Most firefighters have a love-hate relationship with their personal protective ensembles. They love the turnouts' insulating effects but hate how hot the darn things are in the summer time. They love all the pockets, clips, hangers and patches but curse the manufacturers for making such heavy garments. They love the look of the old traditional-style helmets but secretly have to admit they aren't so comfortable after wearing them for three straight hours. Let's not forget the gloves; firefighters can hold a blazing nugget of coal in their hands and never feel the heat, but don't ask them to tie a knot with H-inch rope.

The members of NFPA 1971, Protective Ensemble for Structural Firefighting, have heard it all. The committee feels your pain, as one-third of its members are uniformed firefighters and officers. So why can't the committee spec out that “perfect” ensemble that meets everyone's needs, everybody can afford and never wears out? Let's look at the challenges facing this group in the quest to deliver the “perfect ensemble for structural firefighting.”

Research and development

The latest version of NFPA 1971 was published in 2000. All garments must be labeled as complying with the 2000 edition, and no garments can be manufactured or even labeled to the old standard. In essence, the old edition doesn't exist anymore. Think about that for a moment. Think of it as raising the performance bar every five years — and manufacturers have to make the jump. To make sure everyone does so cleanly, third-party certification is there to make sure all PPE elements manufactured to the new edition really do meet the revised standard.

NFPA 1971 includes helmets, hoods, coats, pants, coveralls, boots and gloves. Prior to the 1997 edition of NFPA 1971, each element of the ensemble was addressed by a separate standard. Each committee wrestled with many of the same protective-clothing issues, but often came to varying conclusions as to acceptable levels of protection. A combined standard ensured consistency in expectation, challenges and performance.

Many firefighters are wearing late-1990s or early-2000 ensembles. Some elements like helmets can last 10 years or more. Gloves, it appears, are good for a year or less, and boots about two years. Coats and trousers have an expected life of about five years, based on the national average. So that means your department is going to be in the market for new PPE. What is on the front burner of the 1971 committee that might affect garments built to the upcoming edition?

When this revision cycle began, the technical committee spent quite a lot of time brainstorming for fire service PPE needs that remained unresolved, challenges PPE and firefighters faced, safety concerns raised during the last edition, and the research and testing tools needed to adequately measure PPE performance in the face of current challenges and future expectations. The committee also reviewed reports from the NFPA, IAFF, NFIRS and OSHA. These reports offered information on mechanisms of firefighter injuries, hazardous environments, PPE use during an injury event and PPE failures in injuries, but lacked the details needed for the committee's purpose. We were looking for the “microscopic” when the reports revealed only naked-eye observations.

The committee surveyed fire departments of varying sizes across the country on an assortment of PPE issues. Unfortunately, this was the least useful source of information. Too often data collection is incomplete and inaccurate. The quality of local documentation is very dependent on the knowledge of the investigator or safety officer. Also, there often is a reluctance to reveal the facts of the case if human error played a part.

Hopefully, the PPE record-keeping recommended in the companion document NFPA 1851, Selection, Care and Maintenance of Structural Firefighting Protective Ensembles, will encourage departments to improve record-keeping efforts, not only for research and analysis but also for department benefit when it comes time to review needs and develop specifications for new PPE.

Survey says

The 1971 committee and resource group members were polled for their opinions on the major issues with the personal protective ensemble and their hopes for the next cycle. The resource group is made up of the more than 50 attendees at each 1971 meeting who have a vested interest in committee business but don't have a committee seat. These non-members voluntarily take on indispensable roles in research and actively participate in task groups. Their input and expertise is invaluable to the development of the final outcome of the committee.

The brainstorming efforts represent those issues that the committee felt were important to the advancement of protection in the personal protective ensemble addressed within the NFPA 1971 standard:

1. Helmets should have reduced weight, improved fit and sizing, face and eye protection, helmet/hood SCBA facepiece interfaces, integrated communications, accountability systems, environment indicators, and better balance and retention.

2. Hoods should look for improved thermal protection performance, included moisture barrier, improved durability, possible inclusion of mesh areas for cooling, better fit and easier donning.

3. Gloves should provide improved dexterity, reduced bulk, improved sizing and fit, better compressive heat resistance in the palms, stronger interface area with garments at wrist, improved electrical resistance, and improved donning and doffing.

4. Footwear should offer reduced weight, improve ankle support, better fit, greater durability especially in toe caps and tread, improved traction, and address interface issues with garment leg bottom.

5. Garments should offer increased overall durability, improved heat release and moisture resistance, better fit and comfort, reduced overall weight, improved interface areas, and improved correlation between real-use environment and test environment. Manufacturers also should consider replaceable components, built-in temperature sensors, integrated harness systems, and multi-use or modular systems, and they should revisit day- and night-time visibility/trim issues.

6. Global issues should consider continuing research on whole garment/mannequin testing, addressing “after-market” accessories, educating end users, integrating electronics and confronting interface issues with non-NFPA 1971 equipment such as SCBA and rope rescue harnesses.

