Skip to content
OPSI · QuébecWebsiteopsi.info1-877-CLÉ-OPSI1-877-253-6774Call
OPSIOrganization of Fire Safety
Practitioners of Québec
The project
Professional oversight Why the professional system? Why a registry? Access to the profession and training Mapping the acts Funding
I am…
Explore the audiences ...a municipality ...a fire safety service ...a representative of another professional order ...a member of OIQ or OTPQ ...a fire safety professional or practitioner ...a building owner or manager ...an insurer or insurance broker ...une centrale ou un syndicat indépendant ...a citizen ...a member of the National Assembly or a public decision-maker
The initiative
Why a new order? Steps Board of directors Outreach and engagement Support us — write a letter Purposes of the organization Proposed internal bylaws
Documents
Proposed Act and 22 regulations — search Complete proposalMy account / SponsorshipParticipation FAQ Evidence file — Section 25 Detailed analysis Risk matrix Missing data Hors de la portée de cette loiOutside the scope of this Act Fiche technique du registreRegistry technical specification Project quiz Learning cards
FAQ
All questions OPSI mission and rationale Professional activities, boundaries and other authorities Admission, competencies and training Ethics, independence and accountability Non-compliance, findings and notices Registry — Documents, reports and filing Registry — Buildings, EDF_ identifiers and administrative identity Registry — Access, confidentiality and technology Governance, oversight and funding Implementation and practical impacts Participation, voting and comments
FR | EN
Support usWrite a letter
01Write and send one letter easily 02Write and send multiple letters together

Sending is not yet available. You can prepare the drafts.

OPSI
01Home
02The project
Professional oversight Why the professional system? Why a registry? Access to the profession and training Mapping the acts Funding
03I am…
Explore the audiences ...a municipality ...a fire safety service ...a representative of another professional order ...a member of OIQ or OTPQ ...a fire safety professional or practitioner ...a building owner or manager ...an insurer or insurance broker ...une centrale ou un syndicat indépendant ...a citizen ...a member of the National Assembly or a public decision-maker
04The initiative
Why a new order? Steps Board of directors Outreach and engagement Support us — write a letter Purposes of the organization Proposed internal bylaws
05Documents
Proposed Act and 22 regulations — search Complete proposalMy account / SponsorshipParticipation FAQ Evidence file — Section 25 Detailed analysis Risk matrix Missing data Hors de la portée de cette loiOutside the scope of this Act Fiche technique du registreRegistry technical specification Project quiz Learning cards
06FAQ
All questions OPSI mission and rationale Professional activities, boundaries and other authorities Admission, competencies and training Ethics, independence and accountability Non-compliance, findings and notices Registry — Documents, reports and filing Registry — Buildings, EDF_ identifiers and administrative identity Registry — Access, confidentiality and technology Governance, oversight and funding Implementation and practical impacts Participation, voting and comments

A Québec initiative to strengthen professional oversight in fire safety.

Support usWrite a letter
01Write and send one letter easily 02Write and send multiple letters together

Sending coming later; preparation only.

La clé : comprendre le projet selon votre rôle.The key: understand the proposal from your perspective.

La clé : mieux s’informer sans empiéter sur les pouvoirs municipaux.The key: better information without encroaching on municipal powers.

La clé : des constats utiles, dans le respect des responsabilités de chacun.The key: useful findings while respecting each authority’s responsibilities.

La clé : collaborer sans confondre les champs d’exercice.The key: work together without blurring professional scopes.

La clé : des champs d’exercice clairs et respectés.The key: clear, respected professional scopes.

La clé : reconnaître les compétences et clarifier les responsabilités.The key: recognize competence and clarify responsibilities.

La clé : des constats traçables et des responsabilités bien définies.The key: traceable findings and clearly defined responsibilities.

La clé : une information ciblée et des accès encadrés.The key: targeted information and controlled access.

