FSEEE loses yet another retardant lawsuit

A federal judge ruled Friday that the U.S. government can continue using retardant to fight wildfires, despite his finding that it does pollute streams in violation of federal law. Banning retardant could cause greater environmental damage from wildland fires, said U.S. District Judge Dana Christensen in court in Missoula, Montana.

The judge agreed with U.S. Forest Service officials who testified that dropping retardant from aircraft into areas near waterways was sometimes necessary to protect lives and property, according to an AP report posted by KEZI-TV.

2019 retardant drop, photo by Kari Greer
2019 retardant drop, photo by Kari Greer

Christensen’s ruling resulted from yet another lawsuit filed last year by an environmentalist group trying to protect fish over people when they learned that the Forest Service had dropped retardant into waterways — what they claim was hundreds of times over the last decade.

The lawsuit is on file HERE: (PDF file).

Retardant is often crucial in slowing the progression of wildfires, which have grown larger and more destructive and more frequent as climate change and a burgeoning wildland/urban interface advance the danger of fires across the West — and other parts of the world.

Firefighters air tanker
Firefighters observe a retardant drop by an RJ85 airtanker. DOI photo.

Though environmental groups claim fire suppression efforts allowed incursions of retardant more than 200 times over the last 10 years, fire officials reply that such situations happened accidentally — and in less than 1 percent of the thousands of retardant drops ordered each year.

During this case — yet another in the decades-long battle by environmental groups against the use of retardant — a coalition including Paradise, California said stopping the use of retardant would risk lives, homes, and forests. (The 2018 Camp Fire killed 85 people and destroyed the town of Paradise.) There’s a good story online about this coalition by AerialFire Magazine.

Paradise Camp fire homes burned
A neighborhood on Debbie Lane in Paradise, California, before and after the Camp Fire that started November 8, 2018. The homes were 14 to 18 feet apart.

“This case was very personal for us,” said Paradise Mayor Greg Bolin on Friday. “Our brave firefighters need every tool in the toolbox to protect human lives and property against wildfires, and today’s ruling ensures we have a fighting chance this fire season.”

“Retardant lasts and even works if it’s dry,” said Scott Upton, a former region chief and air attack group supervisor for CAL FIRE. “Water is only so good because it dries out. It does very well to suppress fires, but it won’t last.”

KDVR-TV reported that the Oregon-based group Forest Service Employees for Environmental Ethics (FSEEE) argued in its most recent lawsuit that the Forest Service was disregarding the Clean Water Act by continuing to use retardant without taking adequate precautions to protect streams and rivers. Launched by Jeff DeBonis in 1989 in Eugene, Oregon, the group (nationalforestadvocates.org) says it has about 10,000 members; it publishes a quarterly called Forest Magazine and pays its director Andy Stahl over $91K annually. The organization receives a substantial part of its support from a governmental unit and/or the general public.

Andy Stahl
Andy Stahl

FireRescue1 reported that FSEEE claims wildfire retardant drops are expensive, ineffective, and a growing source of pollution for rivers and streams. “There’s no scientific evidence that it makes any difference in wildfire outcomes,” said Andy Stahl. “This is like dumping cash out of airplanes, except that it’s toxic and you can’t buy anything with it because it doesn’t work.”

The case has been followed closely by officials in California, where an extremely wet winter is likely to stoke the growth of early-season light fuels. “This is going to destroy towns and many communities in California, if they allow this to go through,” said Paradise Mayor Greg Bolin, whose town was razed by the Camp Fire five years ago. “To maybe save a few fish, really?”

The Smokey Wire is a Forest Service and public lands policy blog administered by Sharon Friedman, Ph.D., forest geneticist, Forest Service retiree, and former Chair of both the Forest Policy Committee and Forest Science and Technology Board at the Society of American Foresters. In a recent post about this retardant case, she commented on a piece in the San Joaquin Valley Sun published about a month ago in April, which noted that if the court sided with FSEEE, the USFS would have to obtain a special permit under the Clean Water Act to use retardant from aircraft — a lengthy process that would span multiple years. During the lawsuit, the USFS initiated the process of receiving such a permit from the EPA with the current 300-foot buffer zone for retardant drops from affected waterways.

