Enclosure 3A - Project Summary Form
NATIONAL FIRE PLAN COMMUNITY ASSISTANCE AND WILDLAND URBAN INTERFACE PROJECTS
Application for Wildland Urban Interface Fuels / Education and
Prevention / Community Planning for Fire Protection Projects
Applicant
Applicant/Organization:
Washington Department of Natural Resources
Phone:
FAX:
Email:
(360) 902-1300
(360) 902-1781
sandy.williams@wadnr.gov
Address (Street or P. O. Box, City, State, Zip):
Resource Protection Division, PO Box 47037, Olympia, WA 98504-7037
Project Coordinator
Project Coordinator (Name and Title):
Sandy Williams, Prevention Education Manager
Organization/Jurisdiction:
Washington Department of Natural Resources
Phone:
FAX:
Email:
(360) 902-1300
(360) 902-1781
sandy.williams@wadnr.gov
Project Information
Project Title:
Regional Prevention Team Training and Mobilization
Project Start:
Project End:
April 1, 2002
June 1, 2003
Federal Funding Request:
Total Project Funding:
$53,150.00
$79,650.00
Are you submitting multiple projects? If so, please explain and prioritize:
State Priority #2
Brief Project Description:
This proposal is to train and mobilize Washington and Oregon Prevention teams for the 2002 fire
season. Prevention teams mobilized during the 2001 fire season proved that human caused fire
can be reduced through information and education. Grant funds will pay for travel and lodging for
instructors and fire service students from Washington and Oregon to attend a National level
Prevention team training in Washington state, in June, 2002. The grant will fund the production of
prevention materials and expenses needed to implement a Pacific Northwest interagency
prevention campaign during the summerand fall of 2002.
Project Location:
County:
Congressional District:
Washington
All high risk counties
1,2,3,4,5,6,8,9
Project Type: Check appropriate project type. More than one type may be checked. If only Box (4) is checked, use Enclosure 4.
(1)
(2)
Wildland Urban Interface Fuels Project
Wildland Urban Interface Education and Prevention Project
(3)
(4)
Community Planning for Fire Protection Project
Fuels Utilization and Marketing Project
If the applicant is an unincorporated area, define the geographic area being represented:
Enclosure 3B (Page 1 of 3) - Project Narrative Description
Applications for funding must include a narrative response that describes the proposal. Please do not submit responses longer than one page,
single space, 12-pitch font.
Describe project including, but not limited to:
 project location
Address these
 project implementation
items as
 anticipated outcomes
applicable:
 measures and reporting
 partners





project income
project time frames
specify types of activities and equipment used
amount or extent of actions (acres, number of homes, etc)
environmental, cultural and historical resource requirements
Response:
The Pacific Northwest, during the summer of 2001, endured the most severe fire season in twenty years. The
impacts to watersheds, homes, federal, and private lands are some of the worst recorded. Washington
Department of Natural Resources suppression costs alone will exceed twenty six million dollars. A two year
drought, and severe lightning storms were just part of the contributory causes for their costs. Two National
Prevention teams were deployed during the 2001 fire season. Several awareness and education products
created were the "I'm concerned” wildfire prevention campaign and a fire safety curriculum for grades K-3.
This grant will modify and use these materials for the 2002 fire season and bring prevention teams to each
type 1 or 2 incident working the teachable moments.
Currently there is a shortage of trained personnel regionally to fully implement prevention teams during high
fire danger. This grant will allow wildfire agencies to recruit and train local prevention teams for use in
Washington and Oregon. The teams will become a regular part of the Pacific Northwest fire prevention
program and should continue indefinitely. The grant will provide for start up costs only. The start up project
will include enough materials for 4 fire prevention teams to be activated at the same time during this fire
season by training 50 team members and 10 team leaders. Partners include Washington and Oregon Fire
Marshall’s offices, fire districts, and Pacific Northwest Wildfire Coordinating Group member Agencies.
The connection to the National fire plan for reducing costly catastrophic fires is clearly evident. The need to
activate teams for the 2002 fire season is urgent and ties well with the educational needs of getting
communities excited about creating Firewise Communities. The timeline for implementation includes a
complete training session in June, preparing prevention materials before June, 2002, and team mobilization
during July through October, 2002.
There are two main outcomes realized by this proposal. The first outcome will be a complete community
hazard risk assessment and mitigation plan for impacted communities and adjacent watersheds at risk durning
an incident. This plan will include inputs from a Washington Incident Management team, local government,
and Agency adminstrators. The risk mitigation plan will outline short term strategies to be implemented by
the team and long term strategies to be implemented after the incident. Short term strategies will include
identification of at risk homes for a structure protection plan, transportion routes for an evacuation plan, and
recommenations for public use restrictions to prevent additional fire starts. Long term strategies include
identification of potential fuel reduction areas, local building ordinances, burn bans, and other ignition
reduction strategies as needed. The second outcome will be the reduction of unwanted fires through the use of
education and coordinated public use restrictions during periods of high fire danger.
Enclosure 3B (Page 2 of 3) - Project Evaluation Criteria
Applications for funding must include narrative responses that address the following four criteria. Within each criterion, subcriteria are listed in descending order of importance. Limit your responses to the areas provided.
1. Reducing Fire Risk. (40 points))
A. Describe how the proposal promotes reduction of risk in high hazard areas or communities.
B. Describe how the proposed project benefits resources on federal land or adjacent non-federal land, or how it protects the safety
of communities.
C. To what extent does the project implement or create a cooperative fuels treatment plan or community fire strategy (include
evidence of the plan if it already exists)?
D. Explain to what extent the affected community or proponent has been involved or plans to involve the affected community in a
qualified fuels education program (e.g., FIREWISE).
