February/March 2006 Volume 15 Issue 2
Published in the interest of fire protection and fire prevention in Ontario.
Comments, suggestions, questions and articles are welcome. Please send them to the attention of:
Carol Gravelle, Editor, Office of the Fire Marshal, 5775 Yonge Street, 7th Floor, Toronto, ON M2M 4J1, Tel: 416-325-3138, Fax: 416-325-3162, Carol.Gravelle@jus.gov.on.ca.
Unless otherwise indicated, the opinions expressed in any material published herein are those of the authors and do not necessarily represent the official policy of the Office of the Fire Marshal.
The reproduction of original articles appearing in this publication is permitted and encouraged, however permission to reproduce material for commercial purposes must be obtained from the Office of the Fire Marshal. Permission to use articles reprinted from other sources must be obtained from the original source.
ISSN 1188-7524
Thank you to everyone who contributed to this issue, particularly Bev Gilbert, Janice Johnstone, Chris Slosser, Gina Pontikas, Taryn Lloyd and Tony Pacheco.
Sparky®, Learn Not to Burn® and Risk Watch® are registered trademarks of the National Fire Protection Association, Quincy, MA 02269, U.S.A. Used with permission.
Fred McLennan
Principal, Ontario Fire College
Ontario Fire College
Seven years ago, the Ontario Fire College changed from a multi-week course delivery model to an intensive one-week style. The change, following consultation with the fire service, afforded a better fit of college programming with the challenges of fire department operations. With the new format, student-learners took on more responsibility for their own learning by completing pre-and post-class assignment in addition to attending classroom sessions. Student-learners brought their knowledge and experiences into classrooms which they shared with others from around the province. In this interplay of different approaches and ideas, lessons learned were reality-based.
Now, the college is emerging as a more traditional post-secondary institution in the delivery of its officer-level programs and specialty seminars. The OFC has agreements with other post-secondary institutions that recognize the equivalence of some of its courses to those offered in community colleges and universities. The firefighter curriculum and OFC pre-class packages are available on-line in recognition of the role of the Internet in supporting education and the distribution of learning. Through its partnership with Georgian College, one entire course is available through e-learning; more will follow.
More and more student-learners are attending OFC locally or regionally delivered courses, often led by OFC Associate Instructors. The significant benefits to individuals and their departments in timely access to training and in time and cost savings of this model are motivating more departments to explore this option. The mix of participants at Ontario Fire College courses has also changed with the offering of courses that address fire safety in key areas such as residential occupancies and industrial settings.
Individuals attending the college now benefit from a new resource centre with extended hours, staffed by two full-time librarians. A new fire station is the base for practical courses and a new auditorium serves the needs of large groups. Ongoing energy conservation and other cost-saving and revenue-generation initiatives ensure that the maximum financial resources are devoted directly to the learning experience.
Strategic alliances with other organizations, consistent with the mission and mandate of the OFC and the Office of the Fire Marshal, are enabling the delivery of new courses such as Trench Rescue and Marine Training. These alliances also assist in the acquisition of invaluable teaching aids.
Seven years from now, the face of the college will no doubt be changed again. Those changes will continue to reflect the underlying philosophy that learning is most valuable when it is applied to, and positively affects, the real world. This learning, focused on the Ontario fire service, will continue to be the raison d’etre of the Ontario Fire College experience.
The fire death rate for preventable structure fires in Ontario hit a historic low in 2005. It declined by approximately 43% since 1997, the year the Fire Protection and Prevention Act (FPPA) was enacted. One of the key components of the FPPA was to mandate municipalities to have public education programs, as well as a component of fire prevention.
“The decline is a milestone in Ontario’s fire history,” says Bernard Moyle, Fire Marshal of Ontario. “It highlights the dedication and commitment that municipalities have been contributing to their public education and fire prevention efforts: all to make Ontario a safer place from fire.”
Most recently another stride to save more lives was made in Ontario. On March 1, 2006, the smoke alarm requirement to have working smoke alarms on every storey, in addition to outside all sleeping areas, came into effect. It applies to all single-family, semi-detached and town homes, whether owner-occupied or rented.
To underline the importance of the new requirement, Working Smoke Alarms: It’s the Law was launched across the province in December. The province-wide campaign heightened awareness about the importance of working smoke alarms and educated the public about the amended regulation, smoke alarm technology and the enforcement of smoke alarm requirements.
Currently the OFM is providing fire departments with a variety of resources and information to ensure everyone in their community is aware of the new requirement. For more information about these resources or to order the public education kit that contains smoke alarm awareness materials, visit www.ofm.gov.on.ca.
10 Year Fire Death Rate in Ontario: All Fatalities and Fatalities in Preventable Structure fires
Fire Death rate: the number of fire fatalities divided by the population multiplied by 1 million
*All fire fatalities rate: This includes homicides and suicides and all other fire deaths.
** Preventable: Fires that were not deliberately set, including fires where the cause is under investigation or undetermined.
Preliminary and subject to revision - any death that is determined to be fire related occurring up to a year after the fire will be added to this total
Note: Does not include fire deaths on Federal or First Nations properties
Four occupants of a rural Burlington farmhouse escaped a fire in early January, which was ignited by a candle. They are lucky to be alive.
The fire began around 6 p.m. after an 11-year-old girl, without the knowledge of her parents, lit a candle in her bedroom. The candle tipped over, igniting some papers and furnishings. After making repeated unsuccessful attempts to put the fire out herself, she eventually got scared and ran downstairs to tell a parent. By that time smoke could be detected throughout the home. The girl’s mother rushed up the stairs to wake her other sleeping 12-year-old daughter. After three attempts to get through the heavy smoke from the bedroom, she finally awoke her daughter and escaped the home. The fire destroyed the upper floor of the century home and damage was estimated at $100,000.
The mother and two teenage girls were taken to hospital for smoke inhalation. The stepfather was not injured. Fortunately four cats and the family dog also made it out of the house safely.
Burlington public education officer Ben Rotsma said the only working smoke alarm in the home had been removed by the stepfather when he started renovations on the second floor several months before the fire. Their home also lacked a smoke alarm on the main floor where the parents’ bedroom was located.
A written violation was issued to the resident, which required the installation of smoke alarms prior to re-occupancy of the home. Fire officials indicated the parents showed extreme remorse for their actions, which could have led to the loss of the children. As a result of the fire the family has been working with the department through the TAPP-C program.
Working smoke alarms are essential to provide the precious seconds needed to safely escape a fire. Even during renovations where people may be living in their homes, working smoke alarms are required on every storey and outside all sleeping areas.
A response to a house fire has resulted in the owner being fined $1,500 for failing to maintain a smoke alarm in operating condition in a residence in Brockville.
The fire, resulting from careless cooking, occurred at approximately 3:55 a.m. on June 30, 2005 when one of the homeowners was away at work and three other family members were asleep in the building.
Upon completion of the fire investigation it was determined that a working smoke alarm was not present in the residence as required by the Fire Code. The owner indicated to Fire Chief Harry Jones that the smoke alarm had been removed from the upstairs ceiling while renovations were underway. The smoke alarm in question was later located, however, no battery was in the alarm.
In provincial court on December 6, 2005, the owner pleaded guilty to the charge as investigation of the fire determined that no working smoke alarm was present outside the sleeping area of the home.
“We hope other homeowners take notice of the outcome of this case and realize that the fire department is serious about smoke alarm offences,” stated Randy Burke, Chief Fire Prevention Officer for the fire department.
On February 1, cheques were presented to each team in support of their training and equipment from the OFM. From left are Fire Marshal Bernard Moyle, Terry Boyko, Toronto Fire Services, Bruce Montone, Ottawa Fire Services, Al Reaume, Windsor Fire & Rescue Services, Barry McKinnon OFM, Jim Coulson, OFM and Doug Silver, Toronto Fire Services.
The OFM developed a comprehensive strategy to be better prepared for the consequences of human caused and natural-caused incidents by establishing a provincial-municipal response system. The new system includes the establishment of three specialized and expert-level chemical, biological, radiological and nuclear response (CBRNR) teams located in Toronto, Windsor and Ottawa and a heavy urban search and rescue (HUSAR) team in Toronto. These teams are available to respond anywhere in the province.