Air Tanker 118 HC_130H Ferguson Fire
While following a lead plane, Tanker 118, an HC-130H, begins a retardant drop on the 2018 Ferguson Fire — photo by Kari Greer

In response, FSEEE argued that 300 feet was an arbitrary number. Despite its argument that the USFS had originally created the 300-foot buffer proposal out of thin air, FSEEE then asked the Court for a 600-foot buffer zone.

U.S. District Judge Dana Christensen
U.S. District Judge Dana Christensen

Judge Christensen noted then that a ruling was pending, because fire season in the West is pending. He expressed skepticism at the nationwide impact of siding with FSEEE and rejected its push for an extended buffer zone. “The last thing I want to do is start imposing magic numbers in terms of buffer zones,” he said. “I mean, that’s way out of my wheelhouse. But I don’t know what the Forest Service did to come up with a 300-feet buffer, and you’re describing it as being essentially nothing. It’s a magic number. And I will tell you, if this Court imposes a 600-foot buffer, that is truly a magic number. So that’s probably not going to happen.”

USFS attorney Alan Greenberg said the Forest Service uses retardant on about 5 percent of wildfires — and less than 1 percent of those drops end up in contact with water.

Christensen said that stopping the use of retardant could result in greater harm from wildfires — including to human life and property and to the environment. (Note that his ruling was not nationwide — it’s limited to the 10 western states where FSEEE alleged harm from pollution into waterways.)

In the lawsuit (online HERE), FSEEE specifies that “the chemical retardants used by wildland firefighting agencies are tested and approved by the United States Department of Agriculture’s Missoula Technology and Development Center, located in this Division. The Forest Service also has a Fire Sciences Lab and Smokejumper Base in this Division. Plaintiff has members who reside in this Division, and who have been injured by the Forest Service actions and activities complained of in this Complaint. Moreover, the Forest Service has discharged aerial fire retardant into navigable waters in this Division without a National Pollution Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) permit.”

May 20 - Airtanker drops retardant
Airtanker drops retardant

After the lawsuit was filed the Forest Service applied to the EPA for a permit that would allow it to continue using retardant without breaking the law. That process could take years. Christensen ordered federal officials to report every six months on their progress; no word yet on whether the USFS will still pursue that EPA permit or whether they have to continue reporting to Christensen about it.

Fire retardant covers a road sign on Barrett Lake Road in the eastern San Diego town of Dulzura, California, site of the Border 32 Fire that burned 4,456 acres between August 31 and Sept 8, 2022. Photo Credit: Josh Stotler
Fire retardant covers a road sign on Barrett Lake Road in the eastern San Diego town of Dulzura, California, site of the Border 32 Fire that burned 4,456 acres between August 31 and Sept 8, 2022.
Photo Credit: Josh Stotler

Health risks to firefighters or other people who come into contact with fire retardant are considered low, according to a 2021 risk assessment. But the chemicals can be harmful to some fish, frogs, crustaceans, and other aquatic species. One government study found misapplied retardant could adversely affect dozens of species including crawfish, spotted owls, and threatened fish such as shiners and suckers. To prevent risk, officials and pilots have avoided drops within 300 feet (92 meters) of waterways. Retardant may be applied inside those zones only when if life or public safety is threatened. Of 213 documented instances of fire retardant contacting water between 2012 and 2019, 190 were accidental and the remainder were necessary to protect lives or property, officials said.

 

Landowners file suits against US Forest Service for burning their property during Chetco Bar Fire in Oregon

Chetco Bar Fire July 13, 2017
The Chetco Bar Fire on July 13, 2017 taken from a helicopter during the Type 3 Incident Commander’s first recon flight.

Two lawsuits have been filed in federal court for firing operations that burned private land during the Chetco Bar Fire that eventually burned more than 191,000 acres on land managed by the US Forest Service and private landowners in southwest Oregon.

The suit, under the Tucker Act for inverse condemnation, seeks compensation for “property taken” by the USFS in its use and management of the Chetco Bar Fire. It alleges that between August 17 and 20, 2017 the USFS conducted firing operations on their property “to achieve its natural resource management objectives, and to otherwise manage its lands”.

