When it comes to replacing a 1985 pumper truck, Puslinch council is thinking small, but mighty.
A proposal put before council on July 18 by Puslinch fire chief Bob Gordon and deputy chief Steve Goode, followed a report presented by Goode at a recent fire committee meeting.
In short the report was titled Pumper 32: Fix it or replace it?
Goode said the existing pumper truck dates back to the mid-1980s.
“It’s a 26-year-old truck.”
He added that Puslinch Fire and Rescue Service had included replacement in 2010, 2011 and most recently in 2012.
He said there are several mechanical issues, some of which were there before 2012.
Goode said some of those issues were ignored as the department was not sure how much should be spent.
“We didn’t want to put a lot of money into an aging truck.”
The situation came to a head during a training exercise on Maltby Road.
While being used as the primary pumper, the unit failed.
The repair cost is $13,450.
Goode had asked Bryan’s Farm Equipment to do an appraisal.
That amount is $3,500 to $5,000 – due to the chassis and the cab.
However, Goode said there is an additional issue in that the Puslinch pumper truck has an open cab.
But because of revised regulations, a fire department cannot use the truck as transportation because of that open cab.
“So we really can’t sell it to another fire department.”
Goode noted that council had recently requested the department undergo a firefighter underwriter survey and that any apparatus over 25 years old gets no credit in the rating.
When Pumper 32 failed, Goode noted the City of Guelph was informed shortly thereafter.
“They will work with us as far as providing a pumper truck to fill tanker trucks – temporarily.
“It is imperative we get this done by October,” Goode said.
“The truck needs to be replaced, the fact is that we just don’t want to put that much money into it.”
Replacement cost for the existing pumper truck was mentioned within the 25 year capital budget plan.
Earlier the chief had recommended putting some money away for that anticipating a replacement cost of $455,000.
However, research indicated some mini-pumpers, which are roughly half the size, have almost the same capabilities as the full-sized pumpers.
The difference, Goode said, is the number of onboard storage compartments.
“It doesn’t have all the bells and whistles. Essentially, it’s just a truck with a box on it.”
Goode added the mini-pumper has a larger pump than the township’s current pumper.
“We believe we can find one for $220,000 or less.”
Goode agreed that Pumper 32 had served the Puslinch Fire Department very well over the years, “and has been reliable – up to this point.”
But, Goode said “it’s really at the end of its useful life.”
“The fire chief and I strongly recommend that council use the reserves in the fire department budget, to purchase a mini pumper.”
Fire committee chairman councillor Susan Fielding said the report “puts things into perspective.”
Fielding said the expectations of the underwriters is that fire departments will not keep vehicles in service that long.
Councillor Jerry Schmidt said “it is fair to say that we want to provide adequate and affordable fire protection to the residents of Puslinch.”
Goode said “the smaller vehicle could be more efficient and attend calls larger trucks had traditionally attended.
That would allow the larger trucks to last longer.
Goode agreed the truck would be used as a primary transportation vehicle.
Councillor Ken Roth had no issue replacing a vehicle needing replacement, but wanted to know how much research was done on the mini-pumper truck.
He asked if it would become the primary response truck.
Goode said it would not.
Pumper truck 31 has a tank capacity of 1,000 gallons.
“It is more of a tanker and a pumper, so it guarantees some safe time.”
The smaller truck could be used for medical responses, and calls not necessarily requiring water.
While it does have a 300-gallon tank, it will serve its purpose.
Councillor Wayne Stokley asked if there were tasks which the smaller truck could not do.
Goode said some of the equipment used on Pumper 32 could be stored on other trucks.
“While there is less storage space, equipment can be placed onto other trucks.”
Stokely asked if the mini-pumper would be used more or less than its predecessor.
“More,” Goode responded.
He explained it is a smaller, safer vehicle which can access narrow laneways – for burning complaints, medical calls, etc.
He said one of the reasons Pumper 32 had not been used as much recently is that it is an older truck.
Goode pointed out that Puslinch is not the only municipality looking at the option of mini-pumper trucks.
He pointed to departments in Freelton (Flamborough) and Rockwood (Guelph-Eramosa) which have smaller trucks.
“We just don’t want to request a $450,000 truck when we can deal with a $220,000 truck.”
Stokley said “even if we agreed to a scaled-down truck would you at some point be looking at a bigger truck?”
Goode said it would satisfy local needs because of the size of the pump.
“The idea of bringing in a vehicle that could be more efficient and used to respond to more calls is a positive thing.”
Fielding said the fire committee would like a resolution to the matter.
Mayor Dennis Lever said there is sufficient money in the budget for the purchase and the current capital forecast indicates Puslinch is in relatively good shape until 2016, when the proposed telesquirt replacement is needed.
“That will put us hundreds of thousands of dollars into the hole.”
Lever wanted everyone to be aware of the large costs coming down the road, although he appreciated the fact this proposal was only for $220,000 rather than $355,000 (in the budget).
Stokley asked if there was any potential of resale.
“Not a chance,” Goode said.
Fielding pointed out the item was in the budget.
“It’s a fact of life that sometimes things get old and you have to replace them.”
Council adopted the recommendation that the 1986 pumper truck be replaced (funded through reserves) with a demo mini pumper truck at a cost of $220,000.
