401.00 PPE Risk Assessment.docx

STANDARD OPERATING PROCEDURES SECTION: 400.00 / Operational Procedures Guideline: 401.00 PPE Risk Assessment Effective Date: 10-01-2016 Revision Date: 1/2023 401.00-All Hazard PPE Risk Assessment 1. Scope  1.1 This document will serve as the DeSoto Fire Rescue PPE all hazard Risk Assessment (RA). Th...

STANDARD OPERATING PROCEDURES SECTION: 400.00 / Operational Procedures Guideline: 401.00 PPE Risk Assessment Effective Date: 10-01-2016 Revision Date: 1/2023 401.00-All Hazard PPE Risk Assessment 1. Scope  1.1 This document will serve as the DeSoto Fire Rescue PPE all hazard Risk Assessment (RA). The primary focus is to establish requirements for the design, performance, and testing of protective ensembles and ensemble elements that provide head, limb, hand, foot, torso, and interface protection for firefighters and other emergency service responders.   Evaluation of current structural firefighting operations is essential to determine overall risk and potential environmental hazards; by extension essential to the determination of agency-specific Personal Protective Equipment (PPE) requirements and liabilities.  (Reference NFPA 1971) Analysis of incidents involving structural firefighting operations should be considered when evaluating needed protection from the potential hazards associated with structural firefighting that the fire agency is responsible for protecting as defined in NFPA 1971. 2.     Purpose  2.1 The purpose of the RA is to provide the most suitable firefighting ensembles and ensemble elements for the Department’s firefighting personnel.   The RA assists the organization in evaluating the risks and hazards their emergency responders face.  Based on the identified risks and hazards and other agency-specific needs, each protective clothing element is evaluated to ensure it provides the emergency responders with the most effective protection from the identified risks and hazards.  This assessment will follow established guidelines for RA outlined in the following laws and standards: NFPA 1851, NFPA 1500, OSHA 1910.132.  Although these articles originate from different Professional and/or Legal entities, all require a “Risk Assessment” or “Hazard Assessment” to be completed. 3. Executive Summary 3.1 Paragraph 1.2.4 of NFPA 1971, Standard on Protective Ensembles for Structural Fire Fighting and Proximity Fire Fighting (Most current edition) states that this standard shall not be utilized as a detailed manufacturing or purchasing specification but shall be permitted to be referenced in purchase specifications as the minimum requirements. 4. Abstract 4.1 PPE has evolved over the years to provide better protection from injury and illness resulting from exposure to hazards. DeSoto Fire Rescue provides PPE to protect firefighters from potential hazards they may encounter while performing their work. There are three levels of protection serving firefighters in the field: – Administrative Controls – Engineering Controls – PPE 4.2 Administrative Controls are policies and procedures that teach and direct Individuals how to recognize and prevent workplace exposures, injuries, and illnesses.  4.3 Engineering Controls are used to remove hazard(s) from the workplace. Such controls include shutting off the utilities at a structural fire, and establishing physical barriers such as seat belts or Lock out/Tag out procedures and barricades to isolate the firefighter from physically encountering the hazard. 4.4 When exposure to hazards cannot be eliminated through administrative or engineering controls, PPE such as gloves, boots, safety glasses, garments, and respirators can be used to create a barrier between responders and the hazard(s). PPE is the basic control measure, as it does not remove the hazard. PPE will protect the firefighter so long as it is used in a manner that is within design specifications and limitations. PPE is meant to reduce the firefighter’s exposure to acceptable levels when other functions of control are not feasible or effective. 4.5 this risk assessment intends to assist our department officials in updating and clearly defining the standard for proper protection levels. 4.6 This risk assessment is used as a baseline to establish the duties and responsibilities as defined in the DeSoto Fire Rescue standard operating procedures. Special risk is defined as services performed by DeSoto Fire Rescue personnel deemed to be outside the scope of the duties and responsibilities defined in our standard operating procedures, and are not included in this risk assessment. 4.7 Daily response exposes firefighters to hazards that affect both the interior and exterior environments. During prolonged activities, environmental conditions increase the hazard and risk to the firefighters. DeSoto Fire Rescue has identified the priority and severity of hazards that firefighters are exposed to and provides the appropriate PPE to maximize protection from potentially harmful exposures. These protective ensembles must be capable of protecting the firefighter during progressive fire operations up to and including “flashover” protection. Tactics for safe fire operations are taught through the direction of DeSoto Fire Rescue’s training coordinator and conforms to the standards of the Texas Commission on Fire Protection. DeSoto Fire Rescue maintains an expectation that firefighters will function within these conditions. DeSoto Fire Rescue provides and maintains PPE that is compliant with NFPA 1971; Standard on Protective Ensembles for Structural Firefighting and Proximity Firefighting (2013 Edition). To provide a protective ensemble that is suitable and appropriate, this assessment is based on known exposure, illness, injury, and fatality-producing incidents regardless of frequency. 4.8 The health risks and safety hazards identified in this risk assessment are based on the requirements of NFPA 1851; Standard on Selection, Care, and Maintenance of Protective Ensembles for Structural Firefighting and Proximity Firefighting (2014 Edition) and supported by research conducted by DeSoto Fire Rescue. 5. Discussion 5.1. All forms of PPE have design and performance standards and within those standards have limitations. It is imperative that firefighters understand the protection limitations of their PPE to avoid incorrect use or reliance on an item intended to protect them from harm but may contribute to injury and/or illness if used incorrectly. 29 CFR OSHA 1910 requires the education of all employees concerning the limitations of PPE. 5.2. PPE is meant to reduce the firefighter’s hazard exposure to acceptable levels when other means are not feasible or effective. However, all PPE has its protective limitations. When those limitations are exceeded, the wearer can be exposed to even greater harm. There are a few terms that firefighters should be familiar with to better understand the performance expectations and limitations of their PPE. Terms such as; flashover, backdraft, chemical exposure, hazardous materials, terrorist attacks, etc. This is not an inclusive list for the user. 6. Firefighter Duties and Responsibilities 6.1. DeSoto Fire Rescue like most career “ALL RISK” fire departments, maintains a progressive strategy and tactics for the suppression of fires.  