ID Number 2007-34
Fuels Treatment Projects Application
NATIONAL FIRE PLAN COMMUNITY ASSISTANCE AND WILDLAND URBAN INTERFACE PROJECTS
Applicant
Applicant/Organization:
Upper Deschutes River Natural Resource Coalition (UDRNRC)
Type of Applicant:
L (Nonprofit Organization)
Email:
jim.king@udrnrc.org
Phone:
541-593-9393
FAX:
541-593-9393
Please Call Ahead for FAX:
Off
Please Call Ahead for FAX:
Off
Address (Street or P. O. Box, City, State, Zip):
PO Box 3042 Sunriver, OR 97707
Project Coordinator
Project Coordinator (Name and Title):
Mr. Jim King, President of UDRNRC
Organization/Jurisdiction:
Collective of 13 Upper Deschutes River neighborhoods
Email:
jim.king@udrnrc.org
Phone:
541-593-9393
FAX:
541-593-9393
Project Information
Project Title:
UDRNRC Fuels Reduction Project
Project Location:
Upper Deschutes River Watershed
County:
Deschutes
Congressional District:
2
Latitude:
43.51
Longitude:
121.27
State the desired outcome in relation to NFP Goals and the Community Wildfire Protection Plan (CWPP). Project Objectives:
The UDRNRC – a grass roots collective of 13 neighborhoods – seeks funding to conduct hazardous fuels reduction in the highest risk areas of 5
neighborhoods. All 5 neighborhoods are classified by Oregon Department of Forestry (ODF) as “Extreme” or “High Density Extreme” and as of 1/1/06, 67%
of all lots (2742 of 3974) and 86% of undeveloped lots (1931 of 2250) remain at “extreme risk” for fire. Our long term goal is to have 100% compliance with
ODF (SB 360) standards.
Name of CWPP:
Community Wildfire Protection Plan of the Upper Deschutes River Natural Resource
Name of Communit(y/ies) at Risk:
DRRHS #1-6 and 9, OWW #I and II, River Forest Acres
Proposed Project Start Date:
04/01/2007
Federal Funding Request:
$199,200.00
Are you submitting multiple projects?
Yes
Proposed Project End Date:
09/30/2008
Total Project Cost:
$459,200.00
If YES indicate the relationship of the projects to one
another:
A (Stand Alone)
If YES, please list the titles of projects by priority and briefly explain their relationship.
Priority #1:UDRNRC Fuels Reduction Project, Priority #2:UDRNRC Fuels Utilization Project. The fuels obtained from the reduction project will be utilized
by the Silvan biomass plant in the utilization project to produce electricity as an alternative to chipping and burning. This will allow more overall acres to be
accomplished for fuels reduction. It will also lower local air pollution and produce a net reduction in greenhouse gasses as well as providing for more local
jobs.
Name of Federal, State or Tribal contact with whom you coordinated this proposal: Organization/Jurisdiction:
Central Oregon Fire Management Services/Prineville
1) Lisa Clark
Phone
541-416-6864
Deputy District Ranger, Deschutes NF
2) Robin Vora
Phone
541-383-4766
Email rvora@fs.fed.us
Oregon Department of Forestry/Prineville
3) Stu Otto
Phone
Email lmclark@or.blm.gov
541-447-5658
Email sotto@odf.state.or.us
Project Planning Information
Name of Local Coordinating Group:
Central Oregon Fire Council
For this project, explain the level of cooperation, coordination or strategic planning, through a "Local Coordination Group." If you have not worked with a
local coordination group, why not?
UDRNRC meets monthly with a fuels steering committee including representatives from ODF, BLM, USFS.
List federal lands that are adjacent to the project and proximity.
All 5 neighborhoods are immediately adjacent to the USFS and BLM.
A) Is there a current hazardous fuels treatment or one that is planned in the next three years on federal land that is adjacent to this project?
Yes
B) Specifically is this project adjacent to a current prescribed burn project or one that is planned in the next three years on Forest Service lands?
Yes
Please indicate planned treatments and associated acres:
Treatment
Thinning
Acres
372
Treatment
Mastication/Mowing
Acres
98
Treatment
Biomass Removal
Acres
372
Treatment
Acres
Treatment
Acres
0
If you have a treatment type other than standard types above:
Treatment
Chipper Services
Acres
274
Project Evaluation Criteria
Applications for funding must include narrative responses that address the following criteria. Be sure you address every one briefly, yet thoroughly.
