Connect with us

Politics

California firefighting aircraft stymied by U.S. Forest Service policy, local chiefs say

Published

on

California firefighting aircraft stymied by U.S. Forest Service policy, local chiefs say

An aerial firefighting task force has been thwarted — and sometimes grounded — by a new interpretation of a U.S. Forest Service policy that prohibits contractors from providing flight supervision over federal lands, according to Southern California fire chiefs.

“I don’t understand why they’ve chosen this time to reinterpret this longstanding procedure,” said Los Angeles County Fire Chief Anthony Marrone. “Why are they moving the goalposts now, during fire season? The timing couldn’t be worse.”

The dispute is the latest to have local fire authorities at odds with the Forest Service amid a punishing season that’s seen more than a million acres of land burn across the state. Some county chiefs have also spoken out about Forest Service staffing shortages they say resulted in delayed federal responses to recent fires, including the Airport fire that destroyed homes in Orange and Riverside counties.

Orange County Fire Authority Chief Brian Fennessy has written to Congress requesting an investigation into the issue.

Advertisement

“This policy application defies common sense at a time when we all know wildfire is, if not the worst threat to public safety in the state of California and throughout the West, pretty close to the top,” he said.

The Forest Service said the policy is a longstanding business rule that applies to aviation operations nationwide. “We had a lack of clarity on the policy, so some people were using it inappropriately,” said Adrienne Freeman, an agency spokesperson.

At the heart of the dispute is the Quick Reaction Force, a 24/7 aerial task force staffed by the fire departments of Los Angeles, Orange and Ventura counties. Its fleet consists of three night-flying helitankers, a mobile base that can mix 18,000 gallons of retardant per hour and an intelligence helicopter that is typically staffed by pilots under contract with the Orange County Fire Authority who manage the airspace and tell the other helicopters where to make drops.

The task force has been operating for several years without issue. But in July, the local agencies received word from the Forest Service that contractors could no longer provide aerial supervision over fires burning on federal land. When the QRF is deployed to these fires, it generally must be overseen by an aerial supervisor who is an agency employee.

The Forest Service has 11 aircraft capable of performing this supervision in California, but only one — an airplane — can do so at night, Freeman said. That plane is at times unavailable because it’s already deployed, has logged too many flight hours, needs to refuel or requires repairs or maintenance.

Advertisement

“As a result of that, we’ve had to pull off of some fires that were threatening communities,” Fennessy said.

For instance, as the task force fought the Bridge fire the afternoon of Sept. 11, the Forest Service airplane supervising the effort, AA-52, had to return to base, according to Fennessy and a written statement provided by Ken Craw, an aerial supervisor who was flying Copter-76 under contract with the Orange County Fire Authority.

Rather than call in Copter-76 to relieve the plane as supervisor, all air operations — six helicopters and two water scoping air tankers — were shut down until another Forest Service plane could arrive a short time later, Craw wrote.

“In my opinion the choice of AA-52 to shut down the aerial firefighting operations instead of using Copter-76 put the public and firefighters at risk, and reduced the efficiency of the efforts to contain the Bridge Fire,” he wrote.

A similar situation resulted in a two-hour delay in QRF helicopters dropping retardant on the Fork fire in the Angeles National Forest on July 19, Fennessy said. Helicopters also were released from the Borel fire in the Sequoia National Forest the night of July 28, even though they had hours of flight time left, he said.

Advertisement

Fennessy and other Southern California fire chiefs have met and exchanged letters with Region 5 Director Jaimie Gamboa, sharing their concerns.

The requirement that an agency employee supervise night operations is impractical when that employee is flying a plane, which circles thousands of feet above helicopters and has limited visibility into what’s going on below, some of the county chiefs said.

“The helicopter coordinator position is more beneficial during nighttime helicopter operations than a fixed-wing aerial supervision platform that’s way too high above the fire,” said Marrone, who was previously in charge of the county’s air operations.

Robert Garcia, fire chief of the Angeles National Forest, has called on the QRF many times, as he has just one night-flying helicopter — the Forest Service’s only night-flying helicopter in the nation, he said.

Garcia said the Forest Service plane can provide adequate nighttime supervision to helicopters because it has technology on board to monitor the effectiveness of drops.