DeSoto firefighters are exposed to all phases of fire progression including incipient, free burning, rollover, flashover, backdraft, and smoldering. Throughout these fire phases, DeSoto firefighters will be exposed to a range of temperatures from moderate through extreme based on the activities, functions, or tasks being performed as identified in this section. Additionally, firefighters are exposed to this varying temperature range at training exercises including “live fire” drills conducted throughout the year. The PPE used by DeSoto firefighters must be capable of providing protection for firefighters at the highest anticipated temperature. 6.2. Activity Types Fire Suppression ← Bulk fuel storage (defensive mode) ← Bulk fuel transport (defensive mode) ← Structural (offensive and defensive mode) ← Vehicle (offensive and defensive mode) ← Other (offensive and defensive mode) Functions or Tasks: Fire Suppression ← Drive/operate apparatus ← Deploy attack lines ← Engage in offensive fire attack ← Engage in defensive fire attack ← Engage in transitional fire attack ← Deploy/operate ← Appliances ← Hand line ← Nozzles ← Master streams ← Deploy/operate adapters ← Wyes/Siamese ← Adaptors ← Deploy/operate supply lines ← Deploy ladders ← Operate from ladders ← Deploy hand tools/equipment ← Operate hand tools/equipment ← Pulling ← Prying ← Chopping ← Cutting ← Deploy powered equipment ← Operate powered equipment ← Don/doff SCBA ← Work from SCBA air supply ← Support activities Rescue ← Structural ← Vehicle ← Confined space ← Collapse Functions or Tasks Rescue: Operations ← Drive/operate apparatus ← Deploy ladders ← Operate from ladders ← Deploy/operate hand ← Tools/equipment ← Pulling ← Prying ← Chopping ← Cutting ← Deploy/operate powered equipment ← Don/doff SCBA ← Work from SCBA air supply ← Deploy/operate stabilization equipment ← Structural stabilization ← Vehicle stabilization ← Trench stabilization ← Deploy/operate confined space lowering/lifting equipment ← Deploy/operate high-angle lowering/lifting equipment 7. Statement of Acceptable Risk 7.1. Acceptable Risk – Acceptable risk varies and is the responsibility of each department to identify what the acceptable risk is while conducting operations. 7.2. The acceptable level of risk is directly related to the potential to save lives or property. Where there is no potential to save lives, the risk to DeSoto Fire Rescue members should be evaluated in proportion to the ability to save property of value. When there is no ability to save lives or property, there is no justification to expose DeSoto Fire Rescue members to any avoidable risk, and defensive fire suppression operations are the appropriate strategy, even though defensive operations are not completely without exposure to hazards. 7.3. When considering acceptable risk to firefighters, DeSoto Fire Rescue employs the following rules of engagement after evaluating the survival profile of any victims and the value of any property involved. 7.3.1 We will risk our lives a LOT, in a calculated manner, to save a SAVABLE life. 7.3.2 We will risk our lives a LITTLE, in a calculated manner, to save SAVABLE property. 7.3.3 We will NOT risk our lives at all for lives or property that are NOT SAVABLE or already lost. 8. Expectation of Exposure / Reasonable Maximum Exposure (RME) 8.1. Thermal Hazards. The NFPA develops minimum standards for PPE. The NFPA recognized that not all departments require the same level of protection for reasons such as: Operational/Training Standards – DeSoto Fire Rescue conducts interior attack operations requiring the proper level of protection (TPP) to ensure firefighter safety. It is sometimes impossible during interior firefighting operations to move away from a heat source. Response Times – Response times are critical when determining the protection values of PPE.  DeSoto Fire Rescue has response times that allow for interior attack during incipient and free-burning fires. These conditions mandate PPE that is capable of protecting firefighters during flashover conditions or high radiant heat conditions. Reasonable Maximum Exposure – RME, takes into consideration the combination of response times, building construction, and contents normally found in structures. Training standards and Standard Operating Procedures identify “Flashover Conditions” and/or direct flame impingement for short periods as the Reasonable Maximum Exposure for DeSoto Fire Rescue. 8.2 Chemical Biological Radiation Nuclear (CBRN) Response. 8.2.1 DeSoto Fire Rescue’s operations defined in this assessment are both man-made and natural incidents; fire suppression and hazard mitigation, rescue, limited mitigation or containment of releases of hazardous materials (HazMat), such as CBRN agents, resulting from industrial accidents, terrorism, or weapons of mass destruction (WMD); and emergency medical support. Chemical Hazards.  DeSoto firefighters respond to HazMat emergencies as first responders only. The layer of the structural ensemble composite material that protects firefighters against chemical hazards is the “moisture barrier.” If deemed appropriate, the ensemble may be worn during HazMat incidents. Biological Hazards. DeSoto Fire Rescue responds to all types of incidents. Biological hazards are frequently encountered during Emergency Medical Services (EMS) incidents. Typical biological exposures to firefighters wearing PPE occur during a response to traffic collisions and other rescue-type incidents when body fluid is encountered. Biological hazards can also be encountered during the initial response to HazMat incidents. In either case, DeSoto Fire Rescue will wear PPE to these incidents. The layer of the structural PPE composite that protects firefighters against biological hazards is the “moisture barrier.” Radiation and Nuclear Hazards.  DeSoto Fire Rescue has the potential to respond to incidents involving radiation and nuclear hazards. Although these hazards are very infrequent, firefighters can find themselves exposed to radiation while answering calls for service, including terrorist attacks. Current PPE provides little or no protection for firefighters against radiation and nuclear hazards. 