After it was first proposed on March 15 by two Colorado state lawmakers, the state continues to pursue the goal of acquiring a fleet of air tankers. Senate Bill 245 introduced by Senators Steve King and Cheri Jahn passed the Senate Agriculture Committee on Thursday on a 5-0 vote, and the next step is in the Appropriations Committee. That seven-member committee will decide if they want to fund the concept.
The bill would create a “Colorado Firefighting Air Corps” which if approved and funded would:
Purchase, acquire, lease or contract for the provision of firefighting aircraft, facilities, equipment, and supplies for aerial firefighting, and retrofit, maintain, staff, and support the firefighting aircraft or contract for the provision of those services.
The Cortez Journal interviewed someone whose name will be familiar to those who have been involved in aerial firefighting for a while, Tony Kern, who formerly headed the U.S. Forest Service aviation program. Here is an excerpt from their article:
The federal government has been studying its air tanker problem for a decade, but it isn’t getting more planes in the air, Kern said. And the planes that are in service are old.
Kern thinks federal failures create an opportunity for Colorado to position itself as an international hub for aerial firefighting technology.
“We can fly a smart bomb through Kim Jong-Il’s window, but we’re still throwing slurry down from 1950s technology into the wind over fires when our own citizens are at risk,” he said.
If you have several hours to kill, you can peruse the seven air tanker studies the federal government has commissioned and paid for since 1995. And if those are not enough for you, an eighth one, the AVID study, was completed at the end of 2012. We are waiting with bated breath for it to be released by the USFS.
13 Comments
This is a very exciting period for Colorado. A unique idea, protect our people and natural resources; or at least attempting to show concern. Will Senate Bill 245 be studied and hacked to death for months to come resulting in nothing but more of the same as last year? Or can State goverment show that they can proceed with a plan and execute it in a timely manner? Sounds like a life and death reality show.
Time to write your Colorado state senator, the chair of the appropriations committee, and the Governor a letter.
Tony Kern’s tenure at USFS Fire & Aviation Management was unfortunately cut short by several factors largely outside his control, including a blood lust by the media and The Beltway Boys searching for a goat after the two airtanker structural failures in 2002, along with the instigation of an intense witch-hunt over financial accountability of a skyrocketing aerial fire suppression budget.
But during his brief stay he was instrumental in requiring TCAS in Federal airtankers, focused on enhanced safety and effectiveness of aerial fire suppression (even if it meant temporarily fewer platforms), and was moving towards use of military C130 flight simulators for contract pilot recurrent training. The Blue Ribbon Panel that Tony commissioned set the standard for studies of the dysfunctional bureaucratic log jam at F&AM; unfortunately he was not around to implement the BRP recommendations.
While I was Safety Committee Chairman for Associated Aerial Firefighters and the California Fire Pilots Association, Tony was always available for two-way thoughtful discussions regarding our questions and suggestions from the field. His aggressive, proactive approach to SEE (Safety, Effectiveness, Efficiency) and outstanding leadership skills, if combined with “Management by Roaming Around” the hangers and airbases, and riding shotgun in airtankers and leadplanes occasionally, would be a much needed breath of fresh air and an invaluable asset to any aerial fire suppression program.
Time to write those with people who actually pay, fly, turn a wrench, pump the gas, have a degree in aviation and other aviation specialized, technical knowledge in the real aviation world.
Do not let the LMA’s muckrake the mission with so much overhead that the aircraft can not fly due to forestry and range management project mission creep and so called “regulation through contracts” that stifles every mission.
The lawmakers and every CO LMA forester or any one that orders CO airtankers or SEATS ought to be forced to READ the Federal Air Regulations (FAR’s) from cover to cover before adding anymore regulatory BS that has been introduced by LMA’s as a “safety issue” in fire aviation.
WE pilot and mechanics know how dangerous this work and it does require some more specialized skill than regular Part 135 work…..but the LMA contract world thinks that this somehow is “their turf.” Might be their turf that is on fire…but aircraft OPERATE in the National Airspace System not the National LMA system….
Hopefully the CO lawmakers will call on the Colorado Agricultural Aviation Association for the proper in put and hopefully CO Dept of Public Safety will consider the LMA’s as secondary SME’s only after careful consideration from serious aviation experts and contract personnel that will not go overboard creating illustrious fiefdoms and crazy other stifling additions to any build of an organization
Nice that Tony Kern can say this especially after drawing a paycheck at the convenience of the Govt as a Federal employee and after maybe getting a PhD paid for by either the USAF or USFS, can come to grips telling us all here what we have known for well over 20 yrs. Right….it has not gotten any airplanes in the air…what USFS USDA or USDOI study ever has??