It's an ambitious list, to say the least, and it doesn't take a rocket scientist to quickly see the contradictions within each list and with current trends. Take the resurgence in the demand for traditional helmets for example. One of the committee's charges is to reduce helmet weight and improve fit and balance. The optimum solution is something akin to the European-style helmet, which has proved most unpopular in the United States. However, that style delivers on some of the most sought-after attributes of a comfortable, protective helmet. The committee spent quite a lot of time trying to find that compromise, honoring styles deeply rooted in tradition while moving forward in protection, safety and durability.

Gloves, helmets and boots pose some of the greatest challenges to the committee. They are small elements, but they are so critical to task performance that they garner much conversation and criticism. Gloves are a good case. For years the committee has struggled with the need for exceptional thermal insulation with the need for excellent dexterity. Throw in the need to keep hands dry and protected from liquid-borne pathogens and there are some serious needs with conflicting solutions. Insulation from heat requires mass — a direct conflict with dexterity, which calls for thin and lightweight materials. An additional layer to protect from liquid penetration adds even more bulk. To top it all off, the manufacturer is trying to build all these requirements and address end-user needs in a design to surround wrist, palm, and every finger and thumb.

Built firefighter tough

Once the PPE issue lists were formed and prioritized, the committee and resource group broke out into task groups to respond to each list, review priorities, initiate necessary research and return recommendations to the full committee. The groups focused on those issues where they were reasonably confident that they could make substantive improvements with the available time and technology.

A garment task group was formed of those committee specialists whose primary expertise is in garments. One of their biggest challenges this year is to continue work on the stored-energy issue. Stored energy is the heat that builds up within the layers of your garment that is suddenly released when you compress the composite. If you've sat for a long period of time burn building without moving, then bent your arm, pulling the material across your upper arm, you know what we're talking about. The task group is exploring ways to protect firefighters from that heat before it reaches the point of creating burns.

In addition, the garment group continues working on the total heat loss test and looking for ways to improve the ability of all garment composites to allow body heat to dissipate outward, also called evaporative heat transfer. The better a composite facilitates heat movement away from the body, the more comfortable the wearer will feel and the lower the core temperature will remain. The firefighter can work longer and harder without serious physiological effects and recover more efficiently physically between calls.

Many of the garment task group members cross over into the durability task group, a team whose charge is to identify and quantify those factors that degrade protective clothing and find test methods to evaluate a material's ability to withstand those destructive challenges. Some of these challenges include light; laundry detergents with excessive pH values; common chemicals such as diesel fuel and fumes; and mechanical issues such as abrasion, tearing, rubbing and delamination. Many of the mechanical and chemical challenges already are addressed in the 1971 standard. The pH of the laundering process is discussed in NFPA 1851 as an important way for the end user to protect the fabrics while still removing harmful soiling.

In the upcoming edition of 1971, the committee is dedicated to addressing the degradation caused by exposure to light. The durability task group is concerned with all layers of a garment, as each layer provides a unique aspect of protection. The composite is just that, a combined synergy of fabrics that in total provides an expected level of protection to the end user.

Task groups for helmets, boots, gloves and hoods are working on their respective elements. An additional task group has been created to look at thermal impacts, and a final group has been established to review all test methods for accuracy and consistency. The thermal task group is looking at applicability of a full mannequin test apparatus to evaluate the overall thermal protective qualities of the entire ensemble. This would be the first significant whole garment test to incorporate the potential effects of garment design in performance evaluation.

Only you make it perfect

It's the 1971 committee's job to decide the minimum requirements for PPE for the structural fire and auto accident environments. What it isn't intended to do is provide departments with specifications for the “perfect ensemble.” That is your choice. Everything you buy has pros and cons. The protective clothing ensemble is a balancing act of thermal protection and weight, technology and cost, comfort and style. Just remember that no mater what it's made of, all protective clothing has limitations.

Which leads to the number-one concern during brainstorming and issues review: education. Think about it for a moment and it makes perfect sense. The more you, as a chief and decision-maker, know about protective clothing, the better decisions you can make at purchasing time. The more you understand about the limitations of protective ensemble, the better your decisions on the fireground will be.

You have an unprecedented number of choices in PPE out there. Make the most if it. Those choices are there for you — the consumer and customer. Don't hang your hat on one feature. Every element is a delicate balance of attributes, and you must take a holistic view. Find the products that suit your department and the type of incidents you respond to, as well as your purchasing power and your overall needs.

This article started out leaning toward the responsibility invested in the NFPA 1971 committee to address the PPE needs of the fire service. But that's not where the responsibility and power reside. We're talking about the power of choice, educated choice. Educate yourselves and your purchasing agents. Question and challenge the salespeople. Above all, use the most important element in your PPE arsenal — your brain.

We can't specify anything as adaptive, resourceful or resilient as your ability to think. It's your first and best resource when you're out there at work. Use it, and your PPE will help your crews home at the end of the shift. That is our greatest gift to the fire service and why we work so hard to make NFPA 1971 the gold standard of personal protective equipment for the fire service around the world.

---

Donna Brehm has been a member of the NFPA 1971 committee since 1988 and she currently is the chair of the Durability Task Group. Brehm has been with the Virginia Beach (Va.) Fire Department since 1977 and a battalion chief since 1986. She has a bachelor's degree in biology from Old Dominion and a master's degree in public administration from Golden Gate University.