Those aren’t any difference in Teams and capabilities, only different agency policies. I coached and coordinated S-420 Command and General Staff for many years with CF, Fed and LG students. Their objectives are the same as well as qualifications. Both are highly qualified and capable of managing incidents inter-agency. The purpose of ICS and training is to adapt to a variety of incidents. Not just wildland.
12 Likes
Objectives not always the same. In the wildland arena, Manage for resource benefit is not in the CF vernacular. Nobody ever posted that one team is better than another. You asked what the differences are. Also, CF IMT members take 420, then when they get to a Section Chief position, they are going to AAIM now, not S-520 at NAFRI. Some have gone to CIMC, but that doesn’t come to California every year as it is hosted nationwide.
2 Likes
That doesn’t matter. An ICT or IMT needs to have the capability to adapt to any agency policies and carry out the objectives as defined by the Host agency . Here’s a prime example, the Creek. At the start of the fire the Forest couldn’t get a Type 1 Fed team in a timely manner as they were all committed in NorCal or out of Region so they ordered a CF Team and were in unified command and it worked well. The whole point of ICS is to recognize each others quals. and meet the objectives of the incident. That’s what unified command is all about.
4 Likes
That’s one thing I noticed last year on MNF-August, the night ops briefing over radio to all the spiked out resources. It was pretty neat, allowed for up-to-the-minute IMET breifings and Ops could direct based on the day’s accomplishments etc.
2 Likes
There were a whole lot of innovative high tech methods undertaken for briefings by Teams last year with COVID.
3 Likes
A few fires I went to did the briefing via YouTube live stream which was huge. Over the radio was very helpful as well.
2 Likes
Does anyone know if there’s a site where Fed type 2 teams are scheduled for national rotation such as the type I teams?
https://www.nifc.gov/nicc/logistics/teams/imt_rotate.pdf
Type 2 teams are not on a national rotation. They are manage by the GACCs which have their own rotations. When NICC gets an order for a Type 2 team they generally go to the nearest GACC.
1 Like
Regarding the “Planning Operations” position, regardless of whose team or what complexity level they are operating… It is a Deputy Operations Section Chief, Planning. There are not two OSC’s with equal authority on at the same time because of unity of command. The Deputy Operations Chief for Planning is there to help the OSCX spend more time in the field and less time trying to attend the Tactics and Planning meetings. The All-Hazards Type 3 AHIMTs also use the position. The NWCG sponsored “Federal Teams,” soon to be configured as Complex Incident Management Teams, also ascribe to the unity of command principle and consider them as deputies. If they don’t, they are mistaken.
3 Likes
Very different operational environments. The NWCG sponsored “Federal” teams were originally designed to manage fires on federal land (now defined as "The NWCG sponsors wildland-fire-focused multi-agency teams that are designed to manage wildland fires on Federal lands, as well as state and local lands, per agreement and request.) Managing a fire on land you own is far different from what CalFire does. The vast majority of land the CalFire IMTs manage fires on is private land – not state owned land. That is a huge difference since you can’t let someone else’s land burn “for the good of the resource” unless you want to have your name on the lawsuit.
5 Likes
As a follow-up to Logchief1’s observations (and multiple path crossings while coaching, etc.) The differences in capability between the typing levels of teams has been cloudy for decades, despite several attempts to provide clarity.
“there is no common agreement on the minimum performance capabilities an AHIMT as a “single resource” should possess at each of the resource typing levels. As previously stated, no organization can currently answer the question, “Exactly what level of performance capabilities should each resource type team possess, and what are the specific differences of performance capabilities between the resource types?” Because an AHIMT is requested and deployed as a single resource with the intent of the AHIMT managing an incident determined to be at a certain incident complexity level, there needs to be a common understanding of the capabilities and competencies in which the AHIMT, as a single resource, is proficient and which it is capable of performing”
The FEMA and NWCG (and for this discussion all others) typing methodologies for both IMTs and AHIMTs as a single resource are based solely on 1) the qualifications of the personnel that deploy with the team, and 2) the AHIMTs’ composition. A team’s composition is the term used to specify which ICS positions are filled and the number of personnel in each ICS position that must be filled (e.g., 2-Operations Section Chiefs, 1-Planning Section Chief) when an AHIMT of that resource type is deployed. Although resource typing, by NIMS definition, is based on performance capability, IMTs as a single resource are currently not categorized based on team performance capabilities like the other resources within NIMS.
This is a very current discussion and a research paper is out for national discussion that will change how AHIMTs and discipline focused IMTs are typed.
1 Like
This is the best explanation on the difference, one manages fire on land they own and the other manages fires on almost exclusively on private lands owned by taxpaying citizens of the state of California. CAL FIRE can not simply tell a private land owner that we are going to let their property burn for the “greater good”, it simply doesn’t work that way.
8 Likes
Well said…
7/18/21
“We are currently experiencing very high demand on Type 1 and Type 2 Incident Management Teams (IMTs) and this heavy demand is projected to continue. Given the limited number of available IMTs, it is necessary to manage assignments nationally. Effective immediately requests for Area Command, National Incident Management Organization (NIMO), Type 1 and Type 2IMTs must be approved by the National Multi-Agency Coordinating Group (NMAC). This includes internal assignments, except for emerging incidents posing an imminent threat to life and property. Reference the 2021 National Interagency Mobilization Guide, Chapter 20, page 43. In order to facilitate prioritization of team orders, NMAC is requesting ordering units provide rationale and information describing the need”
NMAC Executive Secretary
Robin Brooks
2 Likes
The NWCG sponsored “Federal Teams,” are in the initial process of being reconfigured as “Complex Incident Management Teams.” Eventually there will not be Federally sponsored Type 2 IMTs. That administrative decision does not affect NIMS typing, CalFire IMTs, or any other state’s teams or the developing performance criteria for typing teams. It just means they will be called Complex Incident Management Teams (CIMTs). Understand, that in ICS, something that is not typed must be capable of operating at the Type 1 complexity level (think DIVS, the Division/Group Supervisor position). So, the CIMTs will in essence, be Type 1. Much work ahead as they look at 420/520/CIMC - the class/and AAIM, and the PTBs to try and design a progressing path through the maze. Very initial work and a huge lift ahead if it will work.
4 Likes
To lighten this conversation up a little. Good convo BTW.
Asked a friend today back from his 5th mobilization this year, how you doing. He said, good, just waiting to hear back from our travel agent. I said, nice, where you headed? He said, I don’t know. I said, what do you mean you don’t know? He said, waiting for NMAC IMT Travel Agency to make a decision.
Ok, well it was funny when he said it.
5 Likes
That actually is pretty funny MHB. The team I was just with has been home 2.5 days and is getting a roll to Washington tomorrow.
6 Likes
Where did Team 1 go? Never saw them go available.
Cedar Creek. WA-OWF. Winthrop, WA. Also reportedly getting Cub Creek 2 and maybe a couple others.
1 Like
Cedar Creek, Cub Creek 2 and Delancy