8.3 Health Risks and Safety Hazards Expected to be encountered by DeSoto firefighters: 8.3.1 Physiological: ← Physical stress ← Fatigue ← Body core temperature 8.3.2 Physical: ← Sharp edges ← Sharp points ← Falling objects ← Flying debris ← Projectiles ← Splash exposure ← Slippery surfaces ← Vibration ← Abrasive or rough surfaces 8.3.3 Physics: ← Stored thermal energy (heat saturation) ← Thermal energy migration ← Compression 8.3.4 Biological Hazards: ← Bloodborne pathogens ← Blood and other potentially infectious body material ← Airborne pathogens ← Biological toxins ← Biological allergens 8.3.5 Electrical Hazards: ← High voltage ← Electrical arc ← Static charge buildup 8.3.6 Radiation Hazards: ← Ionizing radiation ← Non-‐ionizing radiation 8.3.7 Flame/Thermal: ← Radiant heat ← Convective heat ← Conducted heat ← Flame impingement ← Flashover ← Backdraft ← Burning embers ← Steam ← Scalding water ← Molten metals ← Hot surfaces 8.3.8 Environmental: ← Time of day ← Ambient temperatures ← Humidity ← Internal moisture ← Inside the protective element ← External moisture ← Confined or small spaces ← Rain ← Snow ← Ice ← Wind ← Others 8.3.9 Hazardous Materials & Substances: ← Explosives ← Compressed Gasses ← Flammable Liquids ← Flammable Solids Oxidizers ← Poison ← Radioactive ← Corrosives ← Miscellaneous ← Other Regulated Materials Liquids ← Fuels ← Motor fuels ←Propellants ← Hydraulic fluids ← Lubricants ← Chlorine ← Blood or other potentially infectious body materials ← Alkaline ← Acids ← Battery Acid ← Oxidizers ← Others Liquefied gases ← Oxidizers ← Liquid Oxygen (LOX) ← Liquid Propane Gas (LPG) ← Others ← Compressed gasses ← Oxidizers ← Air ← Oxygen ← Nitrogen ← Helium ← Others Solid chemicals ← Firefighting agents 9. Geographic Location and Climate 9.1 DeSoto firefighters experience both heat and cold based on the typical climate in the North Central Texas area. These temperatures are associated with various levels of humidity. During the typical year high heat creates more of a hazard to firefighter safety than the impacts of cold. Typical temperatures range from lows in the 20s to highs above 100. The impacts of a hot environment require a structural ensemble that has a Total Heat Loss (THL) above the NFPA minimum of 205. DeSoto Fire Rescue requires a THL of 240.00 to help reduce heat stress injuries to firefighters. 10. Frequency of Use 10.1 According to DeSoto Fire Rescue’s reporting system, DeSoto firefighters responded to a total of 8,784 emergencies in calendar year 2015. This section of the risk assessment focuses on PPE frequency of use based specifically on our emergency response data and is explained utilizing the following charts reflecting the activity type, thermal activity, and durability. 10.2 Frequency of use is defined as: Limited – lowest thirty percentile (1 to 30%) Moderate – median thirty percentile (31 to 60%) Often – upper forty percentile (61 to 100%) 10.3. PPE use reflecting on activity type. Activity Percentage Frequency Suppression Activities 2% limited EMS / Rescue 70% often Miscellaneous Responses 25% limited Hazardous Conditions 3% limited 10.7 PPE use reflecting thermal activity. Activity Percentage Frequency Thermal 2% limited Non-Thermal 98% often Conclusion/Decision:  DeSoto Fire Rescue’s structural ensembles are worn on many responses. The percentage of fire responses requiring thermal protection has declined over the years however given the fuel loading with highly combustible contents a high degree of thermal protection is still needed. Our responses have increased in other areas such as EMS, rescue, traffic collisions, etc., therefore DeSoto Fire Rescue recognizes the need for a durable garment emphasizing an increased need for abrasion and ripping performance. 11. Thermal Protective Performance (TPP) 11.1. TPP is the primary test for evaluating layered, or composite fabrics worn as PPE for Structural Fire Protective Garments (SFPG). In accordance with NFPA 1971, protective garment elements composite fabrics consisting of an outer shell, moisture barrier, and thermal barrier shall be tested for thermal insulation and shall have an average TPP of not less than 35.0. The test uses an exposure heat flux representative of the thermal energy present in a flashover. It should be noted that this is a harsh test exposure and does not represent conditions in which firefighters are intended to work. It measures the ability of the composite fabrics to provide a few seconds to escape from such an exposure. 11.2. The actual TPP rating is double the amount of time it takes for a second-degree burn to occur at an exposure level of two calories per centimeter squared (2.0 Cal/cm2). For example, a TPP of 35 equals 17.5 seconds of protection before a second-degree burn occurs. 11.3. The TPP formula does not take into account critical factors that reduce the composite’s ability to protect the firefighter. Specifically, factors such as stored energy, moisture, garment cleanliness, etc. will reduce the composite’s TPP performance. In some cases, a burn injury can occur within 1 to 3 seconds. 11.4. DeSoto Fire Rescue recognizes a five percent (5%) variance in fabric weight, which is the industry standard. In addition, NFPA 1971 allows for an 8 percent variance in the TPP test. Conclusion/Decision: DeSoto Fire Rescue requires a minimum composite TPP rating of 40.  12. Radiant Protective Performance (RPP) 12.1 RPP is the primary test for evaluating PFPG outer shell layers, unlike TPP and THL which test all three layers. RPP measures the amount of radiant energy passing through the outer shell layer and can be translated into the amount of time (in seconds) before the wearer will suffer a second-degree burn. In accordance with NFPA 1971, the outer shell fabric is assigned an RPP value by measuring the intersect of where the temperature on the sample crosses the Stoll Curve (which quantifies the level of heat and the duration of time required for a second-degree burn for a wide range of exposure conditions) when exposed to a two calorie per centimeter squared (2.0 cal/cm2) radiant energy source. The minimum RPP value in accordance with NFPA 1971 is 20 seconds. 12.2 DeSoto Fire Rescue experiences high radiant heat exposure when conducting firefighting operations. This exposure can occur during defensive operations involving fully or highly involved structural fires, vehicle fires, bulk flammable gas fires, bulk flammable liquid fires, and aircraft fires. CONCLUSION DeSoto Fire Rescue requires protective ensemble in accordance with NFPA 1971 2013 Edition for Structural firefighting. 13. Total Heat Loss (THL) 13.1 THL is another primary test for evaluating layered, or composite fabrics worn as structural PPE. THL is a performance requirement for evaporative heat transfer. It measures how well the garment composite (outer shell, moisture barrier, and thermal barrier) allows heat and moisture vapor to transfer away from the wearer, thus helping to reduce heat stress. The test involves placing a fabric or composite sample over a porous heated plate meant to represent the human skin. In accordance with, NFPA 1971, garment composite fabrics consisting of the outer shell, moisture barrier, and thermal barrier shall be tested for evaporative heat transfer and shall have a THL of not less than 205 kW/m2. 