Recently, a Justice of the Peace dismissed an application to have an Information quashed on the basis that it did not set out an offence known to law. The offences involved a marijuana grow house operation in Niagara Falls.
The Information contained two counts. One count involved Article 2.1.2.2. (failing to ensure that activities that create a hazard are not carried out in a building), while the second count involved Article 2.6.4.1. (failing to ensure that temporary electrical wiring not be used where it presents a fire hazard).
To summarize, the applicant raised three arguments. (1) The wording in the Information did not establish the status or capacity in which the defendant was charged. The wording in the Information did not identify whether the defendant is to defend himself against an allegation that he committed these offences outright himself, or whether he is to defend himself against some other responsibility for which he may or may not have been vicariously liable. (2) The Regulation cited in the Information did not carry an obligation “to ensure” and consequently did not create an offence for “failing to ensure”. (3) Respecting Count #1, it did not set out the means by which the allegation was committed, that is, it did not specify either the ‘activity’ or the ‘hazard’ of concern.
To summarize, the JP decided that in both counts the defendant was reasonably informed of the transaction against him, at least insofar as is required to establish: (1) sufficiency of the Information under Section 25 rules of the Provincial Offences Act (POA), and (2), thereby allowing the court the authority to amend the Information under Section 34 of the POA to reflect the capacity in which the defendant was charged or order particulars under Section 35 of the POA – setting out the means by which the offence in Count #1 was committed.
BY ALISON LANGLEY
THE REVIEW (NIAGARA FALLS)
A Toronto landlord claimed he had no idea the massage parlour he owned in Niagara Falls was equipped with sleeping quarters. He was fined $1,750 in Niagara Falls provincial offences court after pleading guilty to several fire code violations, including failing to ensure a smoke alarm was installed outside each sleeping area.
The Niagara Falls Fire Department conducted an inspection at the massage parlour in July 2005. At that time, Fire Prevention Officers noticed several violations to the Ontario Fire Protection and Prevention Act.
The landlord was aware the first floor was being used as a massage parlour, but didn’t know the second storey was also being used, he told the Justice of the Peace.
“He had never seen the interior of the building and he didn’t realize there were sleeping quarters upstairs, “ the landlord’s lawyer said.
Justice of the Peace Richard Bisson said the landlord brought the problems on himself by not bothering to inspect his own property.
“That’s why people are called absentee landlords. That’s why things like this happen,” Brisson told the landlord.
Excerpted from the December 16, 2005 edition of The Review (Niagara Falls).
Q.1 Considering the new smoke alarm requirement, when a storey includes two levels, where is the best place to install the smoke alarm?
A.1 It is best to install the smoke alarm in the higher ceiling area, as the smoke alarm will react quickest to smoke development in either area in this arrangement. As well, smoke alarms are best installed near the stairs that interconnect the levels or storeys. Always install the smoke alarms on the ceiling or on the upper portion of a wall in accordance with the manufacturer’s instructions.
Q.2 Also in accordance to the new smoke alarm requirement, a dwelling unit has two existing smoke alarms that are hardwired to an electrical circuit and interconnected to each other. When one activates, the second smoke alarm also activates at the same time. If additional smoke alarms are being installed to comply with the Fire Code, do they have to be electrically interconnected to the existing smoke alarms?
A.2 No. The additional smoke alarms may be battery powered and need not be inter-connected. Additional hardwired smoke alarms would also satisfy the requirements, whether or not they are interconnected. However, interconnected smoke alarms are a good idea for maximum protection.
Visit www.ofm.gov.on.ca for more information on the new smoke alarm requirement.
BY DEREK COLLINS
CAPTAIN, LEGAL SECTION &
JASON SCOVELL,
FIRE PREVENTION INSPECTOR, TORONTO FIRE SERVICES
Enforcement of the Ontario Fire Code in any municipal fire department in Ontario exists for the purpose of achieving four clear objectives:
The success that Fire Code enforcement achieves anywhere can be attributed in no small measure to an evolutionary cultural change that has occurred throughout the Province of Ontario in recent times. The change began with the introduction of the Fire Protection and Prevention Act (formerly Fire Marshals Act) in 1997 and the Ontario Fire Code in 1981. As both pieces of legislation are still relatively young, we are only now experiencing the success long intended by their advent on the legal stage. These tools now allow municipal fire services to take on a more effective role as an enforcement agency; and the evolutionary changes continue, based on evidence that their use on a day-to-day basis is still being challenged, explored, developed and experimented with. In fact, even the image of the Fire Prevention Inspector, as an agent of enforcement, continues to develop and mature, within the Ontario fire service, the courtroom (legal system) and in the public eye. These are not concepts that can be taught in a classroom, or recited from memory. They are aspects of the professional identity of the men and women who perform the inspection duties, and must be developed over time with experience and practical application.
To further improve the enforcement policies of any fire prevention division, change must occur on many levels. It must occur from within the Ontario fire service, the prosecutors who try the cases and the court services who adjudicate them. Change must also occur within the public’s perception to acknowledge the severity of fire safety offences and their associated punishments.
Let’s look at how we gauge legal success. Success in this area can be summarized through the following categories:
Consistency and quality of both inspection and prosecution are the main keys to success in each of these categories. And both do improve with experience and time. But the increasing challenge in all of this is that for the whole system to be successful, staff training, professional experience and information dissemination throughout the public realm needs to grow quickly, in order to keep up with changing legislation: present experience with each indicates that improvements are needed in each area. Therefore, it is only with the strong continuation of growth in these areas, that we will see them improved and their effectiveness and success maximized through the enforcement activities and day-to-day legal aspects of all fire prevention divisions in Ontario.
The Toronto experience has shown an increase in the number of charges laid over the last 10 years. Also, penalties have increased in the last 10 years as well, as can be seen in the following table:
*1995 stats based on the former municipality of Toronto
**1998 indicates the first year of the amalgamated City of Toronto
Another aspect of the success of Fire Code enforcement in Toronto is that cases that include serious Fire Code violations (smoke alarm, fire alarm, sprinklers, standpipe and retrofit) that directly affect the life safety of occupants, are now being handled more effectively at each level of the enforcement process. The following examples are highlights of some of the more significant prosecutions in the City of Toronto:
Public exposure and dissemination of these legal successes and similar information (i.e., legislative changes) needs to improve in many areas across Ontario. Unfortunately, in larger municipalities (i.e., Toronto), fire safety related stories that potentially offer an effective message are often pushed to the back pages in favour of other stories that are deemed more “newsworthy.” Ontario fire services need to make every effort to ensure this information is shared with the public through the effective use of all media, such as media releases, press conferences and public service announcements.
It is worth noting that on December 15, 2005 the maximum fines for all offences described in Sections 28, 29 and 30 of the Fire Protection and Prevention Act have been doubled. Also, on March 1, 2006 the scope of smoke alarm legislation is expanding to require smoke alarms are installed on every storey within a dwelling unit, in addition to those already required outside sleeping areas. These types of legislative changes should go a long way toward achieving compliance with Ontario Fire Code requirements ahead of the application of enforcement authority, which will improve the safety of living conditions in buildings throughout Ontario.
In the future, since these are provincially-legislated documents, Ontario fire services should take steps to forge new partnerships with each other to share legal successes, precedents and other information. This would further training on all levels across Ontario resulting in a more consistent approach to the legal process and a higher rate of successful prosecutions throughout Ontario. And, since all fire services in Ontario share the same duty to the citizens they serve, the forming of partnerships between municipalities and regions would send a loud and clear message to the judicial system and to the public about how serious and important Ontario Fire Code compliance really is.
BY SHARON GAMACHE
NATIONAL FIRE PROTECTION ASSOCIATION (NFPA)
For the first time in 2005, the National Fire Protection Association (NFPA) designated one day during Fire Prevention Week to emphasize fire safety issues for people with disabilities called People with Disabilities Day.
This year and into the future, fire departments looking to incorporate this component of fire safety into their Fire Prevention Week activities can do so by working with their community agencies and organizations that already target people with disabilities to ensure further success.
The emphasis of the People with Disabilities Day should be on planning, detection, and escape issues.
