ID Number 2007-104
Fuels Treatment Projects Application
NATIONAL FIRE PLAN COMMUNITY ASSISTANCE AND WILDLAND URBAN INTERFACE PROJECTS
Applicant
Applicant/Organization:
Keno Rural Fire Protection District
Type of Applicant:
G (Unknown)
Email:
firechief@kenofire.com
Phone:
541-883-3062
FAX:
541-883-5844
Please Call Ahead for FAX:
Off
Please Call Ahead for FAX:
Off
Address (Street or P. O. Box, City, State, Zip):
PO Box 10 Keno, OR 97627
Project Coordinator
Project Coordinator (Name and Title):
Chief John Ketchum, Fire Chief
Organization/Jurisdiction:
Keno Rural Fire Protection District
Email:
firechief@kenofire.com
Phone:
541-883-3062
FAX:
541-883-5844
Project Information
Project Title:
Keno Fuels Treatment Project
Project Location:
Keno Rural Fire Protection District, Keno, Oregon
County:
Klamath
Congressional District:
2
Latitude:
42.17547
Longitude:
121.972
State the desired outcome in relation to NFP Goals and the Community Wildfire Protection Plan (CWPP). Project Objectives:
The desired outcome is maximize the treatment of hazard fuels in the fire district following a strategy of priorities. The priority for treatments will be: 1.
property with structures/residences/improvements at risk to wildfire, 2. property without structures/residences/improvements but adjacent to properties
defined in 1., and 3. additional properties that will enable combining treatment areas to form strategic locations of reduced fire behavior potential to
maximize the accomplishment of priorities 1. and 2.
Name of CWPP:
Keno CWPP
Name of Communit(y/ies) at Risk:
Keno and Lakewoods Village
Proposed Project Start Date:
10/01/2006
Federal Funding Request:
$153,920.00
Are you submitting multiple projects?
Yes
Proposed Project End Date:
09/30/2007
Total Project Cost:
$186,992.00
If YES indicate the relationship of the projects to one
another:
S (Sequential)
If YES, please list the titles of projects by priority and briefly explain their relationship.
This project is sequential. Fuels treatments commenced on the Keno RFPD in 2002 and has continued to date. The fuels treatment funds requested in this
application would be expended on fuels mitigation work as a result of extensive fuels mapping inventory and imagery supervision conducted with other grant
funds. On-going efforts to develop a Klamath County CWPP will benefit from the technology brought to bear on the Keno CWPP.
Name of Federal, State or Tribal contact with whom you coordinated this proposal: Organization/Jurisdiction:
1) Dave Goheen
Phone
US Fish and Wildlife Service
530-667-2231
2) Joe Foran
Phone
Bureau of Land Management
541-883-6860
3) Joy Augustine
Phone
Email dave_goheen@fws.gov
Email jforan@or.blm.gov
US Forest Service
541-885-3410
Email jaugustine@fs.fed.us
Project Planning Information
Name of Local Coordinating Group:
Klamath County LCG
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?
This project is in coordination and cooperation with the developing Klamath County CWPP.
List federal lands that are adjacent to the project and proximity.
Adjacent lands managed by USFWS, BLM and USFS.
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?
No
Please indicate planned treatments and associated acres:
Treatment
Thinning
Acres
200
Treatment
Mastication/Mowing
Acres
50
Treatment
Hand Pile
Acres
175
Treatment
Hand Pile Burn
Acres
175
If you have a treatment type other than standard types above:
Treatment
chipping
Acres
25
Treatment
Acres
0
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:
The CWPP strategy for Keno, by priority is: properties with residents/structures, properties adjacent to the first
priority, and properties that when treated add to the zone of tactical opportunity. The overall strategy of treatment is
to protect the improvements made by owner investment that makes up the community. Keno, as a rural community,
has a sense of value focused on it's rural setting. This fuels project will continue to implement the CWPP strategy as
have previously awarded grants. The Keno fire district has a proven record of fuels reduction accomplishment.
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:
Utilizing satellite imagery and ground forest inventory sampling, the Keno CWPP has used the best available
technology to identify and map areas of increased fire behavior potential. The areas with increased surface fuel
loading,ladder fuels and stand density are prioritized for treatment. Reduction of surface fire behavior intensity is
accomplished by hand piling and burning, chipping and/or mastication of the surface fuels. Canopy base height is
raised by removing ladder fuels by pruning. Canopy bulk density is reduced by thinning. The result is increased
capacity for district resources.
C. Explain how the project is designed to reduce smoke production impacts that affect public health. (10 points)
Response:
Where possible, alternative treatments that do not involve burning are applied. Chipping and mastication have been
used to mitigate hazard fuels without burning. When burning is prescribed, it has been done under conditions that
support rapid and active combustion of hand piles to minimize the smoke production. Weather conditions are
monitored to burn under good transport and dispersion conditions. Utilization opportunities have never been ruled out.
