Mutual Aid

NFPA releases new hose standard

 

The NFPA recently revised its standard on fire hose. The newest edition requires that hose manufactured before July 1987 be removed from service. This makes sense given all the changes in materials and technology over the past 25 years. ut that’s just one of many significant changes to the standard, first created in 1936 and called NFPA 198, Care of Fire Hose.

The 2013 standard, NFPA 1962, Care, Use, Inspection, Service Testing, and Replacement of Fire Hose, Couplings, Nozzles, and Fire Hose Appliances, includes for the first time the word "replacement" in the title and now covers formal replacement of hose and couplings.

“Too often departments will get a new pumper and take the 20-year-old hose off their old rig and put it in on the new one,” said Jim Glatts, a member of the NFPA committee on fire hose. “Hose has changed significantly in that time with higher pressures and better products.”

According to Glatts, the purpose of NFPA 1962 is to provide a reasonable level of safety for users of fire hose and a reasonable degree of assurance that the hose, coupling assemblies, appliances and nozzles will perform as designed. This applies to the care of all types of fire hose, coupling assemblies, appliances and nozzles while in service, in use and after use, including inspecting and service testing.

Other significant updates include:

  • Fire hose users and the authority having jurisdiction shall establish a replacement schedule for their fire hose, which takes into consideration the use, age and testing results.
  • Attack fire hose shall be service tested to a minimum of 300 psi. Supply fire hose shall be service tested to a minimum of 200 psi. Testing can be done on a fire department’s own fire apparatus.
  • All non-threaded hose connections shall be provided with locks to ensure against unintentional disconnection.

The standard also covers:

  • Nozzle service-testing. This should be done at least as frequently as the hose to which it is attached.
  • System tests. Each pre-connected line or any attack line used for interior firefighting operations on a fire apparatus, together with the nozzle or hose connected appliance it supplies, shall be flow tested as a system at least annually.

The 2013 edition of NFPA 1962 also provides guidelines to consider when purchasing new hose in its Annex B. It includes a chart that lists quality and characteristics needed for fire hose, with items ranging from abrasion resistance to friction loss to weight. It encourages end users to rank items in importance when considering new hose.

Fire hose is the most important and relied-upon tool a firefighter carries. NFPA 1962 updates will ensure it’s the right tool for the job.

Discuss this Blog Entry 19

Anonymous (not verified)
on Feb 21, 2013

Mr.Glatt works for fire one a hose testing company which tested our hose the hose passed the hose test but it was made before 1987 and we small volunteer companies can no longer afford hose testing company people to come up with standards that make us replace something there is nothing wrong with everyone is complaining about high taxes it men like Mr Glatt That make us keep spending and wasting taxpayers dollars

Anonymous (not verified)
on Feb 26, 2013

I've got hose made in 1976 that passes every year no problem, even at the pressures specified for new hose in the standard. Every year I end up replacing several sections of hose that are less than 3 years old, with barely any use on it. Seems like a waste to take pre-1987 hose out of service when it holds up better than the new stuff.

Kerry D. Jett, Chief (not verified)
on Feb 26, 2013

I agree as a small budget volunteer dept what makes them think we have the $$ to replace hose even it has past the test and had minimal use since the last test, isn't that why we test to ensure that they do work and not fail, I understand that even after testing they may still fail. I have hose that was given to us dated 1964 and it past our outside test service test this year. I had hose that was purchased in the last 10 years and it failed this past test. So what do we do AFG is drying up, State funding is tight, local $$ are tight or not availible. I do all that I can to ensure my dept is safe and able to serve our community and will replace hose and or other equipment as needed and try to do this with the $$ I have. I know that with my comments I will probably get some negitive remarks however as chiefs we are use to this.

Anonymous (not verified)
on Feb 27, 2013

You can afford to pay a company to do your hose testing but can't afford new hose? Sounds like your priorities are backwards to me

Anonymous (not verified)
on Feb 22, 2013

As a Rep for Hose and Nozzles i see the issues all the time where department think they are getting atleast 95 gpm out of a handline and when we put the discharge on a flow meter we see number sometime as low as 75 gpm. The addition to the standard is a great inprovement to the Fire Sevrvice.

Anonymous (not verified)
on Feb 26, 2013

Another unfunded mandate!

Daviwalker
on Feb 26, 2013

What is the best procedure to identify the MFG. date of the hoses in question when all the writing has worn away?

Anonymous (not verified)
on Feb 26, 2013

Outstanding change.

bhhowie
on Feb 26, 2013

Well, now what do we do? We can't do a mortgage, pay a truck payment, insurances costs.....
I guess we will ignore this one too.
to bad NFPA can't help us be safe without spending money we do not have.
Something has to give.

Anonymous (not verified)
on Feb 27, 2013

If it fails annual hose testing, repair it, if it fails again then junk it. NFPA and its commercial partners just can`t wait until they bankrupt every department that doesn`t have money running out of its ears, so then everyone can go to tax base because the little outfits went broke. Spend that tax money.