1. Reducing Hazardous Fuels (40 points)
A. Describe the community infrastructure that will be protected. This should include how this project implements all or part of the CWPP strategy. (15
points)
Response:
This project implements the Private Lands Part (part C, pg. 16) of our CWPP. The extreme risk neighborhoods are:
DRRHS #1-6 and 9, OWW #I and II and River Forest Acres. The estimated value is over $5 million. This includes
roads, over 1630 homes, 5 community water systems, utility lines and a new sewer treatment plant. Adjacent to these
areas are the Sunriver and Crosswater resorts, commercial areas and community facilities that are essential to the
economic viability of the area. These neighborhoods are in the Wild and Scenic River Corridor which provides
aesthetic and recreation value.
B. Explain how the proposal reduces fire behavior in high hazard areas by describing the fuels to be disposed or removed, the techniques and timing of the
treatments, and the treatment location relative to the values to be protected. (15 points)
Response:
Current vegetation consists of heavily overstocked stands; with Ponderosa Pine in the overstory and Lodgepole and
bitterbrush in the understory. The best available fire risk data indicates 587 acres in Fire Regime Condition Class 2 or
3 and 547 acres with high, very high or extreme Crown Fire Potential. The goal is to convert the thick overstory to
open stands of Ponderosa with an understory of grass. The homeowners will create a 30' fuel break around their home
and periodic chipper services will be provided. Contractors will create a larger scale fuel break by treating blocks of
vacant lots.
C. Explain how the project is designed to reduce smoke production impacts that affect public health. (10 points)
Response:
The plan is to provide an alternative to the current practice of burning piles. The project will provide chipper services
to individual land owners and either spread the chips back on the property or remove them to local compost sites or a
developing biomass plant. Biomass from the contracted services will be similarly removed or utilized.
2. Increasing Local Capacity (20 points)
A. How would the implementation of the proposed project improve or lead to the improvement of the local economy in terms of jobs and sustainable
economic activity assuming that these grant funds would be used as "seed monies" for future projects. i.e. How many community supported jobs would be
created and for how long would they expect to last? (10 points)
Response:
UDRNRC is committed to using local contractors for the fuels reduction projects. UDRNRC has been instrumental in
introducing community-based-forestry concepts and models to south Deschutes County. UDRNRC took the
leadership role in putting on a large community meeting in January 2006 to build support for the biomass plant and
community based forestry practices. We expect to employ 8 full-time contract workers that will be utilized for 130
workdays.
B. Will biomass that is produced by the project be utilized; if so, in what manner and how much? (10 points)
Response:
UDRNRC was an early and strong supporter of Silvan Power Company’s plans to develop a power generating
biomass plant in Lapine. We testified to their financial backers and provided both research and consultation related to
their efforts to secure long term agreements with the USFS. It is our hope that their plant will be operational and
utilize most of the biomass generated by this project as well as thinning projects on National Forest lands that are in
response to our CWPP.
3. Demonstrating Community and Intergovernmental Collaboration (20 Points)
A. Describe how this project has been collaborated and coordinated with adjacent landowners, local/state/Tribal/federal agencies, and community groups
such as neighborhood associations. (10 points)
Response:
UDRNRC is the umbrella organization of 13 neighborhoods and has been meeting monthly since November 2003 to
address mutual concerns about fire risk. UDRNRC has started a number of citizen-based initiatives related to
reforming fire prevention policies and practices. Strong partnerships have been established with USFS, BLM,
COFMS, ODF, Lapine State Park, Deschutes County, Lapine Rural Fire District and the adjacent Sunriver Resort Fire
Prevention Program.
B. Describe the communities/partners contributions to this project such as: cash or in-kind contributions, cost share agreements, equipment, or labor
(including volunteer work). (10 points)
Response:
Projected are 11,000hrs of sweat equity by the 600 owners to cut and stack debris near roadways for chipper services.
1000hrs by 100 owners preparing for contract services. 500hrs for neighborhood recruitment/coordination. 250hrs for
UDRNRC coordination. 100hrs each by COFMS and ODF. Deschutes Co. hours for technical assistance and
treatment of County owned lots. Possible assistance from Lapine Rural Fire District. Additional time/costs by MidState Electric and Road Districts for treatment.