To date, no utilization opportunity has presented itself. Chips have been utilized for grass suppression along roadways.
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:
The Keno fuels project continues to employ fuels crew personnel that were not in the traditional fire department
personnel. Continued funding of the fuels reduction projects will continue to employ local individuals. Local
contractors with mastication equipment have been used and will be sought for future fuels projects. The Keno fuels
treatment accomplishments to date have the attention of other departments/agencies currently developing a countywide CWPP.
B. Will biomass that is produced by the project be utilized; if so, in what manner and how much? (10 points)
Response:
Biomass utilization is, and shall continue to be, a priority. To date, no economically viable options have been
exploited. Through the development of a county-wide CWPP there may be opportunity to leverage market
commodity. The Keno RFPD is an active member in the local coordination group that will explore market utilization
opportunities. The local biomass utilization market has not been strong.
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:
The Keno fuels reduction project has been the most active project of it's type in Klamath County at the fire district
level. The Keno fire district has been a very active member of the local coordination group that has gained momentum
in 2005. Adjacent agencies, USFWS/BLM/USFS/ODF, have been supportive of the project. The local community
supports the project as evidenced by the highest level of public support experienced in the last 20+ years. Other fire
capacity projects are in progress.
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:
The Keno RFPD supplies monetary, personnel and equipment support to this project. Past and future fuels treatment
projects are coordinated with adjacent federal and state projects. Partner agencies include: US Fish and Wildlife
Service, the Bureau of Land Management, the U.S. Forest Service and the Oregon Department of Forestry. Maximum
benefit from adjacent projects has been accomplished by sharing work across boundaries.
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:
The project budget areas for this grant application are based on several years of funded and accomplished fuels
mitigation projects. The Keno fire district owns and provides the equipment used for fuels reduction projects
including: chainsaws, pruning saws, and a diesel chipper. The district cost-shares the fixed maintenance costs of this
equipment. A type 6 wildland engine is cost-shared for burning support with the fire district picking up 77% of the
equipment cost. All planning and support costs for this project are funded by a Title III grant. A overhead assessment
of 3% is charged. Funds derived by this, and past, NFP grant applications is put into on-the-ground fuels reduction
work.
Project Work Form
Tasks
Continued Fuels Treatments: establish list of
properties to treat in FY 07.
Maintain text and photo-documentation of fuels
reduction activities for use in public education and
project documentation.
Continue and improve monitoring and collaboration
with other county, state and federal
agencies/departments.
Maintain contact and education opportunities with
the public.
Time Frame
Responsible Party
FY 06
KRFPD Fire Chief and KRFPD Wildland Fuels
Specialist
FY 06 and 07
KRFPD Fire Chief and KRFPD Wildland Fuels
Specialist
FY 06 and FY 07
KRFPD Fire Chief and KRFPD Wildland Fuels
Specialist
FY 06 and 07
KRFPD Fire Chief and KRFPD Wildland Fuels
Specialist
Project Budget
Cost Category
Description
Federal
Agency
Applicant
Partner 1
Partner 2
Partner 3
Total
Personnel
$0.00
$78,000.00
$0.00
$0.00
$0.00
$78,000.00
$0.00
$0.00
$0.00
$0.00
$0.00
$0.00
$0.00
$78,000.00
$0.00
$0.00
$0.00
$78,000.00
$0.00
$15,600.00
$0.00
$0.00
$0.00
$15,600.00
$0.00
$0.00
$0.00
$0.00
$0.00
$0.00
$0.00
$15,600.00
$0.00
$0.00
$0.00
$15,600.00
$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
$15,600.00
$29,952.00
$0.00
$0.00
$45,552.00
$0.00
$10,400.00
$0.00
$0.00
$0.00
$10,400.00
$0.00
$26,000.00
$29,952.00
$0.00
$0.00
$55,952.00
$0.00
$2,080.00
$0.00
$0.00
$0.00
$2,080.00
$0.00
$0.00
$0.00
$0.00
$0.00
$0.00
$0.00
$2,080.00
$0.00
$0.00
$0.00
$2,080.00
Slashbuster/Contractors
$0.00
$28,080.00
$3,120.00
$0.00
$0.00
$31,200.00
landowner cost share
$0.00
$4,160.00
$0.00
$0.00
$0.00
$4,160.00
$0.00
$32,240.00
$3,120.00
$0.00
$0.00
$35,360.00
$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
Total Costs
$0.00
$153,920.00
$33,072.00
$0.00
$0.00
$186,992.00
Project (Program) Income 1
(using deductive alternative)
$0.00
$0.00
$0.00
$0.00
$0.00
$0.00
Keno RFPD
Subtotal
Fringe Benefits
Keno RFPD OPE 20%
Subtotal
Travel
Subtotal
Equipment
Vehicles
Subtotal
Supplies
equipment mtce/repair
Subtotal
Contractual
Subtotal
Other
Subtotal
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.