HomeMy WebLinkAboutItem FAGENDA REPORT
DATE: February 11, 2002
TO: Honorable Mayor and City Council
THRU: John B. Bahorski, City Manager
FROM: Lee Whittenberg, Director of Development Services
SUBJECT: STATUS REPORT RE: NATIONAL FIRE PROTECTION
ASSOCIATION DEPLOYMENT STANDARDS (NFPA
1710 AND NFPA 1720)
SUMMARY OF REQUEST:
Authorize staff to continue to monitor the potential applicability of NFPA 1710 and 1720 to
the City of Seal Beach. Receive and File Status Report.
BACKGROUND:
Staff is presenting this matter for City Council information and authorization to continue
the potential applicability of NFPA 1710 and 1720 to the City of Seal Beach. This will
entail cooperation and discussions with the Orange County Fire Authority.
Overview of NFPA 1710 and NFPA 1720:
On July 17, 2001 the National Fire Protection Association (NFPA) announced its
decision to issue two new standards concerning the deployment of fire department
personnel in career and volunteer departments, adding an important amendment designed
to allow local governments real and substantial flexibility in the way they provide fire
and emergency medical services. The announcement came a week after a large coalition
of national, regional, and state local government. Fire service and taxpayer groups
expressed their concerns at an NFPA Council hearing on the standards. Staff prepared a
status report for the August 13, 2001 City Council meeting that was received and filed by
the Council.
In November 2001 the board of directors (Board) of NFPA denied an appeal of a national
coalition of state municipal leagues, the National League of Cities (NLC), International
City Management Association (ICMA), and other national groups, regional and statewide
fire chiefs groups, and others, challenging the issuance of NFPA of two new standards for
the deployment of fire and EMS services. The Board's decision lets stand the July
approval of the standards by the NFPA Standards Council, effective August 2, 2001.
AGENDA ITEM /
CM, Ducumem UGISLATNFPA 1710& 1720.CC SmW, Report 2.d. \LW\02 -0442
Status Report re: NFPA 1710 and 1720
Standards re: Organization and Deployment of Fire Suppression
and Emergency Medical Operations
City Council Staff Report
February 11, 2002
The specific standards approved by the Board are NFPA 1710, Standard for the
Organization and Deployment of Fire Suppression Operations, Emergency Medical
operations, and Special Operations to the Public by Career Fire Departments, and NFPA
1720, Standard for the Organization and Deployment of Fire Suppression Operations,
Emergency Medical operations, and Special Operations to the Public by Volunteer Fire
Departments. NFPA 1710 prescribes strict staffing and response times for career fire
departments. NFPA 1720 is its' counterpart for volunteer fire departments, but its'
requirements are less prescriptive.
National Local Government and Taxpayer Coalition (Coalition) Obiecfions:
The National Coalition (Coalition) opposed NFPA 1710 and 1720 as "one -size -fits -all'
standards that initially could not be customized to local conditions. The Coalition further
objected to the completely closed process by which these so- called consensus standards
were derived, particularly because it excluded the NLC and ICMA after they had
requested the opportunity to participate. The NFPA Technical Committee that developed
the standards also failed to consider NFPA's own internal research that acknowledged the
lack of scientific basis for the standard (the Technical Committee relied heavily on
anecdotal evidence instead). Finally, although called "standards" by NFPA, NFPA
spokepersons routinely misrepresented them as "guidelines" which would have no
binding effect. Under its own rules of procedure, NFPA 1710 and 1720 could have been
adopted as guidelines (i.e., recommended practices) rather than standards (the equivalent
of a standard of conduct), but the NFPA Standards Council refused to do so. As a result,
once adopted by a governing body (including a state legislature) or imposed as a standard
of conduct by a court, regulatory agency or arbitration panel, they are mandatory.
NFPA's Response � Eouivalent Approaches Acceptable:
In response to the National Coalition's appeal, the NFPA Standards Council added an
"equivalency" provision, allowing a local government to meet the purposes of NFPA
1710 or 1720 by other "systems, methods or approaches." In addressing the Coalition's
concerns about flexibility, the NFPA's board decision underscores the importance of the
"equivalency" provision, stating: "An equivalency statement serves to emphasize that
NFPA codes and standards, even when setting prescriptive requirements, are not intended
to restrict ... jurisdictions adopting the standard flexibility to use alternative approaches,
provided adequate technical substantiation and documentation can be developed." The
application of this amendment has not yet been fully explored, though this statement
indicates the board's intent that it provides local agencies some real and substantial
flexibility.
