By Joseph Murray
When I had the privilege of being appointed fire chief of my community nearly 12 years ago, I was faced with a significant challenge right from the start. Our fire department had a fleet of fire pumpers and ladder trucks from six different manufacturers.
Just before my appointment, my fire department, like many others, was challenged with the impacts of a national recession, during which time we made purchases on an as-needed basis, primarily based on cost or urgent need without much concern as to the challenges of maintaining and operating a mixed fleet.
Upon taking office, I found it extremely difficult to coordinate repairs and maintenance with a variety of vendors and contractors. Further complicating our situation was the total demise of one of our manufacturers, which made acquiring parts increasingly difficult. I quickly had to determine if we were to continue on our path of maintaining a mixed fleet or if we should work toward standardizing our fleet. After much research, we chose to begin a fleet standardization process. Although the total standardization process took almost eight years, it has proven to be a great choice for my department. This is not to say that fleet standardization works well or is even possible for every community. There are definitely pros and cons associated with a standardized fleet, and there is no one-size-fits-all answer for how it will work with an individual fire department.
Perhaps more so today than at any point in the history of the fire service, fire chiefs are being tasked with developing a comprehensive fleet replacement plan. This responsibility can be a challenging one as many fire departments across North America are challenged with increasing demands for service, tightening budgets, and the challenges that come from the extreme apparatus build times we are now experiencing. As part of developing a comprehensive fleet replacement plan, it is important for fire chiefs to determine if their long-term intentions are to use a standardized or mixed apparatus fleet in terms of manufacturers. As every fire chief who has been involved in at least one apparatus purchase knows, the choice of manufacturer for even one piece of apparatus often includes a robust and often passionate debate among the department’s apparatus committee members. Anticipating sticking with a single manufacturer as part of a long-term replacement plan obviously can add an additional dimension to those discussions. It is important that fire chiefs have a good understanding of both the positives and negatives of maintaining a standardized fleet when discussing it with their committees.
WHY STANDARDIZE?
The main purpose of fire apparatus fleet standardization is to ensure the fleet has a single manufacturer and standard model (which may or may not vary by type of apparatus). As part of a standardized fleet plan, the fire department will develop a common set of specifications for each type of apparatus in its fleet. These specifications typically include common types of engines, chassis, frames, pumps, tanks, compartment layouts, paint and graphics, and equipment to be carried. Many fire chiefs prefer to standardize their fleets because of the perceived financial and operational benefits such as the ability to stock common parts, reduction of training hours needed when a new apparatus is introduced, and increased safety.
1 There are definitely pros and cons associated with a standardized fleet, and there is no one-size-fits-all answer for how it will work with an individual fire department. (Photo by author.)
Potential Benefits
Capital Costs Savings: As with many other products, buying in bulk can provide significant cost savings to the purchaser. Fire apparatus is no different. The size of your fleet and the size of your purchase can be leveraged to reduce your overall acquisition costs. In general, there is an increase in your cost savings directly proportional to the number of apparatus being ordered. With guaranteed higher volume orders, sales vendors are generally able to quote apparatus well below the median price for each type of apparatus.
Using the same sales vendor repeatedly can also result in the ability to forecast additional purchases, which can result in lower pricing as part of maintaining a relationship with the customer. Another benefit of using the same sales vendor is the gained competency of working within your communities’ purchasing ordinances and purchasing department. As most fire chiefs know, a well working professional relationship with the purchasing and finance teams can make a significant purchase a much more streamlined process.
Apparatus Specification Development Efficiency: Obviously standardizing the fleet makes the specification process much less time consuming. Other than small tweaks here and there based on past experiences, the bulk of the specification work is done with your first purchase. Standardizing the specification leads to fewer mistakes and helps ensure a quality build. Using one manufacturer also means fewer variations in contracts and warranties, all of which will reduce staff time dedicated to the same. Using a single manufacturer allows your staff to become familiar with processes related to contracts and warranties and streamlines working through those processes.
Increased Operational Efficiency and Safety: Whatever your department may call them—engineers, drivers, drivers/operators, etc.—all of them become accustomed to the controls and operation of their assigned apparatus. Standardizing your fleet allows the fire chief greater flexibility in making driver assignments without loss of expertise or proficiency. The familiarity with standard apparatus setup also reduces the chances of mistakes caused by operating dissimilar units. A standardized fleet with similar compartment setups also provides for more efficiency on the fireground finding tools and equipment on an apparatus from another district.