E. Explain how the proposal (a) leads to, enhances or restores a local fire-adapted ecosystem, and/or (b) mitigates or leads to the
mitigation of hazardous fuel conditions.
F. How will the proposed treatments be maintained over time?
Response:
Complex wildfire incidents provide a "teachable moment” to provide education and a reason to organize for
communities and landowners in watersheds at risk The incident and the associated risk assessment provide
an incentive for communities, landowners, local government, and agencies to begin long term coordinated
planning for suppression response, and mitigation strategies. Since most fires in Washington involve federal
managed lands, we feel this strategy will tie well to future landscape level federal fuel management projects.
The long-term outcome will be improved local and regional infrastructure establishment to help reduce risk of
catastrophic fires. We anticipate this process will result in future fuel reduction projects and Firewise
workshop requests.
2. Increasing local capacity. (30 points)
A. How would the proposal improve or lead to the improvement of the local economy in terms of jobs and sustainable economic
activity? How many jobs are expected to be created or retained and for how long (please distinguish between essentially yearround and seasonal jobs)?
B. To what extent will this project be offered to serve as a model for other communities?
C. Will biomass or forest fuels be utilized; if so, in what manner and how much?
Response:
In most cases, teams will be formed utilizing local interagency resources to provide local knowledge
assessments and ties to future needs. We also plan to hire local staff to fill team positions. During the 2001
fire season, up to four local teachers were hired to assist in Incident information. We expect to repeat this
strategy for 2002 by hiring up to four locals per incident.
During the 2001 fire season, high-risk communities were threatened or impacted by wildfire incidents. This
proposal provides an alternative strategy that can lead to wildfire risk assessment planning and mitigation
projects. The resulting plans will be used as a model for other communities and landscapes at risk.
Enclosure 3B (Page 3 of 3) - Project Evaluation Criteria
3. Increasing interagency and intergovernmental coordination. (15 Points)
A. Describe how this project implements a local intergovernmental strategy plan, or creates such a plan. Describe the plan if it
already exists.
B. Explain the level of cooperation, coordination or strategic planning among federal, state, tribal, local government and
community organizations. List the cooperators.
Response:
Interagency cooperation is high. The Washington Geographic board supports the use of prevention teams and
has approved a plan to mobilize prevention teams during the 2002 fire season. Partners include Washington
DNR, Federal Wildfire Agencies and the Washington State Fire Marshall.
Team candidates will be recruited from all geographic board member agencies so that all level of agency
expertise and local knowledge is assured. Agency administrators will provide prevention team direction to
through the Incident Management delegation of authority. The Interagency Incident Team provides
oversight, Logistical and financial support.
4. Expanding Community Participation. (15 Points)
A. To what extent have interested people and communities been provided an opportunity to become informed and involved in this
proposal?
B. Describe the extent of local support for the project, including any cost-sharing arrangements.
C. What are the environmental, social and educational benefits of the project?
Response:
This proposal was developed with support from the Pacific Northwest Wildfire Coordinating Group Fire
Prevention Working Team. A plan for mobilizing prevention teams with Washington Interagency Incident
Management teams has been approved by the Washington Geographic Board for the 2002 fire season. Cash
and in kind contributions from the partners include wages to atttend training, equipment, notably computers
for team use, and prevention materials created during the 2001 fire season. Salaries and travel expenses for
team mobilization will be absorbed in fire suppression costs.
The training session will include slots for Oregon and Washington members to attend. Currently, trained
team members may be shared between states under the Master agreement. Outreach for training and
recruitment will be conducted by the PNWCG prevention working team, DNR and ODF.
Enclosure 3C - Project Work Form
Tasks
Time Frame
Responsible Party
Grant agreements signed
June, 2002
WADNR, and awarding agency.
Update Prevention materials
May, June, 2002
WADNR
Prevention Team training session
June, 2002
WADNR
Teams mobilized
July - October, 2002
Washington Geographic Board
member agencies.
!Unexpected End of Formula
Enclosure 3D Project Budget
Cost Category
Description
Federal
Agency
Personnel
Training organization,
attendance
WADNR
Partner 1
Partner 2
$21900.00
Subtotal
$21900
$0.00
$0.00
Total
$0.00
$21900.00
$0.00
$21900.00
$0.00
$0.00
$0.00
$0.00
Fringe Benefits
Subtotal
Travel
Lodging, meals
Training
room rental
rental
training room
Subtotal
$0.00
$0.00
$3400
$8750
$12,150.00
$850.00
$0.00
$0.00
$0.00
$0.00
$0.00
$0.00
$4250.00
$8750.00
$13,000.00
Equipment
Subtotal
Supplies
Student materials
Prevention
Prevention supplies
supplies
Subtotal
Contractual
Instructor fees
Subtotal
$0.00
$12000
$15000
$27000
$14,000
$14,000.00
$0.00
$0.00
$0.00
$0.00
$0.00
$0.00
$0.00
$0.00
$27000.00
$0.00
$0.00
$0.00
$17,750.00
$0.00
$17,750.00
$3,750.00
$0.00
$0.00
$0.00
$0.00
$0.00
Other
Subtotal
$0.00
$0.00
$0.00
$0.00
$0.00
$0.00
$0.00
$0.00
Total Costs
$53150.00
$26,500.00
$0.00*
$0.00
$79650.00
Project (Program) Income1
(using deductive alternative)
$0.00
*No partner expenses are shown as we do not know the agency make up of the teams until they are trained and formed.
1
Program income is the gross revenue generated by a grant or cooperative agreement supported activity during the life of
the grant. Program income can be made by recipients from fees charged for conference or workshop attendance, from rental
fees earned from renting out real property or equipment acquired with grant or cooperative agreement funds, or from the sale
of commodities or items developed under the grant or cooperative agreement. The use of Program Income during the
project period may require prior approval by the granting agency.