service and how much it would cost to buy spare gear. For instance, it makes sense for a skydiver to have a spare parachute because it's relatively cheap and simple to have a spare chute and at the same time, a failed chute isn't all that uncommon and the results of it are virtually guaranteed death.

Need I mention the economy too? When I say there are better ways to spend that money, I'm not talking within firefighting operations. I'm talking about all of government spending. Buy just a few sets of gear and you've already laid off a secretary. Buy 10 sets and you can say goodbye to a teacher. You've got to think about it like that when deciding just exactly how important equipment is, including spare gear.

At the same time, even though something like an SCBA costs thousands of dollars, it is absolutely essential to firefighting and must always be purchased, even if that secretary or teacher must be laid off.

[JTF429 37]

Your post makes no sense. Many departments have spare engines and trucks. As far as spare gear goes, the gear today is fitted specificaly to the person wearing it. You might have a hand me down set when you join but you will get fitted for a new set sooner or later.All the members on my job have 2 sets of gear that we rotate.What do you do if you go to an MVA and get covered in blood. Sorry I forgot you have your vest to protect you. You gear has to go out and get decontaminated now what. If you pull gear out of the closet that doesn't fit you, now you get hurt. Sure for some departments it can take a few years to get everyone a seconed set. Your gear and SCBA are the most important pieces of equipment you have....

[Guest bigal8]

Departments may have spare trucks but as far as I know, they are ones that are old, used etc. I've never heard of a department buying a truck then soon after, buying another one solely to act as a "spare" and nothing else.

JTF, you said people might get hand-me-down gear at first. If it's acceptable protection for the first few years of a career, why can't it also act as a spare set of gear? Is a newer FF's safety less important than that of an older FF?

[Remember585 815]

I recall a handful of times where we would be out all night, in the snow, working a fire. We get back to quarters, take the gear apart to thaw and dry. A few hours later, we're paged out for something else, and guys are piecing together their gear or other stuff laying around. When I was Captain, I worked on getting 2nd sets of gear for everyone that needed it. The trend is slowly catching on within the entire department, so we are slowly getting a 2nd set to everyone.

It's not like the old days where you grabbed gear off the rig, rarely finding the right size stuff. Wearing improperly sized gear can add to and even expedite firefighter fatigue. I keep my old set of black gear in my old rack at the firehouse so I have a spare, and since I am one of the bigger guys, others can use it if they really need to.

[jcoppola 52]

I guess we are lucky. Each member of the Norwalk Fire Department has 2 sets of black Morning Pride gear. One set for daily use and a second set in case the first is soiled. The spare gear is kept in a special closet at each station where the member is normally stationed. It is under lock and key so if a member needs his second set, he must ask the Lt. on duty for the key and state the reasons therefor. This is to prevent members from keeping the second set in their car or house and using it for convenience. The practice of having 2 sets of gear is invaluable in my opinion. In the middle of the night, in the middle of the winter after a serious fire or accident, knowing you have a clean, dry set of gear back at the station is so important to being able to continue to perform at your best, that I cannot believe it is not mandatory that departments provide this to members.

One of the ways we were able to do this 2 set of gear thing was through a grant for PPE. It included SCBA's and turnouts.

Joe

[xfirefighter484x 234]

I don't think anyone here is debating the fact that for the majority of departments out there, this may not be PRACTICAL, but I think the thread was more intent on asking what people's opinions are on whether or not (in a perfect world) 2 sets of gear SHOULD be standard!

[64FFMJK 21]

The question of second sets of turnout gear and numbers brings up an unfortunate sore spot. If you have 100 members on paper how many ACTIVE members do you truly have. I know of several Fire districts that pad the numbers by not dropping members from active rolls even if they haven't stepped foot into the fire house for training or on a call for 11 to 12 months. How useful is this person to the rest of the rank and file.

I have seen gear sit in a gear room of volunteer stations for months and get sun faded and if you take it off the hook on the wall its different colors it sat so long.

Should 2 sets of gear be standard.

Career staff HELL YES.

Active Volunteer members meeting a preset minimum of training, responses and rostering if implemented Hell Yes

Inactive volunteers No and consider doing things to get them more active.

I am not a big fan of spare off the rack gear since turnout gear is like any other top end suit or parade uniform and should be tailor fit to the wearer.