“USFS employed planned ignitions in the form of large-scale backfires designed to artificially grow the naturally occurring wildfire to sizes much larger than if it has been left to burn naturally,” say the two complaints filed October 21. “The large-scale planned ignitions on the Chetco Bar Fire ignored political and property boundaries and used Plaintiffs’ nonfederal resources as backfire fuel, imposing the costs of the natural resource management objectives upon Plaintiffs.”

The Chetco Bar Fire started from a lightning strike during a storm on June 24 and 25, 2017 and was first reported by an airline pilot 17 days later on July 12.

The attorney representing the landowners is Quentin Rhodes in Missoula, who is not your typical barrister. He worked as a wildland firefighter for eight seasons between 1987 and 1994, serving on the Helena Hotshot crew and later as a smokejumper at West Yellowstone and Missoula. He told Wildfire Today in 2012 that he was in the first planeload of jumpers on the South Canyon Fire in Colorado in 1994, the fatal fire on which 14 wildland firefighters were entrapped and killed. In 2012 he represented owners of a Montana ranch who won a $750,000 judgement against the state of Montana when firefighters on the Ryan Gulch Fire employed firing operations which burned 900 acres of the ranch’s land.

Photos of retardant dropped in Sespe Creek during Howard Fire

Map retardant Sespe Creek Howard Fire
Map showing location of photos of retardant near Sespe Creek at the Howard Fire. The red area is the western side of the fire Oct. 12, 2022. The photo locations were obtained from the metadata in the iPhone photos.

A lawsuit filed Tuesday alleged that the US Forest Service has polluted waterways by firefighting air tankers inadvertently dropping fire retardant in or near waterways in violation of the Clean Water Act and a policy adopted by the Forest Service and other federal agencies in 2011. The policy requires that retardant not be dropped within 300 feet of a waterway on federal land.

Retardant near Sespe Creek at the Howard Fire
Photo 1. Retardant near Sespe Creek at the Howard Fire. Oct. 12, 2022. Peter Deneen.

Fire Aviation has acquired photos and a video that reportedly show signs of retardant being dropped into Sespe Creek on the Los Padres National Forest 8 miles northeast of Ojai, California October 8, 2022. The photos were shot by Pete Deneen on October 12, 2022 at the 85-acre Howard Fire. The creek is designated a “wild and scenic river” and is in a wilderness area.

Retardant near Sespe Creek at the Howard Fire
Photo 2. Retardant near Sespe Creek at the Howard Fire. Oct. 12, 2022. Peter Deneen.

The photos show retardant on rocks and other objects very close to water in Sespe Creek.

Retardant near Sespe Creek at the Howard Fire
Photo 3. Retardant in a dry area of Sespe Creek at the Howard Fire. Oct. 12, 2022. Peter Deneen.

Some organisms, including aquatic threatened and endangered species or their habitats, can be adversely affected by retardants. In addition, retardant in water is a pollutant.

According to US Forest Service data, between 2012 and 2019, the Forest Service discharged retardant on at least 376 occasions totaling 761,282 gallons from aircraft directly into national forest waterways.

In the video below Mr. Deneen explains that there were two locations where retardant was dropped very close to the creek. In one case the aircraft may have turned as it was dropping to follow the creek for several hundred yards, or a second drop accounted for the retardant in the waterway.

The lawsuit was filed Oct. 11 by the Forest Service Employees for Environmental Ethics, FSEEE. In the group’s complaint they are seeking:

  • A declaration that the Forest Service’s placement of retardant in waterways is a violation of the Clean Water Act.
  • An injunction “to compel the Forest Service to comply with applicable environmental statutes, prevent irreparable harm, and satisfy the public interest.”
  • Reimbursement for FSEEE’s costs, expenses, expert witness fees, and attorney fees.
  • “Such further relief as may be just, proper, and equitable.”

More about FSEEE’s history of protesting retardant, and the federal government’s policy of retardant avoidance areas established in 2011.

Environmental group files lawsuit against US Forest Service over use of fire retardant

Air Tanker 41, a BAe-146
Air Tanker 41, a BAe-146, drops retardant. BLM photo.

