Rescue of a Trapped Firefighter, Part 3 of 3
The fourth step of the action plan is incident organization. A command organization is an effective tool used by the incident commander to assemble, coordinate and control tactical resources. The incident organization is required to effectively, efficiently and safely accomplish incident action plan strategies and priorities. The incident commander’s goal in establishing an effective incident organization is to ensure unity of command (one boss), maintain company unity, manage span of control, coordinate communications and establish incident priorities to drive the strategies so that the implementation of the tactical objectives is performed safely to control the incident.
A more practical way of looking at incident organization is that this is the execution area(s) where firefighters implement their tactical objectives and company tasks on the fire scene. It is also an area, space, or location inside and out, above and below, or around the building and adjacent buildings that may be traveled and occupied by firefighters. It is the incident commander’s responsibility to identify and communicate the operational “working area” on all incidents and provide identification (geographically) to those areas, space, locations etc., to maintain firefighter accountability and safety. A positive way of initially implementing this process is to assign arriving companies and their personnel to “geographical areas” (I did not use the words division or group), by using geographical referencing. For example, “Engine 1, proceed to the ‘B’ side of the building, open the roll-up doors, recon and locate the fire.” Now, if something unforeseen happens in this area, space, or location, within a short moment of time you have a pretty good idea as to the location where crews are working if they get into trouble and send necessary help if needed. Seems easy enough, but as companies begin to go to work and incident commanders become busy, at times distracted receiving other information over the radio and from other inputs, somehow this critical information is lost in transition.
Establishing an effective incident organization should be pretty easy. However, this is one area in particular of the incident command process identified in part 2 of this series (book knowledge versus real life experience) that is confusing, misunderstood and individually morphed by departments and their members, which primarily comes from what is perceived after reading incident command books. Perhaps this comes from the incident commander being in a hurry to “check ICS boxes” when assigning companies and feeling he/she has to assign each company that arrives an “incident command supervisory/title,” i.e., interior, fire attack, division and group supervisor, etc. Perhaps the department’s SOPs indicate they have to do it this way? Inexperienced instructional delivery from persons who don’t have the necessary experience of what works and what doesn’t in a real fire emergency also contributes to perceptions. So what eventually happens is the already warped perceptions become exacerbated and the individual incident command learner is left confused and wondering what should be done. Whatever happened to assigning an initial arriving company a tactical objective and using their unit identification, (E-48, primary search, L-56, ventilation/forcible entry, etc.)? More explanation of this to follow!
I want to share with you a conversation (to illustrate the confusion) that I had with a very respected command officer from Northern California who lectures locally and nationally on incident command. He explained how he assigns as the incident commander a company officer while operating at a single family dwelling fire the “incident command supervisory/title” INTERIOR. He said he does this to ensure span of control, improve communications, accountability, etc. In addition, on scene companies can now work through “INTERIOR command position” and the incident commander only needs to communicate with one person. His department at that time used 3,000-square-feet as a general rule of thumb as to the size of the occupancy as when to determine to use the “command supervisory/title” INTERIOR on a building fire.
After listening to this individual for a good period of the evening, I thought about book knowledge versus real life experiences as to what is practical and what has been successful in the actual incident command environment. As I reflected more about the conversation some items of concern became apparent to me. Are fire departments encouraging the use command incident organization terminology like INTERIOR and assigning an officer the “command supervisory/title” INTERIOR DIVISION during building fires, especially single family dwelling fires? If you are assigned INTERIOR DIVISION are you perhaps participating a little too much in the tasks that are occurring or needing to occur within the fire environment? I don’t understand why the size or square footage of a building is a factor for assigning an officer “command supervisory/title” INTERIOR or other command position. If fire organizations are using command organization terminology like INTERIOR at high frequency building fire events such as a single family dwelling fire, wouldn’t you think a mental behavior pattern (slides in each individual’s slide carousel) would be established and continually be practiced over and over again on future building fires? What happens when your fire is in a larger building (commercial or retail) and the incident commander (just like at the single family dwelling fire) assigns an officer “command supervisory/title” INTERIOR DIVISION? Will you be able to effectively and safely manage 10,000-square-feet of geographical working area in that type of building when it is on fire? What happens when your span of control exceeds its safe limit and more companies are required to fight the fire inside a larger commercial building where you have INTERIOR DIVISION assigned? What happens to your span of control when you now have 10-plus companies working for you inside as INTERIOR DIVISION? The command book says establish an INTERIOR BRANCH. Sorry to laugh out loud, but I love to meet and talk with the person who has performed in the “command supervisory/ title” as INTERIOR BRANCH under the conditions and example described earlier. Now the $64,000 question needs to be asked. If you have established the incident organization as I described “INTERIOR DIVISION,” where are the crews working within the building? More importantly, if a mayday call is transmitted for assistance, where are the crews’ “specific locations” inside the building?
