[Congressional Record Volume 150, Number 65 (Tuesday, May 11, 2004)]
[Senate]
[Pages S5229-S5232]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]

      By Ms. CANTWELL (for herself and Mrs. Murray):
  S. 2410. A bill to promote wildland firefighter safety; to the 
Committee on Energy and Natural Resources.
  Ms. CANTWELL. Mr. President, I rise today to introduce the Wildland 
Firefighter Safety Act of 2004, along with my colleague Senator Murray, 
the senior Senator from Washington State. Earlier today, the Senate 
Energy and Natural Resources Committee on which I serve held a hearing 
regarding the outlook for the 2004 fire season. I join many of my 
colleagues, who are very concerned about what appears to be yet another 
year of devastating drought throughout the West, and the

[[Page S5230]]

hazards this could pose in terms of increased fire risk and threats to 
public safety.
  However, we in Washington State recognize the importance of an issue 
that is often overlooked in discussions of fire preparedness. This is 
the topic of wildland firefighter safety, and it's an issue that we 
care deeply about because a horrible tragedy occurred in our state in 
July 2001, when four young Washington firefighters lost their lives at 
the Thirtymile Fire. I come to the floor to introduce this legislation 
today, because we cannot forget the lives that were lost--and the 
families that are still grieving--as a result of the Thirtymile 
tragedy. What's more, we cannot allow the Forest Service and our 
Federal firefighting agencies to repeat the mistakes that the agencies 
themselves admit resulted in these avoidable deaths. Unfortunately, the 
recently-issued findings of the Occupational Safety and Health 
Administration (OSHA)--stemming from the Cramer Fire that killed two 
Idaho firefighters just last summer--indicate to me that the lessons of 
Thirtymile are not being completely heeded. This is simply 
unacceptable.
  Many of my colleagues, particularly those from the West, are probably 
aware of the fact that every summer, we send thousands of our 
constituents--many of them brave young men and women, college students 
on summer break--into harm's way to protect our Nation's rural 
communities and public lands. These men and women serve our nation 
bravely. Since 1910, more than 900 wildland firefighters have lost 
their lives in the line of duty. According to the U.S. Forest Service, 
a total of 30 firefighters across this Nation perished in the line of 
duty just last year, during the 2003 fire season.
  These firefighters represented a mix of Federal and State employees, 
volunteers and independent contractors. And they lost their lives for 
an array of reasons. We all realize that fighting fires on our nation's 
public lands is an inherently dangerous business. But what we cannot 
and must not abide are the preventable deaths--losing firefighters 
because rules were broken, policies ignored and no one was held 
accountable.
  I have already mentioned the Thirtymile tragedy that pushed this 
issue to the fore in the State of Washington. On July 10, 2001, near 
Winthrop in Okanogan County, in the midst of the second worst drought 
in the history of our State, the Thirtymile fire burned out of control.
  Four courageous young firefighters were killed. Their names: Tom 
Craven, 30 years old; Karen FitzPatrick, 18; Jessica Johnson, 19; and 
Devin Weaver, 21.
  Sadly, as subsequent investigations revealed, these young men and 
women did not have to die. In the words of the Forest Service's own 
report on the Thirtymile fire, the tragedy ``could have been 
prevented.'' At that time, I said that I believe we in Congress and 
management within the firefighting agencies have a responsibility to 
ensure that no preventable tragedy like Thirtymile fire ever happened 
again.
  I'd like to thank my colleague Senator Bingaman, the distinguished 
Ranking Member of the Senate Energy Committee, as well as Senator 
Wyden, who was then chair of the Subcommittee on Public Lands and 
Forests. In the wake of the Thirtymile Fire, they agreed to convene 
hearings on precisely what went wrong that tragic day. We heard from 
the grief-stricken families.
  In particular, the powerful testimony of Ken Weaver--the father of 
one of the lost firefighters--put into focus precisely what's at stake 
when we send these men and women into harm's way.
  I can think of no worse tragedy that a parent to confronting the loss 
of a child, especially when that loss could have been prevented by 
better practices on the part of federal agencies.
  At that Senate Energy Committee hearing, we also discussed with 
experts and the Forest Service itself ways in which we could improve 