Quantifiable Reliability: One often repeated argument against fleet standardization is that there is no universal guarantee that a particular manufacturer’s product line will continue to maintain its quality in years to come. While this may be true, there is also no assurance that each new vendor a fire department decides to contract with will maintain its quality expectations either. Standardizing your fleet gives you a period of time to evaluate the quality of your apparatus and provides the fire chief with quantifiable data to evaluate if that particular manufacturer is meeting the department’s quality standards or not. Frequently bouncing from one manufacturer to another does not allow the fire chief to evaluate the overall quality properly.
Maintenance and Repair: As all fire chiefs understand, repairing and maintaining fire apparatus are not cheap. Another benefit of having a standardized fleet is the familiarity your apparatus technicians gain from frequently working on the same models. Through a standardized fleet, technicians can more easily obtain training or access to online learning tools to become experts on that particular apparatus. This will improve technician proficiency, reducing apparatus out-of-service time.
Much like today’s personal vehicles, fire apparatus systems are increasing in the number of electronic sensors and controls, mandated emissions technologies, and various safety devices. Adding these new systems proportionally correlates to the amount of training vehicle technicians require to make repairs and provide maintenance. By limiting the number of new systems your vehicle technicians need to learn, it will become easier for your technicians to become more proficient. For those fire departments that use in-house repair and maintenance services, the costs of testing equipment, diagnostic software, and subscriptions can also be significant and often reoccurring. Using a standardized fleet can greatly reduce these costs when they can be limited to one manufacturer.
Probably one of the most obvious benefits of maintaining a standardized fleet is the ability to more efficiently stock parts and fluid types. Reducing the number of parts and fluids that need to be stocked and maintained can greatly reduce costs and free up space within the maintenance garage. Using economies of scale in purchasing commonly used parts and fluids can greatly reduce their costs as well.
POTENTIAL RISKS OF A STANDARDIZED FLEET
While standardizing the fleet has many benefits, it is not without risks. When determining the desire to standardize or not, fire chiefs should consider the following risks or perceived risks.
Loss of Competition: Using a single vendor for the entire fleet inevitably leads to the loss of competition. Opinions on sole-source purchasing can vary widely from community to community, and the absence of an open bidding process may lead to questions from community members or elected leaders related to using public funds. While an initial acquisition cost could conceivably be lower in an open bidding process, it is important to understand the cost efficiencies over the lifespan of the apparatus in question. The best argument against those who might want a more competitive bidding process is quantifiable data showing the savings of a standardized fleet vs. a mixed fleet. This will again depend on the circumstances of your particular agency and fleet.
Reducing competition when using sole-source purchases to standardize your fleet may present to some as an attempt to bypass fair competition. Others may take political stances accusing collusion or other personal interests in the use of a single manufacturer. It is important for the fire chief to ensure everything is above water and that he can show the benefits of reducing competition for the overall good of the community.
Technology and Innovation: In general, standardizing the fleet is a longer-term commitment. This commitment may have the unforeseen consequence of missing out on using the newest technologies. In my experience, technology improvements that have a significant impact are generally adopted across the board (and often improved on) by most of the fire apparatus manufacturers within a few years. Although your commitment to standardization may temporarily prevent your department from using the most advanced technology, it also may save you the trouble of dealing with issues that inevitably come up with new technologies until thoroughly tested with real-life use.
Lemons: Let’s face it: Any fire chief who has been around for a number of years has inherited or purchased a lemon—that one apparatus that is always down for repairs. It is important to understand if the “lemon-ness” is a flaw of that specific apparatus alone or if it is a reflection of the overall quality of a manufacturer’s product. While fleet standardization may have many benefits, it is especially important that the fire chief and the apparatus committee spend a considerable amount of time on the initial research and specification process. An inferior product can lead to many problems that might not be quickly resolved. It is important for the fire chief to review maintenance records, components availability, and the experiences of other end users that use the same product. It is also especially important to have a thorough understanding of the financial health of the manufacturer to ensure you will have access to parts, components, and maintenance for many years to come. A single lemon is something that can be dealt with; a fleet of lemons is an entirely different problem.
While fleet standardization can lead to many benefits, it is not a one-size-fits-all answer for every fire department. There are risks with standardizing an entire fleet, and there are also some benefits in maintaining a mixed fleet. Each fire chief must determine what is best for his organization. Whichever way a fire chief intends to go, it is important that the decision is well thought out and quantifiable in terms of costs and operational benefits.
JOSEPH MURRAY, Ph.D., is chief and emergency management coordinator for the Dearborn (MI) Fire Department.