La clé : une information encadrée, utile à la prévention.The key: appropriately controlled information that supports prevention.

La clé : une protection du public qui concerne tout le monde.The key: public protection that matters to everyone.

La clé : décider à partir de responsabilités et de données vérifiables.The key: decisions grounded in clear responsibilities and verifiable data.

Une clé : une responsabilité professionnelle mieux définie.A key: better-defined professional accountability.

La clé : avancer avec méthode, étape par étape.The key: proceed methodically, one step at a time.

La clé : savoir aussi ce que le projet ne changerait pas.The key: knowing what the proposal would not change.

La clé : un registre traçable, sans déplacer les pouvoirs de décision.The key: a traceable registry without shifting decision-making powers.

La clé : une démonstration documentée et vérifiable.The key: an evidence-based, verifiable case.

La clé : rendre visibles les données et leurs limites.The key: make both the data and their limits clear.

La clé : savoir qui fait quoi et qui en répond.The key: know who does what and who is accountable.

La clé : encadrer les personnes sans confondre leurs rôles.The key: oversee practitioners without conflating their roles.

La clé : reconnaître les acquis et développer les compétences.The key: recognize prior learning and develop competence.

La clé : analyser les risques sans leur inventer une fréquence.The key: analyze risks without inventing their frequency.

La clé : un financement transparent et un déploiement responsable.The key: transparent funding and responsible implementation.

La clé : comprendre avant de se prononcer.The key: understand before taking a position.

La clé : retenir l’essentiel, à son rythme.The key: remember the essentials at your own pace.

La clé : des règles de gouvernance claires dès le départ.The key: clear governance rules from the outset.

La clé : une gouvernance responsable et transparente.The key: responsible, transparent governance.

La clé : clarifier les enjeux de gouvernance.The key: make governance issues clear.

La clé : comprendre les choix, leurs limites et leurs effets.The key: understand the choices, their limits and their effects.

La clé : lire chaque disposition dans son contexte.The key: read every proposed provision in context.

La clé : accéder à l’ensemble de la proposition.The key: access the complete proposal.

La clé : suivre chaque évolution du projet.The key: follow how the proposal evolves.

La clé : une participation responsable et sécuritaire.The key: responsible, secure participation.

HomeDetailsData availability and evidence method
Observabilité · traçabilité · méthode

Data availability
et méthode de preuve.

Le dossier ne repose pas sur l’idée qu’une statistique absente prouverait un problème.

Le régime actuel ne produit pas, ne centralise pas et ne relie pas tous les renseignements qui permettraient de calculer rétrospectivement un taux provincial représentatif d’erreurs professionnelles. Cette indisponibilité est une limite d’observabilité; le risque doit être évalué à partir d’autres éléments probants.

Principe de méthode. Aucune source provinciale centralisée permettant de relier systématiquement un acte technique, son signataire, sa qualification, une réévaluation ultérieure, les déficiences constatées et les conséquences éventuelles n’a été identifiée dans les sources publiques consultées à ce jour. Cette recherche négative n’est pas utilisée comme preuve d’erreur.
Voie accélérée · projet non adopté

Recensement administratif préalable aux activations.

Le classement des 17 régions exigera un dénombrement fiable et dédoublonné des seuls bâtiments réellement assujettis au régime, à partir de données administratives vérifiables. Aucun nombre ni ordre régional définitif ne peut être présenté avant cette validation.

Fast-track · not enacted

Administrative census before activation.

Ranking the 17 regions requires reliable, deduplicated counts of buildings actually subject to the scheme, using verifiable administrative data. No regional counts or definitive ordering are published before validation.

01 · Ce qui est directement observable

Des faits existent déjà.
Ils ne répondent simplement pas à toutes les questions.

Plusieurs dimensions du risque sont documentées par des sources officielles et techniques.

Données publiques

Exposition et gravité

Les statistiques québécoises documentent le nombre d’incendies, de bâtiments endommagés, de personnes blessées ou évacuées et les décès liés à l’incendie.