13.2 Heat transfer is determined by measuring the energy required to maintain a specific temperature as heat is transferred through the clothing system to the outside environment. Both dry and wet tests are performed on the test samples. The dry tests yield heat loss associated with conductive heat transfer. The wet tests yield heat loss associated with moisture evaporation and transmission. The test yields a total heat loss figure, which represents the amount of energy that can be transferred through a given area of the fabric or composite material under the specific conditions of the test. 13.3 It is important to understand that TPP and THL work inversely; meaning the higher the TPP rating, the lower the THL rating and vice versa. Generally speaking, in order to have greater protection against radiant or convective heat, you need to have thicker or heavier fabrics that will inherently impede the ability for physiological heat to move through it from the body to the outside environment. It should be understood that small differences in THL might be difficult for firefighters to distinguish in the field. It might take 20 to 25 kW/m2 or more, depending on the individual and the conditions, to be felt by the wearer. Conclusion/Decision: DeSoto Fire Rescue requires a composite THL rating of 240.    14. Outer Shell Requirements 14.1. Thermal Hazards 14.1.1 The outer shell is capable of withstanding flashover conditions and remains flexible without breaking open.   Outer shells that become brittle and potentially break open will not protect the thermal liner, which is critical in preventing burns. Conclusion/Decision – Outer Shell: DeSoto Fire Rescue will utilize fabrics for the outer shell that maintain protection after thermal exposure consistent with the conditions found in a structural fire flashover. 14.2. Physical Hazards 14.2.1. PPE shall be worn to all structure fires, petroleum fires/incidents, roadway incidents such as traffic collisions, rescue incidents, hazardous materials incidents, vehicle fires and dumpster / refuse fires. Therefore, this risk assessment considers the proportional response types and the physical hazards that exist in each response situation. 14.2.2. The frequency and severity of physical hazards greatly vary between incidents. To complete the physical hazard section of this document, it was necessary to understand how the “majority” of DeSoto Fire Rescue’s PPE is damaged. This information was captured by assessing how the majority of PPE is damaged within their stations. DeSoto Fire Rescue was trained by independent service providers (ISP) to help determine what physical hazards represent the greatest threat to the PPE. This is completed through the annual inspection process. Specifically, what type of repair causes the highest occurrence of placing a garment out-of-service. 14.2.3. The results of the analysis found that the most significant physical hazard putting the ensemble out-of-service results from the weakening or thinning of the fabric through abrasion.  When the fabric is weakened by abrasions there is a greater likelihood of tears and rips. These findings are consistent with DeSoto Fire Rescue operations and progressive training scenarios. During these interior firefighting operations, firefighters are trained to stay as low to the ground as possible to avoid extreme temperatures at elevated levels. To accomplish this, firefighters are required to kneel and crawl whenever necessary. Firefighters are also trained in conducting primary and secondary searches inside structures. Search techniques require firefighters to maintain contact with interior walls as they progress through the structure. Maintaining contact is accomplished by keeping legs, arms, shoulders, etc. in contact with the interior walls. Significant abrasion of the outer shell routinely occurs during the operations described above causing damage to the outer shell. Abrasion resistance performance is almost exclusively a performance characteristic of the outer shell of the garment. 14.2.4. Though tearing was identified as a significant hazard most tears outside of high abrasion areas were within acceptable repair standards. Outer Shell fabric repairs related to abrasion damage were more common in placing a garment out-of-service. Additionally, tearing was typically in areas where the outer shell fabric was weakened by abrasion. 14.2.5. Abrasion testing for the outer shell materials are conducted using the Taber Abrasion Testing methodology in accordance with ASTM D 3884‐01. Conclusion/Decision: DeSoto Fire Rescue’s outer shell fabric must have superior performance for abrasion resistance and show no excessive wear upon visual inspections after 4000 cycles of Taber Abrasion Testing.  Note:  Current fabrics on the market range from 0 – 5,000 cycles. 14.2.5 Tear Strength. Fabric strength for the outer shell is conducted using the Trapezoidal Tearing Test in accordance with ASTM D 5587 on both laundered and unlaundered samples. NFPA 1971 standards for trapezoidal tear strength is measured by a minimum score of 22 lbs. These performance requirements ensure that the outer shell has superior tear strength to resist tears from sharp edges and tearing hazards. The NFPA standard calls for fabric samples to be tested without slippage or filament pull-through. Conclusion/Decision: The outer shell fabric must have superior tear strength to resist tears from sharp edges and tearing hazards measured by a minimum score of 50 lbs. (Warp) and 50 lbs. (Fill) for initial testing and 40 lbs. (Warp) and 40 lbs. (Fill) after five launderings in accordance with NFPA 1971 test methods. No fabric slippage or filament pull-through will be allowed. 14.3 DeSoto Fire Rescue’s PPE is exposed to sun and ultraviolet light. This condition exists for two primary reasons. PPE is stored in semi-protected areas in the apparatus bays exposing the PPE to damaging effects of sunlight. DeSoto Fire Rescue’s PPE, during shift, is stored outside of the protected PPE lockers which can expose PPE to ultraviolet light and diesel exhaust. Industry experts agree that ultraviolet light exposure is one of the most significant threats to the performance of PPE. Conclusion/Decision: DeSoto Fire Rescue’s outer shell must be composed of fibers that have superior performance to a xenon light test that replicates the extreme exposure. The PPE shall be NFPA compliant. 15.  Thermal Liner Requirements 15.1. Thermal liners are common to structural ensembles and are capable of protecting firefighters to temperatures associated with flashover conditions. The composite needs to protect firefighters and allow for escape during most interior fire attack operations in residential and commercial structures. 15.2.1. Thermal liners consist of two primary components. First is the facecloth which is a fabric that rests against the firefighter’s skin and assists with moisture wicking. The second component is the “batting” which is the insulation that provides the primary protection against thermal energy. 