As the release date of a new NFPA standard approaches, we NFPA standards committee members are filled with a moment-of-truth type of trepidation. We look back and take stock of what we did or didn't accomplish. We search for the right words to define where we stand today and plant some mental seeds for where we want to go in the future. But it's all about moving forward and embracing the changes affecting our industry. And it's not always easy, cheap or popular.

Today's fire service is driven to improve every aspect of the industry as quickly as possible. We want to react so quickly to every actual and potential firefighter injury or death to save the remainder of the corps from the same fate that it puts tremendous pressure on NFPA committees to maximize their efforts during each five-year revision cycle. Just think what has occurred since the last NFPA 1971, Protective Ensembles for Structural Fire Fighting, was published in 2000. There were the events of Sept. 11, 2001. The danger of pandemic flu looms ever larger. We prepare our incident command and local/regional emergency operations centers to deal with WMD events. The National Fire Fighter Near-Miss Reporting System Web site delivers “in your face” accounts of the real-world hazards that can kill or seriously injure firefighters. And since 9/11 more than 500 brothers and sisters have been lost to myriad incidents while on duty.

It's a scary world out there, and many of you expect your protective clothing and equipment to save you from it — or at least give you a fighting chance to escape.

Such has been the climate for the NFPA 1971 committee charged with revising the standard. It should not take a lot of imagination to envision the discussions that took place after 9/11. We asked ourselves, “How can we protect our firefighters from the next event?” The challenge was to figure out what the next “event” might be and what weapon might be chosen. We were literally looking at how to protect the first line of defense for most of the nation.

The economics of the issues weren't lost on us. We realized most departments couldn't afford to purchase, much less find the space to carry, five different types of ensembles to deal with five different types of incidents. Think about it. The average firefighter responds to structural fires, wildland-urban interface fires, hazmat calls, emergency medical calls, technical-rescue calls and a host of miscellaneous incidents. And what are we wearing for a majority of these calls? The workhorse NFPA 1971 structural firefighting ensembles. This leads me to the first of the changes to NFPA 1971, 2007 edition.

In response to the events of 9/11, substantial federal funding was dedicated to developing personal protective strategies to withstand exposure to a CBRN-type event. It was also evident that the vast majority of America's firefighters had only their structural ensemble available for protection on a regular basis. Granted, some departments have a variety of hazmat suits or disposable protection from body fluid-borne pathogens. But every firefighter has his or her turnout gear. So, the logical place to focus was on the structural ensemble.

To that end, NFPA 1971 now includes optional requirements for protection against limited CBRN terrorism agents (specified chemicals, biological agents and radiological particulates) that could be released as a result of a terrorist attack. These requirements are in addition to all the design and performance requirements for standard structural ensemble elements, so there is no compromise in protection from the thermal and mechanical hazards we face on a daily basis. This was an extremely important position for the committee. No one was willing to sacrifice the central purpose of the 1971 document, as all agreed that we continue to lose firefighters in everyday structural fires. We must never lose sight that our purpose is to find the optimal level of protection that will allow firefighters to do their work in the safest manner possible.

Major changes

The most important issue surrounding these new optional requirements for CBRN protection is that it's ensemble-based. A department can't specify optional CBRN coats and trousers and not provide CBRN SCBA, gloves, hoods, boots and helmets. Any ensemble labeled as a CBRN protective ensemble complaint with NFPA 1971, 2007 edition, will specifically identify the additional elements that must be worn to meet the optional design and performance requirements of NFPA 1971.

This is no small issue for most departments, even with the availability of funding via grants such as those of the Assistance to Firefighters Grant program. Departments must be made aware that if they choose to follow the optional CBRN protection path that it's an all-or-none situation. The up-front costs will be substantial, and the element replacement options will be limited. End-users also should be cautioned that this optional requirement isn't intended to replace appropriate hazmat ensembles.

The intent of this optional CBRN protection is to afford firefighters an opportunity to conduct initial rescue and evacuate safely from an environment that they may or may not know is a CBRN event. Once the scene is identified as a true CBRN incident, emergency service personnel should use more appropriate, long-duration CBRN protective ensembles meeting the requirements of NFPA 1994.

A second major change to the NFPA 1971 document is the merger of NFPA 1976, Protective Ensemble for Proximity Fire Fighting. There were such similarities in the protective elements used by both disciplines that the decision was made to merge the two documents and maximize the industry expertise needed to address the technical and operational issues of both ensembles. The full title of the standard is now NFPA 1971, Protective Ensembles for Structural Fire Fighting and Proximity Fire Fighting.

Total heat loss, an assessment of how well the basic multi-layer structural composite of outer shell, thermal liner and moisture barrier allows heat and moisture to transfer away from the wearer, has been increased from 130 to 205 w/m2. Heat stress is one of the major physiological stressors for our occupation. The committee will continue to set improved total heat loss standards for ensembles with each revision cycle to improve garment breathability. The increments of improvement may seem small, but they must be done in concert with maintaining necessary levels of thermal protection, body fluid-borne pathogen protection and durability. The ability of protective garment materials to meet these demands is constantly challenged and over time has resulted in the development of some pretty amazing materials for the fire service.

A variety of smaller changes have been made within the latest revision to NFPA 1971. The size range extremes of XXS and XXL have been added as required sizes for protective gloves. Goggles no longer have to be attached to the helmet but must continue to meet performance requirements designed to ensure safety, durability and visibility under structural firefighting conditions. There has been an increase in the minimum boot height and a decrease in minimum collar height.

The conductive and compressive heat-resistance test performance requirement has been almost doubled. This equates to a higher level of heat transfer resistance in the knee and shoulder areas, which experience continual compression during incident operations.