NFPA 1710& 1720.CC Stmu Report 2
Status Report re: NFPA 1710 and 1720
Standards re: Organization and Deployment of Fire Suppression
and Emergency Medical Operations
City Council Staff Report
February 11, 2002
Practical Implications for the Future
There are a number of practical implications that may flow from the adoption of NFPA
1710 and 1720. Due to the differences in state and local laws, and legal research is
needed for each particular local jurisdiction. There are two major types of concern
however: (1) potential involuntary imposition of the standard on local communities; and
(2) potential tort or other legal liability whether the standard is voluntarily adopted or
involuntarily imposed.
• Involuntary Imposition. Supporters of NFPA 1710 and 1720 have argued that no
local agency is required to adopt the applicable standard, and that neither standard
would apply to any agency that does not adopt it. To be sure, many cities do not use
any of the NFPA codes or standards, and do not intend to do so. But these standards
or their components could nevertheless be imposed on local agencies through formal
or informal action at the federal, state or local level.
• Inadvertent Local '! Adoption" Many local jurisdictions adopt some or all of
NFPA's fire codes and standards. Where an agency does so generally, it may
automatically adopt all changes to them (thus incorporating NFPA 1710 and 1720
upon its becoming effective); alternatively, the agency may have to take an
affirmative act to adopt the applicable standard. Of particular concern, some fire
departments, as a matter of department policy, may start to use the standard as a guide
to their activities without consulting with their governing bodies or their legal
counsel, and without awareness of the liabilities and obligations this could impose on
their local agencies. Local counsel should review department policies and the code
and policy adoption process in their jurisdictions, and warn their fire services, so that
their governing bodies can act purposefully in considering whether to adopt NFPA
1710/1720. Once a standard is adopted, it is binding on the unit of government and
generally can be used as the standard of conduct in tort litigation against it. The City
of Seal Beach has adopted by reference many NFPA Standards, but the NFPA 1710
and 1720 Standards are not currently adopted by the City.
❑ Federal or State Adoption: Action by federal or state governments or agencies
can have the same effect. For instance, following adoption of NFPA 1500, its "2-
in/2-ouf' practice was adopted by OSHA as a national standard for fireground
deployment, and that practice became mandatory for local agencies in "OSHA states"
as well as states whose OSHA agencies independently adopted the Wile. Even before
NFPA 1710 was issued, a bill to impose to on local agencies statewide was
introduced in one state legislature. At the local level, agencies subject to "interest
arbitration" under their charters or state law may find their unions urging an arbitrator
to impose NFPA 1710 on local government whether its voters or their elected
representatives have approved it or not. Evan as the Standards Council was issuing
NFPA 1710, it was being raised in binding labor arbitration in Detroit.
NFPA 1710 & 17N.CC SI WL Report 2
Status Report re: NFPA 1710 and 1720
Standards re.: Organization and Deployment ofPire Suppression
and Emergency Medical Operations
City Council SlaffReport
February 11, 2002
u Tort and Other Liability Implications: Whether a local agency has voluntarily or
inadvertently adopted NFPA 1710 or 1720, or has had the standard imposed upon it
involuntarily, the failure to meet the standard presents significant personal injury
liability issues as well as litigation requesting mandamus and injunctive relief. If this
seems speculative, shortly after the issuance of NFPA 1710 and 1720 the leading
national firefighters association acknowledged on its website that this may be the
initial way in which the standards are given effect. This same organization criticized
the National Coalition for suggesting this potential to the Standards Council.
NextRML NFPA has scheduled 1710/1720 for review in three years, its shortest
review cycle. This presents opportunities for local government associations at the
national and state level to participate actively in NFPA's next discussion of the issue,
assuming NFPA agrees to open its doors to such discussions. In the meantime, other
"equivalent" methods of deploying fire and EMS personnel are under study and
consideration. The City needs to be vigilant in guarding against inadvertent adoption of
the standards or mandates by federal, state or regional agencies. While there is board
agreement about the goal of protecting fire and EMS personnel, there will likely continue
to be broad disagreement about alternative safety methods, including the efficiency of
more aggressive prevention techniques that should continue to reduce the number of fire
incidents and injuries or loss of life in the future.)
FISCAL IMPACT:
Potential direct fiscal impacts, depending as to the impacts of the implementation of
NFPA 1710 and 1720 on current response levels of the Orange County Fire Authority.
RECOMMENDATION:
Authorize staff to continue to monitor the potential applicability of NFPA 1710 and 1720 to
the City of Seal Beach. Receive and File Status Report.
�=of erg
Dre Development Se rvices
1 Priority Focus, League of California Cities
NFPA 1710 & 1720.CC SUd. Report 2