2. PURPOSE / PROPOSAL To obtain approval to replace the SCBA currently in service.
3. BACKGROUND The equipment in service is over twenty-five years old and has been upgraded as much as possible. It is starting to fail with increasing frequency and no longer meets current standards for such equipment. The project has been in our Capital Budget forecast for five years and it now needs to be replaced. 4. DISCUSSION / ANALYSIS A committee of firefighters was formed charged with doing user evaluations to determine which make, MSA, Scott, or ISI, would best suit our SCBA needs for a minimum of ten years. Rigorous product evaluations were carried out over a ninety day period including verifying that proposed equipment met the most current standards from the NFPA & NIOSH, wearer comfort and fit, ease of operation, voice communication capability and discussions with departments that had each brand of equipment in service. Based on their evaluation the committee’s unanimous recommendation was the equipment from Scott Health & Safety. The Scott equipment we are presently using has served us very well, been extremely reliable with parts and service available in St. Catharines. We have no reservations with recommending Scott breathing apparatus for the Fire Department. Proposals were sought with the following responses being received: Acklands Grainger Ltd. (Scott) $304,939.00 (incl. PST) St, Catharines, ON. Canadian Safety Equipment ((ISI) $331,745.76 (incl. PST) Mississauga, ON. A. J. Stone Company (MSA) $339,177.78 (incl. PST) Toronto, ON. In addition, we estimate an additional amount of approximately $6000 will be required to integrate the new equipment into the department including changes to the refill station and equipment and some storage racking bringing the total cost of the project to approximately $310,000. There is residual value for the existing equipment however, given its age, it will be minimal, perhaps $3000 - $5000, based on preliminary discussions with potential purchasers. An exact amount cannot be determined until we have the new SCBA in service and have sought proposals for the old equipment.
5. FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS The project was included in the Department’s 2010 Capital Budget with $65,000 from Development Charges and the balance from the 2010 Capital Levy. The budget was $325,000 and the unspent balance is to go to the purchase of thermal imaging cameras.
6. COMMUNICATIONS N/A
7. CONCLUSION The existing equipment has reached its life expectancy and needs to be replaced to protect the health and safety of the firefighters. The proposal from Acklands Grainger is very favourable, funding is in place and Council is requested to approve the purchase as per this report. Respectfully submitted, Ken Eden Don Smith Fire Chief CAO ATTACHMENTS