One of the first opportunities for fire and life safety planning is in the workplace. Although emergency planning should be addressed year round, Fire Prevention Week is a good time to make sure people have their plans together in the workplace, as well as the home.
People with disabilities and the workplace
Lack of adequate egress from buildings could well be a barrier to an effective escape plan. Over the years, many changes have been made to allow more people access into buildings. Provisions for helping people get out of buildings during a fire or other emergency, however, are often overlooked.
“Emergency responders and employers concerned about workplace safety need to be well aware of different kinds of disabilities and the most efficient and appropriate methods to assist a person with disabilities in an emergency,” advises Linda Woodbury, disabilities services coordinator for the City of San Diego and a member of the Center for High-Risk Outreach’s Fire Safety for People with Disabilities Task Force.
“A person who is deaf, for example, needs to see the alarm; a person who is blind needs alarms that aren’t so loud that they can’t hear directions or sense the echo from their surroundings; a wheelchair-user may need the use of an evacuation chair; and so on,” says Woodbury. “Evaluation should be made on a situation by situation basis and, ideally, advice should come from people who are disabled themselves.”
NFPA’s new educational safety handout, Workplace Safety for People with Disabilities, is available in both English and Spanish and can be downloaded free from www.nfpa.org. Also available from NFPA’s online catalog is the Disability Evacuation Training Program VHS/DVD toolkit. The program helps safety directors develop and implement evacuation plans.
NFPA recently organized the Disability Access Review Advisory Committee (DARAC) to advise NFPA’s president and Board of Directors on improving the codes and standards making process in such a way that it will not only help people with access to the workplace, but will provide viable emergency egress. For more on the committee, contact Alan Fraser, NFPA staff representative to the Committee at sfraser@nfpa.org.
People with disabilities and the home
Since most fires happen in the home, escape planning is of prime importance for people with disabilities, as it is for others. Fire departments or organizations that conduct smoke alarm installation programs can make these programs more inclusive by installing smoke alarms with special features for people with disabilities. Alarms with 10-year lithium batteries or alarms that can be tested with a television remote, for example, work for people who may be unable to stand on a ladder to test an alarm or change a battery. People who are deaf or hard-of hearing are not able to hear conventional alarms and need alarms with strobe lights.
In the United Sates, Oklahoma State University Fire Protection Publications and the Massachusetts Fire Marshal’s Office are implementing comprehensive smoke alarm programs for people who are deaf or hard-of-hearing. Jennifer Mieth, public education manager for the Massachusetts Office of the Fire Marshal, conducts education sessions on fire safety and smoke alarms for all the people who receive alarms with strobe lights.
“Every smoke alarm project needs to have fire safety education to be effective,” said Mieth. “This is even more important for people who are deaf or hard-of-hearing and who are unlikely to pick up this crucial information unless it is specifically directed to them.”
Recently the Ontario Office of the Fire Marshal (OFM), in conjunction with the North Shore Fire Safety Education Committee, Alzheimer Society of Ontario and Alzheimer Society of Haldimand Norfolk County, developed a fire safety fact sheet to provide caregivers with important fire safety information to provide a safer environment for those with Alzheimer Disease – and those who live with them. It is now available on the OFM website.
Information on where to purchase smoke alarms for people who are deaf and a directory of organizations serving people who are deaf can be found at www.nfpa.org. Also, to support your home safety planning activities NFPA’s Fire Safety for People with Disabilities brochure emphasizes fire safety in the home and is available from NFPA’s online catalog. For an audiotape or Braille copies, contact the Center for High-Risk Outreach at 617-984-7285.
These resources can be utilized as a starting point toward including everyone in your fire safety planning activities for Fire Prevention week and throughout the year.
Once again learning about fire safety in the classroom has paid off for some very lucky winners of the Fire Marshal’s Public Fire Safety Council’s Keeping Our Kids Safe campaign.
Open to elementary schools, teachers can register to take part in the campaign either online or by faxing their information to the Council. The campaign requires teachers to download and teach a safety lesson, and then submit a completed LESSON TAUGHT! form (either online or by fax). All names of participants are entered in the prize draw. Take a look at this years’ winners!
Fire Marshal Bernard Moyle presents a trip to Florida to grand prize winner, Kris Singh, a teacher at Jefferson Public School in Brampton. On hand for the presentation were Deptuy Fire Chief Andy MacDonald of Brampton Fire and Emergency Services. Onlookers include Singh’s class, who were thrilled to speak with the Fire Marshal, OFM staff, Brampton Fire and Emergency Services staff and Gale Solomon-Henry, Jefferson Public School Principal.
Second prize winner was Leah James, teacher at Ridgeview Public School in Brampton. She received a weekend in Ottawa for two. Transportation through Via Rail Canada.
Over the past several years, a number of Ontario fires and explosions have been attributed to the improper use of flammable hardwood floor finishing products in homes. These incidents have resulted in injuries, fatalities, and significant property losses.
BY MICHAEL NG, P. ENG
OFM FIRE PROTECTION ENGINEER
In 2000, Ontario experienced five incidents related to the improper use of flammable hardwood floor finishing products. Two of these incidents occurred over a three-day period and resulted in two separate fire fatalities. These fatalities subsequently led to a coroner’s inquest.
Hardwood floor finishing products include adhesives, sealers, lacquers and finishes. Many of these products contain highly flammable organic solvents. The vapours that evolve at room temperature are susceptible to ignition when exposed to an ignition source. All solvents used for this application produce vapours that are considerably heavier than air and tend to accumulate at floor level or low areas such as pits and basements. They can migrate down to the basement if an unimpeded path such as a floor vent and/or open door is available. This exposes the vapours to potential ignition sources such as pilot lights on gas fireplaces, water heaters and furnaces, which are often found in the basement.
It is important that homeowners are aware of the fact that the Ontario Fire Code (OFC) regulates the storage, handling, processing and use of flammable and combustible liquids. Since many floor finishing products fall under this classification, they are subject to the applicable mandatory requirements. To eliminate the risk of fire and burn injury, here are some relevant OFC requirements and OFM recommended safety practices that should be followed when working with these products.
Recommended Safety Practices
If a flammable liquid based product must be used:
OFC Requirements
On November 15, 2005 at Terrace Bay Public Library, Terrace Bay Fire Department held a cybercamp with Sparky. The goal of the cybercamp was to teach young children about fire safety at home. The day consisted of the children playing two computer games, Risk Watch and Sparky the Fire Dog, from the National Fire Protection Association (www.nfpa.org). Both games informatively presented the children with different fire hazards and indicated how they should react to such hazards.
At one point during the day, Lt. Jeff Pope went over the Stop, Drop and Roll technique with the children and gave some fire safety tips on what to do should there be a fire in their homes. A total of nine children attended the cybercamp.
Photo courtesy of Ken Benoit, Fire Chief, Terrace Bay Fire Department.
As a result of an amendment to the Ontario Fire Code in December 2005, every home in Ontario is now required to have working smoke alarms on every storey, as well as outside all sleeping areas. The new requirement took effect on March 1, 2006. (For more information on the Fire Code amendment, refer to communiqué no.
2005-35.)
In previous months, the OFM has undertaken and will continue to undertake considerable public education efforts to raise property owners’ and tenants’ awareness about this new regulation, to ensure widespread compliance.
In addition to numerous resources being available for distribution to the public, members of the fire service need to be informed about the regulation and suggested strategies for enforcing it. The following pages are based on some of the technical questions you may have as a member of the Ontario fire service. Answers have been provided. If you have further questions about Section 2.13 of the Ontario Fire Code, please contact Bruce Weaver, OFM Fire Protection Specialist at 416-325-3175 or Bruce.Weaver@jus.gov.on.ca.
What dwelling units are regulated by Section 2.13 of the Fire Code?
Section 2.13 applies to all detached houses, semi-detached houses and row houses where each house is occupied as a dwelling unit. (A dwelling unit is defined by the Fire Code as meaning “a suite operated as a housekeeping unit, used or intended to be used as a domicile by one or more persons and usually containing cooking, eating, living, sleeping and sanitary facilities”.)