the agency's safety performance. And almost a year to the day after 
those young people lost their lives, we passed a bill--ensuring an 
independent review of tragic incidents such as Thirtymile that led to 
unnecessary fatalities.
  Based on subsequent briefings by the Forest Service, revisions to the 
agency's training and safety protocols, and what I've heard when I have 
visited with firefighters over the past two years, I do believe the 
courage of the Thirtymile families to stand up and demand change has 
had a positive impact on the safety of the young men and women who are 
preparing to battle blazes as wildland firefighters.
  Yet, I'm deeply saddened by the fact that it's clear we haven't done 
nearly enough.
  In July 2003--two years after Thirtymile--two more firefighters 
perished, this time at the Cramer Fire within Idaho's Salmon-Challis 
National Forest. Jeff Allen and Shane Heath were killed when the fire 
burned over an area where they were attempting to construct a landing 
spot for firefighting helicopters. Certainly some 28 others lost their 
lives fighting wildfires last year, and we must recognize the sacrifice 
and grief befalling their families.
  After the Thirtymile Fire, however, I told the Weavers and the 
Cravens, the families of Karen FitzPatrick and Jessica Johnson that I 
believed we owed it to their children to identify the causes and learn 
from the mistakes that were made in the Okanogan, to make wildland 
firefighting safer for those who would follow. That is why the findings 
associated with the Cramer Fire simply boggle my mind.
  We learned at Thirtymile that all ten of the agencies' Standing Fire 
Orders and many of the 18 Watch Out Situations--the most basic safety 
rules--were violated or disregarded. The same thing happened at Cramer, 
where Heath and Allen lost their lives two years later.
  After the Thirtymile Fire, OSHA conducted an investigation and levied 
against the Forest Service fire citations for Serious and Willful 
violations of safety rules. It was eerie, then, when just this March 
OSHA concluded its investigation of Cramer. The result: another five 
OSHA citations, for Serious, Willful and Repeat violations. Reading 
through the list of causal and contributing factors for Cramer and 
putting them next to those associated with the Thirtymile fire, my 
colleagues would be struck by the many disturbing similarities. Even 
more haunting are the parallels between these lists and the factors 
cited in the investigation of 1994's South Canyon Fire on Storm King 
Mountain in Colorado. It's been 10 years since those 14 firefighters 
lost their lives on Storm King Mountain--and yet, the same mistakes are 
being made over and over again.
  Let me repeat: This is not acceptable. The firefighters we send into 
harm's way this year--and the ones we've already lost--deserve better.
  Training, leadership and management problems have been cited in all 
of the incidents I've discussed. Frankly, I have believed since the 
Thirtymile tragedy that the Forest Service has on its hands a cultural 
problem. What can we do, from the legislative branch, to provide this 
agency with enough motivation to change? I believe the first step we 
can take is to equip ourselves with improved oversight tools, so these 
agencies know that Congress is paying attention. Today I'm introducing 
legislation--the Wildland Firefighter Safety Act of 2004--that would do 
just that.
  I believe this is a modest yet important proposal. It was already 
passed once by the Senate, as an amendment to last year's Healthy 
Forests legislation. However, I was disappointed that it was not 
included in the conference version of the bill. But it is absolutely 
clear to me--particularly in light of OSHA's review of the Cramer 
Fire--that these provisions are needed now more than ever.
  First, the Wildland Firefighter Safety Act of 2004 will require the 
Secretaries of Agriculture and Interior to track the funds the agencies 
expend for firefighter safety and training.
  Today, these sums are lumped into the agencies' ``wildfire 
preparedness'' account. But as I have discussed with various officials 
in hearings before the Senate Energy and Natural Resources Committee, 
it is difficult for Congress to play its rightful oversight role--
ensuring that these programs are funded in times of wildfire emergency, 
and measuring the agencies' commitment to these programs over time--
without a separate break-down of these funds.
  Second, this legislation will require the Secretaries to report to 
Congress annually on the implementation and effectiveness of its safety 
and training programs.

