The Missing Nozzle Report
On March 14 at 22:40, you responded as the officer of Engine 18 on a mutual-aid box alarm at 1420 W. Cermak Road, a three-story mixed-occupancy building. You arrived at 22:47 and found smoke from the second-floor rear. Your crew stretched 200 feet of 1¾-inch hose and operated for about one hour. After overhaul, you inventoried your equipment and found one 50-foot section of 1¾-inch hose with a deep chafe and cut near the coupling, and one aluminum 1½-inch fog nozzle missing. The nozzle was last seen on the second floor near the rear stair, where two mutual-aid companies also operated. Your company is Engine 18; your name is Lieutenant A. Moreno. The battalion chief has asked every company officer to submit a brief written report of equipment damage or loss by 0900 tomorrow. You have your handwritten notes and need to write the report.
1. Which draft sentence best opens the equipment-discrepancy paragraph? Explain why, using specific weaknesses in the other two. A. 'Upon completing overhaul, it was discovered that a section of hose had been damaged and a nozzle was missing, which was probably taken by one of the mutual-aid companies.' B. 'After overhaul, my crew inventoried the hose and nozzles. One 50-foot section of 1¾-inch hose had a deep chafe and cut near the coupling; one 1½-inch aluminum fog nozzle was missing.' C. 'We lost a nozzle and messed up a hose sometime during the fire, and I think another company probably borrowed it without telling us.'
Read the worked answer
B is the best choice. It is active, specific, and neutral. 'My crew inventoried' identifies who did what. '50-foot section,' '1¾-inch hose,' 'deep chafe and cut near the coupling,' and '1½-inch aluminum fog nozzle' give an investigator enough detail to identify the item. The semicolon cleanly separates two distinct facts. There is no speculation.
A is weaker because 'it was discovered' hides the actor, 'a section of hose' is vague, and 'probably taken by one of the mutual-aid companies' is speculation that may unfairly implicate another company.
C is unprofessional because 'messed up' and 'borrowed' are imprecise and casual, and 'I think another company probably borrowed it' is both speculation and an accusation. In an equipment report, vague or accusatory language weakens credibility and can create avoidable conflict between companies.
2. Using the notes, write the complete equipment-discrepancy paragraph for the report. Keep it factual, neutral, and in the past tense.
Read the worked answer
Equipment discrepancy. After overhaul was completed on March 14, my crew inventoried Engine 18's hose and nozzles. We found one 50-foot section of 1¾-inch hose with a deep chafe and cut near the male coupling. That section was removed from service and tagged for repair or replacement. We also found that one aluminum 1½-inch fog nozzle was missing. The nozzle was last seen on the second floor near the rear stair, where Engine 18 and two mutual-aid companies operated. I have not determined how the nozzle left the fireground. I am reporting the loss so that the nozzle can be accounted for and so that other companies can check their equipment.
The paragraph states what was observed, where the item was last seen, and who else was operating in that area, without asserting who took it. It uses past tense and avoids emotional language. It also separates the damaged hose from the missing nozzle so each discrepancy can be tracked.
3. What should you leave out of the report, and why? Give two specific examples from the scenario.
Read the worked answer
I would leave out speculation about which mutual-aid company took the nozzle. The notes say only that two mutual-aid companies operated in the same area. Naming or implying a culprit without evidence could unfairly damage another company's reputation and would not help the battalion chief recover the equipment.
I would also leave out emotional or judgmental language, such as calling the loss 'careless' or saying a company 'borrowed' the nozzle. Those statements are conclusions, not observations, and they invite dispute.
Why it matters: an equipment report may become part of an investigation, a cost-recovery record, or a safety review. It should contain facts that a reader can verify: what was found, when, where, by whom, and what was done. Speculation makes the report less credible and can turn a simple inventory problem into an intercompany conflict.