Advertisement

Still, he said, he’s expressed concerns about the policy interpretation to others in the Forest Service because of his forest’s reliance on the QRF intelligence helicopter to provide relief when the Forest Service plane is unavailable.

“I think it’s worth taking a hard look at this policy, because the QRF is really, to my knowledge, a singular example of this particular scenario,” he said. “But the consequences are high.”

The Forest Service may deviate from the policy when it’s in a unified command, or if there’s imminent threat to life or property, he said. Garcia has done so at least two or three times since July, enabling him to use the QRF helicopter for aerial supervision. Such supervision is needed only if more than two aircraft are flying over a fire, he added.

Garcia acknowledged that confusion over the new policy interpretation has at times resulted in some delays in decision-making, but said that hasn’t affected the outcome of any fires in Angeles National Forest. The probability of success in keeping the Bridge fire small was low from the start because of hot, dry conditions and steep, rugged terrain that hadn’t burned in more than 100 years, and the Fork fire was contained relatively quickly at 301 acres, he said.

The California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection also prohibits the use of contractors as aerial supervisors, a policy that was formalized this year but was in practice for a couple years before that, said Nick Schuler, deputy director of communications for Cal Fire.

Advertisement

But that hasn’t posed as much of an issue to the QRF because Cal Fire has agreements with Los Angeles, Orange and Ventura counties for them to provide initial attack fire suppression in many areas where the task force does its night flying work, Fennessy said. As a result, the counties dictate operations within those areas, he said.

The timing of the Forest Service’s change in policy interpretation has left him scratching his head. The contract pilots are “the best of the best,” with all the appropriate training and qualifications, and no one has raised safety concerns about them, Fennessy said.

He wonders whether the shift was retaliation for a 2022 60 Minutes episode in which he said the Forest Service was slow to use the QRF to fight the Caldor fire in Northern California and only greenlighted its use when he threatened to take the helicopters back home.

“It caused a lot of tension between the agencies — L.A., Ventura, Orange — and the Forest Service,” Fennessy said. “That’s the only thing I can think of because why now, years into this?”

Freeman of the Forest Service vigorously disputed that allegation. “No one gave that a thought, and we continue not to,” she said.

Advertisement

The Forest Service has been working to beef up its night flying operations, including by changing policy in Region 5 so that its employees can fly in contract aircraft to gain experience in nighttime aerial supervision, she said.

“We have worked incredibly hard to try to get to a place where we can utilize the QRF as well as all the resources in these counties,” she said. “This shouldn’t be about who has what. This is about trying to figure out ways to work together.”

Politics

FBI Director Kash Patel says bureau ramping up AI to counter domestic, global threats

Published

on

FBI Director Kash Patel says bureau ramping up AI to counter domestic, global threats

NEWYou can now listen to Fox News articles!

FBI Director Kash Patel said Saturday that the agency is ramping up its use of artificial intelligence (AI) tools to counter domestic and international threats.

In a post on X, Patel said the FBI has been advancing its technology, calling AI a “key component” of its strategy to respond to threats and stay “ahead of the game.”

“FBI has been working on key technology advances to keep us ahead of the game and respond to an always changing threat environment both domestically and on the world stage,” Patel wrote. “Artificial intelligence is a key component of this.”

‘PEOPLE WOULD HAVE DIED’: INSIDE THE FBI’S HALLOWEEN TAKEDOWN THAT EXPOSED A GLOBAL TERROR NETWORK

Advertisement

Kash Patel, director of the FBI, speaks during a news conference at the Department of Justice in Washington, D.C. ( Eric Lee/Bloomberg via Getty Images)

Patel said the bureau is developing an AI initiative aimed at supporting investigators and analysts working in the national security space.

“We’ve been working on an AI project to assist our investigators and analysts in the national security space — staying ahead of bad actors and adversaries who seek to do us harm,” he said.

Patel added that FBI leadership has established a “technology working group” led by outgoing Deputy Director Dan Bongino to ensure the agency’s tools “evolve with the mission.”

EXCLUSIVE: FBI CONCLUDES TRUMP SHOOTER THOMAS CROOKS ACTED ALONE AFTER UNPRECEDENTED GLOBAL INVESTIGATION

Advertisement

The bureau is ramping up its use of AI tools to counter domestic and international threats. (Brendan Smialowski/AFP )

“These are investments that will pay dividends for America’s national security for decades to come,” Patel said.

