Forum Replies Created

Viewing 5 posts - 61 through 65 (of 65 total)
  • Author
    Posts
  • in reply to: Div B 2.2.3.5 #1880
    Joseph GardinerJoseph Gardiner
    Participant

    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

    in reply to: Clean Agent Suppression Systems #1816
    Joseph GardinerJoseph Gardiner
    Participant

    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

    in reply to: Locked rooms in escape games #1752
    Joseph GardinerJoseph Gardiner
    Participant

    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.

    in reply to: Prosecution #1537
    Joseph GardinerJoseph Gardiner
    Participant

    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:

    http://www.mcscs.jus.gov.on.ca/english/FireMarshal/Legislation/TechnicalGuidelinesandReports/TG-2012-01.html#P347_68300

    in reply to: NFPA 96 Rooftop Inspections #1513
    Joseph GardinerJoseph Gardiner
    Participant

    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

Viewing 5 posts - 61 through 65 (of 65 total)