Model Incident Command System— An Overview
STRATEGY AND TACTICS
Taking command of an incident is an awesome task at best. And decisions on managing manpower and equipment often must be reached within seconds. There is no “best” method when it comes to commanding an incident; but, depending on circumstances, there are “better” methods.
The National Fire Academy (NFA) developed a model incident command system, which is a compilation of the knowledge and expertise of people from all areas of the nation. It is not just one department’s method of managing an incident scene, it is a collection of what are considered to be the better methods of commanding and controlling an incident.
First taught at the National Fire Academy in 1981, the course has been continually improved and revised under the guidance of Charles Burkell, resident programs division instructor; Romey Brooks of the Materials Development Division, and William Blair, emergency incident policy and program chairman. The revisions are made as a result of feedback from students whose departments have implemented various parts of the incident command system. The NFA encourages fire departments to choose the overall system that addresses their needs by adjusting those parts of the model to best suit their operations.
Is your department so different?
The company officer is the target audience for the incident command system. All incident operations usually begin with the arrival of one unit followed by another, then another. Each unit moves into position to accomplish certain tasks and responsibilities. As more units arrive, they too are positioned and cident.
When the entire first-alarm assignment has arrived, four or five companies are hard at work. There are firefighters applying streams, some doing primary search, others are venting. People are rushing in and out of the structure. There is action everywhere. Hoselines are in both the front and rear doors. Ladder company crews are breaking windows on the ground floor.
The scene presents the appearance that the fire department is effectively battling the enemy. But, how effective is the effort? It is time to stop the action and review what has occurred.
The scene described is typical for nearly all fire departments. This is what we see when companies respond to, and operate at, an interior structural fire. To the layman observing the actions of two different fire departments handling similar incidents, the differences in command and control may not be noticed. However, the experienced fire officer can readily discern the difference between a well commanded incident and one that is poorly handled. How do you and your department compare with the following review of the incident?
Areas that we often ignore
Often, fire officers will be at a loss when it comes time to calling just the right shot. Time is critical at a fire. Was the structure pre-fire planned as a means of giving the first-arriving personnel the necessary, vital information to make good initial decisions? If there was a pre-fire plan, was it in a simplified form, easy to comprehend, and practical for the first-in officer?
Does the officer know the capability of the first alarm assignment? Does he know if there is sufficient manpower, apparatus, water supply, etc., to control the situation? Does the first-in officer know how to measure these parameters? Does he know how to measure the capability of each unit dispatched?
The companies are at work performing various tasks to extinguish the fire. How did they decide what tasks to perform? Is there an incident commander with an overall strategy assigning all companies to tasks that are coordinated with the rest of the operations? Or, are the companies practicing the “free enterprise” system of fire protection, with every company officer assigning himself a task? Are the two hoseline crews opposing one another, driving fire and heat into each other? Is ventilation taking place where it will be most effective for the interior crews? Or, are the venting teams just breaking glass? Are there sufficient personnel doing the search? Too many? Too few? Are hose streams being played into the structure through windows even though there are crews operating inside? Is the fire being pushed into unburned areas?
Getting It Together
The model incident command system stresses the methodology that is necessary tor you and your department to meet the challenge of operating in a coordinated and efficient manner on the fireground. Beginning with this issue, FIRE ENGINEERING will present the segments of the National Fire Academy’s model incident command system. By adapting the various segments to fit your department, you can produce an effective command and control system that is designed to meet the challenges of our contemporary environment. The segments to be presented are:
Resource determination
Combustion
Water
Fire flow calculations
Resource capability
Planning for effective use of
resources
Pre-fire planning
Performance standards
Managing fireground resources
Communications
Size up
Command or combat
Strategic priorities
Strategy
Tactics
Rescue
Exposure
Confinement
Extinguishment
Overhaul
If there is an incident commander, is that officer in a good position to control the scene and other arriving companies? Are the arriving units reporting to the commanding officer for assignments so that the incident has coordinated management? Does the incident commander have a working knowledge of strategy, tactics, and methods? Does he know the interrelationship of these terms?