A spokesperson for the FBI told Fox News Digital it had nothing further to add beyond Patel’s X post.

The FBI currently uses AI for tools such as vehicle recognition, voice-language identification, speech-to-text analysis and video analytics, according to the agency’s website.

DAN BONGINO TO RESIGN FROM FBI DEPUTY DIRECTOR ROLE IN JANUARY

Advertisement

Patel credited outgoing Deputy Director Dan Bongino for his leadership with the AI initiative. (Michael M. Santiago/Getty Images)

Earlier this week, Bongino announced he would leave the bureau in January after speculation rose concerning his departure.

CLICK HERE TO DOWNLOAD THE FOX NEWS APP

“I will be leaving my position with the FBI in January,” Bongino wrote in an X post Wednesday. “I want to thank President [Donald] Trump, AG [Pam] Bondi, and Director Patel for the opportunity to serve with purpose. Most importantly, I want to thank you, my fellow Americans, for the privilege to serve you. God bless America, and all those who defend Her.”

Advertisement
Continue Reading

Politics

Lawmakers weigh impeachment articles for Bondi over Epstein file omissions

Published

on

Lawmakers weigh impeachment articles for Bondi over Epstein file omissions

Lawmakers unhappy with Justice Department decisions to heavily redact or withhold documents from a legally mandated release of files related to Jeffrey Epstein threatened Saturday to launch impeachment proceedings against those responsible, including Pam Bondi, the U.S. attorney general.

Democrats and Republicans alike criticized the omissions, while Democrats also accused the Justice Department of intentionally scrubbing the release of at least one image of President Trump, with Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.) suggesting it could portend “one of the biggest coverups in American history.”

Trump administration officials have said the release fully complied with the law, and that its redactions were crafted only to protect victims of Epstein, a disgraced financier and convicted sex offender accused of abusing hundreds of women and girls before his death in 2019.

Rep. Ro Khanna (D-Fremont), an author of the Epstein Files Transparency Act, which required the release of the investigative trove, blasted Bondi in a social media video, accusing her of denying the existence of many of the records for months, only to push out “an incomplete release with too many redactions” in response to — and in violation of — the new law.

Khanna said he and the bill’s co-sponsor, Rep. Thomas Massie (R-Ky.), were “exploring all options” for responding and forcing more disclosures, including by pursuing “the impeachment of people at Justice,” asking courts to hold officials blocking the release in contempt, and “referring for prosecution those who are obstructing justice.”

Advertisement

“We will work with the survivors to demand the full release of these files,” Khanna said.

He later added in a CNN interview that he and Massie were drafting articles of impeachment against Bondi, though they had not decided whether to bring them forward.

Massie, in his own social media post, said Khanna was correct in rejecting the Friday release as insufficient, saying that it “grossly fails to comply with both the spirit and the letter of the law.”

The lawmakers’ view that the Justice Department’s document dump failed to comply with the law echoed similar complaints across the political spectrum Saturday, as the full scope of redactions and other withholdings came into focus.

The frustration had already sharply escalated late Friday, after Fox News Digital reported that the names and identifiers of not just victims but of “politically exposed individuals and government officials” had been redacted from the records — which would violate the law, and which Justice Department officials denied.

Advertisement

Among the critics was Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene (R-Ga.), who cited the Fox reporting in an exasperated post late Friday to X.

“The whole point was NOT to protect the ‘politically exposed individuals and government officials.’ That’s exactly what MAGA has always wanted, that’s what drain the swamp actually means. It means expose them all, the rich powerful elites who are corrupt and commit crimes, NOT redact their names and protect them,” Greene wrote.

Senior Justice Department officials later called in to Fox News to dispute the report. But the removal of a file published in the Friday evening release, capturing a desk in Epstein’s home with a drawer filled of photos of Trump, reinforced bipartisan concerns that references to the president had been illegally withheld.

In a release of documents from the Epstein family estate by the House Oversight Committee this fall, Trump’s name was featured over 1,000 times — more than any other public figure.

“If they’re taking this down, just imagine how much more they’re trying to hide,” Schumer wrote on X. “This could be one of the biggest coverups in American history.”