Trim and other visibility markings must meet more stringent performance requirements aimed at ensuring a higher degree of visibility and durability. The requirement for fluorescence has been better stated, which may effect the availability of some products you have been used to specifying on your garments. Better test methods to evaluate trim performance have brought a much higher level of consistency in product performance across the board. Remember, the trim on structural protective clothing isn't intended to meet the requirements of ANSI 107. It's intended for visibility at non-highway incident scenes where there's little risk from high-speed vehicular traffic. Trim assists incident commanders and fellow firefighters in locating each other in reduced visibility conditions, augmenting accountability systems and providing enhanced incident scene safety.

Certification of PPE

The certification chapter of NFPA 1971 has been extensively reworked since the last edition of the standard. Certification organization testing laboratories must be accredited, meaning they meet a set of “best practice” standards as defined by the International Organization for Standardization. The benefit to the fire service lies in the consistency this process brings to product testing and in the increased confidence that substandard laboratories won't be able to certify products that truly do not meet the intended performance requirements. Similar products produced by different manufacturers will be evaluated based on the same standards using similar processes, keeping the playing field level and improving the credibility of the entire certification process for end-users.

Of significant importance to the fire service is a highly enhanced section called the Manufacturers' Safety Alert and Product Recall System. We realized that there can be an important product safety gap once products were out in the field. The sales and distribution layers between manufacturer and end-user are often complicated and can stifle appropriate notification of product concerns back to the manufacturer; the same is true for product notices from the manufacturer to the end-user.

This new section requires manufacturers to establish written safety alert and recall systems, and it creates clear links between manufacturer, product certification organization and the end-users. For the future, the Technical Correlating Committee (the project coordinators for the fire service protective clothing and equipment standards) is exploring ways to use Internet-based fire service information clearing-houses such as the Responder Knowledge Base to supplement the distribution of safety alert and recall information to the fire service.

Enhancements to durability testing specifications have been incorporated in the 2007 edition of NFPA 1971, and the new edition introduces an assessment of component material for resistance to degradation caused by light. Often this concept is misconstrued as “ultra-violet degradation,” when in fact different materials react to unique wavelengths of light. During the committee's work, testing revealed that not all the wavelengths harmful to PPE materials are in the UV range. The enhanced durability test includes the use of a test apparatus that can subject materials to a range of light wavelengths that simulates natural, fluorescent and incandescent light sources that our PPE is subjected to most often in the station, in storage and at incident scenes.

Interestingly, we also learned that the energy absorbed by materials when exposed to light continues to affect the materials even after the light source has been removed. This valuable piece of information has been assimilated into the upcoming NFPA 1851, Selection, Care and Maintenance of Structural and Proximity Protective Ensembles. That document will include updated information on proper storage of PPE and add references to warehouse-type storage facilities and the need to keep gear from constant exposure to fluorescent or incandescent light.

Drag-rescue device

Finally, the most visible change between the 2000 and the 2007 editions of the standard: the drag-rescue device. The concept of a DRD was initially developed following a tragic circumstance involving the extreme difficulty rescuers had in trying to extricate a trapped firefighter from a structure and the firefighter's ultimate death.

The DRD is a simple system that allows rescuers to gain purchase on a downed firefighter; maximize leverage of those rescuers; and limit the potential for the downed firefighter to lose his or her coat, SCBA or any other torso-affixed item as rescuers grab onto any part of the victim's PPE to effect the rescue. The DRD concept gained popularity while the revision to NFPA 1971 document was still being prepared, and many manufacturers began offering a DRD as an option. In conjunction with good training programs on self- and peer rescue, as well as mayday training, a DRD can be an effective tool in the efficient extrication of a downed firefighter.

What makes the DRD such a unique change to the NFPA 1971 2007 edition is that is it a distinct, physical change to the garment. It's not subtle, like changes to the performance requirements for fabrics or the composition of fasteners or helmet thermoplastics to meet higher heat-resistance requirements. Departments should communicate with their members on this issue and decide how they will respond to the issue of the “haves” and “have nots.” First and foremost, the DRD is not a panacea. It is only one tool of potential use to assist in rescuing a downed firefighter.

An alternative to a DRD can be created with the simple use of small-diameter cording or webbing that can be carried in each firefighter's pocket. A department may want to consider retrofitting garments made to the 2000 edition of NFPA 1971 and add a DRD. It is a relatively simple procedure, especially as the DRD does not penetrate the moisture barrier.

This change in NFPA 1971 should be perceived as just that: a change for the better. It happens with every edition. And depending on the retirement schedules of your department, you quite often will have personnel in PPE crafted to meet the standards of different editions. There are few departments that can afford to make wholesale replacements every time a new NFPA standard hits the street.

After March 1, 2007, it will not be permissible for manufacturers to label any PPE as compliant with the 2000 edition of NFPA 1971. Once a manufacturer has achieved compliance with the 2007 edition of NFPA 1971, elements manufactured after that date will be labeled to the new standard edition. The bottom line is that departments should expect to conform their specifications to the 2007 edition of NFPA 1971, because most major manufacturers are already certified and producing 2007-compliant products.

The NFPA 1971 Committee is already looking forward. Technology waits for no one. We continue to evaluate the demands on today's firefighter and the protective elements worn for an incredibly wide variety of incidents. But never forget the most valuable piece of PPE is your brain — use it!

---

A 30-year veteran of the fire service, Donna Brehm is deputy chief of the Virginia Beach (Va.) Fire Department. She has served on the NFPA 1971 committee since 1988 and is currently chair of the NFPA 1999 committee. She has a bachelor's degree in biology from Old Dominion, a master's degree in public administration from Golden Gate University, and holds the Chief Fire Officer Designation.