Has the incident been sectored into manageable units? Or, is every company officer reporting directly to the incident commander? Is there someone in charge of the interior? The rear? The roof? Upper floors? The flanks?
What were your answers? Could it be that your department is like most others?
What have we learned from the national experience?
Based on instructor experience at NFA, it has been found that:
- Some departments, finding themselves lacking in the knowledge
- and procedures needed to properly command and control an incident are faced with “free enterprise” firefighting tactics.
- Some of us do not know how to determine the capability of our company or first-alarm units.
- Pre-fire planning appears too complex and time consuming, yet it is significantly important should a building become involved in fire.
- Departments do not have a sectoring system. In fact, they do not delegate authority on the fire-ground; everyone reports to the officer-incharge of the incident.
- There are fire department officers who do not understand the full meaning of incident command, and continue to work in a system that has failed to set the proper parameters for effective incident command and control.
We are creatures of habit. We tend to inherit our procedures from past generations of good fire officers. We accept the reasoning that if it worked 20 years ago, why shouldn’t it work now. We are parochial, seeing our method of doing things as the best way. Unfortunately, for most of us, the old habits will not produce effective command and control of a modern-day incident.
Our habits have been scrutinized, and there is a new methodology sweeping the nation—the NFA’s model incident command system.
The coordinator
The fire department officer, while operating at an incident, will find that 80% of his responsibility is the coordination of the efforts of the attack crews. Unless there is an incident commander from the arrival of the very first unit, it is doubtful that even the efforts of the first two companies will be coordinated. More effective coordination of efforts at the incident scene is necessary if we are to further reduce this nation’s fire loss and reduce the number of injuries to citizens and firefighting personnel.
Why an Incident command system?
The world in which we live is constantly changing. The burning environment in which we as firefighters and fire officers must operate has become increasingly hostile due to heavier fire loads, synthetics, etc. The toxicity of the by-products of combustion have reduced the time we have for locating and removing people that have become incapacitated by the fire. The increased heat production of the petrochemical synthetics has considerably reduced the time from ignition to flashover. This same factor has increased the rapidity with which the fire spreads and the amount of water required to absorb the heat being produced. We have less time after arrival on the scene to get our act together.
Because of our synthetic environment, the inefficient use of our resources will result in increased life and property loss. A comprehensive model incident command system is the primary method of increasing effectiveness and efficiency through the increased coordination of effort.
Time of confusion
Every emergency incident of any magnitude is initially accompanied by considerable confusion. The confusion eventually subsides to a minimum with the passage of time. This length of the “time of confusion” depends on many factors. The question is not “Should there by any confusion?” (we believe that it is inevitable in the early stages of an incident), but rather “How long does the confusion last?”
Most of us have been involved with incidents that were as confused at the end as they were in the beginning. With a model incident command system, we are simply trying to reduce the time of confusion by applying early, effective command and control of the situation.
RESOURCE DETERMINATION: Combustion
By comparison, the world that the contemporary firefighters and fire officers face is much more volatile than what was faced even a few decades ago. At one time, and for most of this nation’s history, the citizen lived in a Class A combustible world. A world where most things were made from cellulose materials—trees and plant life. The fur and feather of animals were included in finished goods. The fire load in the average home had a heat of combustion of approximately 6,000 to 9,000 Btu per pound. The typical heats of combustion when one pound of Class A material is consumed by fire are:
Today, we live surrounded by synthetics—an environment that has its origins in the world of the petrochemical industry, where chemical processing has produced solid objects from petroleum-based gases and liquids. The typical heats of combustion produced when one pound of these synthetic materials is consumed by fire are:
What does this information tell us about today’s fire structure and the probable behavior of fire? Let’s take a look at the standard time temperature curve that is presently used to classify fire endurance of building components.
