Seize, Clear, Hold, Build: How a Military Framework Aligns with the Blue Card Hazard-Zone System

Seize, Clear, Hold & Build

Learn How a Military Framework Aligns with the 
Blue Card Hazard-Zone System

By Dennis De Salvo
B Shifter Buckslip, Aug. 18, 2026

Key Takeaways

  • Use checklists to reduce cognitive overload.
  • Seize: Identify the biggest problem and act quickly.
  • Clear: Address life safety and search.
  • Hold: Reinforce operations and maintain progress.
  • Build: Add resources, command support, rehab and accountability.
  • Train through repetition and simulation.
  • Seize, Clear, Hold, Build supports, not replaces, the Eight Functions of Command.

The modern fireground is a demanding environment for even the most seasoned fire officer. Fuel loads, building construction and the challenges posed by building size and occupancy make a fire officer’s job difficult. With limited discretionary time, fire officers make critical decisions that have real consequences. Therefore, they must train and have methods to address the critical fireground factors (CFFs) quickly.

When pilots manage an in-flight emergency, they do not just figure it out, relying on memory or experience. An aircraft is a complex piece of engineering, and no pilot can be expected to remember how to manage every possible problem. Therefore, pilots use checklists to ensure proper management of any challenge. The fireground is just as intricate as an aircraft, so using a checklist to solve fireground problems can provide a faster, more organized approach to address an incident’s demands. When time matters, the fire officer must rely on proven methods when making critical decisions. In his book Choosing Command, Chief Dennis Rubin advocates using checklists when the work is important, complex, and fast-moving, and when a high degree of accuracy is necessary.1 Does that sound like today’s fireground?

In the book Extreme Ownership, authors Leif Babin and Jocko Willink describe the “Seize, Clear, Hold, Build” approach used by the U.S. Army in Ramadi, Iraq, to drive out insurgents.2 This approach emphasizes seizing the area, clearing combatants, holding the gains, and building infrastructure to support long-term operations. This same concept can provide fire officers with an organized, structured approach to managing fireground operations. Together, each phase can serve as a fire officer’s checklist to address the difficulties of the modern fireground.

Seize

The first-arriving officer seizes the incident by assessing the CFFs, using that information to deliver a clear, structured initial radio report and develop an incident action plan (IAP). To avoid cognitive overload, the officer needs a process, a checklist just like the ones pilots use. IC No. 1 should consider the following questions3 when forming an IAP:

  • What is the most significant problem?
  • Is anything getting in the way of achieving tactical objectives?
  • What could hurt or kill me right now?

Seizing the incident requires forming an initial IAP that rapidly improves conditions. It should be simple and, most importantly, reflect what the first‑due company can realistically accomplish. When IC No 1 takes decisive action to mitigate the highest‑priority threat—often by containing the fire—they begin to stabilize the environment for victims and firefighters. “NFPA 1700 9.7: Assessment of Fire Dynamics to Determine Strategy” supports the following fire attack concepts.

  1. The quickest water on the fire is the best water on the fire. A simple plan to get water on the fire quickly is key to seizing the incident. This reset of fire conditions provides the IC with some breathing room to further assess the problem and coordinate additional tactical priorities.
  2. Exterior fire control is an effective option. It improves conditions for victims, limits the fire’s attack on the structure, and creates a safer environment for firefighters to conduct fire control and search efforts.
  3. When wind is a factor, attacking the fire from the windward side is the safest option. Winds above 10 mph can create dangerous fire conditions for firefighters operating against the wind. Attacking from the windward side places firefighters in a safer position. 
  4. We should conduct fire attack on grade with the fire or below it. Attacking fire from grade is safest. Entering from above places firefighters in the hottest and most dangerous part of the flow path.

Attacking fire from grade is safest. Entering from above places firefighters in the hottest and most dangerous part of the flow path.

These actions help establish control of the fireground by improving conditions and giving incoming companies a safer, more organized environment for the next phase of the operation. Extensive research supports getting water on the fire as quickly as possible. Long before the research, the late Chief Tom Brennan, drawing on decades of experience, said, “If you get water on the fire and put it out, many of your other problems will often go away.”

Clear

IC No. 1’s next priority is to clear the incident by addressing life safety. This phase builds directly on the actions taken during the seize phase. It ensures that we allocate resources early to accomplish the primary reason we responded to the incident: to save lives. Section 13.4.1 of NFPA 1700: Guide for Structural Firefighting reinforces this principle by emphasizing that protecting occupants is the foundational objective of structural firefighting operations. The standard provides detailed guidance, and its core message is clear: We must rapidly and deliberately address search and rescue and occupant protection.