An environmental group filed a lawsuit in a Montana federal court Tuesday alleging that the US Forest Service has polluted waterways by inadvertently dropping fire retardant in or near waterways.  The retardant was dropped by aircraft under contract with the Forest Service while assisting wildland firefighters on the ground.

The suit says government data released earlier this year showed more than 760,000 gallons of fire retardant was dropped into waterways between 2012 and 2019. The lawsuit alleges the continued use of retardant from aircraft violates the Clean Water Act and requests a judge to declare the pollution illegal.

retardant avoidance areas
Example of retardant avoidance areas (red) in Northern California along Hwy. 96 near Klamath River.

The Forest Service has established retardant avoidance areas along waterways where the liquid is not supposed to be applied. This puts buffer zones around waterways and habitat for some threatened, endangered, and sensitive species in order to avoid applying retardant in those areas. When they were first established in 2011 it resulted in approximately 30 percent of USFS lands being off limits for retardant while fighting fire. There is an exception if human life or public safety is threatened. The policy was the result of an Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) that studied the use of retardant and how it affects water resources and certain plant and wildlife species. The EIS was written in response to a July, 2010 decision by U. S. District Court Judge Donald Molloy in a lawsuit filed in 2008 by the Forest Service Employees for Environmental Ethics.

The same organization, FSEEE, filed the new case yesterday. An attorney in Missoula, MT who specializes in environmental law, Tim Bechtold, will be representing FSEEE. Presiding over the case will be District Court Judge Dana Christensen. He joined the court in 2011 after a nomination from President Barack Obama. Before, he was a partner in the firm of Christensen, Moore, Cockrell, Cummings, and Axelberg, in Kalispell, Montana. One of the 15 practice areas the firm deals with today is environment and natural resources.

In 2012 FSEEE issued a statement criticizing the use of air tankers on fires, claiming it is “immoral”. The group argued that aerial firefighting is too dangerous and ineffective and that “retardant doesn’t save homes; proper construction and landscaping save homes.”

Lawsuit filed to obtain documents about the Beachie Creek Fire in Oregon

Linn County requests records about the suppression of the fire

Beachie Creek Fire progression map
Beachie Creek Fire progression map. U.S. Forest Service map. Each line represents 24 hours of growth, but the map data begins on September 2, 2020 and does not show the preceding 18 days. It started in the black area.

A county in Oregon has filed a lawsuit against the U.S. Forest Service that is related to the Beachie Creek Fire that burned over 193,000 acres east of Salem, Oregon in September.

The Davis Wright Tremain law firm in Portland submitted a request September 28 on behalf of Linn county, requesting records related to the fire. The request cited the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) which requires a federal agency to respond within 20 business days, unless there are “unusual circumstances,” or notify the party of at least the agency’s determination of which of the requested records it will release, which it will withhold.

About 12 percent of the Fire was in Linn County, with the rest in Marion and Clackamas Counties. The Linn-Marion county line is near Highway 22 close to the communities of Lyons, Mill City, Gates, Detroit, and Idanha where many structures were destroyed.

The Forest Service replied to the FOIA in a letter dated the next day, saying (and this is an exact quote):

Please be advised your request is not perfected at this time and we will be reaching out to you to discuss clarification once it has been to thoroughly review.

After not receiving the documents or apparently hearing nothing further from the Forest Service, the attorneys for Linn County filed a lawsuit November 2, 2020 in the U.S. District Court in Eugene, Oregon.

Below is an excerpt from the complaint:

During its first few days, USFS officials attempted to extinguish the fire, which at that point was 10 to 20 acres, but could not effectively utilize traditional means because the fire was burning on the side of a steep, densely forested mountain…The Beachie Creek Fire thus continued to burn at a relatively small size for days but became a conflagration in early September as conditions became windy and dry, jumping to 200 acres on September 1, 2020, then growing to 500 acres after that. When a windstorm that had been predicted for at least one week prior hit Labor Day night, the Beachie Creek Fire exploded, torching ancient rainforests in the Opal Creek area and roaring down North Santiam Canyon. The fire destroyed the communities of Mill City and Gates, decimated thousands of structures and claimed at least five lives.