Chris F. Severt (not verified)
on Feb 27, 2013

Just another example of the NFPA standards board dictating when we need to spend money on thier own companies products. Everyone knows the board is made up of either manufacturers or firefighters being paid by the companies. Sounds a lot like our current Federal Government. Maybe we should let individual fire departments decide if their hose needs replacing. If it is tested and passes then why replace it. I sure am glad the NFPA board does not dictate when the members of a fire department are no longer of any use and need to be replaced. Wait maybe that is next.

Anonymous (not verified)
on Feb 27, 2013

The industry has gone too far with regulating age requirements for hose. If hose is annually tested and passes the standard, what is the difference. Most of this country is served by volunteer fire companies with limited budgets. The standard was common sense and safe as it was and now is not any improvement other than spending money based on age not performance.

Anonymous (not verified)
on Feb 27, 2013

Once again the manufacturers practice self serving under the guise of safety. Detioriation of hose is based on numerous factors including frequency of use, storage, exposure to chemicals, maintenance etc. The serivce pressure test for large diameter hose was reduced to 200 psi a number of years ago even though there are areas where static pressure exceeds that amount. I would propose that storz couplings be machined to function without locks...the locks were added because they could not machine them properly...some fall apart upon twisting while others require spanners and alot of muscle. All NFPA standards should have an evaluation section to see if the changes actually favorably impact safety.

Anonymous (not verified)
on Feb 27, 2013

NFPA is taking one more step to make small FD's non-compliant. Small Town America has a LOT of FD's working just fine with older hose, older bunker gear, etc., but keeps writing standards requiring replacement of perfectly serviceable stuff. The manufacturers must love it! Sure, we'd all love to have new gear and new hose and $2000 physicals before someone can start training and etc., but it's not possible in the real world a lot of us live in. So it just makes us that much more non-compliant. Fine for big departments trying to justify a budget request, but impossible for the small departments that protect the majority of the US (by land area, not by population).

Anonymous (not verified)
on Feb 27, 2013

We are also a small rural fire department with several pieces of pre 1987 hose that is in excellent condition and passes all the testing. My only concern is that hose testing is basically a static test wereas actual use is very dynamic and failure of older hoses may be caused by the rapid opening and closing of a nozzle. We implemented a phase-out/replacement policy several years ago and by replacing a few lengths per year have replaced just about all the "old" hose. The old hose is still used during low pressure training senarios and this saves the new hose from being dragged through the dirt and mud.

Anonymous (not verified)
on Feb 27, 2013

I am confused. If the NFPA testing standard is adhered to and the the hose passes then how can it be unsafe? It isn't new, but it is still safe to use as the test indicates. I can understand the need to improve flow characteristics through new materials, but that should be a local choice and not made by hacks like Glatts who only want to sell more services or hose. The NFPA needs to get rid of the industry people who sit on their technical committees, if they are truly concerned about firefighter safety. The industry types are there to ensure that planned obsolescence is built into each standard. That way they can sell more, regardless of whether departments take care of their equipment or not. This whole process it ridiculous and the NFPA should be ashamed of itself.

Anonymous (not verified)
on Mar 4, 2013

We had the same opinion-if it passes test then it's fine. Until we had a 30 year old length of 2.5 inch blow in the street during a fire. It passed test 3 months before, as did about 30 other lengths that were 20-30 years old. The stuff can't last forever, and people need to understand that fire service isn't free.

Anonymous (not verified)
on Feb 28, 2013

Does anyone writing these standards have to deal with a budget? In the last 10 years changes in nfpa standards have doubled the cost of scba, added 1/3 to the cost of apparatus. Now they want hose replaced even if it passes the annual test.

AXE (not verified)
on Mar 14, 2013

We dont need any more BIG Brother Idea"s We are still paying for our 800 MHZ radio Usage Fee's to our sherriff's Dept . We had a better Radio system (VHF) before we could talk directly to our police dept's , ambulance crews and neighboring fire dept's . with out a patch . We have many choices buying enough radio's to talk to dispatch , or do we buy enough radio's to make it safe for the fire ground ? Now we have the OLDER BROTHER who sells HOSE saying the we Need More Hose . The Quality is not there in the new hose . I think we need to do more research before we make more mandates and don't provide funding . AXE .

Please or Register to post comments.

What's Mutual Aid?

Mutual Aid is a blog of news and views from FIRE CHIEF staff and industry experts -- a virtual conversation about the issues important to you.

Contributors

Janet Wilmoth

Janet Wilmoth grew up in a family of firefighters in a Chicago suburb. She first worked for FIRE CHIEF magazine in 1986 as an associate editor and also served as FIRE CHIEF's international...

Mary Rose Roberts

Mary Rose Roberts is a senior editor at Penton Media, with a focus on wireless technology, public safety and fire leadership for FIRE CHIEF, Urgent Communications and Wildfire magazines. She also...
Blog Archive