Advertisement

Several victims also said the release was insufficient. “It’s really kind of another slap in the face,” Alicia Arden, who went to the police to report that Epstein had abused her in 1997, told CNN. “I wanted all the files to come out, like they said that they were going to.”

Trump, who signed the act into law after having worked to block it from getting a vote, was conspicuously quiet on the matter. In a long speech in North Carolina on Friday night, he did not mention it.

However, White House officials and Justice Department leaders rejected the notion that the release was incomplete or out of compliance with the law, or that the names of politicians had been redacted.

“The only redactions being applied to the documents are those required by law — full stop,” said Deputy Atty. Gen. Todd Blanche. “Consistent with the statute and applicable laws, we are not redacting the names of individuals or politicians unless they are a victim.”

Other Republicans defended the administration. Rep. James Comer (R-Ky.), chair of the House Oversight Committee, said the administration “is delivering unprecedented transparency in the Epstein case and will continue releasing documents.”

Advertisement

Epstein died in a Manhattan jail awaiting trial on sex trafficking charges. He’d been convicted in 2008 of procuring a child for prostitution in Florida, but served only 13 months in custody in what many condemned as a sweetheart plea deal for a well-connected and rich defendant.

Epstein’s acts of abuse have attracted massive attention, including among many within Trump’s political base, in part because of unanswered questions surrounding which of his many powerful friends may have also been implicated in crimes against children. Some of those questions have swirled around Trump, who was friends with Epstein for years before the two had what the president has described as a falling out.

Evidence has emerged in recent months that suggests Trump may have had knowledge of Epstein’s crimes during their friendship.

Epstein wrote in a 2019 email, released by the House Oversight Committee, that Trump “knew about the girls.” In a 2011 email to Ghislaine Maxwell, who was convicted of conspiring with Epstein to help him sexually abuse girls, Epstein wrote that “the dog that hasn’t barked is trump. [Victim] spent hours at my house with him … he has never once been mentioned.”

Trump has denied any wrongdoing.

Advertisement

The records released Friday contained few if any major new revelations, but did include a complaint against Epstein filed with the FBI back in 1996 — which the FBI did little with, substantiating long-standing fears among Epstein’s victims that his crimes could have been stopped years earlier.

Sen. Adam Schiff (D-Calif.), one of the president’s most consistent critics, wrote on X that Bondi should appear before the Senate Judiciary Committee to explain under oath the extensive redactions and omissions, which he called a “willful violation of the law.”

“The Trump Justice Department has had months to keep their promise to release all of the Epstein Files,” Schiff wrote. “Epstein’s survivors and the American people need answers now.”

Advertisement
Continue Reading

Politics

Sen Murphy warns ‘people are going to die’ as Congress punts on expiring Obamacare subsidies

Published

on

Sen Murphy warns ‘people are going to die’ as Congress punts on expiring Obamacare subsidies

NEWYou can now listen to Fox News articles!

A bipartisan Obamacare fix remains out of reach in the Senate, for now, and lawmakers can’t agree on who is at fault. 

While many agree that the forthcoming healthcare cliff will cause financial pain, the partisan divide quickly devolved into pointing the finger across the aisle at who owns the looming healthcare premium spikes that Americans who use the healthcare exchange will face. 

Part of the finger-pointing has yielded another surprising agreement: Lawmakers don’t see the fast-approaching expiration of the Biden-era enhanced Obamacare subsidies as Congress failing to act in time.

“Obviously, it’s not a failure of Congress to act,” Sen. Chris Murphy, D-Conn., told Fox News Digital. “It’s a failure of Republicans to act. Democrats are united and wanting to expand subsidies. Republicans want premium increases to go up.”

Advertisement

Partisan rancor over Obamacare has seeped into how lawmakers view the effect that expiring subsidies will have on their constituents. Sen. Chris Murphy, D-Conn., argued that it was a “life or death” situation, while Republicans contended that Democrats set up the very cliff they maligned.  (Tom Williams/CQ-Roll Call, Inc. via Getty Images)

DEMOCRATS’ LAST-MINUTE MOVE TO BLOCK GOP FUNDING PLAN SENDS LAWMAKERS HOME EARLY

Senate Republicans and Democrats both tried, and failed, to advance their own partisan plans to replace or extend the subsidies earlier this month. And since then, no action has been taken to deal with the fast-approaching issue, guaranteeing that the subsidies will lapse at the end of the year.

