BEAUREGARD PARISH, La. — In the early hours of July 15, 2025, a volunteer firefighter was killed and a second firefighter was injured when the privately owned vehicle (POV) they were driving while responding to a medical call left the road and struck trees in rural Louisiana.
The pair had heard the dispatch radio traffic and self‑dispatched without formal activation by the public safety answering point. The crash occurred on an unmarked rural road with dense fog conditions and a sharp 90‑degree curve, resulting in one firefighter being partially ejected and pronounced dead at the scene, while the other sustained minor injuries.
The NIOSH report highlights significant risks associated with POV response by volunteer personnel, especially under degraded visibility conditions and in locations with limited road markings.
What factors caused the death and injury of the firefighters?
The investigation found that weather and roadway conditions significantly contributed to the crash. Dense fog, high humidity, lack of road markings and reflectors, and a posted 15 mph speed advisory for the curve combined to reduce visibility and increase risk while the POV approached a 90‑degree right‑hand curve.
The department’s standard operating procedures (SOPs) regarding the use of privately owned vehicles for emergency responses were either insufficiently enforced or not followed. Although SOPs existed, they allowed for self-dispatch and the use of POVs and firefighters responded without formal activation by the dispatch center.
Inattentive driving by the POV driver was identified as the cause of the crash. The driver recognized the curve only after entering it and attempted to brake and steer the vehicle to avoid a rollover, but the vehicle exited the roadway and struck trees. The crash report cited inattentive driving as the cause.
The practice of self‑dispatch by volunteer personnel created an uncoordinated arrival at the incident and increased risk, NIOSH stated. The firefighters heard the radio, determined they could respond, and went without formal assignment; this exposed them to hazards outside the dispatch and accountability system, according to the report.
The investigation also noted that human performance‑mode errors, specifically skill‑based performance in familiar tasks (driving) without conscious monitoring, likely contributed to reduced hazard awareness. Even experienced drivers can slip into automatic modes where critical cues (e.g., roadway risk changes) are missed.
What can fire departments do to prevent a similar tragedy?
The NIOSH report noted several actions fire departments can take:
- Fire departments should ensure that initial and annual emergency vehicle operations training emphasizes adjusting driving for the weather and roadway conditions present. Training under varying conditions helps drivers recognize when routine tasks become hazardous and require adaptation (see National Fire Protection Association 1451 standard for vehicle operations training programs).
- Departments should enforce SOPs for driving and operating privately owned vehicles when responding to emergencies. A consistent policy that restricts or governs POV use helps ensure compliance and reduces uncontrolled response exposure (see NFPA 1451 for training and policy guidance).
- Departments should ensure all firefighters are trained to recognize how physiological and psychological factors affect driving when responding to emergencies. Adrenaline, stress and the rush of an emergency can impair decision‑making and hazard recognition.
- Departments should ensure all firefighters are trained on and aware of skill‑based human performance mode errors. Drivers should be trained in self‑check habits and conscious monitoring to prevent slipping into automatic driving mode, where risks go unnoticed.
- Departments should ensure emergency response protocols include content that explicitly prohibits firefighters and resources from self‑dispatching to an emergency scene unless formally requested. A formal dispatch process is key to accountability, coordination and scene safety (see NFPA 1225 standard for emergency services communications).
What questions from this LODD can fire officers use in training?
- What specific driving hazards were present in this incident, and how might they have been mitigated by driver awareness or modification of response policy?
- How does the use of privately owned vehicles differ from fire‑department apparatus in terms of risk, training expectations, and policy requirements?
- What mechanisms can your department implement to prevent self‑dispatch or uncontrolled responses by volunteer personnel, and how would you enforce them?
Hands-on drill for firefighter training
Emergency‑vehicle response under limited visibility
Objective: To train response personnel in adjusting driving and decision‑making under low‑visibility roadway conditions (fog, darkness), unfamiliar road geometry, and use of POVs or light vehicles.
Props/apparatus: Use a station POV or light-duty vehicle equipped with emergency lighting, cones or temporary markers to simulate a curve or hazard, and roadway surface markers (paint or tape) to simulate limited edge delineation.
Safety considerations: Conduct at low speeds in a controlled environment, ensure no actual traffic, use spotters, and equip participants with seat belts and occupant restraints.
Success criteria: Participants demonstrate appropriate speed reduction, hazard recognition of the curve ahead, proper vehicle positioning, and the ability to execute a controlled slow turn or stop without leaving the roadway.
Does your department allow for self-dispatch and POV response? How is it part of your SOPs and training?