Consider these questions when addressing life safety3:

  • Is it reasonable to believe this occupancy/structure is occupied?
  • Is it reasonable to believe there is tenable space in this occupancy/structure?
  • Can we do something about it and survive?

We hold the incident to maintain control & prevent regression. Too often, we lose early progress because we don’t anticipate needs.

Hold

Once life safety and immediate hazards are addressed, the operation transitions to the hold phase, which is the responsibility of IC No. 2. Upon arrival, IC No. 2 evaluates the CFFs, verifies company positions, and obtains a CAN report (conditions, actions, and needs) from IC No. 1 before assuming command.

Holding the incident requires assigning the appropriate number of companies to critical positions for fire attack, search, ventilation and on deck. IC No. 2 ensures that each of these functions is supported throughout the incident. Consider these questions4 when addressing holding:

  1. Is our response large enough to control the fire?
  2. Are we adequately supporting fire attack (forcible entry, ventilation)?
  3. Do we have adequate resources on scene to reinforce the current operations?

We hold the incident to maintain control and prevent regression. Too often, we lose early progress because we don’t anticipate needs. Proper forecasting is not easy and cannot be done in a box. It requires accurate CAN reports from company officers and supervisors operating in the hazard zone so the IC can maintain sufficient resources and keep the incident on track.

Build

Once the incident is firmly held and progress is steady, the operation enters the build phase. Here, IC No. 2’s responsibility is to continue supporting the incident with sufficient personnel, equipment, and command staff for the duration of the operation.

Building begins with ensuring adequate staffing, supporting command and establishing rehab before fatigue becomes a safety concern. This is a challenge, and if not managed effectively, an incident can quickly regress. Consider the following when addressing the build phase:

  1. Are there sufficient firefighters and supervisors to perform the remaining work?
  2. Do you have enough support at the command post (support officer, senior advisor)?
  3. Take care of the workers. Establish rehab and firefighter decon.

IC No. 2 must align the command structure with the operation’s evolving needs. This includes maintaining accountability, updating the IAP, and preparing for the transition into the overhaul, investigation, and recovery stages. The purpose of building is to establish the operational footprint needed to sustain the gains made during the earlier phases. It ensures the incident concludes with the same discipline and coordination that defined its beginning.

The seize, clear, hold and build framework does not replace the Eight Functions of Command. It is a method to assist the IC in working through the functions when critical decisions must be made with limited time. This method provides the IC with the tools to quickly address the incident’s tactical and organizational needs.

To get the most out of this framework, integrate it into your department’s incident command training. Have  IC No. 1 and IC No. 2 use these checklists during sets and reps, simulations and tabletop training. The Blue Card and B Shifter websites offer many resources, such as PowerPoints, sets and reps,  and simulations,  that provide structure for practicing the seize, clear, hold and build concept. The B Shifter site also offers a simulation of the week, monthly 10-minute command drills, and useful downloads, including NIOSH reports and standard operating guidelines, which provide opportunities for quick drills and tabletop exercises.

The aviation industry not only uses checklists to improve operations but also uses simulations to train and evaluate a pilot’s skills. As a passenger, I feel much better than I would flying with a pilot who relies solely on their experience. Experience alone is not sufficient. So take advantage of all the resources that Blue Card and B Shifter offer, and practice our craft so you are ready for your next hazard zone. As Bruno once said, “Educational times on the fireground are many times not fun times.”5

References

  1. Rubin, D. (2025). Choosing to Command: Crew Resource Management Applied to Emergency Operations. Fire Engineering Books. Tulsa, Oklahoma.
  2. Willink, J., & Babin, L. (2015). Extreme Ownership: How U.S. Navy SEALs Lead and Win. St. Martin’s Press.
  3. Stewart, C., & Phillips, E. (2024). Critical Thinking and Decision‑Making Workshop. Alan V. Brunacini Command Training Center.
  4. Brunacini, A. (2002). Fire Command (2nd ed.). National Fire Protection Association.
  5. Brunacini, A. (2003). Timeless Tactical Truths. Uptown Graphics.
Author picture

Dennis De Salvo is a certified Blue Card instructor and a retired division chief of training with 30 years of fire service experience. Before leading his department’s training division, he served 11 years as a battalion chief in one of the largest, busiest battalions in Pasco County, Florida. Throughout his career, he has overseen onboarding programs, daily skills development, and command‑level training for company officers and chief officers.