I guess money, JET A, and 100LL have gotten tankers into the air….certainly not eight fun filled studies…we all get it. The problem in the early years was no one had the political acumen to face the Senate and Congress with some real issues….a 12 page “strategy” is hardly a strategy on how to sustain and support a program that has been done on the cheap so long that thinking C130J ‘s and C27J’s are going to magically appear for anyone in the Federal LMA’s or any State to save the day…
Thank you, Tony. CO gets the message as well as folks here who have worked in the aviation world
Here’s a link to the Colorado Senate bill, plus history, etc.
Do the cost numbers seem realisitic? I haven’t a clue.
http://www.coloradocapitolwatch.com/bill/1/SB13-245/2013/0/
John,
Do you know what type of aircraft they want to get out of AMARC and convert to tankers? If Colorado wants large air tankers, the choice is limited pretty much to C-130’s or P-3’s. I think the C-27J’s, if they become available will be taken by the Coast Guard.
Price seems reasonable if it is to convert an aircraft type [C-130 / P-3] that already has the engineering done and the FAA type certification.
Sorry, I don’t know what type of aircraft are being considered. I can inquire of Sen. Meek’s office.
Sorry, I meant Sen. King. Meeks is the legislative aide who sent me the governor’s brief.
This bill has cleared the Colorado Senate, with an amendment to make the funding (est. $17.5M in FY13-14) discretionary instead of mandatory. The plan is a fleet of 3 LATs and 3 tactical/lead a/c to become active summer 2015, and 6 personnel – contract mgr, admin asst, 3 AA group supervisors, and an a/c maintenance supervisor (health & retirement not budgeted). We’ll see no CFAC for *this* fire-season.
Some senators were supposted to meet with the governor last Friday to “hash out the funding situation.
The bill is now on the docket for the House Agriculture, Livestock, & Natural Resources committee. We’ll see what House Appropriations does with it soon.
Note: Co-sponsor Senator King has a new CFAC website now: [link no longer works]
http://www.denverpost.com/recommended/ci_23097839
http://www.leg.state.co.us/clics/clics2013a/csl.nsf/fsbillcont3/779A297FF0DAC4DB87257AEE005848DB?Open&file=SB245_r1.pdf (Legislative Council Fiscal Note)
Senators King and Jahn (co-sponsors) did in fact meet with the CO governor on Friday. The press release called it “a productive meeting”, which in legi-speak, could mean durn near anything. The blurb clearly states “Talks to restore funding for the first year of the program are ongoing.” No mention of 2nd/3rd-year expenditures the plan calls for.
Here is the briefing paper that was presented to Gov. Hickenlooper:
http://coloradosenatenews.com/Downloads/ColoradoFireFightingAirCorps.pdf
Note the liberal use of “Center of Excellence for Advanced Technology Aeriel Firefighting,” which is Phase II of the program. It is used more like a catch-phrase to hang contemporary catchphrases from, such as “global driver for innovation”, “job-creation”, “long-term potential” and “tax revenue.” A bi-partisan marketing sell-job.
The House speaker is quoted as saying ““I think it’s worth the investigation to see if this makes sense for Colorado, but when we’re doing long term obligations, I think there needs to be more study by the departments.” That’s the ticket. Stall it in committee until the next session. No problem for a short-sighted politician: the new NIFC outlook predicts a near-normal fire season for Colorado this summer.
Third reading of the bill [final vote] in the House is scheduled for today [Monday May 5th]. Bill has already passed the Senate.
Monday May the 6th … sorry
Thanks for the heads-up, Mr. bean. I hadn’t expected it to clear committees so quickly. Here is the amendment that the House Committee on Agriculture, Livestock, and Natural Resources:
“(4) DURING THE SECOND REGULAR SESSION OF THE SIXTY-NINTH GENERAL ASSEMBLY, BUT PRIOR TO APRIL 1, 2014, THE DIVISION SHALL SUBMIT A REPORT TO THE JOINT BUDGET COMMITTEE AND TO THE MEMBERS OF THE GENERAL ASSEMBLY THAT SETS FORTH THE DIVISION’S ANALYSIS OF THE FEASIBILITY OF CONTINUING THE C-FAC AND WHETHER MORE EFFICACIOUS FIREFIGHTING ALTERNATIVES TO THE C-FAC EXIST. THE REPORT SHALL INCLUDE THE DIVISION’S RECOMMENDATIONS, IF ANY,
TO ENHANCE THE STATE’S ABILITY TO CONDUCT AERIAL FIREFIGHTING THROUGH THE C-FAC, INCLUDING BUDGET REQUESTS FOR DIRECT AND INDIRECT COSTS RELATED TO THE ACTIVITIES DESCRIBED IN PARAGRAPH (a) OF SUBSECTION (2) OF THIS SECTION.”
I guess that would be the boilerplate “analyze and reconsider” clause.
Comments are closed for this article!