[[Page S5231]]

  I assure my colleagues who have not spent time dwelling on this issue 
that the maze of policy statements, management directives and curricula 
changes associated with federal firefighter training is dizzying and 
complicated. The agencies have a responsibility to continually revise 
their policies in the face of new science and lessons learned on the 
fire line. Meanwhile, Congress has the responsibility to ensure needed 
reforms are implemented. As such, I believe that Congress and the 
agencies alike would benefit from an annual check-in on these programs. 
I would also hope that this would serve as a vehicle for an ongoing and 
healthy dialogue between the Senate and agencies on these issues.
  Third, my bill would stipulate that Federal contracts with private 
firefighting crews require training consistent with the training of 
Federal wildland firefighters. It would also direct those agencies to 
monitor compliance with this requirement. This is important not just 
for the private contractor employees' themselves--but for the Federal, 
State and tribal employees who stand shoulder-to-shoulder with them on 
the fire line.
  This is actually quite a complex issue about which many of us are 
just beginning to learn. With the severity of fire seasons throughout 
the country over the past two years--and notwithstanding the Clinton 
Administration's efforts to hire a significant number of new 
firefighters as part of the National Fire Plan--the number of private 
contract crews hired by the agencies to help with fire suppression has 
tripled since 1998. According to Oregon Department of Forestry 
estimates, the number of contract crews at work has grown from 88 in 
1998 to 300 this year--with 95 percent based in the Pacific Northwest.
  In general, these contract crews have grown up in former timber 
communities and provide important jobs--especially given the fact the 
agencies themselves do not at this juncture have the resources to fight 
the fires entirely on their own. And many of these contractors have 
been in operation for a decade or more and boast stellar safety 
records.
  Nevertheless, as the number of--and need for--contractors has grown, 
there are more and more tales of unscrupulous employers that take 
advantage of workers and skirt training and safety requirements. This 
is a growing concern for U.S. Forest Service employees and State 
officials. Last summer, the Seattle Times wrote a detailed feature on 
the issue, quoting internal Forest Service memos as well as evidence 
from the field.

  I ask unanimous consent that this article be printed in the Record.
  Among the contractor practices cited in the Seattle Times article: 
breaking safety rules and failing to warn other crews on the fire line; 
falsifying or forging firefighting credentials and ignoring training 
requirements; hiring illegal immigrants that cannot understand fire 
line commands--and committing various labor abuses; and rotating a 
single crew from fire to fire for 50 straight days--while Federal 
firefighters are not allowed to work more than 14 or 21 days in a row.
  The article quoted from a November 2002 memo written by Joseph 
Ferguson, a deputy incident commander for the Forest Service: ``If we 
don't improve the quality and accountability of this program, we are 
going to kill a bunch of firefighters . . . Although there were two or 
three good to excellent crews on each fire, that was offset by 20 to 30 
that were hardly worth having,'' Ferguson added. ``It was apparent that 
training for most of these crews had been done poorly or not at all.''
  Paul Broyles, who heads a safety committee for the National 
Interagency Fire Center added that private crews he has seen have 
varied from ``fantastic to a he[ck] of a lot less than good and some 
were real safety concerns.'' He noted that while State government and 
feds were trying to crack down on violations associated with 
documentation, ``the assumption is, where there's one problem, there's 
probably more.''
  The Wildland Firefighter Safety Act of 2004 is a modest beginning in 
addressing the challenges posed by integrating private and Federal 
contract crews--and doing it in a manner that maximizes everyone's 
safety on the fire line.
  I understand that the Federal and State agencies are already 
attempting to push contractors in this direction--and this provision 
will bolster that momentum.
  And so, I hope my colleagues will support this simple legislation. 
Ultimately, the safety of our Federal firefighters is a critical 
component of how well prepared our agencies are to deal with the threat 
of catastrophic wildfire.
  Congress owes it to the families of those brave firefighters we send 
into harm's way to provide oversight of these safety and training 
programs.
  We owe it to our Federal wildland firefighters, their families and 
their State partners--and to future wildland firefighters.
  The Wildland Firefighter Safety Act of 2004 will provide this body 
with the additional tools it needs to do the job. Thank you.
  There being no objection, the article was ordered to be printed in 
the Record, as follows:

