Ontario -- Equipment mounted externally on apparatus

Advancements, reviews, maintenance questions, discuss anything apparatus related...
whymelord
Posts: 1
Joined: Wed Dec 31, 1969 7:33 pm

Ontario -- Equipment mounted externally on apparatus

Postby whymelord » Thu Nov 12, 2015 12:40 pm

Good day all.

We are currently having a debate about what equipment/tools can be mounted on the exterior of our fire apparatus based on the Ontario MTO rules. For example, we have removed all of our pike poles from their standard spring loaded brackets and due to space we just have them piled in the corner of our rear hose bed.

I have done a bunch of looking and the MTO legislation and regulations and the National Safety Code standards don't explicitly deal with this. Has anybody done any extensive research and/or have any additional information on this topic? How can we mount tools outside of compartments that won't offend any of the MTO and/or Ministry of Labour inspectors/investigators?

I apprecate any input that can be shared.

L.

cwal31
Posts: 1
Joined: Wed Dec 31, 1969 7:33 pm

Postby cwal31 » Tue Nov 24, 2015 12:16 pm

Is this the basis of the argument? It seems to come up frequently with regards to tie downs.
This out of the commercial vehicle operator's manual - Ontario

Use of Unmarked Tie-Downs
"The cargo-securement standards do not allow the use of a tie-down, or component of a
tie-down, to secure cargo to a vehicle unless it is marked by the manufacturer with
respect to its working load limit"

Otherwise, yes, all equipment needs to be secured down on the exterior of the apparatus. With working load limit information attached to the tie down device.
Last edited by cwal31 on Tue Nov 24, 2015 12:18 pm, edited 1 time in total.

80Sierra
Posts: 5
Joined: Wed Dec 31, 1969 7:33 pm

Postby 80Sierra » Thu Feb 25, 2016 11:53 pm

As long as the mounts or tie downs are the original equipment, as speced by the manufacturer and meet the safety standards as outlined in NFPA 1901 or 1911, it shouldn't matter what the Ministry says as long as you are meeting these standards. Authority having jurisdiction does hold some weight in how the vehicles are allowed to operate but ultimately NFPA dictates whats currently acceptable.

User avatar
hmckay91
Posts: 420
Joined: Wed Dec 31, 1969 7:33 pm

Postby hmckay91 » Fri Feb 26, 2016 11:57 am

[quote=""80Sierra""]Authority having jurisdiction does hold some weight in how the vehicles are allowed to operate but ultimately NFPA dictates whats currently acceptable.[/quote]

80Sierra

I respectfully disagree. There are multiple levels of government and regulation at play here. Transport Canada, the provincial MOT and to a lesser extent the municipality are the Authorities Having Jurisdiction.

NFPA are standards are generally viewed as best practices (and some not even that). Any NFPA standard has no standing at all unless embodied in legislation. For example NFPA 10 and NFPA 13 are referenced in fire/building codes and are therefore enforceable.

If you want a fire apparatus in Canada you need it to be built to "CAN/ULC- S515-12 Standard for Automobile Fire Fighting Apparatus".
Although differences do exist between the two standards (Can/ULC and NFPA), they are much more similar than different. This close alignment is thanks to the excellent cooperation between ULC Standards, the NFPA, the Canadian firefighting community, and manufacturers serving this community.
As to the OPs question and cwal31's response, if the mount is commercially available and generally used to secure the item it is designed for and is in proper working order you should be good.
Load-securement requirements are found in Section 111 of the Highway Traffic Act (HTA) and in Ontario Regulation 363/04. This regulation adopts National Safety Code (NSC) Standard 10, Cargo Securement, as the standard for securing loads in Ontario.
Performance Criteria

The requirements included in NSC Standard 10 require all cargo-securement systems to withstand specified minimum amounts of force in the forward, rearward, sideways and downward directions.

Generally, operators are not required to conduct testing of cargo-securement systems to determine whether they comply with the performance requirements. The standard states clearly that cargo secured according to the general rules and the commodity-specific rules is considered to meet the specified performance criteria.
There's never time to do it right but always time to do it over.


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 5 guests