The New NFPA 1802 Portable Radio Standard

[trauma74]

StackPath

Since the 1970s, the portable radio has been a vital tool on incident scenes. Unfortunately, the extreme physical environment that’s encountered by firefighting, hazmat and technical rescue punishes these devices.
Furthermore, the hazard profile of residential structures dramatically increased because of furnishings that burn faster and hotter, engineered building materials that can fail and open space architecture that requires longer supports.
In June 2011, two San Francisco Fire Department firefighters tragically perished in a residential fire. The investigation revealed that both firefighters’ remote speaker microphones (RSMs) failed because of high heat. Therefore, they couldn’t transmit a mayday that they were trapped. Unfortunately, this wasn’t an isolated incident. Communications are one of the five most frequent contributing factors in National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health (NIOSH) reports. As a result, there were calls for a new standard to define radios that are better suited for the hazard zone.
The NFPA established a committee in March of 2013 to define a more rugged portable radio. This new standard, NFPA 1802: Standard on Two-Way, Portable RF Voice Communications Devices for Use by Emergency Services Personnel in the Hazard Zone (2021 edition), defines for the first time a radio and speaker microphone that are designed for the inherently hostile environment in which firefighters, hazmat teams and other agencies operate.
Thirty-five Technical Committee members worked on this effort, along with another 21 committee alternates and several other noncommittee observers. The group classifications on this Technical Committee included users, enforcement, manufacturers, labor, testing laboratories, consumers and special experts. Fire departments represented major areas and suburban/rural departments. The committee was led by Robert Athanas, who served on the FDNY for 36 years. He was assisted by NFPA Staff Liaison David Trebisacci.
Overview
The technical committee worked on three major areas to define these new devices: ergonomics, feature set and environment. Decisions were made at the beginning:

• The standard would encompass both the radio and the RSM, because the RSM often is the most exposed item to the fire environment
• The standard only would concern two-way voice devices
• The standard would be agnostic to the specific technologies that are used, such as radio frequencies and communications technologies (analog vs. digital modulation; trunking vs. nontrunking; LTE 4G as found in broadband devices); the result is that this standard will be useful even as voice communications advance

Author’s note: The standard is very wide-ranging. Therefore, the summaries that are below are highlights and not all-inclusive. For specific details refer to the standard, which can be found at nfpa.org.
Ergonomics
Emergency incident scenes are stressful and distracting. Multiple researchers have discovered first responder “tunnel vision” when a situation deteriorates. Thus, every first responder’s wireless lifeline device must be simple to use, to reduce the chances for error. Some of the key issues addressed:

• Radio control knobs and cable connectors must be able to be manipulated by responders who have large hands and/or who are wearing structural firefighting gloves
• The emergency alert (mayday) button must be easy to find
• Manipulation of the radio’s controls is difficult or impossible if a member is trapped or injured or the radio is worn under the turnout coat or in the coat radio pocket; therefore, some important controls must be available from the RSM, which typically is worn on the outside of the turnout coat: the RSM is required to have an emergency alert button, and it can have at least one programmable button, which can be used for various purposes, such as reverting back to a home channel/talkgroup; the cable that’s between the radio and the RSM is monitored; problems create an alert
• NFPA 1802 radios and RSMs will include voice announcements of various actions, including channel/talkgroup changes: if there is radio traffic, the voice announcement is delayed and then played when the radio traffic ceases; announcements while the radio is operated in the hazard-zone mode are louder
• The radio must provide clear voice transmission and reception; speech intelligibility is objectively measured with an internationally recognized test method that’s used by cellular telephone carriers, called POLQA