Observations officielles

Déficiences réelles

Des opérations d’inspection ciblées, comme l’Opération Vulcain du SIM, documentent des non-conformités réelles et certaines situations jugées critiques.

Normes et obligations

Complexité technique

Les codes, normes et exigences applicables permettent d’identifier les actes, essais, systèmes, compétences et jugements techniques en cause.

Populations connues

Une partie des effectifs

Des régimes sectoriels permettent de connaître certaines populations, sans pour autant recenser toutes les personnes qui réalisent l’ensemble des actes ciblés.

Données et sources vérifiées le 5 octobre 2026.
16 907incendies déclarés · 2021
16 471incendies déclarés · 2022
≈ 308/anpersonnes blessées
≈ 27 000/anpersonnes évacuées
34décès par incendie · 2024 · donnée préliminaire

Ce que ces chiffres démontrent : l’ampleur de l’exposition et la gravité potentielle. Ce qu’ils ne démontrent pas : un taux de faute professionnelle.

Statistiques incendie · Québec Prévention · Québec Opération Vulcain · SIM Décès 2024 · MSP
Exemple · CCQ 2024

Une seule famille professionnelle représente déjà une population substantielle.

La CCQ recense 1 747 mécaniciens en protection-incendie actifs sur les chantiers en 2024, dont 661 apprentis et 1 086 compagnons. Elle indique aussi 148 entreprises ayant recruté dans le métier, 118 nouveaux apprentis admis en 2024 et 94 % du volume de travail réalisé dans le secteur institutionnel et commercial.

Limitation: ces 1 747 personnes ne constituent ni le futur effectif OPSI ni un dénombrement des personnes exerçant tous les actes proposés. Elles démontrent uniquement qu’une des familles concernées représente déjà une population importante. Les populations provenant de sources différentes ne doivent pas être additionnées mécaniquement lorsqu’elles peuvent se chevaucher.

Source · CCQ
02 · Ce qui n’est pas centralisé

Le problème est l’observabilité,
pas l’absence de toute information.

Plusieurs relations nécessaires à un taux provincial représentatif ne peuvent actuellement pas être reconstruites de façon exhaustive.

Nombre exact de personnes réalisant chacun des actes ciblés.
Identité commune des signataires à travers les employeurs.
Volume annuel total de rapports par type d’acte.
Taux de rapports matériellement erronés.
Répétition d’erreurs par une même personne après un changement d’employeur.
Historique provincial des non-conformités par bâtiment.
Suivi uniforme des corrections.
Proportion des déficiences initialement non détectées.
Historique disciplinaire commun des praticiens qui ne sont membres d’aucun ordre.
Ce que nous pouvons affirmer avec prudence

Il est impossible de calculer rétrospectivement, à partir des données publiques actuellement centralisées, un taux provincial représentatif d’erreurs professionnelles pour les actes ciblés. Cela ne signifie ni que les erreurs sont fréquentes, ni qu’elles sont rares. Cela signifie que le dénominateur et les liens nécessaires à cette mesure ne sont pas réunis dans une source commune.

03 · Comment le risque peut néanmoins être évalué

Une statistique unique n’est pas
la seule forme de preuve.

Le Guide d’analyse préliminaire de l’Office prévoit expressément une estimation qualitative ou quantitative de la probabilité et demande d’examiner le lien causal, les cas avérés et les mesures d’atténuation existantes.

Expositionbâtiments, systèmes, actes et personnes concernés
Complexiténormes, essais, interactions et jugement technique
Déficiences observéesconstats officiels dans des bâtiments réels
Cas sentinellesévénements documentés permettant d’étudier les mécanismes de défaillance
Asymétrie d’informationdifficulté pour le client de refaire l’essai ou de vérifier la conclusion
Existing oversightce qu’il fait, ses limites et les mécanismes qui suivent ou non la personne
Méthode OPSI

OPSI ne substitue pas une hypothèse à une statistique absente. Le projet utilise plusieurs catégories indépendantes d’information pour déterminer si le risque est suffisamment crédible et sérieux pour justifier un examen institutionnel plus approfondi.