15.2.2. Thermal liner facecloth has two primary impacts on the performance of the composite. Specifically, the facecloth has a significant impact on both moisture management (wicking) and the ability of the firefighter to move freely within the garment. 15.2.3. The thermal liner facecloth interacts with the moisture barrier allowing moisture from sweating to be removed. The ability of the composite to perform this task is greatly impacted by the thermal liner facecloth. The facecloth must have superior moisture-wicking performance to allow the moisture to be dispersed through the composite. 15.2.4. Moisture management against the firefighter’s skin is a critical factor that all structural and proximity ensembles must manage. This specific factor is required for three reasons: 15.2.5. Moisture (water) conducts heat transfer. Moisture on the firefighter’s skin results in a higher probability of burn injury compared to dry skin. 15.2.6. Moisture against the skin can result in steam or scald-type burn injuries if the firefighter’s skin and the layer of material in contact with the skin is moist or wet. 15.2.7. DeSoto Fire Rescue has examined two tests measuring a garment’s ability to manage moisture. THL and fabric Wickability, THL has been previously addressed in this RA. 15.2.8. Wickability: Wickability is achieved by the facecloth’s ability to absorb and disperse the moisture. Wickability is measured by test method AATCC 79-2010 is used to measure how rapidly a fabric will absorb or wick water. One drop of distilled water is dropped onto the fabric and a stopwatch is activated to record the time for the water droplet to completely absorb into the fabric. Conclusion/Decision: DeSoto Fire Rescue requires facecloth Wickability performance to reduce firefighter fatigue and provide superior moisture management. 15.2.10. Facecloth comfort and appearance can be affected by “pilling.” The pilling of textile fabrics refers to an appearance caused by bunches or balls of tangled fibers held to the surface. This unpleasant appearance can seriously compromise the fabrics’ performance in thermal environments. Pills are developed on a fabric surface in four main stages: fuzz formation, entanglement, growth, and wear-off. The greater the pilling the less comfort and ease of movement the garment will have. 15.2.11. Pilling resistance is performed in accordance with ASTM D3512‐82 at 30, 60, and 90‐minute intervals. Each specimen is 4 3/16” square. The specimens are prepared and agitated in an Atlas Random Tumble Pilling Tester for the desired and stated timeframe. The samples are then removed and compared to the scale that has been set up for this test method. Durability Performance Scale Rating Values 1 2 3 4 5 Very Severe Pilling, Severe Pilling, Moderate Pilling, Slight Pilling, No Pilling Conclusion/Decision: To improve facecloth comfort and performance, DeSoto Fire Rescue uses gear with a rating of 4 (Slight Pilling) or 5 (No Pilling) both before and after washing agitation. 15.3. The thermal batting is comprised of different fibers that are designed to give specific properties to the finished product such as TPP, THL, and flexibility. The thermal batting is the main component responsible for protection from the thermal environment. Factors such as construction, layering, and weight are important considerations. There are two basic types of thermal batting: 15.4. Single Layer Needle Punch (NP) Batting – NP liners are typically thicker and bulkier than Spun Lace batting. 15.5. Multiple Layer Spun Lace (SL) -In efforts to reduce weight and bulk, two and three layer SL battings have been developed. The layers float between the facecloth of the thermal liner and the moisture barrier. Both the separate layers and the SL technology allow for improved movement. 15.6. The weight of PPE has a direct impact on the physical performance of a firefighter. A lighter-weight garment results in greater fire ground performance and allows the firefighter to work for longer periods thereby increasing firefighter effectiveness and performance. Two-layer SL thermal barriers provide the best weight-to-thermal protective performance ratio. Conclusion/Decision: DeSoto Fire Rescue will use multiple-layer (two layers) of spun lace technology to improve performance. 16.  Moisture Barriers 16.1. Moisture barriers are also critical in preventing the transmission of liquids from the outside of the garment to the skin. The moisture barrier material shall meet all moisture barrier requirements of NFPA 1971, which directly includes water penetration resistance, viral penetration resistance, and common chemical penetration resistance. 16.2.1. Liquid Penetration Resistance: This is important because fire and safety professionals often encounter a variety of liquids, such as water, body fluids, and chemicals at emergency scenes. Sometimes, the most dangerous hazards are the ones that they can’t see. In this environment, contamination from blood and body fluids is a serious concern. The moisture barrier is the component in PPE that resists penetration of liquids commonly found at the fire scene. Moisture barriers will be tested against the following liquids for penetration resistance: battery acid (37% sulfuric), ASTM Ref. Fuel C (unleaded gasoline surrogate), hydraulic fluid (phosphate ester), aqueous film-forming foam (AFFF), and swimming pool chlorine solution (65% free Cl). 16.2.2. Breathability: Heat stress-related injuries are a top concern for the Addison Fire Department. The moisture barrier can have an impact on the composite’s Total Heat Loss (THL), which will affect the heat stress associated with the overall garment. 16.2.4. Durability: Durability is necessary because of the rough conditions in which firefighters work. Moisture barrier materials are subjected to abrasion, bending, flexing, and other mechanical actions in both ambient temperatures and extreme temperatures. Conclusion/Decision: To achieve the required protection, DeSoto Fire Rescue’s moisture barrier shall be constructed of bi-component ePTFE membrane technologies. The moisture barrier material shall meet all moisture barrier requirements of NFPA 1971-2013 edition, which includes water penetration resistance, viral penetration resistance, and common chemical penetration resistance.  17. Helmet performance requirements 17.1 Top Impact Resistance Test – The helmet shall be tested in accordance with NFPA 1971, 2013 edition, Section 8.15 and (8.1.3.2 at 77°F.) Conclusion: The helmet shall be NFPA compliant. 17.2 Top Impact Resistance Test – The helmet shall be tested in accordance with NFPA 1971, 2013 edition, Section 8.15 and (8.1.4 at -25°F) for 4 hours. Conclusion: The helmet shall be NFPA compliant. 17.3 Top Impact Resistance Test – The helmet shall be tested in accordance with NFPA 1971, 2013 edition, Section 8.15 and (8.1.3.2 at 285°F) for 10 minutes. Conclusion: The helmet shall be NFPA compliant. 