Beachie Creek Fire
Beachie Creek Fire August 27, 2020, eleven days after it started, before it grew very large on September 8. USFS photo.

The fire was reported August 16, 2020 in the Opal Creek Wilderness about six miles northwest of Detroit Lake in Oregon, about 38 miles east of Salem. According to records in the daily national Incident Management Situation Report and GIS data, the fire was:

–10 acres August 26, 10 days after it was reported;
–23 acres August 31, 15 days after it was reported;
–150 acres September 3, 18 days after it was reported;
–469 acres September 7, 22 days after it was reported; (just before the wind event that began that night).

From the Statesman Journal:

Forest Service officials told the Statesman Journal it tried to put out the fire during its first few days, and that fire crews dumped “a ton of water” on it. They said they couldn’t safely get firefighters in to extinguish the blaze on the ground, which at that point was 10 to 20 acres, because it was burning on the side of a steep, densely-forested mountain.

“You have deep duff, significant litter and a ladder fuel,” [Rick Stratton, a wildfire expert and analyst] said. “That’s why it doesn’t matter how much water you put on it, it can hold heat. You have to have people on the ground working right there, in an area that elite firefighters turned down twice.”

Firefighters worried about flaming debris coming down the mountain and being unable to escape. Firefighter safety has been emphasized since 19 Granite Mountain Hotshots were killed in an Arizona wildfire.

Beachie Creek Fire progression map
Beachie Creek Fire progression map, zoomed in to the general area where it started. U.S. Forest Service map. Each line represents 24-hours of growth, but the map data begins on September 2, and does not show the preceding 18 days. It started in the black area. The legend is on the map at the top of the article.

A fixed wing mapping flight at 8:37 p.m. PDT September 9 found that in about 48 hours the fire had spread 25 miles to the northwest from its point of origin and had burned at that time 310,549 acres.

satellite photo fires smoke Washington, Oregon, and California
GOES-17 photo of smoke from wildfires in Washington, Oregon, and California at 5:56 p.m. PDT Sept. 8, 2020. The photo was taken during a very strong wind event.

Many fires started in Oregon around August 16 from lightning that moved through northern Californian into Oregon. Conventional wisdom is that the Beachie Creek Fire was a result of the this storm, although the Forest Service has not officially disclosed the cause. Complicating the issue is the reports that the gale force winds of September 7 and 8 caused multiple power lines to fail, starting additional fires which eventually burned into the Beachie Creek Fire.

This fire and others in Oregon, California, and Colorado were crying out for limited numbers firefighters, engines, helicopters, and air tankers but the fire suppression infrastructure available fell far short of the need. This meant that after the wind subsided, putting the huge blazes out quickly was not possible — without rain. Stopping a fire pushed by very strong winds is not possible, regardless of the air power or ground-based firefighting resources available.

Much of Oregon was also in severe to extreme drought along with Nevada, Arizona, and Colorado. This resulted in the moisture content of the vegetation (or fuel) being low, making it receptive to igniting and burning more quickly and intensely than if conditions were closer to average.

Well over 1,000 structures burned. Some of the communities that were hardest hit included Detroit, Mill City, Santiam River, and Gates.

The information Linn County requested from the Forest Service was about the agency’s policy for managing fires, and the Beachie Creek Fire in particular. Some examples:

  • Contracts and documents relating to arrangements made with outside contractors for firefighting equipment and training in the Pacific Northwest;
  • Maps and records depicting all former “owl circles” and all locations of other endangered species habitat in the 2 years immediately preceding the Beachie Creek Fire;
  • Records declaring the Beachie Creek Fire a Prescribed natural Fire, a Management Ignited Fire or a Wildfire, and all records discussing or relating to that declaration;
  • Records illustrating the Suppression Response for the Beachie Creek Fire;
  • Records illustrating the Control Strategy for the Beachie Creek Fire;
  • Records relating to inputs to and outputs derived from the FLAME computer program or any other predictive computer analysis for the Beachie Creek fire for the period commencing on August 1, 2020, through the date records responsive to this request are provided;
  • All Social media posts discussing or describing the Beachie Creek Fire;
  • All current Forest Service Manuals in effect immediately preceding the Beachie Creek Fire and effective throughout the Fire Event.