What costs more $5,000 to pay for a set of gear or the cost of a funeral and litigation

[ex-commish 490]

I don't think anyone here is debating the fact that for the majority of departments out there, this may not be PRACTICAL, but I think the thread was more intent on asking what people's opinions are on whether or not (in a perfect world) 2 sets of gear SHOULD be standard!

From a safety standpoint I say absolutely. Cut out a few parades, scale down on the bells and whistles when you buy apparatus or dont buy apparatus you really dont need. It can be done.

[Guest]

Just my two cents worth here:

Just about every department out there has a hard enough time with their budgets now. Equiping each firefighter with 2 sets of turnouts is an expense that can not be handled. Many smaller department have a hard enough time keeping one set per member. Not only do we need to look at the expense of 2 sets of gear per firefighter, but we also have to consider storage concerns. Where to keep the gear, at the station in mass storage, in the firefighters locker, or in his/her POV vehicle?

Now keeping extra sets in storage for back up is a good idea. But not an extra set per member. I would go along with a sampling of sizes to keep just in case members need it if their gear is wet, damaged, etc. Departments need to look at their past track records and see what the history is of calls and if any firefighters were not able to respond to calls because of lack of gear.

I understand that sometimes things happen and alot of members could get their gear contaminated. but while waiting for gear to get cleaned and returned to service, if many firefighters are off line, then begin calling back off duty crews or set up mutual aid on first alarms.

Yes we are firefighters, EMT's, Paramedics, Law Enforcement folks. And over the years we have served our communities with honor. But we still need to be financially responsable to the taxpayers that we serve. There are many other items we can use money for other then a 2nd set of gear for each member.

like I said, just my two cents worth.

[Bnechis 3,961]

However this does not necessarily warrant spare sets of gear for every member. Perhaps there should be a few communal sets of spare gear of varying sizes.

Every "heavy" winter fire we freeze 40-60 sets of gear that are then unsafe until they thaw and dry. We can not expect 25 to 30% of our department to be out of service for the next 24 hours. All of our gear is custom sized, this reduces injuries and we found the high end gear we use lasts much longer than the "standard" off the rack gear.

It's not fair to simply say that because turnout gear can get damaged, every member should have a second set. Should we have spare engines too? Ones that only get used if the regular engine is damaged at a fire? Essential equipment can always break, whether it's a firefighter's turnout gear, a Secret Service officer's sidearm, or even a teacher's blackboard. There can't be a spare for everything - that's why we take risks.

ISO requires a spare engine for every 1-7 you own and a spare ladder for every 1-7 you own. We have 2 spare engines for 5 engines and they are inservice (due to maintnenace) as much as the frontline rigs. We have 1 spare ladder for 3 inservice and often that is not enough. 80% of the time we have a spare inservice (and we have a modern and well maintained fleet).

If you advocate buying spare gear, you have to ask for often and for how long the regular gear is put out of service and how much it would cost to buy spare gear. For instance, it makes sense for a skydiver to have a spare parachute because it's relatively cheap and simple to have a spare chute and at the same time, a failed chute isn't all that uncommon and the results of it are virtually guaranteed death.

How often do we have thunderstorms? If your gear is soaked it can not be used, unless you want to be boiled like a lobster. unless you do not go in on fires, then I guess if you do not care for the comfort of your people, then what the hell.

Need I mention the economy too? When I say there are better ways to spend that money, I'm not talking within firefighting operations. I'm talking about all of government spending. Buy just a few sets of gear and you've already laid off a secretary. Buy 10 sets and you can say goodbye to a teacher. You've got to think about it like that when deciding just exactly how important equipment is, including spare gear.

So by your logic, we should get rid of the FD, then we can hire extra secretaries and teachers. BTW if your in NYS and not in the big 4 cities then the school money does not come from municipal government. so if you buy the gear, it does not change the school budget, if you do not buy the gear it does not change the school budget.

Does your dept. spend $$$ on dress uniforms and parades? How important is that?

Note: as I've pointed out the law requires you provide adequate and safe gear, but does not require all the other bells and whistles.

At the same time, even though something like an SCBA costs thousands of dollars, it is absolutely essential to firefighting and must always be purchased, even if that secretary or teacher must be laid off.