17.4 Top Impact Resistance Test – The helmet shall be tested in accordance with NFPA 1971, 2013 edition, Section 8.15 and 8.1.6 Radiant/Convective: 1.0W/CM2 for 2.5 minutes. Conclusion: The helmet shall be NFPA compliant. 17.5 Top Impact Resistance Test – The helmet shall be tested in accordance with NFPA 1971, 2013 edition, Section 8.15 and 8.1.7 Water immersion for 4 hours. Conclusion: The helmet shall be NFPA compliant. 17.6 Acceleration Impact Resistance Test – The helmet shall be tested in accordance with NFPA 1971, 2013 edition, Section 8.16 and (8.1.3.2 at 77°F.) If helmet utilizes an internal face shield then helmet shall be tested with the internal face shield in place. Conclusion: The helmet shall be NFPA compliant. 17.7 Acceleration Impact Resistance Test – The helmet shall be tested in accordance with NFPA 1971, 2013 edition, Section 8.16 and (8.1.3.2 at 285°F) for 10 minutes. If helmet utilizes an internal face shield then helmet shall be tested with the internal face shield in place. Conclusion: The helmet shall be NFPA compliant. 17.8 Acceleration Impact Resistance Test – The helmet shall be tested in accordance with NFPA 1971, 2013 edition, Section 8.16 and 8.1.6 Radiant/Convective: 1.0W/CM2 for 2.5 minutes. If helmet utilizes an internal face shield then helmet shall be tested with the internal face shield in place. Conclusion: The helmet shall be NFPA compliant. 17.9 Physical Penetration Resistance Test – The helmet shall be placed in the holder, an aluminum projectile weighing approximately 280 grams and 6 inches in length is loaded into the chamber and locked in position. The chamber is pressurized to approximately 30 psi. and then the projectile is released by opening a valve. The projectile is propelled thru the metal tube a distance of 4 ft to the impact site of the sample. Conclusion: The helmet shall be NFPA compliant. 17.10 Electrical Insulation Test – The helmet shall be tested in accordance with NFPA 1971, 2013 edition, Section 8.31A. Immerse in tap water. Conclusion: The helmet shall be NFPA compliant. 17.11 Electrical Insulation Test – The helmet shall be tested in accordance with NFPA 1971, 2013 edition, Section 8.31B. Submerge helmet in water for 15 minutes. Conclusion: The helmet shall be NFPA compliant. 17.12 Retention System Test – The helmet shall be tested in accordance with NFPA 1971, 2013 edition, Section 8.35. Conclusion: The helmet shall be NFPA compliant. 17.13 Suspension System Test – The helmet shall be tested in accordance with NFPA 1971, 2013 edition, Section 8.36. Conclusion: The helmet shall be NFPA compliant. 17.14 Weight of helmet – The weight of the helmet including accessories shall be measured. Conclusion: The helmet shall not weigh < 3 lbs. 18.   Footwear performance requirements 18.1 Boot Thermal Performance Conductive Heat Resistance Test 2 –The protective footwear elements shall be tested for thermal insulation as specified in Section 8.8 of NFPA 1971 2013 edition. Conclusion: Requires that the temperature of the insole surface in contact with the foot shall not exceed 44°C (111°F). Flame Resistance Test 4 –The protective footwear, with components in place, shall be tested for resistance to flame as specified in Section 8.5 of NFPA 1971 2013 edition. Conclusion: Requires that the boot components shall not have an afterflame of more than 5.0 seconds, shall not melt or drip, and shall not exhibit any burn-through. Heat and Thermal Shrinkage Resistance Test– The protective footwear shall be tested for resistance to heat as specified in Section 8.6 of NFPA 1971 2013 edition. Conclusion: Requires that the footwear shall not have any part of the footwear melt, separate, or ignite; shall show no water penetration; and shall have all components remain functional. Radiant Heat Resistance Test–The protective footwear shall be tested for thermal insulation as specified in Section 8.9 of NFPA 1971 2013 edition. Conclusion: Requires that the temperature of the upper surface in contact with the skin shall not exceed 44°C (111°F). Conductive Heat Resistance Test–The protective footwear shall be tested for thermal insulation as specified in Section 8.7 of NFPA 1971 2013 edition. Conclusion: Requires that the temperature of the upper lining surface in contact with the skin shall have a second-degree burn time of not less than 10.0 seconds, and shall have a pain time of not less than 6.0 seconds. Boot Breathability of the moisture barrier Liquid Penetration Resistance Test–The protective footwear upper material composite and footwear seams shall be tested for resistance to liquid penetration as specified in Section 8.27 of NFPA 1971 2013 edition. Conclusion: Requires that the boot upper material shall allow no penetration of the test liquids for at least 1 hour. Viral Penetration Resistance Test -The protective footwear upper material composite and footwear seams shall be tested for resistance to liquid or blood-borne pathogens as specified in Section 8.28 of NFPA 1971 2013 edition. Conclusion: Requires that the boot shall allow no penetration of the Phi-X-174 bacteriophage for at least 1 hour. Chemical Penetration Resistance Test –The protective footwear upper material composite and footwear seams shall be tested for resistance to common chemicals as specified in Section 7.3.2 of NFPA 1992 2012 edition. Conclusion: Requires that the boot shall allow no penetration of the Acetone, Ethyl Acetate, 50% w/w sodium hydroxide, 93.1% w/w sulfuric acid, Toluene, Dimethylformamide, Nitrobenzene, for at least 1 hour. Whole Boot Barrier Breathability Test – The whole boot shall be tested for breathability as specified using ASTM E-96, Method B as specified in MIL-DTL-44419A. Conclusion: Requires that the whole boot shall have a minimum of 580gm./m2/24 hours Whole Boot Breathability – Whole boot breathability must have a minimum of 1.5 g/hr. using the method described in GL-PD-10-01E (US Army Temperate Weather Mountain Combat Boots) section 4.5.1 (Whole Boot Breathability). Conclusion: Requires a minimum of 1.5 g./hr. 18.3 Durability Puncture Resistance Test – The protective footwear shall be tested for resistance to puncture as specified in Section 8.20 of NFPA 1971 2013 edition. Conclusion: The boot shall not be any puncture to the footwear upper under after an average applied force of 60 N (13 lbf). Cut Resistance Test –The protective footwear uppers shall be tested for resistance to cut as specified in Section 8.21 of NFPA 1971 2013 edition. Conclusion: The boot uppers shall not have a complete cut-through after a cut distance of more than 20 mm (0.8 in.). Whole Shoe Flex Test - Footwear functionality shall be determined by flexing the specimen for 100,000 cycles performed in accordance with Appendix B of FIA 1209, Whole Shoe Flex as specified in 8.6.14.11 of NFPA 1971 2013 edition. Conclusion: Footwear with evidence of liquid leakage, sole separation, and or seam separation shall be a failure. Satra Flexibility Test – The protective footwear shall be tested for flexibility using the SATRA TM194: 2004 test method. Conclusion: Footwear must reach the Maximum Flex Angle of 50 degrees without exceeding the critical bending moment with a resulting stiffness Index not to exceed 10.0 as detailed below to provide maximum flexibility. Burst Strength – Moisture Barrier Laminates must have a burst strength of at least 50 psi for 2 minutes after exposure to chemicals including DEET as specified in MIL-DTL-44419A. Conclusion: Footwear must withstand constant stress after exposure to DEET without compromising performance. 