By Shane Pearson
Like many departments, the Salina (Kansas) Fire/EMS Department has faced increasing pressure to maintain reliable front-line fire apparatus while managing an aging fleet of vehicles. So our decision to purchase new fleet of fire apparatus was not taken lightly; it was driven by a combination of operational, financial and strategic factors:
- Aging fleet conditions, maintenance frequency and associated costs, availability of parts for aging apparatus
- Reliability concerns that affected front-line and reserve apparatus capabilities
- Desire for standardization in layout and equipment placement as well as simplified maintenance capabilities
- Extended apparatus manufacturing lead times that required more deliberate planning and procurement strategy
- Need for long-term fiscal responsibility and planning, ensuring that major capital investments delivered operational value and sustainable lifecycle benefits
The result was not only a new fleet but a new, more efficient purchasing process.
| READ NEXT: Beyond the general fund: Smart ways to finance your next apparatus
Past purchases
In the past, when it came time to purchase a new fire apparatus, the department convened a committee comprised of members from various ranks within the department. The time-consuming effort of determining custom specifications, plus the many other factors that go into the process, would often take months to reach a final recommendation. The department would then send out information to apparatus manufacturers soliciting competitive bids.
This time around, as we explored new approaches to apparatus purchasing, our research showed that 80% of stock production apparatus from various manufacturers met the custom specifications we would draft when utilizing our traditional spec, bid and buy process. It therefore became clear that the quickest way to take delivery was to utilize a manufacturers’ stock production program.
Key players involved
The Salina Fire Department’s approach relied on input and support from multiple levels of the organization — operations personnel, chief officers, our fleet emergency vehicle technician (EVT) as well as the city managers office and city administrative stakeholders, with ultimate authorization coming from elected officials.
Internal stakeholders
- Fire chief: Provided strategic direction, operational priorities, and alignment with departmental goals
- Chief officers/Command staff: Assessed appropriate apparatus deployment needs, potential staffing impacts and first due area apparatus requirements
- Company officers and frontline personnel: Provided input regarding functionality of the apparatus, equipment storage and access, and operator usability
- Apparatus committee (operations personnel, master EVT): Evaluated mechanical options, reviewed and compared custom vs. stock production specifications, and reviewed serviceability and maintenance requirements
External stakeholders
- City Manager office, city administration: Supported the project from a strategic and fiscal perspective
- Finance staff: Assisted with funding strategy and capital planning
- City Commission: Supported and approved the investment as part of the city’s broader capital improvement strategy and planning for the future
- Manufacturers and vendors: Provided technical information, build options, production timelines, and options for warranty and post-delivery support
A key part of the process was ensuring that operational input from end-users was balanced with long-term maintenance, serviceability and support after the sale, and, of course, budget requirements.
Manufacturer research, evaluation and selection
We conducted extensive research and engaged in discussions with multiple apparatus manufacturers. This process allowed us to compare chassis platforms, build quality, service support, operational fit, standardization options, production/delivery timelines and purchasing options. This was a very important step, as the decision was not based solely on vendor preference, but rather on operational requirements, longevity, value, delivery timeline and customer service after the sale.
The department ultimately selected Pierce, utilizing the stock production program to streamline procurement and substantially reducing delivery time. This approach offered a significant advantage by accelerating the process while still allowing the department to select options. At a time when long build timelines can delay fleet replacement by years, using stock production was a strategy to move more quickly without sacrificing quality or fleet consistency.
The department selected the Pierce Enforcer chassis as the common platform for all seven apparatus. The fleet package included:
- 2 pumpers
- 2 HDR dry rescue trucks, with one reconfigured at the department into a HazMat response unit
- 2 single-axle 107-foot Ascendant quints
- 1 rear-mount aerial platform
Why standardization mattered
Selecting a common chassis and standardized configuration across the fleet created several important advantages:
- Ease of maintenance, such as common parts and maintenance requirements
- Equipment location standardization, allowing personnel to locate tools and equipment more efficiently across multiple units
- Operator familiarity, so drivers and officers can transition between apparatus with less adjustment
- Training efficiency because core chassis systems, controls and layout are consistent
- Long-term fleet consistency, supporting future replacement planning and specification development
Rather than viewing each apparatus as a standalone purchase, the department approached the fleet as an overall operational system.
That being said, customization is still an option where needed. Specifically, one of the HDR dry rescue trucks was reconfigured into a HazMat response unit, demonstrating the department’s focus on building a fleet aligned with actual service demand. This option to reconfigure one of the units reflects a practical fleet philosophy of standardization where possible with configuration options for mission-specific capabilities.
