We will state the appropriate rule from the current SLOCF manual and then, indicated by arrow and italicized copy:

→ What SLO City FD actually did.

The decision to refuse to fight a fire is a huge, serious, and significant decision. Nowhere in any firefighter narratives on this fire is there any discussion or consideration of what they are intending to do and the effects it will have on the business, the employees, the family operating the business, the community downwind who had to eat all the smoke needlessly generated, and the millions of gallons of water wasted. If only Incident Commander BC-1 Neal Berryman or Fire Chief Garret Olson would have considered fighting the fire (instead of only considering a quick burndown in the name of firefighter safety but at the expense of everyone else and the community), it would have been a small short fire. By refusing to fight the fire when they could and should have, they abandoned their responsibilities to the community and chose only to serve themselves. They not only chose not to do their job, they did worse than nothing – They intentionally helped spread and intensify the fire. SLO City FD leadership is responsible for most of the destruction in The Sub and ALL of the Square Deal destruction that followed.

SAN LUIS OBISPO CITY FIRE - EMERGENCY OPERATIONS MANUAL - (EXCERPTS)

SLOCF - E.O. 501.00
INCIDENT COMMAND

COMMAND RESPONSIBILITIES

• "The IC will then establish command and identity/name of an incident, and take an effective command position."

→ The fire was not in view from the command position. BC-1 Berryman failed to take effective command position as he could not see the fire from his command position.

• "The IC shall perform a size-up/risk assessment, determine the incident objectives, and communicate them to all participants."

→ No size-up/risk assessment was done. BC-1 Berryman had a predetermined agenda stemming from either his own preferences or underground (or unpublished) firefighter policies that SLO City FD is operating with. BC-1 Berryman makes no mention of any risk actual assessments in his narrative. He tells the business owner he will take ZERO risk just over 12 minutes into the fire.

→ Failed completely in sizing up the incident. BC-1 Berryman sent firemen onto the roof before even looking at the fire. BC-1 Berryman does not comment anywhere in his narrative on the continuous and ongoing sizing-up of the situation he is supposed to be doing in determining the actions he should be taking.

• "The IC shall be responsible to continually evaluate the progress toward accomplishing incident objectives and/or adjust them as necessary."

→ Actually fighting the fire was never evaluated or considered – No R.I.C./F.A.S.T. personnel were assigned to allow possible entry to fight the fire. The only re-evaluation was how to accelerate progress of burning the structure down. Nowhere in BC-1 Berryman's narrative does he claim he constantly or repeatedly re-evaluated the fire – Nowhere does he show any concern to actually put water on the fire or stop the fire's progress. All his actions do the opposite.

• "The IC shall be responsible to continually evaluate the progress toward accomplishing incident objectives and/or adjust them as necessary."

→ Actually fighting the fire was never evaluated or considered – No R.I.C./F.A.S.T. personnel were assigned to allow possible entry to fight the fire. The only re-evaluation was how to accelerate progress of burning the structure down by cutting large holes ahead of the fire. BC-1 Berryman does send the chainsaw crew to the roof four times to cut additional holes without interior operations. Nowhere in BC-1 Berryman's narrative does he claim he constantly or repeatedly re-evaluated the fire – Nowhere does he show any concern to actually put water on the fire or stop the fire's progress. All his actions do the opposite.

•The IC shall be responsible for proper organization and documentation of the incident, and to utilize an Incident Action Plan (IAP) to assist in management of the incident.

→ BC-1 Berryman's narrative is totally insufficient and lacking in detail. Very little documentation is done. He does not take initial responsibility nor give reason for the defensive posture from the start. He leaves out completely the firefighting from 1:00pm until 11:00pm. It is as if there was no Square Deal fire…