18.4 Sole grip Slip Resistance Test –The protective footwear shall be tested for slip resistance as specified in Section 8.40 of NFPA 1971 2013 edition. Conclusion: The boot sole shall have a coefficient of friction of 0.40 or greater. 18.5 Sole durability Abrasion Resistance Test – The protective footwear soles and heels shall be tested for resistance to abrasion as specified in Section 8.23 of NFPA 1971 2013 edition. Abrasion resistance tests shall be performed in accordance with ISO 4649, Rubber, vulcanized or thermoplastic — Determination of abrasion resistance using a rotating cylindrical drum device, Method A, with a vertical force of 10 N over an abrasion distance of 40 m. Conclusion: The footwear soles shall not lose shall not be greater than 200 mm3 of their volume. Satra Slip Resistance Test – The protective footwear sole shall be tested for slip resistance in dry, wet, and frosted ice conditions using the SATRA TM144:2011 test method. Conclusion: Footwear that does not meet the minimum test values for slip resistance (average of left and right foot). 18.6. Electrical Safety Electrical Insulation Test 2 –The protective footwear shall be tested for resistance to electricity as specified in Section 8.31 of NFPA 1971 2013 edition. Sample footwear shall be tested to14,000V (rms) in accordance with Section 9 of ASTM F 2412, Standard Test Method for Foot Protection. The electrode inside the boot shall be a conductive metal shot. Conclusion: The footwear shall have no current leakage in excess of 3.0 mA. 19.   Glove performance requirements 19.1 Resistance to cut: the glove body composites shall be evaluated in accordance with ASTM F 1790, Standard Test Methods for Measuring Cut Resistance of Materials Used in Protective Clothing, with the modification that specimens shall be tested to a specific load with the measurement of cut distance. Conclusion: The blade will travel more than 20mm or.8 inches and will not achieve a complete cut-through of glove composites. 19.2 Resistance to puncture: the glove body composites shall be tested in accordance with ASTM F 1342, Standard Test Method for Protective Clothing Material Resistance to Puncture, Test Method A. Conclusion: The glove body composites shall not be punctured under a force of at least 40 N (8.8 lbf). 19.3 Conductive heat resistance - the glove body composite shall be tested in accordance with ISO 17492, Clothing for protection against heat and flame — Determination of heat transmission on exposure to both flame and radiant heat. Thermal Protective Performance (TPP) Test. Conclusion: The glove body composites shall have an average TPP rating of at least 35.0. 19.4 Conductive heat resistance - the glove body composite shall be tested for thermal insulation as specified in the Conductive Heat Resistance Test. Specimens shall be tested in accordance with ASTM F 1060, Standard Test Method for Thermal Protective Performance of Materials for Protective Clothing for Hot Surface Contact, with the following modifications: Specimens shall be tested using an exposure temperature of 280°C (536°F). A pressure of 3.45 kPa ± 0.35 kPa (0.5 psi ± 0.05 psi) shall be applied during the test. Conclusion: The glove body shall have a second-degree burn time of not less than 10.0 seconds, and shall have a pain time of not less than 6.0 seconds. 19.5 Heat and thermal shrinkage resistance test -Whole gloves shall be tested for resistance to heat as specified in Section 8.6, Heat and Thermal Shrinkage Resistance Test, and shall not melt, separate, or ignite; shall not shrink more than 8 percent in length or width; shall be donnable; and shall be flexible. Conclusion: The glove shall not melt, separate, or ignite; shall not shrink more than 8 percent in length or width; shall be donnable; and shall be flexible. 19.6 Heat and thermal shrinkage resistance test - The glove lining materials of the glove body shall be individually tested for resistance to heat as specified in Section 8.6, Heat and Thermal Shrinkage Resistance Test, and shall be as specified in ISO 17493, Clothing and equipment for protection against heat — Test method for convective heat resistance using a hot air circulating oven. Testing shall be carried out such that the center of the oven is at a temperature of 260°C, +6/−0°C (500°F, +10/−0°F). Conclusion: The glove lining shall not melt, separate, or ignite. 19.7 Glove Hand Function Test - gloves shall be tested for hand function. The apparatus shall be as specified in ASTM F 2010, Standard Test Method for Evaluation of Glove Effects on Wearer Hand Dexterity Using a Modified Pegboard Test with the modification that the stainless steel pins shall be within a medium knurled 30 degree (25 teeth/in.) surface. Conclusion: The whole gloves shall have an average percent of barehanded control not exceeding 220 percent. 19.8 Glove Donning Test - gloves shall be tested for ease of donning. Conclusion: The whole glove shall have the dry hand donning time not exceed 10 seconds, shall have the wet hand donning time not exceed 30 seconds, shall have no detachment of the inner liner, shall have no detachment of the moisture barrier, and shall allow full insertion of all digits. 19.9 Liner Retention Test - Gloves shall be tested for retention of the glove liner. Liner retention shall be evaluated with the use of locking forceps and a force-measuring gauge. The locking forceps shall be attached to the inner liner of the digit to be tested ensuring that an unattached liner or the outer shell is not grabbed. The hook of the force gauge shall be looped around the locking bridge of the forceps. The digit of the glove shell shall be gripped ensuring that the inner liner is not impeded. The force gauge shall be pulled until 25 N (51⁄2 lbf) registers on the dial and then released. Conclusion: Each digit shall be inspected for indication of detachment of inner liner and/or moisture barrier. Failure of any digit of any glove shall constitute failure. 19.10 Grip Test, - Gloves shall be tested for grip; each specimen glove pair shall be tested as a complete set of gloves. The pulling device shall be a 3.2 cm (11⁄4 in.) diameter fiberglass pole attached to an overhead calibrated force measuring device in such a fashion that pulls on the pole will be perpendicular to the ground and downward in direction. This pole shall be used until surface degradation occurs. Conclusion: Each pair of gloves shall not have a drop of more than 30 percent from the peak pull force value. 