Basements and Stories “On Side Charlie”-Part 1
There is an old Indian fable about six blind men trying to make sense of an elephant. Each of the men was touching a different part of the elephant; the side, the trunk, a tusk, one of its legs, an ear, and its tail. Each man was convinced that he knew what an elephant was like based on what he could feel. All of them were right, but none of them knew what an elephant was really like. Firefighters and fire officers can encounter the same challenges.
The initial incident commander (IC #1) at a structure fire endeavors to avoid the challenge faced by the six blind men by performing 360-degree reconnaissance (if possible). The first arriving command officer (IC #2) blends his or her direct observations and the information provided by IC #1 to develop an understanding of the situation.
This is the first of a three-part series of posts dealing with developing a common operating picture and shared situational awareness related to building layout and configuration.
Note: Adapted from Zillow. (2025). 314 N X St, Washougal, WA 98671. https://bit.ly/4iXCujl.
Recently East County Fire and Rescue Captain Danny Burch asked the Blue Card staff for their perspective on how to describe this type of building. Their answer was that there are several ways that it could be described, but what is important is that firefighters and fire officers that respond to incidents together should describe it the same way. This is important, but is there more to this?
Given the conditions illustrated above, IC #1 transmitted an initial radio report (IRR) stating that their company arrived to a small, one-story house with a working fire. Which of the following follow-up reports would provide the clearest picture of the incident and related critical fireground factors?
Option 1: 360 complete, one story on Side Charlie with a working fire in a walkout basement.
Option 2: 360 complete two stories on Side Charlie with a working fire in a walkout basement.
Option 3: 360 complete two stories on Side Charlie including a walkout basement with a working fire in the basement.
If everyone responding to this incident agrees that the number of stories is based on grade level on Alpha (as reported in the IRR) and that a walkout basement is not reported as a story, this follow-up is clear and concise. Similarly, if everyone responding to this incident agrees that a walkout basement is reported as an additional story, this follow-up is clear and concise.
However, it is possible that not everyone responding uses the same conventions in describing this type of building… Option 3 is the result of giving this considerable thought and may be the most certain way to communicate the layout and configuration of this building and the location of the fire.
Critical Factors
My previous post, Can You Communicate? discussed information density in incident communications. Information density is the amount of relevant information in a text or spoken message.
The presence and type of basement (or absence of a basement) and if the basement is involved in fire, are essential critical factors. Clearly articulating this information is essential.
Up Next
The second post in this series will examine basements, and “stories on Side Charlie” in a bit more detail and the third will look at several relevant incident case studies.
Contact Command Competence if you would like to schedule a one-day workshop on The Scientific Approach to Attic and Basement Fires!
References
Blue Card. (2023). Sample Incident Command System SOG 7-2023. Retrieved April 2, 2025, from https://bit.ly/4hUncKT.
Zillow. (2025). 314 N X St, Washougal, WA 98671. Retrieved April 6, 2025, from https://bit.ly/4iXCujl.