You really need to learn how governments budget. If my dept. buys millions of $$4 worth of anything, it is because we budgeted for it and the sity agreed. The School District, does not care what we spend or don't because they will do what every they want. In fact, 30 years ago our municipal budget was 25%, County 25% & school 50%. The city has held back, even the county has, and now we see the school district has just filled in the difference. As we have no control or impact on them.

[xfirefighter484x 234]

From a safety standpoint I say absolutely. Cut out a few parades, scale down on the bells and whistles when you buy apparatus or dont buy apparatus you really dont need. It can be done.

I agree with you 100%!!!! Maybe not for all departments, but for a some, yea, you are correct.

[fyrlt17 13]

Don't Forget NFPA 1851 2008

Not to confuse the Issue

Texas Turnout

Aug 1, 2008 12:00 PM

By Carrie Cleaveland

For seven years, Texas fire departments have been required to comply with NFPA 1851, Selection, Care and Maintenance of Protective Ensembles for Structural Firefighting and Proximity Firefighting. On June 24, the 2008 edition went into effect, bringing with it more rigorous testing requirements and for many departments, more cost.

The first edition of NFPA 1851 was released in 2001. It covers eight sections: records, protecting personnel from contamination, selection, inspection, cleaning and decontamination, repair, storage and retirement, disposition and special incident procedures. A state bill adopted the initial regulations of NFPA 1851 in 2001. Since then, the Texas Commission on Fire Protection has conducted routine inspections of fire departments to ensure compliance.

The commission has six officers throughout the state inspecting departments every two years. Inspectors ensure the departments have standard operating procedures in place to keep gear in good working condition and check records for any outside testing and repairs that need to be done. Departments themselves are primarily responsible for routinely inspecting their personal protective equipment, making repairs, and retiring worn or out-of-date turnout gear.

The 2008 edition of NFPA 1851, however, requires more rigorous tests that cannot be done in-house without training from the manufacturer, and according to Texas Fire Commission Compliance Program Manager Miles Skipper, this could cause headaches for fire departments across the state.

The new tests are:

Light test

A light is held inside the clothing to show either places in the thermal barrier where the material bunches up or is thinned. The light is sized to fit in the sleeve of a coat, should not touch the liner and should not produce heat damage to the liner. The test is performed annually.

Puddle test

The liner is placed over a 5-gallon bucket, with specific, high-wear areas to be tested. An alcohol/water mixture is poured over the liner to indicate degree of wear. This is performed in years one and two. This was recommended in the previous edition of NFPA 1851, but not required.

Pressure test

This is a water-penetration barrier evaluation requiring special equipment to test specific areas of the garment. It is performed at year three and every year after. Skinner says that this test has been problematic for some departments. “We're getting reports of a lot of protective clothing failing the pressure test,” he says, “even new stuff. That's a manufacturing problem.”

Another problem facing departments is the 2008 edition's mandatory 10-year retirement rule for structure gear. “That caused quite a stir,” says Skinner. “A lot of departments have reserve gear in case of emergency, if a firefighter's gear was torn or needed to be repaired. In the meantime, they would bring out this old gear, some of which was over 10 years old. By the commission adopting NFPA 1851 in total, that required those departments to get rid of it.”

NFPA 1851 also mandates that the outer shell of aircraft firefighter gear must be retired after five years, the liner after 10. Retired structure gear still can be used for non-live-fire training.

This likely will affect a department's bottom line when it comes to rotating PPE, in keeping the clothing up to NFPA 1851's rigorous expectations. According to the commission, the average cost for a verified independent service provider to re-stitch seams is 50 cents per inch — that may or may not be included in the cost for cleaning and inspection, which is approximately $30 to $35 per piece. The commission suggests that specifying that the thermal and vapor barriers attach to each other in way that would allow inspection without removing stitches could help keep costs down.

It is important to consider the cost of purchasing and installing proper cleaning equipment against that of contracting out those services or repairing and replacing gear if improper equipment is used. The initial costs might be high, but departments doing proper in-house cleaning and inspection will save money overall. For small departments with smaller budgets, the commission recommends sharing the costs with several nearby small departments and keeping the equipment in a central location.

Skinner says that the commission is granting fire departments extra time to work any necessary changes into their budgets.

“Some departments already have five- to seven-year rotation plans, so it will be a lesser impact on them,” he says. “But there will be budget increases. Any time you talk about safety issues, it's tempered with what you can afford. Most people don't drive the safest car on the road; they drive what they can afford with the minimum safety features built in. As you can afford it, you move up and drive a safer car. The same is true with protective clothing. We mandate fire departments do at least the minimum in Texas to meet safety standards.”