Feature set
At minimum, every radio must allow for analog conventional (nontrunked) transmission. This requirement provides for lowest-common-denominator communications among all emergency scene radios, even if all of the supporting radio infrastructure should fail.
Interoperability is guaranteed among all NFPA 1802-certified radios and all NFPA 1802-certified RSMs by means of the inclusion of a universal connector.
Visual and audible indicators of battery status are displayed.
Hazard-zone operation is different from the nonhazard zone, and the radio defaults to the hazard-zone mode when it is powered on initially. In the hazard zone, the radio’s volume is louder. Radios can be programmed so that inadvertent powering off of the radio can be reduced when in the hazard zone.
Bluetooth technology allows the use of wireless SCBA microphones/speakers, RSMs, etc. As well, the radio periodically self-checks, and it must have a data logger that stores recent events, such as mayday activation. The purpose is to provide information for both the fire service and its vendors regarding proper performance of this equipment under stress.
Environmental & testing
Overtemperature events are detected, recorded and alerted, and the radio and RSM must be rated nonincendive (Class I Division 2). Optionally, the radio and RSM can be certified as intrinsically safe-rated (Class I Division 1).
Radios and RSMs must undergo very extensive environmental testing. After most tests, the radio and/or RSM must undergo successful voice quality and operational checks. Here are a few highlights:

• Six complete cycles of 15 minutes of baking at 350 degrees F (177 degrees C), followed by immediate immersion in water for 15 minutes
• A three-hour vibration test
• Impact tests are performed on three devices by dropping on a concrete floor from 9.8 feet (3 meters), as if dropped from the bed of a ladder truck or engine
• Corrosion test includes high humidity and a salt spray
• A high-temperature test exposes the device to 500 degrees F (260 degrees C) for five minutes
• Heat and flame test first exposes the device for 15 minutes to a temperature of 203 degrees F (95 degrees C), after which the device is subjected to a 1,742 degrees F (950 degrees C) flame for 10 seconds
• A temperature stress test exposes the device to multiple cycles of warm-hot-warm-cold temperatures

Now what?
The committee didn’t address the provision of SCBA audio devices (microphones and earpieces). This will be the responsibility of the committee for NFPA 1981: Standard on Open-Circuit Self-Contained Breathing Apparatus (SCBA) for Emergency Services. When NFPA 1981 includes this, voice intelligibility will improve significantly.
Radios and RSMs that meet this standard will have new levels of ruggedness and ease of use and improved voice quality and functionality, which will result in improved safety for firefighters and others who work in the hazard zone.
Although the standard only recently was issued, several manufacturers plan to introduce NFPA 1802 radios and RSMs.

 

[xmo]

I suspect that the high-tier products from the larger radio companies are already pretty close to meeting the new standard but it will force departments everywhere to buy expensive radios instead of low or mid tier.

No one will want the liability once the lawyers get hold of this: "This terrible tradgedy could have been prevented for only a few dollars if your agency had only followed NFPA guidelines and provided my client with the safety of a code compliant radio."

 

[mmckenna]

Although the standard only recently was issued, several manufacturers plan to introduce NFPA 1802 radios and RSMs.

Harris XL-400p is their NFPA-1802 compliant radio. Not much info on the internet yet, but the Harris rep gave me a glossy sheet on it. XL-200p in a heavier case, bigger knobs. Described as "Throw it on the grill next to the steaks, then dunk it in water and it still works".

disclaimer- I'm not in the fire service, but I am a professional radio guy.
I think some of this NFPA stuff has gone way to far. I get it. Really. No one wants to see any line of duty deaths, especially me, but NFPA is going too far on some of their standards. Some of the NFPA standards seem to be written by radio manufacturers as a way to keep taxpayer dollars flowing in (have you ever priced out what it costs to provide survivable radio coverage inside a large building to meet NFPA standards?). Trying to replace human beings evaluating risks using intelligence and knowledge with technical standards is getting pretty silly.
In my professional opinion, this NFPA standard jumps the shark. It goes way overboard, erring on the side of "If we spend more on radio equipment, that must make us safer".
Every fire fighter carrying a several thousand dollar multiband portable radio into a fire, designed to meet the latest NFPA standard, plus the speaker mic.
-or-
Create a standard where a basic radio is built into the SCBA to allow communications.