A report published last month by Kaiser Family Foundation, a nonprofit healthcare think tank, found that Americans who use the credits will see an average increase of 114% in their premium costs.

The increase can vary depending on how high above the poverty level a person is. The original premium subsidies set a cap at 400% above the poverty level, while the enhanced subsidies, which were passed during the COVID-19 pandemic, torched the cap.

Advertisement

For example, a person 60 years or older making 401% of the poverty level, or about $62,000 per year, would on average see their premium prices double. That number can skyrocket depending on the state. Wyoming clocks in at the highest spike at 421%.

SENATE MULLS NEXT STEPS AFTER DUELING OBAMACARE FIXES GO UP IN FLAMES

Sen. Rick Scott, R-Fla., doesn’t want to blow up Obamacare or get rid of Obamacare subsidies, but he does want to provide Americans with more options for healthcare.  (Andrew Harnik/Getty Images)

In Murphy’s home state of Connecticut, premiums under the same parameters would hike in price by 316%.

“When these do lapse, people are going to die,” Murphy said. “I mean, I was talking to a couple a few months ago who have two parents, both with chronic, potentially life-threatening illnesses, and they will only be able to afford insurance for one of them. So they’re talking about which parent is going to survive to raise their three kids. The stakes are life and death.”

Advertisement

Both sides hold opposing views on the solution. Senate Republicans argue that the credits effectively subsidize insurance companies, not patients, by funneling money directly to them, and that the program is rife with fraud.

Senate Democrats want to extend the subsidies as they are, and are willing to negotiate fixes down the line. But for the GOP, they want to see some immediate reforms, like income caps, anti-fraud measures and more stringent anti-abortion language tied to the subsidies.

Sen. Rick Scott, R-Fla., who produced his own healthcare plan that would convert subsidies into health savings accounts (HSAs), argued that congressional Democrats “set this up to expire.”

SENATE REPUBLICANS LAND ON OBAMACARE FIX, TEE UP DUELING VOTE WITH DEMS

Senate Majority Leader John Thune, R-S.D., panned Senate Democrats’ Obamacare subsidy proposal as “obviously designed to fail.”  (Tom Williams/CQ-Roll Call, Inc. via Getty Images)

Advertisement

But he doesn’t share the view that the subsidies’ expected expiration is a life-or-death situation.

“I’m not taxing somebody who makes 20 bucks an hour to pay for healthcare for somebody who makes half a million dollars a year, that’s what they did,” he told Fox News Digital. “All they did was mask the increase in healthcare costs. That’s all they did with it.”

Sen. Jim Banks, R-Ind., similarly scoffed at the notion, and told Fox News Digital, “The Democrat plan to extend COVID-era Obamacare subsidies might help less than half a percent of the American population.”

“The Republican plan brings down healthcare costs for 100% of Americans,” he said. “More competition, expands health savings accounts. That needs to be the focus.”

Democrats are also not hiding their disdain for the partisan divide between their approaches to healthcare.

Advertisement

Sen. Brian Schatz, D-Hawaii, told Fox News Digital that the idea that this “is a congressional failure and not a Republican policy is preposterous.”

“They’ve hated the Affordable Care Act since its inception and tried to repeal it at every possible opportunity,” he said, referring to Obamacare. “The president hates ACA, speaker hates ACA, majority leader hates ACA, rank-and-file hate ACA. And so this is not some failure of bipartisanship.”

While the partisan rancor runs deep on the matter of Obamacare, there are Republicans and Democrats working together to build a new plan. Still, it wouldn’t deal with the rapidly approaching Dec. 31 deadline to extend the subsidies.

CLICK HERE TO DOWNLOAD THE FOX NEWS APP

Senate Majority Leader John Thune, R-S.D., predicted that the Senate would have a long road to travel before a bipartisan plan came together in the new year, but he didn’t rule it out.

Advertisement

“It’s the Christmas season. It would take a Christmas miracle to execute on actually getting something done there,” he said. “But, you know, I think there’s a potential path, but it’ll be heavy lift.”

Continue Reading
Advertisement

Trending