19.11 Overall Liquid Integrity Test - Gloves shall be tested for resistance to leakage, the test subject shall then immerse the donned specimen(s) straight down into the surfactant treated water to between the minimum and maximum water height lines for 5 minutes +30/−0 seconds. The test subject shall flex the specimen in a gentle, complete fist-closing motion every 10 seconds with each fist-closing motion taking 10 seconds. A complete fist-closing motion shall be when the ends of the glove fingertips make contact with the palm surface of the glove. The specimen(s) shall then be removed from the test subject’s hand, and the watermark able glove(s) shall be inspected for water marks. Conclusion: The appearance of any watermark on the inner glove after testing any glove shall be considered leakage and shall constitute failing performance. 19.12 Torque Test - Torque testing shall be evaluated with the use of a 15⁄8 in. diameter solid acrylic cylinder securely centered on a calibrated digital torque meter capable of measuring up to 10.0 N-m (88.5 in.-lbf). While standing, each test subject shall grasp the cylinder so that the elbow is against the side of the body and the arm bend creates a right angle. Each test subject shall make five successive attempts to twist the cylinder in the appropriate direction exerting as much force as possible. The range of motion of the subject’s arm shall indicate the end of the twisting cycle. The average maximum force over the five attempts shall be the barehanded control value. The average maximum twisting force with gloves over the three trials for each size shall be calculated, recorded, and reported. The average twisting force shall be compared with the barehanded control value. Conclusion: The whole glove shall have an average percent of barehanded control not less than 80 percent. 20. Hood performance requirements 20.1 Thermal Protection Thermal Protective Performance (TPP) Test - Hoods shall be tested for thermal insulation. Conclusion: The hoods shall have an average TPP rating of not less than 20.0. Heat and Thermal Shrinkage Resistance Test - Hoods, shall be individually tested for resistance to heat. Conclusion: The hoods shall not shrink more than 10 percent. Heat and Thermal Shrinkage Resistance Test - Hoods shall be individually tested for resistance to heat. Conclusion: The hood shall not melt, separate, or ignite. Limiting Oxygen Index (LOI) – Hoods shall be individually tested to ASTM D2863. The Limiting Oxygen Index measures the amount of oxygen required in the environment for a fabric to support combustion. Conclusion: The blend of fibers making up the hood shall have a LOI rating of 55. 20.2 Durability Cleaning Shrinkage Resistance Test - Hoods shall be individually tested for resistance to shrinkage. Conclusion: The hood shall exhibit shrinkage of more than 5 percent, and shall have the hood-opening meet the requirements specified when new. Burst Strength Test - Knit hood material(s) shall be tested for material strength. Conclusion: The hood shall have burst strength of not less than 225 N (51 lbf). 21. Reflective Trim Garment reflective and fluorescent trim requirements for the Addison Fire Department. 21.1 Convective Heat Exposure Test - The trim shall be tested in accordance with NFPA 1971, 2013 edition, Section 8.1.3as specified in section 8.1.3. Conclusion: The garment trim shall maintain a minimum RA of 350 or greater when measured at 0.2° observation angle/5° entrance angle when determined in accordance with the procedure defined in ASTM E808-01 and E809-08. 21.2 Convective Heat Exposure Test (120) – The trim shall be tested as specified in ISO 17493 for one minute at 120° C. Conclusion: The garment trim shall maintain a minimum RA of 450 or greater when measured at 0.2° observation angle/5° entrance angle when determined in accordance with the procedure defined in ASTM E808-01 and E809-08. 21.3 Convective Heat Exposure Test (150x3) – The trim shall be tested as specified in ISO 17493 for three separate ten minute exposures at 150°C with a ten minute cool down period between each exposure. Conclusion: The garment trim shall maintain a minimum RA of 450 or greater when measured at 0.2° observation angle/5° entrance angle when determined in accordance with the procedure defined in ASTM E808-01 and E809-08. 21.4 Convective Heat Exposure Test (5-260) – The trim shall be tested in accordance with NFPA 1981, 2013 edition, section 8.6 per ISO 17493 for five minutes at 260 C. Conclusion: The garment trim shall maintain a minimum RA of 350 or greater when measured at 0.2° observation angle/5° entrance angle when determined in accordance with the procedure defined in ASTM E808-01 and E809-08. 21.5 Convective Heat Exposure Test (2-260) – The trim shall be tested in accordance with NFPA 1971, 2013 edition, Section 8.6 per ISO 17493 for two minutes at 260° C. Conclusion: The garment trim shall maintain a minimum RA of 450 or greater when measured at 0.2° observation angle/5° entrance angle when determined in accordance with the procedure defined in ASTM E808-01 and E809-08. 21.6 Wash and Dry Test – The trim shall be washed for 50 cycles in accordance with ISO-6330 Method 2A (60°C home wash) and dried per ISO-6330 Procedure E (50°C tumble dry). 22. Form – Fit – Function 22.1 Firefighters perform a wide variety of activities as outlined in Section 6 “Firefighters Duties and Responsibilities”. These duties require the ensemble to be engineered in a manner that allows for the best range of motion and ergonomics. A garment with poor engineering that restricts range of motion may result in work production inefficiencies and in some circumstances impact firefighter safety. 22.2 Garment manufacturers typically have a variety of ergonomic designs that may enhance the Addison firefighters ability to conduct operations outlined in section 6. It is sometimes difficult to determine what garment engineering techniques will best enhance our firefighter’s performance. Therefore, after selecting the fabric composite that best meets our needs the DeSoto Fire Rescue will evaluate various manufactures designs in an organized wear trial. The wear trial will include several firefighters doing the tasks outlined in section 6. 22.3 The selected garment manufacturer and garment designed will ensure that every DeSoto firefighter’s ensemble is properly fitted to ensure both mobility and firefighter safety. Conclusion: DeSoto Fire Rescue will ensure both firefighter safety and work performance by selecting a garment manufacturer and garment design (structural) that best meets the duties and responsibilities outlined in section 6. This selection process will include a wear trial evaluation of the manufactures designs that best meets our requirements.

Show More Show Less