Equipment placement and operational consistency
A major component and requirement at the beginning of the process was aligning equipment placement and crew expectations across each of the apparatus. Because each of the trucks share essentially identical chassis configurations, the department was able to support more consistent:
- Driver/operator training and orientation
- Daily checks and inspection routines
- Tool and equipment placement
- Scene workflow
- Transition between apparatus assignments
This standardization reduces confusion, especially in high-stress or time-sensitive operations and supports safer and more efficient performance. And as our experience with the new apparatus grows, the department is continuing to refine equipment placement and compartment configurations to improve speed, familiarity and interoperability.
Furthermore, as apparatus were placed into service, the department could integrate them into operations with less disruption than would be expected from a mixed fleet. Common chassis configuration supported a smoother rollout by reducing the learning curve for personnel and simplifying fleet support functions. The result was not just a shortened delivery timeframe of new units, but a more coherent and usable fleet structure.
Long-term apparatus plans
The purchase of these seven new apparatus has created future opportunities for the Salina Fire Department. With a standardized front-line fleet, several of the previous frontline apparatus were moved into reserve capacity. The previous reserve fleet consisted of 30-year-old (or older) apparatus, with an aging front-line fleet and mixed ages of apparatus from 4 to nearly 20 years old.
The updated apparatus replacement plan is a fixed and budgeted 10-year and 20-year long-term plan. Most of the current new frontline fleet will move to reserve status in 10 years, then be transitioned out of the department after 20 years. This allows for a formal replacement schedule and long-range capital financial planning.
This fleet acquisition provides a model that can guide future decisions involving apparatus, specialty vehicles and other major capital equipment.
Tips for replication
For other agencies, the most important lesson is that successful apparatus replacement is not just about selecting a manufacturer. It is about building a clear operational strategy of what is the best suited configuration for your department, then aligning purchasing decisions with long-term organizational benefit.
Other departments can replicate this approach by adopting several key principles:
- Think fleet-wide, not unit-by-unit
- Prioritize standardization
- Engage multiple manufacturers before making a decision
- Evaluate delivery timelines as a major factor
- Balance specialized response needs (Hazmat, Tech Rescue, if applicable) with fleet commonality
- Use apparatus purchasing as an opportunity to improve the entire operations for the organization
Additionally, departments looking to apply a similar approach can begin with the following steps:
- Assess fleet condition and operational risk: Identify which units create the greatest maintenance, reliability or service-delivery concerns.
- Document requirements (needs over wants): Define what each apparatus type must accomplish in your local environment.
- Engage internal and external stakeholders early: Include operations, training, maintenance, finance, city administration and elected officials.
- Research multiple manufacturers: Compare not only apparatus features, but also support, build timelines, and standardization options.
- Consider stock production options where appropriate: If available, these can significantly reduce procurement and delivery time.
- Select a common platform when operationally feasible: A standardized chassis can produce long-term benefits in maintenance, training and usability.
- Standardized equipment layout and operator expectations where possible: Consistency matters just as much as the truck itself.
- Preserve mission-specific capability (it’s a balance of multiple factors): Standardization should not eliminate the ability to configure units for rescue, hazmat, aerial or other specialty functions.
- Capture lessons learned for future purchases: Build institutional knowledge so future leaders are not starting from scratch.
Lastly, here’s what to avoid in your process:
- Treating each truck as a separate project with unrelated specifications
- Over-customizing units to individual preferences
- Underestimating the value of common chassis platforms
- Waiting too long to address long lead times
- Focusing only on upfront price instead of lifecycle and operational value
- Failing to align apparatus purchases with actual service demands
Result and conclusion to this process
The Salina Fire Department’s new apparatus replacement plan was not simply about replacing older trucks. It was about modernizing the department’s fleet to improve response capability, standardize the fleet as much as possible, and provide better response capabilities to the citizens we serve. While our process may not work for everyone, it was a tremendous step forward for our department compared to how fire apparatus had been purchased in the past — and the experience provides a replicable model for other agencies interested in streamlining their own processes.
ABOUT THE AUTHOR
Shane Pearson has 25 years of experience with the Salina (Kansas) Fire Department, serving in various roles throughout his career, including division chief of EMS and deputy chief of operations prior to being appointed fire chief in February 2025. Pearson also serves as the president of the Kansas State Firefighters Association. He started his emergency services career in 1990 as a volunteer firefighter in his hometown in eastern Kansas.