Voir le faisceau de preuves View the risk matrix Office guide
04 · Ce que le registre rendrait observable

Transformer des données dispersées
en information utile à la prévention.

Le registre ne corrigerait pas rétrospectivement les données historiques. Il permettrait toutefois de produire progressivement une base commune et traçable pour les actes qui doivent y être inscrits.

Acte → professionnel

Identifier l’auteur, la date, le bâtiment et la catégorie d’acte lorsque l’inscription est requise.

Non-conformité → correction

Mesurer les types de non-conformités, les taux et délais de correction et leur évolution.

Tendances agrégées

Analyser les tendances par système, activité ou territoire lorsque l’anonymat peut être préservé.

Anonymized statistics

Produire des indicateurs de prévention sans permettre raisonnablement d’identifier une personne, un professionnel, un propriétaire ou un bâtiment.

Le registre ne transformerait pas automatiquement toute corrélation en causalité. Les statistiques futures devraient conserver leurs limites méthodologiques et distinguer les déficiences observées, les erreurs professionnelles établies et les autres facteurs pouvant contribuer au risque.

Fonctionnement du registre Mapping the acts
HomeDetailsData availability and evidence method
Observability · traceability · method

Data availability
and evidence method.

The file does not rely on the idea that a missing statistic proves a problem.

The current framework does not produce, centralize and link all of the information required to retrospectively calculate a representative province-wide professional-error rate. That is an observability limitation; risk must therefore be assessed using other evidence.

Method principle. No province-wide centralized public source has been identified to date that systematically links a technical act, its signer, the signer’s qualification, a later reassessment, identified deficiencies and possible consequences. That negative search result is not used as evidence of error.
01 · What is directly observable

Evidence already exists.
It simply does not answer every question.

Several dimensions of risk are documented by official and technical sources.

Public data

Exposure and severity

Québec statistics document fires, damaged buildings, injuries, evacuations and fire-related deaths.

Official observations

Real deficiencies

Targeted inspection operations such as SIM’s Operation Vulcain document real non-compliances and some situations considered critical.

Standards and duties

Technical complexity

Codes, standards and applicable requirements identify the acts, tests, systems, competencies and technical judgment involved.

Known populations

Part of the workforce

Sector-specific regimes identify some populations without enumerating everyone who performs all targeted acts.

Data and sources verified October 5, 2026.
16,907reported fires · 2021
16,471reported fires · 2022
≈ 308/yearpeople injured
≈ 27,000/yearpeople evacuated
34fire deaths · 2024 · preliminary data

What these figures show: the scale of exposure and potential severity. What they do not show: a professional fault rate.

Fire statistics · Québec Prevention · Québec Operation Vulcain · SIM 2024 deaths · MSP
Example · CCQ 2024

One occupational family alone already represents a substantial population.

CCQ reports 1,747 fire-protection mechanics active on construction sites in 2024, including 661 apprentices and 1,086 journeypersons. It also reports 148 firms recruiting in the trade, 118 new apprentices admitted in 2024 and 94% of work volume in the institutional and commercial sector.

Limit: these 1,747 people are neither OPSI’s future membership nor a count of everyone performing all proposed acts. They show only that one relevant occupational family is already sizeable. Populations from different sources must not be mechanically added when they may overlap.

Source · CCQ
02 · What is not centralized

The issue is observability,
not the absence of all information.

Several relationships needed for a representative province-wide rate cannot currently be reconstructed exhaustively.

