Pacific Northwest Wildfire Coordinating Group
Ken Snell
Chair, PNWCG
August 4, 2010
Dear Ken:
RE: Task Order 1007-03, Review of NWCG Operations and Workforce Development
Committee proposed ICS Form 224.
The PNWCG Operations Working Team individually reviewed the proposed ICS 224 form. The
comments were compiled and a Conference Call was conducted to complete a summarization of
the comments. Don Moritz of the Oregon Department of Forestry was invited to participate in
the comment phase and the Conference Call.
The following is the summary of the input from all who were involved:
(These are not ranked in any particular order)
 Given the past use of Crews in All Hazard events, there should be some method of
capturing performance on these types of events.
 The final version of the ICS 224 must be consistent and compatible with whatever
electronic performance tracking program is being used. (EaTIS, VIPER, are some
examples from the past)
 Keep the complexity of the form as low as possible. Keeping this process user friendly
will facilitate a higher quality output from the form. We also felt that leaning toward
simplification of the form would be better to facilitate the incident completing the
performance report. One thought on this may be simply ranking the broad topics of
“Leadership, Tactics, and Specialized Operations” then leaving the sub-topics as prompts
to consider the ranking and create a comment box under each broad topic to expand if
desired.
 Given the weight that the ICS 224 carries in the contract compliance and best value
determination, it is very important that any ranking or scoring component is
commensurate with the requirements of the contract the crew is working under.
 Crew conduct is mentioned as a subtopic in the Miscellaneous category. This topic is a
major component of a crew’s performance and should be a more prominent part of the
evaluation.
2
 The complexity of the assignment is another area we believe should be addressed. For
example; Fuel type, Terrain, Environmental Factors, etc. this would be specific to the
location of the crew’s assignment not the overall complexity rating of the incident.
 Add a box for the printed name of the Crew Supervisor to facilitate contact for follow up
as needed.
 The aviation section needs a reference to fixed wing aircraft
 Currently the ICS 224 is used for all crews, including Engine and Helitac for example. If
that is the intention going forward, some edits will be needed to accommodate.
 The OWT recommends that when the updated form is completed that the TWT is tasked
with developing a plan for delivering training on the new form.
The Operations Working Team would like to extend a special thanks to Don Moritz for his time
and expertise in helping us in the review process.
If you have any questions or need clarification on any of the comments we have provided, please
contact myself or any of the OWT members.
Sincerely,
Randy M. Johnson
Chair, Operations Working Team