This nonsense where every fire fighter needs to be carrying a $7000+ multiband portable radio with AES256, trunking and all the other crap is just down right silly. NFPA should have focused on a standard that stuck to one band and built it into the SCBA.
Instead, what they've done is created a new standard where every single fire department in the county is going to want to replace perfectly good radios that serve their needs with $8000+ radios. Small agencies cannot afford that. Taxpayers cannot afford that.

The additional cost on maintenance, accessories, and I expect periodic recertification of the radio, is pricing out small agencies.

And God help any taxpayer that questions the standard.

I give it 2 years, then the NFPA will be back (with the help of big radio "M"anufacturers) with an all new standard that will require replacement of these new radios. I'm betting lead lined radios to survive a direct nuclear strike at ground zero, submersible to the bottom of the Marianas trench, transmit capability from 20KHz to 90GHz, you know, in case they need to talk to submerged submarines, etc. etc. etc.

NFPA has jumped the shark.

 

[JimD56]

I mentioned this on another forum but can't remember which one.
The NFPA is in bed with ALL the firefighter gear manufacturers and insurance companies. Several of the standards are "over the top" and not followed. This is coming from a 30+ year experienced Fire Lieutenant/Paramedic who works for the 6th Largest and 4th busiest agency in the entire country, and I also saw this first hand working in R & D for a period of time. I can tell you my department is sticking with APX7700xe's with the 450-460mhz analog side for our agency, and the 700-800mhz side for mutual aid and medcom. The Officer and Driver/Operator of EVERY unit carry the APX and the 2 firefighters on the tailboard carry the XPS5000R, yes a 20-year-old radio. We do NOT use any SCBA radio interface systems. Our Federal USAR Team will comply with the new standard in future purchases.

 

[zerg901]

Submitted revisions to NFPA 1221 approx 20 years ago about doubling. AFAIK it has never been addressed.

- FDNY FG video - doubles or near doubles at 12:50, 15:10, 16:10, 20:20 - (recording seems to jump at those points also)

 

[12dbsinad]

Screw you NFPA... I'm still using my trusty Baofeng! Plus I can listen to some tunes at the same time

 

[mmckenna]

Screw you NFPA... I'm still using my trusty Baofeng! Plus I can listen to some tunes at the same time

You forgot to mention the built in flashlight.

 

[GlobalNorth]

When NFPA was initially formed, it made sense to have minimum standards for certain gear. Now, the FF industry has discovered what a boon this can be to their profit margins and they throw money at memberships to promote LED lighting, radios, turnouts, flame resistant [FR] station wear that is miserably hot for desert climates, when 100% cotton has some inherent flame resistance as a natural fiber.

The NFPA has turned into a bureaucratic cudgel to force not only the curmudgeons in the Fire Service to stop using ears as temperature gauges, but to compel profligate agencies to buy expensive radios, LED light systems that blind motorists, etc. Why some agencies still use leather helmets and helmet designs from the 1880s is a mystery as well. European helmets are far superior.

The NFPA aren't as modern as they believe themselves to be.

 

[buddrousa]

But it is the Industry Standard and if you the Firefighter Does Not Meet this Standard then if anything happens to you your Insurance Does Not Have to PAY. Just Look at the 9/11 Firefighter Families that have not received 1 DIME because they did or did not do 1 thing and got hurt or worse.

 

[12dbsinad]

You forgot to mention the built in flashlight.

Yes, you're right. Didn't Motorola copy Baofeng with their cheezy little flashlight on the RSM? (as if battery life didn't already suck)

 

[Onelick]

I work for a city department that covers 3 states, and 6 counties through both first due and mutual aid. We have the opportunity to use VHF analog, UHF digital trunked, VHF digital trunked, 800 digital trunked, UHF Digital non trunked, 700Digital trunked, I think the only system we don't have a chance to use is the old low band analog. So, we need the multi band radios. I drive the front end of a tiller ladder truck, so I'm mostly outside throwing ladders, running the aerial, getting equipment, etc. While I may be wearing my SCBA, I don't have the facepiece on nor am I breathing air outside. The radio-SCBA interface is pretty much useless to me until I put my facepiece on.
I agree that most of these standards are over the top, but take a look at who comprises these committees. It's mostly manufacturer's representatives.
Just another viewpoint,