Below is a description of the fire written by the U.S. Forest Service and posted on InciWeb:


“The Beachie Creek Fire was first detected on August 16, 2020 approximately 2 miles south of Jaw Bones flats in rugged terrain deep in the Opal Creek Wilderness. A Type 3 team was ordered to manage the fire on the day it was detected and implemented a full suppression strategy. A hotshot crew tried to hike to the fire within the first 24 hours. They were unable to safely access and engage the fire due to the remote location, steep terrain, thick vegetation and overhead hazards. Fire managers continued to work on gaining access, developing trails, identify lookout locations, exploring options for access and opening up old road systems. The fire was aggressively attacked with helicopters dropping water. A large closure of the Opal Creek area and recreation sites in the Little North Fork corridor was immediately signed and implemented. The fire remained roughly 20 acres for the first week. On August 23rd, the Willamette National Forest ordered a National Incident Management Organization (NIMO) Team to develop a long-term management strategy. This is a high-caliber team which has capacity to do strategic planning. The fire grew slowly but consistently and was roughly 200 acres by September 1st, fueled by hot and dry conditions.

“At the beginning of September, a Type 2 Incident Management Team (PNW Team 13) assumed command of the fire. The fire size was estimated to be about 500 acres on September 6th. On that day, the National Weather Service placed Northwest Oregon under a critical fire weather warning due to the confluence of high temperatures, low humidity and rare summer easterly winds that were predicted to hit upwards of 35 mph in the Portland area on Labor Day. The unique wind event on September 7th created an extreme environment in which the fire was able to accelerate. The winds were 50-75 miles per hour, and the fire growth rate was about 2.77 acres per second in areas of the Beachie Creek fire. This allowed the fire to reach over 130,000 acres in one night. Evacuation levels in the Santiam Canyon area went directly to level 3, which calls for immediate evacuation. Additionally, PNW Team 13 was managing the Beachie Creek Fire from their Incident Command Post established in the community of Gates. That evening, a new fire start began at the Incident Command Post forcing immediate evacuation of the Team and fire personnel. From the night of September 7th, these fires became collectively known as the Santiam Fire. Ultimately, the Santiam Fire name reverted back to Beachie Creek Fire in order to reduce confusion for the communities in the area. The Incident Command Post was re-established in Salem at Chemeketa Community College. At the end of the wind event, the Lionshead Fire also merged with the Beachie Creek Fire having burned through the Mount Jefferson Wilderness.

“After the night of the wind event, the Beachie Creek Fire was managed under unified command by PNW Team 13 and the Oregon State Fire Marshal and the focus shifted to recovery and preservation of life and property. On September 17th, a Type 1 IMT (SW Team 2) assumed command of the fire. Growth on the fire slowed and the fire reached 190,000 acres. A second Type 1 team (PNW 3) took over command of the Beachie Creek Fire, along with the Riverside Fire to the north, on September 29th. Evacuation levels were lowered or removed as fire activity slowed. At the beginning of October, seasonal fall weather moved over the fire producing several inches of rain. During these weeks, a BAER (Burned Area Emergency Response) team assessed the burned landscape and habitats to try to evaluate damage. On October 8th, PNW Team 8, a Type 2 team took over management of the fire. Focus efforts on the ground shifted from suppression and mop-up to suppression repair. On October 14, the fire was downgraded and transitioned command to local Type 3 Southern Cascades team.  The acreage topped out at 193,573 acres. Closures remain in place to keep the public safe from hazards like falling trees and ash pits that can remain hot and smolder for months after the wildfire event.”

(end of excerpt)


Our take

The Forest Service is notorious for flagrantly violating the law in regards to the mandatory standards for providing information requested with a FOIA. They have been known to stall for years, or have simply refused to comply. Not every citizen seeking information from their government has a petty cash account with $400 for the filing fee, or the tens of thousands of dollars it could take to pay attorneys for a FOIA lawsuit. Our citizens deserve transparency. However, it also seems unusual to file a lawsuit approximately 26 business days, as Linn County did, after initially submitting the FOIA — just 6 days over the 20-day requirement.