A seasonal home, such as a cabin or cottage, is also considered a dwelling unit for the purpose of this Section. Section 2.13 also captures any other dwelling unit that is not otherwise regulated by Retrofit, Part 9 of the Fire Code. For example, where a building contains a mixed use of occupancies and also contains one or two dwelling units, Section 2.13 would require the dwelling unit(s) to be provided with smoke alarms.
Part 9 regulates houses containing secondary apartment units and most multi-storey, multi-unit residential buildings. Smoke alarm requirements for these buildings are already contained in Part 9 of the Fire Code and Section 2.13 does not apply to these units.
Does Section 2.13 apply equally to dwelling units that are owner occupied and rental units?
Yes. Each dwelling unit is regulated regardless of the ownership arrangement.
Where are smoke alarms required to be located in each dwelling unit?
A smoke alarm is required to be installed between each sleeping area and the remainder of the dwelling unit. Where the sleeping areas are served by hallways, the smoke alarms must be installed in the hallways.
In addition, at least one smoke alarm is required to be installed on each storey that does not contain a sleeping area.
Where a dwelling unit is of a split-level design, is a smoke alarm required on each separate level?
No. A smoke alarm is not required on each level in a split-level dwelling unit because each level does not count as a separate “storey”.
To determine the number of storeys in a dwelling unit, and thus determine the number of smoke alarms required, it is necessary to first identify the “first storey” of the dwelling unit.
The Fire Code defines the “first storey” as meaning the storey with its floor closest to grade and having its ceiling more than 1.8 metres above grade.
Once the first storey has been identified, it is then possible to identify the basement. The Fire Code defines a basement as meaning a storey or storeys of a building located below the first storey. Similarly, once the first storey is identified, it is then possible to identify the second storey and, where applicable, the third storey.
As illustrated below, a storey can consist of more than one level. Only one smoke alarm is required to be installed in each storey (see note 1). However, when a dwelling unit contains multiple sleeping areas, a smoke alarm must be installed to protect each separate sleeping area. This may necessitate additional smoke alarms on some levels of a split-level home (see note 2). The following illustrated example of a split-level dwelling unit is provided for clarification.
Note 1: One smoke alarm required for each of the basement, first and second storeys.
Note 2: An additional smoke alarm is required on the lower level of the second storey due to sleeping rooms.
When a storey includes two levels, where is the best place to install the smoke alarm?
It is best to install the smoke alarm in the higher ceiling area, as the smoke alarm will react quickest to smoke development in either area in this arrangement. As well, smoke alarms are best installed near the stairs that interconnect the levels or storeys. Always install the smoke alarms on the ceiling or on the upper portion of a wall in accordance with the manufacturer’s instructions.
Many homes have existing smoke alarms that are hardwired to an electrical circuit. Where additional smoke alarms are installed, are these required to be hardwired as well?
No. Any additional smoke alarms required by Section 2.13 of the Fire Code are permitted to be battery powered.
It is best to install the smoke alarm in the higher ceiling area, as the smoke alarm will react quickest to smoke development in either area in this arrangement. As well, smoke alarms are best installed near the stairs that interconnect the levels or storeys. Always install the smoke alarms on the ceiling or on the upper portion of a wall in accordance with the manufacturer’s instructions.
A dwelling unit has two existing smoke alarms that are hardwired to an electrical circuit and interconnected to each other. When one activates, the second smoke alarm also activates at the same time. If additional smoke alarms are being installed to comply with the Fire Code, do they have to be electrically interconnected to the existing smoke alarms?
No. The additional smoke alarms may be battery powered and need not be interconnected. Additional hardwired smoke alarms would also satisfy the requirements, whether or not they are interconnected. However, interconnected smoke alarms are a good idea for maximum protection.
Is it permissible to replace existing permanently hardwired individual smoke alarms or electrically interconnected smoke alarms with battery powered smoke alarms?
No. When smoke alarms are being replaced, the installation must not reduce the level of detection required by the Building Code in effect at the time of construction of the dwelling unit, or by municipal by-laws in effect before the Fire Code adopted this requirement. This requirement is contained in Sentence 6.3.3.5.(1) of the Fire Code. In other words, existing permanently wired individual smoke alarms or electrically interconnected smoke alarm installations must be maintained to provide the same level of protection as originally required. Any replacement smoke alarms must be of a type comparable to the original (or better).
Is a cellar, attic space or crawl space required to have a smoke alarm installed under the changes to Section 2.13 of the Fire Code?
A space without a finished floor is not considered a storey and therefore smoke alarms are not required.
“Attic space” is defined in the Fire Code as a space between the roof and the ceiling of the top “storey” (i.e. cavity within the roof space). As such, it is not designated as a “storey” and a smoke alarm is not required. However, an attic or roof space that has a floor and contains a living space or storage is no longer an “attic space” by definition. Such a space is considered a “storey” and a smoke alarm must be installed.
A “crawl space” is not defined in the Fire Code but generally refers to a cavity space located beneath the house or a portion of the house and typically has a very low overhead. A crawl space without a finished floor is not a storey and does not require a smoke alarm. Where a crawl space has a finished floor and is used for storage or contains an appliance, it is a storey and requires a smoke alarm. A crawl space that extends out from an adjoining basement does not require a separate smoke alarm since a smoke alarm is already required to protect the basement.
“Cellar” is defined in the Fire Code as a basement that is more than 50% below grade. A cellar, like a basement is considered a “storey”. A smoke alarm is required to be installed in a space that falls under the definition of a cellar.
Is it permissible to install additional smoke alarms beyond the minimum required in Section 2.13?
Yes. The regulation does not prohibit the installation of additional smoke alarms beyond the minimum number that are required. In larger homes, in homes where there are room and ceiling configurations that may interfere with the movement of smoke, or in homes where people sleep with bedroom doors closed, it is recommended to install additional smoke alarms to enhance early detection of smoke and warning of fire.
Members of the Longbow Lake Fire Brigade are thrilled to receive this 1999 GMC, four-wheel drive truck, donated by TransCanada PipeLines Limited. The truck will be re-furbished to become a first response vehicle for the volunteer fire brigade, carrying equipment and firefighters to highway traffic collisions and wildfires.
The Longbow Lake Fire Brigade is a non-profit and charitable organization that provides fire suppression and emergency response services to Kirkup and LeMay townships. The department is composed of volunteers entirely and is funded by donations from the community.
TransCanada PipeLines, through their Community Investment Department, seeks to identify and forge meaningful partnerships with not-for-profit organizations that enhance the value of community-based initiatives and improve the quality of life for residents of the communities in which they work, live and conduct business.
The Longbow Lake Fire Brigade greatly appreciates the opportunity to partner with TransCanada PipeLines, and their support in the donation of this vehicle.
From left are Fire Chief John Baker, Longbow Lake Fire Brigade, Pat Magee and Wes Manulak, both of TransCanada PipeLines.
If you have an item you would like to see published in Update Ontario, please send it to: The Editor, The Ontario Fire Service Messenger, Office of the Fire Marshal, Place Nouveau Building, 5775 Yonge Street, 7th Floor, Toronto, Ontario M2M 4J1. Tel: 416-325-3138, fax: 416-325-3119 or email Carol.Gravelle@jus.gov.on.ca.
BY CHERYL ROSELL
EDUCATIONAL CONSULTANT
With updates to the Emergency Response Guidebook 2004 (ERG 2004), the Fire Marshal’s online self-study course for Terrorism/Hazardous Materials Awareness for First Responders in Ontario has been updated to reflect those changes. This course was developed in response to ongoing concerns for public safety as a result of hazardous materials incidents and potential threats and acts of terrorism. The revisions were made in consultation with multi-agency stakeholders.
This updated course meets NFPA 472, Standard for Professional Competence of Responders to Hazardous Materials Incidents (2002 Edition). The purpose is to specify competencies for those who respond to hazardous materials incidents at the awareness level.
As before, the primary target audience for this course includes the following groups:
In addition, this course is also designed to benefit
Before starting, participants are encouraged to obtain a copy of the Emergency Response Guidebook 2004 (ERG 2004). This guidebook is distributed free of charge to Public Safety Organizations by Transport Canada, Safety and Security.