One Texas fire department meeting more than the minimum safety standard is the McKinney Fire Department. Neil Howard, division chief of administration, has been working to keep PPE in his department at high safety levels for the last eight to 10 years. McKinney is a moderately affluent suburb of Dallas.

“Around that time, there were a lot of news reports about firefighters getting burned and there was a big push to better maintain gear and protect firefighters,” he says. “We took that as a warning to stay ahead of the curve.”

Howard agrees with Skinner: a department has to start small. “You have to see what kind of cost is involved in doing your maintenance,” Howard says. “If you have a lot of old gear, it will be more cost-effective to replace your gear than to have it tested and repaired. If you have a small department with, say, 60 members, 20 sets of gear is going to be hard to start off with financially. You might have to start out with five or 10 and build yourself up. You might do five every year on a five-year replacement. Five sets of gear will run you $5,000 to $6,000, and even a small department should be able to budget that to put toward gear. It might take five years to get to everyone in the department, but it still keeps them in compliance and it's a small piece of the pie. Take it in small steps. It's like life; we don't always get to live in the big house or drive the fancy cars when we're young, you have to wait till later in life to afford them. You have to crawl before you walk.”

Because maintenance and inspection of gear has been a high priority for the McKinney Fire Department, the revisions to NFPA 1851 haven't affected the department too drastically. While it will need to perform the three new mandatory tests, it currently is on a three-year gear rotation plan, which has been a four-year process to complete. “This is the first year where a third of the department will have two sets of gear,” Howard says. “The second set is less than six years old. When we replace gear at the three-year mark, the old gear goes into reserve.”

Howard credits then-president of Safety Solutions Jim Evans with helping the department beef up its inspection and maintenance procedures. Two and half years ago, Evans instigated a lot of the changes that are in practice today. “We learned a lot about cleaning properly,” Howard says, “like not hot-air drying the material and trying to keep gear out of the sun.” Five of the department's seven stations have extractors and RAM air dryers. Two of the stations have enclosed storage rooms to keep bunker gear out of direct ultraviolet light.

McKinney also has a single employee who inspects and cleans all bunker gear. He reports back to Howard on whose gear needs to be retired and how many sets need to be ordered each year. “You have to have somebody assigned,” Howard says. It has to be a project that someone will take on and treat as theirs.”

McKinney's policy requires captains to inspect gear every month, contacting the bunker gear inspector if any problems are detected. The gear inspector will check it over, clean it in-house if possible, and send it out to Safety Solutions for repairs if significant damage is reported.

As will most departments, budgets still are a primary issue for McKinney. “We've had limited budgets over the years,” Howard says, “but we started out small, and as the department grows, we add new sets of gear.”

[Beekman 5]

Could you imagine OFPC doing inspections of Fire Departments every two years? You can't get some departments to wear their first set of gear...don't even bother buying a second set.

[antiquefirelt 994]

It's definitely nice having two sets. We found the only way to accomplish this was for member's who receive new gear to keep their old set, short of any major damage. We also have a quartermasters locker with enough gear for 50% of the FD. If on duty members or call members need gear cleaned, they can get a full set of dry fairly well fitted gear. This is not optimal, but is heading that way.

I agree this is good use of money for those who are using the gear regularly, but understand the skepticism in slower FD's. The problem is who defines active enough when choosing who gets what? If you are doing this for a "safety" reason, then you basically are disregarding the safety of those not "chosen", which could prove very costly.

Please, don't toss out NFPA standards as the answer, as picking and choosing based on what you want vs. what you really need (adequate staffing)waters the whole thing down.

[38ff 250]

SHOULD 2 sets be standard, yes. Can most volly depts (like mine) pay for it, probably, but I feel the $ for a 2nd set can be better spent on other things we really need. My dept issues a set that stays in the station for your "everyday" set of gear. Should that become contaminated, ripped or whatever, we have a room that has of our extra gear, and you go see an officer, and get issued a 2nd set until your gear is dry/cleaned in our turnout gear washing machine, or fixed.. We send out any gear that needs repairs when it needs to be done.. This is sort of a "second set" in my mind. When your everyday set comes back from being fixed or drys out, you hand in the second set. This works well from both an operational and financial standpoint.