In the early 1900s, after several disastrous fires resulted in large property losses, the National Bureau of Standards (NBS), the National Fire Protection Association (NFPA), and insurance interests joined hands to conduct tests to study the behavior of structural fire. As a result of these tests, the Standard Time-Temperature Curve was developed. The American Society for Testing and Materials (ASTM) E-119 Standard Time-Temperature Curve was developed over 60 years ago, and, with no major changes since then, is still used today (see figure 1).
In 1980, the NBS, Center for Fire Research, released an interim report “Fire Development in Residential Basement Rooms,” NBS 80-2120. The report states that due to extensive research on compartment fires and increased information available on fire behavior, doubts have been raised about the validity of applying the Standard TimeTemperature Curve to today’s environment.
The report goes on to state that the design of residential buildings has changed considerably in the past six decades, especially in the area of lightweight construction materials based on performance codes. Also, many new products, such as synthetic fabrics, finishes, laminates, and composites are the primary furnishings, wall and ceiling coverings in residential rooms. These materials burn faster and may lose their integrity earlier and at lower temperatures than wood-base materials. The real temperature development can be expected to be quite different from the temperature history described by the Standard Time-Temperature Curve (see comparison in figure 1).
A series of 16 full-scale tests was conducted. An example of the results of one test showed that heavy flames were coming from the doorway 2 minutes and 25 seconds from time of ignition. A review of the NBS report will show that a fire in a typical residential room will attack the structure more severely than that anticipated by the Standard Time-Temperature Curve. The rate of the development and the intensity of the fire during the first 20 minutes may be much greater than we have expected.
The conclusion that we as firefighters can draw from these test results is the probability of greater involvement of the building much earlier, possibly before we even leave the fire station. Our reflex time, the time from ignition to the time suppression activities begin can be as long as 20 minutes or more. Observing the chart will give you an idea of the possible severity of a fire in a modern residential occupancy during the first 20 minutes as compared to the Standard Time-Temperature Curve. The fire may penetrate walls, ceilings, or floors more quickly, resulting in rapid fire extension.
In lightweight construction, which is presently being used in many areas of the country, we can expect early structural failure. The main components of lightweight construction are trusses of 2 X 4-inch lumber, possibly 3/8-inch plywood, or 1-inch steel tubing used as web members.
A few progressive fire departments have conducted tests on the effect of fire on typical lightweight construction elements. The time of failure, from the start of ignition varied from a half minute to six minutes. The type of element tested determined failure time. With the present state of the economy, contractors and builders will use the less expensive and faster methods to put up a building. Unfortunately, it will surely come down under fire conditions much faster than it went up.
With the potential for greater heat output, the use of a booster line should not even be considered, and a 1 1/2-inch line may not be adequate depending on the degree of involvement. A good choice would be a 1 3/4-inch hose. It would provide the additional water and still give the mobility of a small diameter hose. The advantages of this type hose and its means of increasing productivity will be covered in another article.
While we have confined our discussion to residential buildings, the same would hold true for other occupancies that have similar furnishings, such as office buildings with modern decor. An analysis of the synthetics in your home should be indicative of the other occupancies in your community. The answer to the problem is a sprinkler system that extinguishes the fire in its early stages.
We are well established in an era that is more flammable and toxic than ever before in the history of man. An incident commander must have a thorough understanding of today’s fire environment along with fire behavior to develop effective fire strategy and tactics.
It is important that the contemporary fire officer understand how the heat of a fire is absorbed by our most abundant extinguishing agent—water.
What to Expect
In subsequent articles, you can expect to find some review of what you already know about combustion, fire control, and command. You will also be exposed to information that is entirely new. There will be forms and formats for analyzing information in a way that will provide you with hard data about your department’s capability. There will be methods of operation presented that will require you to analyze the very core of your procedures. We will challenge the way you think. We will challenge you to justify what you presently do at an incident. We will give you the ability to make improvements in your departmental operations. We will give you the knowledge and the tools to effect change. The rest depends on you.