Those who have taken the course previously are encouraged to review it in order to maintain currency in relation to the required competencies.
To access this course, go to the web site of the Office of the Fire Marshal, www.ofm.gov.on.ca and look under Multi-Agency Preparedness/Response. Participants who complete this self-study course and submit the application form found in Appendix A will receive a Certificate of Completion from the Ontario Fire College.
In February, a group of fire service stakeholders (From left to right: Scott Heard, (A) Captain, City of Vaughan Fire & Rescue Department; Leslie Kennedy, Educational Consultant, Academic Standards and Evaluation, OFM; Bill Sullivan, D/C Training, Toronto Fire Services; Tony Weir, Training Officer, Barrie Fire & Emergency Service; Alan Brody, Training Officer, Mnjikaning Fire Rescue Service; Phil Carr, (A) Captain, City of Vaughan Fire & Rescue Department; (seated) Garry Hobson, Training Officer, Central York Fire Services) met to amend the simulations guide. Stay linked to www.ofm.gov.on.ca for the revised guide.
BY TONY PACHECO
EXECUTIVE ASSISTANT TO THE FIRE MARSHAL
Ontario firefighters have been given new authority to access closed roads when traveling to an emergency in Personally Owned Vehicles (POVs) thanks to a recent legislative amendment.
Bill 169, Transportation Statute Law Amendment Act 2005, received Royal Assent on November 21, 2005. It amended the Highway Traffic Act to allow firefighters to respond on closed roads in personally owned vehicles, in the performance of their duties.
The idea of the closed road strategy was spurred on by a concern raised by the Northern Bruce Peninsula Fire Department. It was based on a firefighter from this fire department who responded to an emergency on a road that was closed due to weather conditions. Unfortunately, the firefighter became involved in a collision with a police cruiser that was stopped on the road and as a result of this collision, the firefighter faced increased car insurance rates.
Little did anyone know that this concern would see the Office of the Fire Marshal (OFM), the Ontario fire service and a number of stakeholder groups working together as a cohesive unit over the past year to develop a long-term strategy to address the issue of firefighters driving their POVs on closed roads.
The first OFM-led strategy session began in January 2005 when representatives from fire service and municipal stakeholder groups were invited to provide input into the development of a suitable long-term strategy. Those who accepted the invitation and became members of the Closed Road Working Group included: Ministry of Transportation; Ontario Association of Fire Chiefs; Ontario Provincial Police; Fire Fighters Association of Ontario; Association of Municipalities of Ontario; Municipal Health and Safety Association of Ontario; Insurance Bureau of Canada; and the Northern Bruce Peninsula Fire Department.
The goal of the Closed Road Working Group was to develop a comprehensive long-term solution and to seek support for a legislative change to the Highway Traffic Act, 1990.
“This is a great success story primarily for fire services that serve rural communities and utilize volunteer firefighters that respond in their own vehicles,” said Fire Marshal Bernard Moyle. “Before this change, firefighters and police faced a tough decision on whether to obey the [Highway Traffic] Act in such a situation or break the law by allowing a personal vehicle on a closed road in the interest of protecting public safety.”
As part of the overall strategy, the OFM believed firefighter safety should be maintained as a priority and should be addressed prior to the implementation of any legislative change. That is why the working group focused its efforts on the development of other documents to support an amendment to the Highway Traffic Act. These included an OFM Public Fire Safety Guideline that would include contingency planning considerations for responses on closed roads; Sample Emergency Road Closure Notification Protocol; a sample standard operational guideline (SOG) for the fire service that would handle firefighter emergency response in POVs; and training for firefighters who use POVs to respond to emergencies.
The OFM also worked with the Insurance Bureau of Canada to send out a bulletin to its members mentioning the passage of Bill 169 and requesting the insurance industry to provide firefighters with ‘claims forgiveness’ for at fault claims submitted as a result of collisions that may occur while a firefighter is responding to an emergency in a POV. The bulletin was issued in December 2005 and indicates that for individual firefighters with ‘clean’ driving records, support was being sought from the insurance industry to provide forgiveness for the first at-fault accident provided there were no other serious convictions connected with the collision, for example, careless or impaired driving.
Although changes to the Highway Traffic Act allow firefighters to use their POVs in the performance of their duties, firefighters still need to adhere to all the rules of the road in order to safeguard their safety when responding to emergencies.
“It is vital that firefighters remember that they have no right to speed, ignore traffic signals or posted signs when responding to emergencies,” Moyle continued. “The OFM would urge all fire departments to hold training sessions in the coming months to remind staff of their rights and responsibilities when responding in their own vehicles and ensure they are aware of all legislation and insurance issues surrounding the issue.”
A teaching plan with operational guidelines was inserted in the last edition of The Messenger to assist in the training process and to ensure all firefighters are aware of safe driving practices in POVs.
On December 1, 2005 the Office of the Fire Marshal released its third communiqué regarding closed roads. Communiqué 2005-34: Firefighter Response in Personally Owned Vehicles on Closed Roads: Transportation Statute Law Amendment Act, 2005 and Implementation Documents for the Fire Service provides additional information and is available on the OFM website at www.ofm.gov.on.ca.
Additionally, firefighters will have new authority to direct traffic sometime in the coming year with a second amendment also having been introduced through the passage of Bill 169. This revision to legislation will not come into force until proclamation, which is not anticipated until at least Spring 2006.
The OFM compiles statistics on all fatal fires that occur in Ontario. These statistics can assist the fire service to determine fire trends, plan fire prevention initiatives and target public education activities. Due to the methods and criteria used in reporting fire deaths, statistics are subject to change.
Fatal Fire Summary
January 2006: 5 fatal fires resulting in 6 fire deaths
Age Group 0-15: Male - 0, Female - 0, Total - 0
Age Group 16-64: Male - 3, Female - 1, Total - 4
Age Group 65 and over: Male - 1, Female - 0, Total - 1
Total: Male - 4, Female - 1, Total - 5
Fire Cause - Accidental 2, Undetermined 0, Under Investigation 2, Incendiary 1
Time of Day - 0001-0800 - 1, 0801-1600 - 1, 1601-1800 - 0, 1801-0000 - 3
Locations of fatal fires: Athens and Rear of Yonge and Escott (1); Hamilton (1); Timmins City (1) and Toronto(2).
February 2006: 4 fatal fires resulting in 6 fire deaths
Age Group 0-15: Male - 2, Female - 0, Total - 2
Age Group 16-64: Male - 2, Female - 1, Total - 3
Age Group 65 and over: Male - 1, Female - 0, Total - 1
Total: Male - 5, Female - 1, Total - 6
Fire Cause - Accidental 1, Undetermined 0, Under Investigation 3, Incendiary 0
Time of Day - 0001-0800 - 5, 0801-1600 - 0, 1601-1800 - 1, 1801-0000 - 0
Locations of fatal fires: Clarington (1); Ottawa (1); Scugog (3) and Woodstock (1).
BY RACHELE LABRECQUE
STANDARD-FREEHOLDER (CORNWALL)
In early January, Cornwall fire department arrived at an apartment unit where an unattended candle had sparked a fire.
“The fire was extinguished and contained to the living room area of one unit,” said Michel Bickerstaffe, Senior Fire Prevention Officer, Cornwall Fire Department. “The smoke and heat damage was significant. The fire was deemed accidental and the ignition source was a candle. The building was ventilated to clear the smoke in the hallways.”
Damage was estimated at more than $50,000.
Excerpted from the January 10, 2005 edition of the Standard-Freeholder (Cornwall).
BY MONIQUE BEECH
THE STANDARD (ST.CATHARINES-NIAGARA)
Luck wasn’t working for a 15-year-old Lincoln girl who tried to save her home from fire and inadvertently started one.
The girl was home alone at about 3 p.m. when an ember flew from the wood-burning stove and hit the floor of her two-storey home, said Lincoln Fire Chief Scott Blake.
Panicked, the girl picked up the ember with a piece of cardboard and flung it outside, only to hit a pile of building materials. The material ignited and flames spread to the house, including a large porch.
“It was going pretty good when we got there,” said Blake. “We quickly knocked it down. They were fortunate.”