Exact number of people performing each targeted act.
Common identity of signers across employers.
Total annual report volume by act type.
Rate of materially erroneous reports.
Repeated errors by the same person after changing employer.
Province-wide building non-compliance history.
Uniform correction follow-up.
Share of deficiencies initially missed.
Common disciplinary history for practitioners who are not members of any order.
What can be stated cautiously

A representative province-wide professional-error rate for the targeted acts cannot be calculated retrospectively from currently centralized public data. This means neither that errors are frequent nor that they are rare. It means the denominator and links required for that calculation are not assembled in one common source.

03 · How risk can still be assessed

One single statistic is not
the only form of evidence.

The Office des professions preliminary-analysis guide expressly contemplates qualitative or quantitative probability estimates and asks applicants to examine causal links, documented cases and existing mitigation measures.

Exposurebuildings, systems, acts and people concerned
Complexitystandards, testing, interactions and technical judgment
Observed deficienciesofficial findings in real buildings
Sentinel casesdocumented events used to study failure mechanisms
Information asymmetryclients generally cannot repeat the test or independently verify the conclusion
Existing oversightwhat it does, its limits and which mechanisms do or do not follow the individual
OPSI method

OPSI does not substitute an assumption for a missing statistic. It uses several independent categories of information to determine whether risk is credible and serious enough to justify deeper institutional review.

See the converging evidence See the risk matrix Office guide
04 · What the registry would make observable

Turn scattered data
into prevention information.

The registry would not repair historical data retroactively. It would progressively create a common, traceable basis for acts that must be recorded.

Act → professional

Identify the author, date, building and act category when filing is required.

Non-compliance → correction

Measure non-compliance types, correction rates and delays, and change over time.

Aggregated trends

Analyze trends by system, activity or territory where anonymity can be preserved.

Anonymized statistics

Produce prevention indicators without reasonably identifying an individual, professional, owner or building.

The registry would not turn every correlation into causation. Future statistics should retain methodological limits and distinguish observed deficiencies, established professional errors and other contributing factors.

How the registry would work Mapping the acts
Support us — write a letterMy account / SponsorshipParticipation FAQDashboard
OPSI

Organization of Fire Safety Practitioners of Québec.
A collective initiative led by the Organization of Fire Safety Practitioners of Québec to strengthen public protection.

HomeStepsProject quizBoard of directorsPurposesProposed internal bylawsProfessional oversightEvidence file — Section 25Data availabilityMapping the actsWhy the professional system?Access to the profession and trainingRisk matrixWhy a registry?FundingDetailed analysisFAQProposal search engineComplete proposal
La protection du public, c’est la clé. Compétence · Intégrité · ImputabilitéPublic protection is the key. Competence · Integrity · Accountability
opsi.info1-877-CLÉ-OPSI1-877-253-6774
Preparing to incorporate the non-profit · Separate from the proposed professional order.
The texts presented are working proposals, not law currently in force.
Latest documented release : v308

Settings

Choose your browsing preferences.

Appearance

On your first visit, the theme is selected randomly and then stored in a cookie.

Cookies

Retirez vos accords facultatifs et effacez les préférences enregistrées sur cet appareil, sans fermer votre session.

Surprise

🥚 Look, an Easter egg… This one was never filed in the registry! 😂

OPSI Easter egg OPSI games Psst… There’s a little surprise in Settings. Nothing to file with the registry. 😉 ↗ Change history Documented changes through v308
External service

A question about OPSI?

Ask your question freely.

You will be redirected to Google (AI mode), an external service independent of OPSI. Its answers may contain errors.

Also compare the proposal with your own AI

Give it opsi.info or the proposal text. Ask pointed questions, compare several models and verify their sources.

Your browsing.

A consultation website without advertising.

A consultation website

Public explanatory pages and proposed legal texts can be read without an account. The consultation is not the future central fire-safety registry. No advertising tracker is added.

Accounts and contributions

The database stores your email, public display name, password hash, sponsorship history, comments, voting identifiers, moderation decisions and security audit events. Your email is not displayed publicly. The president and authorized administrators have role-limited access.