4. Managing Cost Efficiency (20 points)
Discuss the process you used to arrive at your cost structure for the main Project Budget areas such as personnel, equipment, supplies and other (i.e.
overhead). In your response please justify: cost per acre, purchase of equipment, percent of overhead, percent of partner or matching funds, and portion of
administration cost. (20 points)
Response:
As primarily a citizen driven volunteer effort, the Coalition is committed to maximizing the use of fuels reduction
funds for actual “on the ground” work. The budget assumptions are as follows: Fuels treatment resources: 1)Chipper
services offered to all owners of “at risk” lots - 2740 at risk lots x 20% expected utilization means 548 1/2 acre lots at
10 lots/day @ $1250/day = $68,000 for 274 acres 2)98 acres of contract services @ $1000/acre = $98,000 (45 acres
(approximately 90 lots) in DRRHS #1-5 & 9, 23 acres (approximately 46 lots) in OWW II, 15 acres (approximately 30
lots) in DRRHS #6, 10 acres (approximately 20 lots) in OWW I, 5 acres (approximately 10 lots) in River Forest
Acres). Coordination: 5% administrative costs = $8,300 (3% Coalition (UDRNRC) administrative costs = $4,980, 2%
Coalition (UDRNRC) and neighborhood coordination = $3,320) 5% Project Field Coordinator = $8,300, 10% NECS
(Grant and Contract Coordination) = $16,600 Total: $199,200
Project Work Form
Tasks
Prioritization of treatments
Time Frame
Fall 2006
Responsible Party
Fuels Steering Committee
Recruit and Train Contractors
Winter 2007
Northwest Environmental Consulting Services
Establish Schedule of Chipper Services
Winter 2007
Neighborhood Coordinators
Winter/Spring 2007
Neighborhood Coordinators
Neighborhood letters and recruitment
Layout and Flag Neighborhood Projects
Spring 2007
Northwest Environmental Consulting Services and
Neighborhood Coordinators
Contract for Chipper Services and Contracts for
Contractor Services
Spring 2007
Northwest Environmental Consulting Services
Provide Chipper Services to all 5 neighborhoods
and implement Contracts for Neighborhoods
Spring - Fall 2007
Promote Owner Maintenance
Fall + 2007
Contractors with Northwest Environmental
Consulting Services supervision
Association Leadership and Upper Deschutes River
Natural Resource Coalition
Project Budget
Cost Category
Description
Federal
Agency
Applicant
Landowners
ODF
Deschutes Co.
Partner 1
Partner 2
Partner 3
Total
Personnel
$8,300.00
$35,000.00
$0.00
$2,000.00
$2,000.00
$47,300.00
$0.00
$0.00
$220,000.00
$0.00
$0.00
$220,000.00
$8,300.00
$35,000.00
$220,000.00
$2,000.00
$2,000.00
$267,300.00
$0.00
$0.00
$0.00
$0.00
$0.00
$0.00
$0.00
$0.00
$0.00
$0.00
$0.00
$0.00
$0.00
$0.00
$0.00
$0.00
$0.00
$0.00
$0.00
$0.00
$0.00
$0.00
$0.00
$0.00
$0.00
$0.00
$0.00
$0.00
$0.00
$0.00
$0.00
$0.00
$0.00
$0.00
$0.00
$0.00
$0.00
$0.00
$0.00
$0.00
$0.00
$0.00
$0.00
$0.00
$0.00
$0.00
$0.00
$0.00
$0.00
$0.00
$0.00
$0.00
$0.00
$0.00
$0.00
$1,000.00
$0.00
$0.00
$0.00
$1,000.00
$0.00
$0.00
$0.00
$0.00
$0.00
$0.00
$0.00
$1,000.00
$0.00
$0.00
$0.00
$1,000.00
Fuels Reduction Contract
$98,000.00
$0.00
$0.00
$0.00
$0.00
$98,000.00
Chipper Contract
$68,000.00
$0.00
$0.00
$0.00
$0.00
$68,000.00
$166,000.00
$0.00
$0.00
$0.00
$0.00
$166,000.00
$8,300.00
$0.00
$0.00
$0.00
$0.00
$8,300.00
$16,600.00
$0.00
$0.00
$0.00
$0.00
$16,600.00
$24,900.00
$0.00
$0.00
$0.00
$0.00
$24,900.00
$199,200.00
$36,000.00
$220,000.00
$2,000.00
$2,000.00
$459,200.00
$0.00
$0.00
$0.00
$0.00
$0.00
$0.00
Administration
Volunteer Labor
Subtotal
Fringe Benefits
Subtotal
Travel
Subtotal
Equipment
Subtotal
Supplies
Office
Subtotal
Contractual
Subtotal
Other
Project Field Coordinator
Grant Coordination
Subtotal
Total Costs
Project (Program) Income 1
(using deductive alternative)
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.