Had the girl recalled the fire safety message “Get out and stay out!” the situation probably would not have escalated to this level. Damage is estimated at about $35,000.
Excerpted from the January 17, 2006 edition of The Standard (St.Catharines-Niagara).
In late January firefighters arrived at a house fire just outside of Simcoe. Extremely heavy smoke and an aggressive fire caused close to $100,000 in damage to the raised bungalow and its contents. It could have been much worse.
The lone occupant of the house was alerted by a working smoke alarm, and escaped without any burns but was suffering from smoke inhalation. Several cats were rescued by firefighters and a dog was rescued by a neighbour.
Norfolk County Fire & Rescue Fire Chief Denys Prevost said “It is lucky this home had a working smoke alarm to alert the occupant with enough time to escape from this fast moving fire. Another smoke alarm in the basement might have provided additional warning time.”
As of March 1, 2006, smoke alarms are required on all storeys of a home, including outside all sleeping areas.
BY MARY GOLEM
OWEN SOUND SUN TIMES
Volunteer firefighters with the Chesley and Area Fire Department have added a piece of equipment that will enhance their capabilities as firefighters.
Thanks to a fundraising effort, major donations from Chesley’s Homecoming and a Grande Olde Opry event and financial support from companies and individuals, the Chesley and Area Fire Department now has a $12,500 thermal imaging camera.
Both the shape of an object and its temperature can be detected with the camera, enhancing firefighters’ search and rescue efforts, as well as offering support in fire detection, location and knowledge if the fire is spreading.
“It is really a vital tool for firefighters and we are so grateful to the community for its support,” said Deputy Fire Chief Robert Bell.
Excerpted from the January 4, 2006 edition of the Owen Sound Sun Times.
The difference between “level” and “storey” is that storey is a defined term in the Ontario Fire Code and level is not. To determine the number of storeys in a dwelling unit, and thus determine the number of smoke alarms required, it is necessary to first identify the “first storey” of the dwelling unit.
The Fire Code defines the “first storey” as meaning the storey with its floor closest to grade and having its ceiling more than 1.8 metres above grade.
Once the first storey has been identified, it is then possible to identify the basement. The Fire Code defines a basement as meaning a storey or storeys of a building located below the first storey. Similarly, once the first storey is identified, it is then possible to identify the second storey and, where applicable, the third storey.
Using language already defined in the Fire Code will help everyone understand the new requirement and ensure consistency of messaging throughout Ontario.
BY HEATHER CRAWFORD
THE NORTH HURON CITIZEN
Back row from left: Fire service personnel Captain David Sparling, Rob Kolkman, Lieutenant Paul Kerr join Grey-Bruce General Hospital chief of staff Dr. Don Eby. Front row from left: Lieutenant Mike McDonald, Mike Pawitch, Doug Cloakey, Frank Saunders and Jeff Josling. Absent: Herb Govier. Photo courtesy of Heather Crawford, The North Huron Citizen.
Blyth firefighters were presented with awards from their local hospital in December after they saved the life of a Brussels resident using a defibrillator.
The Blyth Fire Department is the only department in Huron County to have the medical training to use a defibrillator and it certainly paid off when they used it to save a man’s life on November 18.
The man, was working in the field of a farm close to Blyth with his friend and neighbour when a combine caught on fire. His friend ran to call the fire department and came back to find the man had suffered a heart attack.
“He worked on me until the fire department came,” the man said.
The neighbour performed CPR on his friend immediately, prolonging his life until the fire department arrived on the scene.
“[The firefighters] had to get me down because I was on top of the combine,” he said. “They worked on me until the ambulance arrived.”
“This is why we’ve been doing medical training for all these years,” Captain David Sparling said. “It’s the ultimate reward for our firefighters to be able to save a life.”
The awards were given to the firefighters from their base hospital, Grey-Bruce General in Owen Sound, as well as a certificate to the entire department accepted by Fire Chief Paul Josling.
“I think [the medical training] is a valuable service to the community,” Josling said. He added that the firefighters had used the training at least a dozen times before.
Dr. Don Eby, Chief of Staff for Grey-Bruce Gerneral Hospital, distributed the certificates to the department on December 7.
“He’s a very strong supporter of [First Response training],” Josling said.
The man, who in now recovering well said being attended to by firefighters before an ambulance arrived is not common in many areas.
“I certainly appreciate the help of the fire department. A lot of times that doesn’t happen.”
Excerpted from the December 15, 2005 edition of The North Huron Citizen.
BY CHRIS GOUGEON
BRAMPTON FIRE AND EMERGENCY SERVICES
Each year, from May through to September, Brampton Fire and Emergency Services regularly visit local shopping malls and farmers’ markets. But they aren’t shopping. Instead Brampton Fire’s 60 suppression crews use the visits to raise awareness about the importance of home fire escape plans and working smoke alarms as part of their annual Home Safe Home program.
In 2004, the program adopted a random survey. In addition to increasing the awareness level of Brampton residents, the survey provides Brampton Fire and Emergency Services with answers that can be used as measurable results to further evaluate the percentage of Brampton families who possess the knowledge to create and implement an Escape Plan for themselves, in their own homes.
The crews get to decide which venue they would like to visit. They return to the venue as many times as necessary until each crew has conducted at least 200 surveys and given an information package to each person who completes a survey. The crews also randomly distribute an additional 300 information packages to passerby.
Each information package is developed with the objective of increasing fire safety awareness and contains a cover letter from Brampton Fire Chief Terry Irwin, OFM “Facts about Smoke Alarms” pamphlet, Brampton Fire’s “Home Fire Safety” pamphlet and an instructional sheet on “How to Make an Escape Plan” with grid paper printed on the back. Each year Brampton Fire adds one additional piece of information into its packages. In 2005, the piece of the information stressed the need for clear and visible house numberings. In 2006, the recent Fire Code amendment requiring a smoke alarm on every storey and outside all sleeping areas in the home will be emphasized.
A large portion of the success of this program is due to public interaction with ‘real, live’ firefighters: one of the best forms of educational awareness available. Residents in the community can choose not to read the newspaper, listen to the radio, watch television or surf the Internet, but it is difficult to ignore a firefighter directly asking “ Do you have a home fire escape plan and working smoke alarms on every storey of your home?”
The survey consists of four questions with each question dealing with a segment of the steps required to make an Escape Plan:
1. If the smoke alarm goes off in your home, indicating a fire, do you think you would have enough time to collect valuables before you get out?
2. If you discovered fire in your home should you call 9-1-1 before you leave your home?
3. Do you think that one path of escape from the home is enough?
4. Is everyone in your home aware of a meeting place once outside?
It is assumed that if a resident answers all four questions correctly they have the knowledge to create and implement an Escape Plan. The number of “all correct” answers was then tallied to calculate a percentage of the population that had the knowledge to create an Escape Plan. In 2004, the percentage of people who answered all four answers correctly was 26.4% while the data from 2005 showed almost a six percent increase to 32.3%.
In 2005 Brampton firefighters surveyed almost 11,000 people and distributed more than 27,000 information packages at a cost of less than $3,000. Each person gave the name of their street and the firefighters assigned the fire area numbering system to be used later to plot on the city map the number of “hits” in each area. This allowed for an analysis of the saturation of contacts in the city showing that the areas with the highest concentration received the highest number of “hits.”
Brampton Fire and Emergency Services will continue with the Home Safe Home program for a period of five years and track any variations in the answers received. Due to the large number of those surveyed and the large percentage of correct answers, the program demonstrates a willingness by Brampton residents to be informed about fire safety, specifically how to create a home fire escape plan and the importance of working smoke alarms. Based on this information, Brampton Fire believes that the continuation of this program and their efforts will increase these numbers to further underline how the program is worthwhile and necessary. The question that remains is what percentage of YOUR population has the knowledge to make an Escape Plan?
Check out our latest books and videos from the Fire Sciences Library & Audio-Visual Resource Centre. We provide current fire resources to support the Office of the Fire Marshal as well as fire departments, emergency services and fire related industries. The collection consists of 9,000+ books, standards, statue law, reports, 80+ journals, and over 1,300 audio-visual resources. A full listing of new resources is available on our website!
