Commercial Fire

Commercial Fire Date:10-14-2013

Incident #AB13001507

Address:4800 Harbour Pointe Blvd. SW

Time:16:49:54

PIA FormatThe PIA is not to blame or point fingers at anyone. It is presented to analyze the following:What actions took place?What actions were beneficial?What actions could be changed/taken in the future?Any safety issues and/or equipment failures?Any suggestions to improve our service?Building Size & Layout

Units DispatchedM2516:49:54(BLS)L2316:54:?(FS)B1116:56:?(FC)B16 L15E10E11TR21EN6A24MDC (CH25)Self Added ResourcesAC16AC11FM25SF25MSO21DispatchWas the alarm reported, received, and dispatched correctly?

Reported = NO initially. YES by additional callers.

Received = Yes

Dispatched = Yes

Was IC Established and Followed?Established & maintained = M25

Had one unit arrive and report to command

Had one unit arrive and ask report to command? after being told to standby.

IC Flow ChartSize UpDid the initial arriving officer properly size-up the building?

For the most part. No mention on size or use of building. Officer did state smoke conditions, location and initiate command.

Extent of FireSmoke showing from the C/D Corner. Some evacuation had occurred. One sprinkler head was operational over the fire area.

Incident Action PlanReconRescueConfinementExtinguishOverhaulSafety BenchmarksWas 2in/2out established? = YesWas ISO established? = Yes. AC16Was gross decon established? = NoWas rehab established? = It was determined that the incident would not need an official rehab.Was appropriate PPE in place during fire attack? During overhaul? = Yes. Proper PPE was being used during the incident.Was there air monitoring and appropriate PPE in place after overhaul was completed? = YesRescueWas there a need for rescue efforts and if so were they done appropriately?

Aggressive evacuation was needed. Officer from M25 went to doorway and told all remaining employees of the business in the fire area to evacuate.ExposuresWere there any exposures? If so, were they addressed?

Yes. The rest of this mega size building was a potential exposure. M25 crew closed the fire doors early on in the incident.OverhaulWas the fire completely extinguished? = Yes

Was the area of origin preserved as much as possible? = Yes

Was the structure secured prior to leaving? = Business continued operations in the building.

Was the building turned over properly? = YesHose LayoutL23Traffic ControlDid law enforcement provide traffic control?

Mukilteo PD arrived, but there was no need for traffic control.UtilitiesWere the utilities handled effectively and within a reasonable timeframe?

There was no need for a utility company response. However, in the fire room there was some operating electrical that had not been dealt with. There was an operational sprinkler head, yet there was still some equipment operating in the room.

SupportWas support 7 requested?

Incident size did not need the resources of Support 7.

Was a chaplain offered?

NoCommunicationsWere radio communications clear & concise?

Yes. The IC did an excellent job of communicating the initial assignments on the TAC channel in clear, concise terms.

Were all communications answered & understood?

Yes. Interior crews communications were received routinely on the first transmit.

Safety Problems/Equipment FailuresWere there any safety issues?Trip hazards in the doorwayThe ladder might have been a little close to the building if it needed to be relocated in a hurryIC failed to don a command vestIC was more mobile than he needed to be.

Were there any equipment failures?

None reported

Pictures

Pictures cont.

Pictures cont.

Water Supply PIV & Hydrant Location

Fire CauseSparks from a grinding operation made entry into a filter system that caused the filters to catch on fire.Any suggestions that would improve our service? Any comments?A comprehensive pre-fire plan for the building and its suppression system would have been very beneficial.

Discontinue stealth mode responses. Staff each station with a Captain, PM, & FF and only send one EMS unit to BLS emergencies.

Grid was not correct with SNOCOM.

Definitive direction for the basing of apparatus and the location of staging. Especially applicable because of multi-jurisdictional response.

Pre-fire plan would have been very beneficial to us for RIT.