I have heard the argument from many that the ICS system of command is a “toolbox” concept and incident commanders can use the toolbox for flexibility and support for their incident. However, some of those tools within the ICS “toolbox” are very dangerous if the user has never actually used them or has no “real world” experience applying the tools for a specific incident. I am speaking from experience with a department that has experienced three near-misses in the early 2000s using these “command supervisory/titles” as part of its incident organization. It is imperative how incident commanders go about establishing their incident organization because it can be a very dangerous tool if not used properly.
The fifth step of the action plan is situation status. Simply speaking, “what is going on with the fire?” Is the fire getting bigger or smaller? What hazards exist, can we mitigate them, what additional resources need to be ordered, what progress have we made? Critical components of situation status include collecting, processing and organizing ongoing incident fire information. This information allows the incident commander to develop projections and forecast future events. It is critical for the incident commander to receive continual intelligence from fire companies working in and around the operational area. Their situational awareness has to be communicated on a regular interval so that the incident commander can make the necessary adjustments in the incident action plan.
When a transfer of command is given many components of situation status is conveyed. Some people possess a talent to convey information in a very clear, concise and correct manner. I’ve always said, don’t tell me how to build the watch, but rather tell me the time! A method I’ve used successfully to communicate, especially to my boss or others at a fire, goes something like this: “Here is what the fire was doing when we arrived on scene,” “here is what we have done since we have arrived on scene and it had a positive or negative effect on the fire,” “here is what is needed in the immediate future to assist in mitigating or controlling the fire.”
Situation status also consists of the utilization of building pre-plans, target hazard information, structural components, jurisdictional knowledge, weather, terrain, water system information, specialized maps, etc. In a more advanced setting situation status is communicated through an ICS Form 209, where a much more comprehensive gathering of intelligence is accomplished.
The sixth step of the action plan is resource status. This is a very challenging process for the incident commander (no assistance), who is now faced with a dynamic escalating incident and immediately has to order, allocate, assign, track, control and reassign resources to match the incident’s growth. At any incident or event, the incident commander must assess the situation to ensure resources are organized, assigned and directed to accomplish the incident action plan. As they work, resources must be managed to adjust to changing conditions. Managing resources safely and effectively is the most important consideration for the incident commander at an incident.
The purpose of resource tracking is to ensure personnel safety by maintaining real time resource accountability. The incident commander or the assistant needs to document the company assignment and the time, which is the start time for an individual resource assigned to a specific area. In addition, if a company is reassigned or released from the incident that needs to be documented/recorded as well. For example, if a company is reassigned to another area or division, that movement needs to be recorded.
Seems easy enough; however, if you have ever sat in the seat of command during a stressful and rapidly escalating incident it is not a very easy task to perform and far too many incident commanders have to play catch-up to organize their resources.
Fireground accountability is a high priority for the incident commander. The expectations for the incident commander are pretty well identified throughout NFPA 1500, 1521, 1561, which all identify critical incident components such as: risk analysis, establish accountability systems, maintaining location and function of all companies at the scene, etc.
The seventh step of the action plan is a communication plan. Securing your communications during a dynamic incident is critical. Establishing a communications plan to ensure that all resources working on an incident, including the incident command staff, do not have to compete with other resources being dispatched to other emergency calls and reduce related non-emergency radio traffic.
A defined and secured communication plan established early in the incident allows for companies working on the emergency to communicate on specific frequencies to support safety, accountability, coordination, effectiveness, and completion of the incident objectives. For example, group, division supervisors, branch directors, command and general staff members should be communicating with the incident commander on the command channel. Companies working on the incident should be communicating with their boss on the tactical frequency, as well as communicating with other companies on the fireground. The communication plan can also be identified on ICS Form 205.
Incident commanders are faced with the need to maintain a channel span of control that may be limited because of radio channel availability. The result is too many people on too few channels — and communication overloads your incident. The pitfalls of your communication system becoming overwhelmed by the amount of radio traffic include: lost messages, contention between users, and too often, responders turning down their radio volume to focus attention on other items in front of them. Anyone ever involved in a large-scale response with dozens of responders in a small area, each carrying a radio with busy channels, knows how difficult communicating can become.
The eighth step of the action plan is the safety (medical) plan. As the incident commander, what contingency have you established if at some point in your incident one of your firefighters is injured, becomes missing, is trapped or suffering from chest pains? What immediate assistance can you provide? Many times incident commanders working off a “tactical platform” get so caught up in tactical/task assignments that are occurring on the fireground they forget to request, assign, and stage critical life support and transporting resources to support the firefighters working on the incident.
The safety plan also includes the assignment of a safety officer, rapid intervention crews, implementation of the accountability system, ensuring effective communication, and continual updates (conditions, actions, needs and location) from companies working in the operational area. If you don’t have effective communications, you have no command!!