                [From the Seattle Times, July 20, 1003]

Risky business; Growth of Private Fire Crews Worries Forest Officials. 
  Some Fear Training and Safety Are Compromised by Burgeoning Use of 
                         Contract Firefighters

                            (By Craig Welch)

       Crewuch Valley, Okanogan County.--While the Forest Service 
     was retooling safety training after the deaths of four 
     firefighters in this rugged valley two years ago, a new 
     danger was quietly mushrooming in the woods.
       Private businesses eager to get into the increasingly 
     lucrative wildfire-fighting industry were breaking rules, 
     skirting training and falsifying records to send 
     inexperienced men and women to battle blazes, according to 
     government records. Some churned out crews that fell asleep 
     on the fire line or couldn't understand commands in English. 
     Others arrived hours late to fires that then ballooned out of 
     control.
       Private crews are now essential in the West's battle 
     against flames a war once fought primarily by government 
     employees. The number of private 20-person firefighting crews 
     sent by companies that contract with the government to fight 
     fires around the nation more than tripled since 1998, from 88 
     to 301 this year. About 95 percent of those crews are based 
     in the Northwest.
       But some federal officials worry the quality varies 
     dramatically from experienced, well-respected contractors to 
     crews that present significant safety concerns.
       And government oversight has struggled to keep pace.
       The problem grew so acute last year that Joseph Ferguson, a 
     deputy incident commander for the Forest Service, wrote in an 
     internal memo in November: ``If we don't improve the quality 
     and accountability of this program, we are going to kill a 
     bunch of firefighters.''
       Last year's fire season was a record breaker, scorching 6.9 
     million acres and costing $1.6 billion to fight.
       With a new fire season under way, officials are still 
     working to week out contractors and private trainers who cut 
     corners and put employees or other firefighters in harm's 
     way. Several private crew operators are also urging the 
     government to crack down on problem contractors.
       In May, in a first-of-a-kind action, a regional 
     firefighting group composed of federal and state agencies 
     suspended a Twisp-based contractor from training any more 
     pacific Northwest firefighters. Employees of Charles ``Bill'' 
     Hoskin, who has trained hundreds of private firefighters, 
     told investigators that Hoskin put firefighters through a 
     required 32-hour training course in 12 hours.
       He was accused of teaching Spanish-speaking firefighters 
     with instructors who spoke only English, of selling red cards 
     the photo ID that shows carriers have met requirements to be 
     a firefighter to people he had not trained, and of giving 
     firefighters bogus fitness tests.
       Hoskin, former chief of the Twisp rural volunteer fire 
     department, has denied all charges of improper action and 
     says he will be vindicated.
       Last month, Rue Forest Contracting, of Mill City, Ore., 
     agreed to $25,000 in fines after 23 of its firefighters were 
     found with forged or phony training credentials. 
     Investigators believe some were sent to fires with no 
     training at all. Owner Larry Rue's attorney declined comment.
       Last year, the Oregon Department of Forestry, which 
     oversees fire contractors for Oregon and Washington under an 
     interagency agreement, cited 45 private crews for various 
     violations and banned 13 from firefighting for up to a month.
       The reason: Firefighters showed up late to fires, skipped 
     safety briefings, drank or used drugs at fire camp, engaged 
     in sexual harassment, had falsified training records or were 
     part of a crew with no English-speaking leaders, according to 
     the department.
       Oregon labor officials, meanwhile, said they were 
     investigating 30 private firefighter-training or pay 
     violations at any one time last year.
       Ferguson, the Forest Service incident commander who fought 
     fires in Oregon, Utah and Colorado, complained in his 
     November memo

