Forum Replies Created
-
Posts
-
Rob,
I would go back to the property to conduct a final or follow up inspection. If OFC violations still exist you should issue another order. Charge the company if the order is not complied with.
I would suggest consulting your city prosecutor before doing anything.
Joe Gardiner
Vince,
1. Are your fire inspectors certified as building inspectors? No
2. Do your fire inspectors conduct plans review? No
3. Do your fire inspectors conduct inspections on new construction / alterations (building permit issued)? No
4. Does your building department pay the wages of your fire inspectors that do plans review? (Are they paid an hourly rate by the building department for their services?) N/A
5. Does your building department cover the cost of BCIN courses, building codes, exams and annual certification? N/A
Hope this helps,
Joe
Gregory,
This is a tricky one. Not having all of the information, I could surmise that the building has been changed from its original occupancy without a building permit that would have addressed your exit sign issue. I would start by testing your theory with the requirements found in the Ontario Building Code. If you still figure that exit signage is required, I suggest issuing an order under 21 (f). You could write the order two ways; if you are confident of the sign location requirement, you could order the installation of the signs OR write and order to have the building be assessed by a professional (designer-architect-engineer) to determine the appropriate exit signage required by the OBC for that particular occupancy. I would personally go with the second option and would also speak with your Building Department to determine if they have any options for you before proceeding with the order. I hope this helps.
Joe Gardiner
Hello Darren,
I would definitely issue a fire order to have the owner remove the combustible furniture from this alcove. There are a couple sections in Part 2 OFC that immediately come to mind when dealing with this issue 2.4.1.1.(2) & 2.4.1.2. The latter provides you the ability to approve non-combustible furniture in this area i.e. solid wood furniture. This order is easily justified given your past experience with fires occurring of the same nature. I have inspected all of the buildings in North Bay that have a similar configuration to the building in your synopsis and have consistently enforced this section with 100% compliance. Hopefully this helps.
Joe
Hello Doug,
I was a police officer and did one for Fire College about 7 years ago or so. Send me an email if you are interested. joe.gardiner@cityofnorthbay.ca
Joe
Good Morning John,
NFPA 80, Chapter 19 does a good job explaining the checking, inspecting and testing of fire dampers. I would not approve any other inspection schedule unless it is referenced in the manufactures instructions. The cost of inspecting fire dampers is unfortunately the cost of doing business. Hopefully this provides you enough information to get you started.
Joe Gardiner
Hello Dave,
The installation of this suppression system would require a building permit which would deal with both systems and elevate you getting involved. I would contact your building department and they will more than likely require the owner retain an architect to figure this conundrum out depending on the occupancy. Hopefully this helps.
Joe
I personally think you would be justified using 21 (b) order or don’t approve their fire safety plan as per 2.8.2.1. (1) unless they implement a system that satisfies you.
We have not experienced this in North Bay.
Hello Martin,
OFM-TG-01-2012 – has a good explanation of the entire enforcement procedure. The North Bay Fire Department does not have policies or guidelines for laying information’s. In a nut shell, we typically charge by way of long form information when there is more than one OFC violation because the offence(s) is grievous in nature, they are repeat offenders or we cannot achieve a timely and cooperative compliance. Charges must always be discussed with our administrators due to the delicate nature of our small political community. Hopefully this helps. I’ve posted a link below to the TG.
Hyperlink:
Hello Paul,
North Bay Fire Department Requirements:
• There must be at least one person on site that has successfully completed training in NFPA 96 and approved by our office.
• Documentation (either on report or bill of sale) must describe the deficient areas of a commercial hood system.
• Documentation must not be provided that indicates only a portion of the system was cleaned to NFPA 96 because the entire system must be cleaned to be in compliant with NFPA 96.
• All areas are checked for cleanliness – Service providers must clean surfaces to bare metal.
• Roof and external areas must be maintained free of grease and deposits.
• There must be some type of grease containment unit on the roof if the unit does not possess the capability of containing grease.
• Listed inspection ports shall be installed so that the entire system can be cleaned and inspected. NO more than 15 foot runs or at every 90 degree elbow should exist without an inspection report.
• The duct must be a sealed system and has to be water tight.We have an internal policy basically outlining these requirements.
Joe Gardiner