Onelick

 

[BoxAlarm187]

This nonsense where every fire fighter needs to be carrying a $7000+ multiband portable radio with AES256, trunking and all the other crap is just down right silly. NFPA should have focused on a standard that stuck to one band and built it into the SCBA....I give it 2 years, then the NFPA will be back (with the help of big radio "M"anufacturers) with an all new standard that will require replacement of these new radios.

Where does the standard require ANY of this? The AHJ still has the option to purchase the radio that best meets their local needs. As for the second part, NFPA standards are updated every 5 years.

The NFPA has turned into a bureaucratic cudgel to force not only the curmudgeons in the Fire Service to stop using ears as temperature gauges, but to compel profligate agencies to buy expensive radios, LED light systems that blind motorists, etc. Why some agencies still use leather helmets and helmet designs from the 1880s is a mystery as well. European helmets are far superior.

NFPA does not require, or even endorse, the use of LED lighting systems. The lighting standard within NFPA 1901 hasn't been updated in over a decade when LED's were obviously much less popular.

Good or bad, the US fire service is deeply rooted in tradition, which is why many firefighters still wear leather. Some leathers are NFPA compliant, some are not. The superiority of the newer European designs is a matter of perspective for many firefighters.

I agree that most of these standards are over the top, but take a look at who comprises these committees. It's mostly manufacturer's representatives.

NFPA does not allow any more than 50% of any committee to have comprised by manufacturer's representatives.

 

[mmckenna]

Where does the standard require ANY of this? The AHJ still has the option to purchase the radio that best meets their local needs. As for the second part, NFPA standards are updated every 5 years.

This standard doesn't.
My point was that some agencies do have a legit need for a multiband portable, operate on trunking systems, and use encryption.
Add the costs of that to the price of a new NFPA compliant radio and speaker mic, and I'm willing to bet you an ice cold beer that we'll be seeing $10K portable radios.

Pointless.

Interior attack doesn't need all this crap. They don't need to be able to talk to the garbage collector three cities over. For interior attack, pick one band, run analog, ditch all the crap. Build the radio into the SCBA, eliminate the need to rated speaker mics. I bet a realistic price for that would be in the $2000 range.

But as was pointed out, that doesn't make as much money for the manufacturers.

The NFPA doesn't appear to be looking at this from a logical angle. That's easy to do when taxpayers will fund anything you ask for. All you have to do is make them think they are being unpatriotic or hate public safety professionals unless they fund every single whim, every single purchase, and never ask questions.

 

[BoxAlarm187]

Interior attack doesn't need all this crap. They don't need to be able to talk to the garbage collector three cities over. For interior attack, pick one band, run analog, ditch all the crap. Build the radio into the SCBA, eliminate the need to rated speaker mics. I bet a realistic price for that would be in the $2000 range.

I see your point, but let's use my agency for example. We provide automatic- and mutual-aid into four surrounding jurisdictions. One if VHF, one is UHF, one is an older Smartnet system, and one is P25. It's for that reason that we run tri-band radios. When we go into this other jurisdictions, we want ALL personnel to be able to communicate seamlessly with the other personnel on scene. We do use gateways when we need to, but obviously don't like the latency and other issues that are known to exist with a gateway.

Keep in mind that it's still up to the AHJ to adopt NFPA standards, and many don't. There are lots of manufacturers making both NFPA compliant and non-compliant tools, knowing that some people could care less about compliance with the consensus standard.

 

[ten13]

I have to agree with mckenna.

If you read just about all the "recommendations" (and that's all they are) from the NFPA, they are geared towards "big city" FDs, and the real potential of those departments coming in contact with the worst case scenarios of firefighting, most generally, high-rise building fires.