[[Page S5232]]

     that Northwest private crews in 2002 were ``the worst we've 
     ever seen.''
       ``Although there were two or three good to excellent crews 
     on each fire, that was offset by 20 to 30 that were hardly 
     worth having,'' Ferguson wrote. ``It was apparent that 
     training for most of these crews had been done poorly or not 
     at all.
       Bill Lafferty, head of Oregon's fire program, oversees most 
     of the country's private 20-person ``hand crews.'' He's 
     beefing up enforcement but admitted that ``we really don't 
     know the magnitude of the cheaters in the system.''
       ``We're struggling as best we can,'' he said. ``But we're 
     barely scratching the surface.''
       On a recent 90-degree day, firefighter Dustin Washburn, 21, 
     rolled a boulder from the charred dirt and saw smoke rise 
     from smoldering embers. He attacked it with a pulaski, an 
     axlike firefighting tool, smothering the fire.
       This 20-person private hand crew was trying to douse 
     hotspots on portions of a 34,000-acre blaze that still burns 
     in the Chewuch River high country in Okanogan County.
       ``Who was working this area?'' asked Myron Old Elk, the 
     crew leader for a private unit of Oregon-based Ferguson 
     Management. ``Get over here. It's still hot.''
       Private crews typically dig lines, knock down spot fires or 
     burn areas to reduce fuels. They're supposed to get the same 
     training as government crews.
       Many, such as this Ferguson unit, are run by respected, 
     experienced hands. Old Elk has fought fires for a dozen 
     years. Private Ferguson Management crews have battled blazes 
     since 1981.
       ``Myron's great,'' said Lonnie Click, a supervisor on this 
     roiling blaze. ``If he doesn't understand directions, he'll 
     ask, then double-ask, until he gets it exactly right.''
       But the industry has grown so quickly that some new 
     companies supply firefighters however they can.
       Contractors have hired illegal immigrants and paid them 
     under the table, or deducted so much for food and incidentals 
     that some earned only 50 cents in a two-week pay period, 
     according to Oregon's Bureau of Labor and Industries. 
     Underage firefighters ``borrowed'' Social Security numbers to 
     fake certification.


                            feast or famine

       Firefighters aren't allowed to work more than 14 or 21 days 
     in a row without a rest day, but some private firefighters 
     have rotated from fire to fire for 50 days straight, 
     according to Forest Service memos. A crew removed from one 
     Oregon fire for poor safety ratings last year showed up two 
     weeks later on a nearby fire.
       ``There's a lot of money to be made here, and when there's 
     a lot of money at stake, people figure out angles,'' said 
     Scott Coleman, owner of Oregon's Skookum Reforestation, which 
     for decades has provided contract crews.
       The nation's private wildfire firms have grown out of 
     Oregon's logging, tree-planting and forestry labor pool. As a 
     result, Oregon now manages the bulk of them.
       For years, it was feast or famine. New contractors started 
     after busy fire years, then disbanded during slow ones.
       But wildfires had grown increasingly unruly in the 1990s, 
     just as federal agencies had downsized their own crews. So 
     the government increasingly has turned to contractors.
       After 2000, when firefighting help was enlisted from as far 
     away as New Zealand, more contractors, including several from 
     Washington, saw opportunity. Contractors typically charge the 
     government $22 to $36 an hour per worker. The contractor buys 
     vehicles, equipment and clothing, provides training and pays 
     firefighters from $9 to $18 per hour.