New Books
Carbon Monoxide : A Clear and Present Danger by Bob Dwyer. (2003)
Emergency Responder Training Manual for the Hazardous Materials Technician by Wiley-Interscience. (2005)
Fire Safety in High-Rise Buildings by National Fire Protection Association. (2003)
Fire Officer Coaching by Fire Protection Publications. (2005)
Fire Protection Systems for Special Hazards by National Fire Protection Association. (2004)
Introduction To Fire Pump Operations by Thomas Sturtevant. (2005)
The NFPA Guide To Gas Safety by Carl Rivkin. (2005)
Plans Examiner: For Fire and Emergency Services by Fire Protection Publications. (2005)
New Videos and DVDs
Candles: Tiny Flame, Deadly Threat. (2005)
Program aims to inform viewers about the dangers associated with candle use. Discusses how candle fires commonly start and how to use candles safely and prevent fires.
Fundamentals of Fire Fighter Skills. Skills and Drills Series. (2005)
No. 1 Response and Size Up No. 2 Ropes and Knots No. 3 Forcible Entry and Search and Rescue No. 4 Ladders and Ventilation No. 5 Extinguishers No. 6 Fire Suppression No. 7 Salvage and Overhaul No. 8 Special Operations
Go for Safety: A Children’s Guide to Home Fire Safety. (2004)
Aims to teach children ages seven to nine years old fire safe behaviours through interactive lessons. Covers: matches and lighters, smoke alarms, escape planning, crawling low under smoke and Stop, Drop and Roll.
Portrait of a Serial Arsonist: The Paul Keller Story. (1993)
Documentary looks at one of the most terrifying serial arsonists, Paul Keller who was responsible for nearly 100 fires and damages estimated at more than $35 million dollars.
The Fire Sciences Library & Audio-Visual Resource Centre are located in the Office of the Fire Marshal serving staff and residents of Ontario. We welcome visitors to come to the library and borrow from our collection. We will also courier material directly to clients. Hours are Monday – Friday 8:30am to 4:15pm. Visit our website by clicking on Resource Centre at www.ofm.gov.on.ca Phone: (Library) 416-325-3235/3236, (Audio-Visual) 416-325-3121, Email: firesciences.information@ofm.ca.
BY DON MITCHELL
REGIONAL PESTICIDE SPECIALIST, ONTARIO MINISTRY OF THE ENVIRONMENT
Notices to Fire Departments
Yearly, most fire departments receive notices (post cards and letters) from businesses advising of the storage of pesticides. This article explains why these notices are being sent and what they mean to a fire department.
In Ontario, the Ministry of the Environment regulates the selling and usage of pesticides, under the Pesticides Act and Regulation 914. Section 114 of the regulation requires all pesticide vendors and extermination businesses, who store pesticides of a certain Schedule, to submit an annual report to their local Fire Department.
In order to understand why the cards and letters are required and what their contents mean, it is imperative to understand the basics of pesticide regulation.
Who Regulates Pesticides?
In Canada, pesticides are regulated by at least two and sometimes three levels of government. Health Canada, through its Pest Management Regulatory Agency (PMRA), regulates pesticide products under the Pest Control Products Act (Canada). Pesticides sold or used in Ontario, must be: approved by Health Canada, have a valid Pest Control Products Act registration number, be classified by Ontario and placed in an Ontario Schedule. For more information about Health Canada and the Pest Management Regulatory Agency, please visit: www.pmra-arla.gov.on.ca.
Each province regulates the sale, storage, use, disposal and transportation of Federally Registered Pesticides. Licensing and certification of pesticide users also falls under provincial legislation. Municipalities may further restrict pesticide use within their municipal jurisdictions.
What is a pesticide “Schedule”?
Pesticides come in many varieties and have different human health and environmental risks. They may be found in a powder, solid, liquid or a gas form. Some may be immediately dangerous to human health and/or the environment, such as Methyl Bromide gas. Others may be less hazardous, such as the common household compound, insecticidal soap. In some cases, it is necessary to restrict access to types of pesticides, limited to trained and licensed individuals. Other variations may be used by the general public.
The Ontario Pesticide Advisory Committee (OPAC) is a multidisciplinary body, created to advise government on pesticide issues and to allow for their classification. Before a pesticide can be used in Ontario, it must be classified by OPAC and placed into one of six Schedules. Highly toxic and/or persistent pesticides are classified and listed in Schedules 1, 2 and 5. Pesticides posing a lower risk to human health and the environment are classified and listed in Schedule 3. Those that pose the lowest risk, which can be used by the general public, are located in Schedules 4 and 6.
For more information on OPAC, the lists of pesticides approved for use in Ontario and how they are classified, please visit www.opac.gov.on.ca. You may also contact your local Ontario Ministry of the Environment’s Pesticide Specialist.
Who can use or sell pesticides?
The Pesticides Act and regulation 914 restrict the sale and use of pesticides classified in Schedules 1, 2 and 5 to licensed exterminators. Non-exterminators may request a special permit, for some products.
Pesticides classified in Schedules 3, 4 and 6 are generally available to homeowners. A Vendors Licence is required to sell pesticides listed in Schedules 1, 2, 3, 5 and 6. A specialized General Vendors Licence, which includes training and certification of an outlet representative, is required to sell higher risk pesticides, classified in Schedules 1, 2 and 5. This type of licence is usually held by Agricultural Supply companies and pesticide wholesalers. Retailers such as big box stores, supermarket chain stores, hardware chain stores and garden centres, generally have a Limited Vendors Licence allowing them to sell only the lower risk pesticides, which have been classified in Schedules 3, 4 and 6.
Why is annual notification important for fire departments?
Section 124 of Regulation 914 is intended to proactively provide fire department personnel with advanced location knowledge of where pesticides are stored. With this information, fire departments may take additional precautions in their firefighting initiatives to ensure public safety and ensure the protection of the environment.
Extra precautions may be required and will be determined by the type and volume of pesticides in storage. If a large amount of toxic pesticides (Schedule 1, 2 or 5) were involved in a fire in an urban setting, evacuation of people close to the fire may be considered. If the fire involves a large amount of less toxic pesticides, (Schedules 3, 4and 6) near a sensitive waterway, firefighting techniques involving reduced water volumes, may be considered.
Reporting Pesticide Spills and Fires to Ministry of the Environment (MOE)
The duty to report pesticide spills typically rests with the person responsible for the pesticide. However, others may also have a reporting duty. When pesticides are involved in a fire, it is recommended that the fire department notify the ministry’s Spills Action Centre, by calling: 1-800-268-6060.
Under the Pesticides Act and Regulation 914, Section 29(1), when pesticides are spilled or are involved in a fire, the person responsible for the pesticide must report the spill or fire to the MOE, when it causes or is likely to cause an impact on a person or the environment. In the case of a pesticide vendor, this could be an employee or the storeowner. In the case of an extermination business, it could be the business owner or a designated employee.
Under the Environmental Protection Act Part X Section 29, every person who spills or causes a spill of a pollutant causing or is likely to cause an adverse effect, shall notify the Ministry. In this case when pesticides are spilled as a result of firefighting activity, the fire department should be reporting this to the Ministry.
The most effective method for anyone to report a spill is by calling the Spills Action Centre at: 1-800-268-6060.
Where can I get more pesticide information?
For more information about the Ontario Pesticides Act and regulation 914, you may contact your Regional Pesticide Specialist at a Ministry office near you.
In late February, three units from Guelph Fire Department responded to a fire in progress. On arrival, firefighters found a small fire in a second floor bedroom. The fire was quickly brought under control and subsequently extinguished. All smoke was also ventilated from the house.
Fortunately there were no injuries thanks to a working smoke alarm. The occupants of the home (one adult male and three children) immediately left the building upon hearing the smoke alarm. Once again, the value of a working smoke alarm cannot be underestimated.
First awarded in 1971, the Fire Services Long Service Medal is an expression of public appreciation for the dedication and hard work of Ontario firefighters. It is officially recognized by the province and is included in the Fire Protection and Prevention Act, 1997. Both full-time and volunteer firefighters can qualify for the medal.
Besides the medal, each recipient is also presented with a citation, which includes their name and the signature of the Fire Marshal of Ontario.