An investigation should determine how much of an effect, if any, fires reportedly started by power lines had on the destruction of private property. It may turn out that some of the structures along the Highway 22 corridor were destroyed by fires sparked by power lines.

If, as appears to be the case, the suppression activity on the fire was less than aggressive for 22 days while it grew to 469 acres, it may have some similarities to the Chimney Tops 2 Fire that burned into Gatlinburg, Tennessee from Great Smoky Mountains National Park in 2016. After creeping along the ground on a hilltop for five days with no suppression activity except for some helicopter drops one afternoon, the 35-acre fire was pushed by strong winds into the city, causing the deaths of 14 people. Over 130 sustained injuries, and 1,684 structures were damaged or destroyed. Approximately 14,000 residents were forced to evacuate.

Thanks and a tip of the hat go out to Kelly.

Electric co-op in Washington reaches settlement to pay $1.1 million for suppression of fire that killed three firefighters

Earlier, power companies agreed to pay the seriously injured lone survivor $5 million

Twisp River Fire map
Photo from the report on the Twisp River Fire.

The Okanogan County Electric Co-op has agreed to a $1.1 million settlement for the suppression costs of the deadly 2015 Twisp River Fire.

U.S. Attorney William D. Hyslop announced that the settlement had been reached with Okanogan County Electric Cooperative, Inc. (“OCEC”) and its insurer, requiring the payment of $1.1 million to the United States in fire suppression costs resulting from the Twisp River Fire that began on August 19, 2015 in north-central Washington.

The $1.1 million recovers a large portion of the U.S. Forest Service’s costs incurred in suppressing the fire. It was part of a larger settlement of claims that were brought separately by other plaintiffs, including U.S. Forest Service firefighter Daniel Lyon and the State of Washington, who sought to recover damages for personal injury and property damage caused by the fire.

The Twisp River Fire ultimately burned approximately 11,200 acres, claimed the lives of three USFS firefighters, and severely injured Mr. Lyon. He suffered third degree burns over nearly 70 percent of his body, but three other firefighters in the same engine died in the vehicle, according to the corner’s report, from smoke inhalation and thermal injuries. They were Richard Wheeler, 31; Andrew Zajac, 26; and Tom Zbyszewski, 20. All four were employees of the USFS working on the Okanogan/Wenatchee National Forest out of Twisp, Washington.

The US Attorney claimed the Twisp River Fire ignited due to contact between a tree branch and OCEC’s electrical distribution line. He further claimed OCEC failed to properly maintain a vegetation management plan designed to detect and prevent the tree branch from contacting the distribution line. OCEC denied these allegations.

In January Mr. Lyon reached a settlement with two utility companies, OCEC and Douglas County PUD, just before an appeal of his $100 million civil suit was to be heard before the state Supreme Court. In that settlement the companies agreed to pay $5 million.

From the Wenatchee World, when the $5 million settlement was announced in January:

“I am very grateful that my case calls attention to the plight of injured first responders,” said Lyon, who was burned over most of his body and has undergone more than a dozen surgeries and 100 medical procedures. “I am also grateful my case has reached a settlement so that I can now move on with my life knowing I will have the resources I need for the future.”

Last July, his attorneys, in an appeals brief, argued the Professional Rescue Doctrine that largely bars such claims violates the state constitution, which gives people equal protection under the law and offers the right to seek compensation for damages.

Lyon’s attorneys note that courts in some other states, where the doctrine once held sway, have opted to throw it out.

An attorney for one of the two defendants, in an earlier interview, says the wounds Lyon suffered — however grievous — resulted from risks inherent to the dangerous job of firefighting.

“The law does not allow them (professional first responders) to sue — and there are good policy reasons behind that,” said A. Grant Lingg, who represents the Okanogan County Electric Cooperative. “You don’t want the people who start a fire to be afraid to call the fire department for fear that that an injured first responder will sue them.”

The video below is about the January settlement.

Thanks and a tip of the hat go out to Tom. Typos or errors, report them HERE.