Tell that to some volunteer fire chief from "East Cupcake" Idaho whose last three fires were barn fires with exterior attacks. Yet, I'm sure (in fact, I know) that those same chiefs have been approached by mainstream manufacturers of all equipment who tell them that their product "complies with the NFPA...." and are a "must-have".

I know a guy who was a cop in a "big city" police department who was also a radio buff, and that department was approached by a radio /\/\ anufacturer many, (many?), years ago about switching to a digital-trunked system in its infancy days. The radio people brought in the radio buff cop and he told that there was absolutely no reason to abandon their present system, and that the digital-trunked system offers no advantages and will cost an arm and a leg.

The department's radio people went back to the "M" anufacturer and said, thanks, but no thanks. The manufacturer was apoplectic that they lost a major sale to a radio-ignorant, unknowing, department. When they found out why, the approached the radio buff who was approaching retirement and hired him to sell the same equipment he told his own department to turn down.

All a manufacturer has to do today is mumble something about "NFPA-compliant" to the fire service and the town or city will be doing bake sales and increase taxes to raise the money for the "latest technology" they don't need.

 

[ten13]

But it is the Industry Standard and if you the Firefighter Does Not Meet this Standard then if anything happens to you your Insurance Does Not Have to PAY.

That's not entirely correct.

First off, most big cities are "self-insured."

Second, most municipal insurance policies only require compliance with "reasonable" standards (certainly not strict compliance with NFPA recommendations), and most probably not require "payment" for GROSS negligence on the part of the municipality, which is a very high bar to jump ("gross negligence" would be if the FD "ordered" members to enter a fire building with known defective, or NO, fire gear, or something along those lines).

"Industry Standard" would mean, in this context, that the firefighters HAVE "A radio," not necessarily one which, as aptly described elsewhere here, can talk to garbage collectors three towns over, with all the bells and whistles of a top of the line system.

 

[mmckenna]

I see your point, but let's use my agency for example. We provide automatic- and mutual-aid into four surrounding jurisdictions. One if VHF, one is UHF, one is an older Smartnet system, and one is P25. It's for that reason that we run tri-band radios. When we go into this other jurisdictions, we want ALL personnel to be able to communicate seamlessly with the other personnel on scene. We do use gateways when we need to, but obviously don't like the latency and other issues that are known to exist with a gateway.

Sounds like you have a legit need for tri band radios.

But with training and planning, there are other approaches that will work. My issue, as a taxpayer, is that so often public safety agencies default to the highest dollar solution to solve issues that -may- happen. It wouldn't be difficult to get interior attack crews off tri band radios and on to a single band, built into the SCBA, meets the spirit of the NFPA radio solution. I'd find it highly unlikely that each and ever member on the interior attack crew would need to talk to dispatch directly while actually engaged in fighting a fire. More than likely, the actual need is to be able to talk to the guys outside the building. That could easily be done with a single band analog radio system built into the SCBA.

Carry one or two tri-band radios on the truck, and absolutely have a tri-band mobile.

But each and every seat on the truck needing what may turn out to be a $10,000 radio is stretching it.

 

[buddrousa]

I did not say I agreed with the Standard I just stated what we were told by our people. You still did not address the 9/11 issue I stated. If my Driver rolls the pumper and the fireman that are not in full gear with seatbelts they get no line of duty death benefits. What do you care to call this?

 

[BoxAlarm187]

You still did not address the 9/11 issue I stated. If my Driver rolls the pumper and the fireman that are not in full gear with seatbelts get no line of duty death benefits. What do you care to call this?

As I have told many others: show me a single instance of LODD payments being denied for a lack of seatbelts, non-compliant helmets, outdated gear, or anything else safety-related.

The 9/11 event is the anomaly for LODD benefits, with separate funding, qualifications, denials, and much more. It should not be affiliated with "routine" fire service LODD's.

PSOB benefits are denied routinely for medical cases, not traumatic ones. Insurance payments are something completely different, and will vary between self-insured agencies and those with outside insurance.

 

[mmckenna]

Harris XL-400.