April 20, 2014

Advertise with Stand Firm

July 1, 2012


Government Bureaucracy Limits Fire Fighting Capacity

There is so much about government red tape that will can drive you to develop serious mental and personality issues.  Take for instance the wildfires that have been raging in Colorado.  Imagine how the population would feel if they knew that while they watched helplessly, this bad boy Boeing 747 Supertanker Very Large Air Tanker (VLAT) aircraft with a 20,000 gallon tank capacity sat idle.

1. We were offered a Call-When-Needed (CWN) contract a few years ago by the US Forest Service (proving our technical viability), but we were never called into action resulting in a multi-million dollar loss to our company as we were required to maintain and have flight crew available should we be called. The only contract that will sustain a VLAT program is an Exclusive-Use contract, which provides an income stream to sustain the
program even if the asset is not utilized. We invested over $50M to develop this asset in the firm belief that we could better control fires as we proved in Israel and Mexico under CWN contracts that we could afford to offer at the time.

2. There have been recent changes to the US Forest Service procurement policies. Today, only small businesses are eligible for contract awards concerning air tanker assets; Evergreen is not a small business and, therefore, is excluded from consideration for any award.

3. The US Forest Service’s specification for Next Generation Air Tanker aircraft limits tank size to 5,000 gallons. The Supertanker’s tanks hold about 20,000 gallons, which is considered outside the USFS specification. The USFS just awarded contracts to four small businesses with aircraft equipped with these smaller tanks, and excluded the Evergreen Supertanker. Since World War II, tank capacities have been in the 3,000 to 5,000 gallon range, yet we continue to face the growing threat from mega fires today. We believe the Supertanker represents an overwhelming response to this growing threat.

How would you feel about this policy if it were you family’s home in the path of a marching fire?

Here’s what you can do if you think this policy needs to be re-examined: 

Please contact your state representatives in Washington DC to demand an examination of their current procurement policies concerning VLAT aircraft. The US Forest Service says it best:  “Only YOU can prevent wildfires.”

Please remember to pray for all who have been affected by the fires in Colorado.


Share this story:


Recent Related Posts

Comments

Facebook comments are closed.

8 comments

Don’t you remember the Coast Guard not allowing many oil-skimmers to help out during the Gulf oil spill for various bureauracy reasons?

[1] Posted by B. Hunter on 7-1-2012 at 09:13 PM · [top]

The smaller planes have a smaller carbon footprint, I’m sure.  So what if you need to make 4-5 more flights instead of just one and probably use even more fuel as a result? 

You want the ocean levels to rise just to save your house?  You cold, cold person.  THEY"RE TRYING TO SAVE THE PLANET!!!!!

[2] Posted by Bill2 on 7-2-2012 at 05:46 AM · [top]

Another death panel?

[3] Posted by APB on 7-2-2012 at 07:06 AM · [top]

All you government-hating wingnuts just fail to understand the perfectly sound reasoning behind this regulation, which I am sure will be explained by our Dear Overseers soon.  In the meantime, you can finally get off the edges of your seats…the long-awaited, desperately-needed federal regulations on the design of putt-putt golf courses has **finally** been released:

http://www.openmarket.org/2012/06/28/regulation-of-the-day-221-miniature-golf-courses/

And here you think your trillions of tax dollars are being piddled away uselessly.

[4] Posted by Jeffersonian on 7-2-2012 at 10:39 AM · [top]

[4] Jeffersonian,

I am beginning to think ever more seriously that it is about time to dismantle the entire edifice and start over. And while we are about that task, we should give serious consideration to ensuring that the U.S. Constitution (2nd Ed.) contains a few added features:

• Only prosctiptive Federal laws shall be valid. Prescriptive laws are invalid prima facie;

• That which is not proscribed by law, is automatically permitted to all legal residents;

• Congress may enact no law that pertains solely to iteslf, nor may it enact any law that exempts is members from any Federal law or program, nor may it enact any law that purports to establish a publicly-funded insurance program.

• Member states of this federation shall retain the right to ignore any Federal law which violates their sovereignty in any matter not explicitly authorized within this Constitution, including any law enacted pursuant to an Amendment to this Constitution which that state has not ratified;

• No member state shall be bound by any Federal law which it has not ratified.

• Every member State in this Federation shall retain in perpetuity the right of “free exit” from the Federation.

• Every citizen of the United States who is not incarcerated, nor owes any unpaid settlement at law, shall have the right of “free exit” from the Federation and its territories without the payment of any future taxes.

• The Federal government shall guarantee the rights of use and possession of property to its legal owner, without reservation. Disputes among property owners shall remain subject to resoluton via civil suits at law in the member State in which the property is located.

• The Federal government shall guarantee the rights of freedom of association and freedom of exchange, without reservation.

• No public monies shall be granted to any private enterprise with the sole exception of payment for services rendered or goods procured.

There! I think that should help give us a restarting point closer to what the Founders intended.

Pax et bonum,
Keith Töpfer

[5] Posted by Militaris Artifex on 7-2-2012 at 02:00 PM · [top]

I like it, Martial Artist.  I’ve been in discussions with a friend of mine and a couple of state Senators about how to put this runaway train back on the rails, and there are some good suggestions in your post.  It’s clear we cannot keep going on the path we are.  Something must be done, and soon.

[6] Posted by Jeffersonian on 7-2-2012 at 08:50 PM · [top]

[6] Jeffersonian,

Thank you for you concurrence. I thought you, and others, might well like it. Most of it is about some degree of restoration of the Rule of Law, which has come under almost continuous erosion since the era of the T. Roosevelt administration. That is why I characterized it as a “restarting” point. The nation needs a “reboot,” ideally sometime before we see the dreaded political “blue screen of death.”

Pax et bonum,
Keith Töpfer

[7] Posted by Militaris Artifex on 7-3-2012 at 02:17 PM · [top]

Defense cuts have or are reducing the number of Air Force C-130’s available for fire fighting duty.

[8] Posted by Don+ on 7-3-2012 at 03:12 PM · [top]

Registered members are welcome to leave comments. Log in here, or register here.

Comment Policy: We pride ourselves on having some of the most open, honest debate anywhere. However, we do have a few rules that we enforce strictly. They are: No over-the-top profanity, no racial or ethnic slurs, and no threats real or implied of physical violence. Please see this post for more explanation, and the posts here, here, and here for advice on becoming a valued commenter as opposed to an ex-commenter. Although we rarely do so, we reserve the right to remove or edit comments, as well as suspend users' accounts, solely at the discretion of site administrators. Since we try to err on the side of open debate, you may sometimes see comments which you believe strain the boundaries of our rules. Comments are the opinions of visitors, and do not necessarily reflect the opinion of Stand Firm site administrators or Gri5th Media, LLC.