Public comments and archives

Published contributions, their public display names and their approved revisions may be consulted and used in an OPSI consultation brief. A comment refers to a precise version of a proposed section. Non-public drafts and sponsorship email addresses are not part of public archives. The participation FAQ explains moderation, retention and requests for correction or withdrawal.

Aggregate audience counts without consent

The public consultation server counts requests by public page, UTC day and hour, successful OPSI document downloads, and selected feature activations, even if you decline optional cookies. The MySQL counters contain no IP address, browser identifier, fingerprint, browsing history, full URL or personally identifiable event record. Counts are requests or actions, not unique visitors or completed reading. Aggregate counts are kept for trend analysis without a defined automatic expiry.

Optional audience statistics

Only if you actively agree, OPSI also uses a signed pseudonymous browser cookie for session and page history, estimated active time, coarse browser/device/OS information, campaign source, referral domain, time-zone offset, approximate viewport dimensions, scrolling and game/feature-use events (never answers or typed text). No IP address or complete user-agent string is kept in these optional statistical records. The data are accessible only to the president and kept for 395 days by default (the hosting retention value may differ). Withdrawal stops tracking immediately and requests deletion of the associated browser history. A browser does not prove a unique person.

Technical and security logs

The host, web server and security services may separately process IP addresses to protect the infrastructure, prevent abuse and investigate incidents when demonstrably necessary. Such technical records are not joined to audience statistics or used to reconstruct the journeys of people who refuse tracking. Their actual fields, authorized access, retention and deletion schedule, as well as Apache/proxy logs and backups, must be verified and documented with the hosting provider before launch; PHP cannot control their expiry.

Cookies and local progress

Sign-in uses a secure session cookie. A signed browser identifier limits repeated votes, without proving a unique person. With your separate optional agreement, the site can save learning progress and the history of questions you submit on your device (up to one year). Without agreement, learning and question history remain only in the current page memory; the games still work. Theme changes and game scores use local preferences. Technical rate-limit records are periodically purged. You can change or withdraw optional choices from the footer.

Email

Verification, sponsorship and account-recovery messages use the server-configured transport. When Microsoft Graph is enabled, necessary delivery information is sent to that service. Delivery is not guaranteed merely because the service accepted a message.

Retention and your requests

Legislative archives and contribution history are retained for consultation traceability; withdrawal normally hides a comment without erasing its history. Exceptional redaction is separately controlled and logged. Contact info@opsi.info (privacy officer contact for this project, subject to confirmation of the designated person) for access, correction, withdrawal or retention questions. Pseudonymized records remain personal information; counters created without identifiers must not be misrepresented as anonymization of existing personal data. The operator must validate the legal grounds and retention schedules. This implementation is not a legal compliance certificate.

FAQ — Participation and privacy

Methodology and drafting.

Transparency about the nature of the published documents.

The texts presented on this site are working proposals. They are expected to evolve as evidence is gathered, consultations take place and the Organization makes decisions.

Research, drafting and review may have been assisted by digital tools, including artificial-intelligence tools. These tools do not determine the Organization’s direction, positions or decisions.

The Organization of Fire Safety Practitioners of Québec assumes full responsibility for the content it publishes, including drafting choices and proposals submitted for consultation.

✕

Participate

Contact the OPSI team to contribute to the initiative.

info@opsi.info
✕

Privacy

No advertising tracking. Aggregate request counts do not require optional cookies; detailed statistics and saved learning progress require separate consent.

✕

Methodology

The OPSI proposal is an unadopted working document; assumptions and limitations require independent review.

Read the proposal
✕

Settings

Theme preferences and in-site cookie reset require JavaScript.

Cookies et statistiques

Le site compte les consultations globales sans identifier les visiteurs. Les cookies nécessaires restent actifs. Le suivi détaillé et la sauvegarde des progrès sont facultatifs; le refus ne bloque rien.