                        new emphasis on training

       Last year, 270 20-person private crews in the Northwest 
     were paid $91 million. Several companies grossed $1 million 
     apiece.
       ``Overhead can be enormous, but if you have a good fire 
     season and get sent out a lot, you bet there's profit in 
     it,'' said Coleman, vice president of the National Wildfire 
     Association, which has pushed to weed out unscrupulous 
     contractors. ``But if you don't train someone well, you're 
     basically endangering his life.''
       Five federal agencies the Forest Service, National Parks, 
     Bureau of Land Management, Fish and Wildlife Service and 
     Bureau of Indian Affairs fight fires.
       The agencies renewed efforts to make safety the top 
     priority after 14 Forest Service firefighters were trapped by 
     flames during the July 2001 Thirty Mile fire in the Chewuch 
     Valley. Jessica Johnson, Karen FitzPatrick, Devin Weaver and 
     Tom Craven were asphyxiated by superheated gases after 
     deploying their shelters.
       Investigators determined crew leaders violated all 10 
     standard safety rules. The agency put new emphasis on 
     training, communication, spotting hazardous situations and 
     handling emergencies.
       But among new private crews, training issues can be even 
     more basic. Firefighters have bought fire IDs from former 
     firefighters and spliced in their own photographs.
       ``Just yesterday, I got a call from a woman who wanted to 
     verify that I'd trained these two guys who had '03 dates on 
     heir certification,'' said Harry Winston, who trains contract 
     firefighters through First Strike Environmental in Oregon. 
     ``I hadn't. They'd scratched out '02 on their red cards and 
     put in this year's date.''
       Don Land, who worked for Hoskin, the suspended contract 
     trainer, was made an ``engine boss'' a person who operates a 
     wildland firetruck without any training, according to the 
     state Bureau of Labor and Industries.
       Land was released from prison after a three-year sentence 
     in 2001. He said that Hoskin hired him for the fire season. 
     Land said he had not completed the required training and 
     lacked even a driver's license, but was given the job of an 
     engine boss.
       The state accused Hoskin of giving his students answers to 
     written tests and allowing them to use a 5-pound weight in a 
     fitness test that requires hiking with a 45-pound pack.
       Hispanic crews now make up half of the Northwest's private 
     firefighters, and contractors have been disciplined for 
     sending crews with no English speakers to fires a potential 
     hazard when communicating risk.
       New rules require crew and squad leaders to speak both 
     English and the language of the crew. But an internal Forest 
     Service memo suggested that bilingual leaders on Oregon's 
     Tiller Complex fires last year appeared to be there mainly 
     for their language skills. Five crew bosses confessed to not 
     understanding their leadership responsibilities.
       Paul Broyles, who heads a safety committee for the National 
     Interagency Fire Center, said the private crews he's seen 
     varied from ``fantastic to a hell of a lot less than good and 
     some were real safety concerns.''
       A contract crew on an Oregon fire Broyles worked last year 
     was stationed to make sure a rolling inferno stayed behind a 
     fire line. Instead, the crew watched as flames crossed the 
     line, never informing a nearby elite ``hotshot'' crew of the 
     danger headed its way, he said.
       The state and the federal government are strengthening 
     oversight and tightening controls on documentation, said 
     Broyles. Still, he said, ``the assumption is, where there's 
     one problem, there're probably more.''
       This year, Oregon plans to investigate private crews more 
     heavily. The state now inspects training classes and expects 
     to hire new compliance officers.
       But much of the training is designed to be self-policing.
       Wildfire contractors form associations, which sign 
     agreements with federal and state agencies. The association 
     then guarantees that contractors meet regulations.
       Of eight such associations, some are vastly more qualified 
     than others, said Ed Daniels, who oversees Oregon's 
     certification and training.
       Qualifications to form an association: ``Thirty-five 
     dollars and a pen to sign a memorandum of understanding,'' he 
     said.
       Hoskin was president of his association.
                                 ______