Pour la version en français, veuillez appuyer ici.

Comments on Codes

CAFC produces articles and a series called “Comments on Codes”  that allow us to communicate key issues related to building and fire codes. The issues addressed to date have included the following:

• Accessibility Standards: Given the overarching concern about how the standard works, the comments below should not be construed as either backing or not backing the standard nor of it being referenced in the National Building and Construction Code. Read more.

• Advancing the Responsible Introduction of Innovation: Currently, innovations in any material or construction can be introduced into the code without due consideration to whether or not firefighters are trained and equipped for response. This translates into firefighters finding out on the scene when innovation goes wrong or when the inevitable fire, flood, or evacuation need arises. Remember that 85% of the country’s fire service is volunteer and is raising money for gear. It would be problematic to assume that there is funding for training and equipment every time a code change comes out. Read more
  

• Tall Wood Buildings: This is especially pertinent in new wood materials where Canada is becoming a world leader. What is missing here is that cities like Vancouver and Toronto have fire protection engineers that spend years preparing teams and scenarios. A firefighter safety objective would require the codes process to consider the responsible introduction of innovation. Read more
  

• Ensuring a balance between economic interests and safety needs: We recognize and support the success and needs of Canada’s industries. A strong economy is often associated with safety. However, in the Codes process, which expects stakeholders to present research grade evidence, industries with R&D budgets, do much better than the fire service can when it comes to commissioning research. This can be rectified with a firefighter safety objective in the code, putting the onus on industry to demonstrate firefighter safety, rather than the safety sector to refute industry’s significant lobby. Read more
  

• Sprinklers for eliminating fire related deaths in new residential construction: In parts of the country, such as Vancouver, where Sprinklers have been introduced, we have all but eliminated deaths in new residential constructions. A firefighter safety objective in the code, would turn sprinklers from a perceived cost to a cost effective solution. It would also likely make deaths in new residential construction, a thing of the past in all parts of the country. Read more
  
  
• Reducing the number of presumptive illness cases in firefighters: Canada spends a great deal of compensation for presumptive illness in firefighters due to cancer, respiratory diseases and post-traumatic stress injuries among others. A firefighter safety objective in the code would reduce these costs by offering better consideration to exposures from items relevant to the building codes. Read more (forthcoming)

• Radio interoperability of buildings: A firefighter safety objective in the code would also ensure that changes in one industry don’t have unanticipated impacts in another. For example, the introduction of new radio wave frequencies, creates a situation in buildings where firefighters can no longer communicate. A firefighter safety objective in the code would control for these types of situations. Read more

We participate actively in the public review of code change proposals. You can find our comments over the year here.

Finally, the CAFC is very appreciative that the Minister’s Mandate letter includes a commitment to a firefighter safety objective in the new code and clarification that firefighter safety is included in the safety of occupants. We hope this will translate effectively on the issues above.