Below are the tentative dates of Long Service Medal Investitures coming up this year. They are subject to change depending on attendance and facility availability.
If your district does not have enough applicants to hold a ceremony (20-25), you are invited to attend a ceremony in a bordering district. To make arrangements, contact OFM Acting Awards Coordinator Heather Wadden at 416-325-3106.
March 21-Regional Municipalities Of York, Halton & Peel Investiture Awards-Markham, ON
April 16-22-Wildfire Prevention Week-Ontario
April 27-Waterloo, Wellington, Brant & Perth, Huron Investiture Awards-TBA
May 6-10-OAFC Annual Meeting and Seminar-Toronto, ON
May 18-Chatham-Kent, Essex, Lambton Investiture Awards-TBA
June 5-8-OMFPOA Training Educational Symposium-Barrie, ON
June 15-Ottawa-Carleton,Prescott-Russell, Lanark, Stormont-Dundas, Renfrew Investiture Awards-TBA
June 21-Fire Safety Awards-Toronto, ON
July 27-Elgin, Huron, Middlesex, Oxford Investiture Awards-TBA
August 3-6-Fire Fighter’s Association of Ontario Convention-Essex,ON
August 24-Algoma, S.S. Marie, Manitoulin, Nipissing, North Bay, Sudbury Investiture Awards-TBA
Sept. 14-16-FireCon-Thunder Bay, ON
Sept. 14-Kenora, Rainy River, Thunder Bay Investiture Awards-Thunder Bay, ON
Oct. 8-14-Fire Prevention Week-Ontario
Oct. 19-Hamilton-Wentworth, Haldimand-Norfolk, Niagara Investiture Awards-TBA
Nov. 14&21-Toronto, Etobicoke, North York, East York, Scarborough & York Investiture Awards-TBA
Nov. 15-17-Public Educators' Conference-Cambridge, ON
BY BETH WECKMAN, P. ENG
PROFESSOR OF MECHANICAL ENGINEERING, UNIVERSITY OF WATERLOO
This is the challenge that has been presented to the 32 fourth year Mechanical Engineering students in Professor Weckman’s Fire Safety Engineering class at University of Waterloo (UW) this winter. As one part of their course marks, these students are hard at work addressing the following challenge:
You are engineers working for ApplianceSafe Incorporated and have been asked by the Electrical Safety Authority to look into the occurrence and root causes of stove and dryer fires in Ontario. They require you to develop at least one innovative, yet practical, design concept that can be retrofitted into existing stoves and dryers or incorporated into new stove or dryer designs to mitigate the possibility of occurrence of fires in these appliances.
With the help of the Electrical Safety Authority and the Office of the Fire Marshal of Ontario, students are first conducting background research to identify the most common causes of stove and dryer fires in the Canadian context. Engineering and fire safety analysis will then be applied to link several common causes of fire to possible design issues within the appliances. Once the weakest points in existing designs are identified, each student team will propose design modifications or totally new designs and analyze them from points of view such as cost, benefit, practicality, etc., in order to assess and justify the feasibility of each design and its potential to reduce the likelihood of fire from the identified cause(s).
So far, the students have organized themselves into 12 design teams, with six teams taking on the dryer challenge and the other six tackling issues in stove design. Much of the necessary background information has been assembled and the teams are currently working very hard to meet specific deadlines, like the identification of important design issues and presentation of preliminary new design concepts. Recently two stoves and two dryers arrived at the university, graciously donated by Frigidaire for students to dismantle and examine during the course of the Challenge. The donation of these appliances is of great benefit, as it will help the students visualize the internal workings of a typical appliance, as well as aid the design teams in understanding possible causes for fires and provide a real-life test bed for their preliminary design ideas and concepts. With UW’s successful record in student design and innovation, we look forward to seeing the results of the First Annual ESA-UW Dryer-Stove Design Challenge! due in mid-April.
For more information about the Challenge, please contact Professor Beth Weckman at 519-888-4567 or ejweckman@uwaterloo.ca.
Leslie Kennedy left the OFM on February 28. Leslie was an education consultant in Academic Standards & Evaluation.
Kathy Paidock left on January 2. She was the information coordinator.
Gina Pontikas returned to the OFM on February 20 and is now acting information coordinator.
Barry McKinnon has assumed the position of Assistant Deputy Fire Marshal (ADFM).
Carol-Lynn Chambers will provide leadership and management responsibilities for both Strategic Development, and Emergency Management & Response Units on a trial basis effective April 1.
Laura Newton is acting administrative coordinator in Midhurst.
Gisele Bentley is the acting Administrative Assistant in Midhurst.
A man was lucky to escape his burning farmhouse on March 1, 2006 thanks to a working smoke alarm and his loyal canine companion.
At approximately 4:30 a.m., the smoke alarm activated. At this time, the dog Shakespeare began barking and awoke his sleeping owner, enabling him to escape with Shakespeare.
Unfortunately, the fire destroyed the rural, older home despite the arrival of fire crews from the Warkworth Station of the Trent Hills Fire Department just 13 minutes after being called.
Luckily, the man’s wife and children were out of town at the time.
Education and Materials ad for Fire Marshal's Public Fire Safety Council.
A fire in Warkworth in February proved the value of a new law requiring working smoke alarms on every storey of the home.
Two adults managed to escape their home after a smoke alarm sounded on the second level of their home.
The couple were downstairs when they heard the alarm and upon checking the alarm, they noticed smoke coming from under their bedroom door.
The Warkworth Station of the Trent Hills Fire Department responded to the 9-1-1 call made at 11:10 a.m. They managed to contain the blaze and only minor damages resulted. An electric blanket caused the fire.
Thank you to everyone who filled out the “Smoke Alarms Save Lives” sheet that was included in the December/January 2006 edition of The Messenger. Every submission further instills how important working smoke alarms can be. Keep the submissions coming!
Fire Marshal Bernard Moyle and Doug Crawford Deputy Fire Marshal present Bev Gilbert with his 25 year long service medal in November. His wife, Cynthia, looks on. That same evening Alex McKenna, former OFM employee, received his 40 year federal and provincial service bars for his commitment to the fire service.
A new regulation requiring smoke alarms on every storey as well as outside all sleeping areas of every home will make Ontario an even safer place to live, says Community Safety and Correctional Services Minister Monte Kwinter.
“It’s simple – smoke alarms save lives,” says Kwinter. “Even with the lowest fire death rate in Ontario’s history in 2005, we can all do more to protect our loved ones. Installing smoke alarms on every storey of a home and outside all sleeping areas can ensure your family has the precious seconds needed to escape from a fire. The new regulation that takes effect March 1, 2006 will mean safer homes and safer communities.”
Announced in December, the smoke alarm amendment to the Ontario Fire Code applies to all single family, semi-detached and town homes, whether owner-occupied or rented. It was announced in conjunction with the launch of the Office of the Fire Marshal’s public education campaign, Working Smoke Alarms: It’s the Law!, designed to heighten awareness about the importance of working smoke alarms.
“Since 1997, the number of fire deaths has declined by approximately 43 per cent,” said Bernard Moyle, Fire Marshal for Ontario. “Although these numbers reflect a milestone in Ontario’s fire history, people are still losing their lives in fires. We expect that having more smoke alarms in homes will mean earlier warning of fire, which will result in faster escape by occupants, earlier arrival by the fire department and ultimately less risk to firefighters and the public.”
Smoke alarms can be purchased for as little as $10. Municipal fire departments across Ontario have increased their public education efforts to ensure homeowners are in compliance and will soon be enforcing the new smoke alarm requirements. For homeowners, tenants and individual landlords, non-compliance with the Fire Code smoke alarm requirements can result in a ticket for $235 or a fine of up to $50,000.
Ontario Fire Marshal Bernard Moyle (left) and Minister of Community Safety and Correctional Services Monte Kwinter help Helen Tennyson, of Toronto, install a smoke alarm in her house. The regulation requiring smoke alarms be installed on every storey of a home, as well as outside all sleeping areas, took effect on March 1, 2006. Smoke alarms on every storey of a home can help ensure families have the time they need to escape a fire.
|
||||||||||||||||||
