Enclosure 3A - Project Summary Form
14
NATIONAL FIRE PLAN COMMUNITY ASSISTANCE AND WILDLAND URBAN INTERFACE PROJECTS
Application for Fuels Treatment Projects
Applicant
Applicant/Organization:
Keno Rural Fire Protection District
Phone:
Type of Applicant: (enter appropriate letter in box)
G
503- 883-3062
FAX:
A. State
B. County
C. Municipal
D. Township
E. Interstate
F. Intermunicipal
G. Special District
503-884-5844
Email:
firechief@kenofire.com
H. Independent School District
I. State-Controlled Institution of Higher Learning
J. Private University
K. Indian Tribe
L. Nonprofit Organization
M. Other (Specify) _
Address (Street or P. O. Box, City, State, Zip):
P.O. Box 10, Keno, OR 97627
Project Coordinator
Project Coordinator (Name and Title):
John Ketchum, Fire Chief
Organization/Jurisdiction:
Keno Rural Fire Protection District
Phone:
FAX:
Email:
541-883-3062
541-883-5844
firechief@kenofire.com
Project Information
Project Title:
Keno Rural Fire Protection District Fuels Treatment
Proposed Project Start Date:
Proposed Project End Date:
October 2004
September 2005
Federal Funding Request:
$148,800.00
Total Project Cost:
$179,800.00
Are you submitting multiple projects? If so, please prioritize, and explain if the projects are stand alone, sequential or other:
Yes. This project is sequential; it is to continue an on-going fuels treatment program.
Brief Project Summary: Who, What, Where, Desired Outcomes in relation to NFP Goals and Community Risk Assessment and
Mitigation Plans (This should summarize page 2).
This project is the hand and mechanical fuels reduction work being performed by employees of the
Keno Rural Fire Protection District and contractors. The work is being done on private property to
lower fire behavior potentials to more readily managed levels. Treatment locations are being
prioritized based on strategic planning for contiguous areas of lowered fire behavior potential.
Maintenance of the treatment areas into the future will be addressed in an on-going management
plan funded by another source. Values at risk include about 2000 structures, mostly residential, in
a rural wooded setting.
Project Location:
County:
Federal Congressional District:
Keno
Klamath
Second
Name of Federal, State or Tribal contact with whom you coordinated this proposal:
Telephone number of Contact:
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service – Dave Goheen
530-667-2231
Enclosure 3A (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 (e.g., Watershed,
Address
neighboring community)
these items
as applicable:  anticipated outcomes

project relationship to the community risk assessment and
mitigation plan
 amount or extent of actions (acres, number of homes, etc.)
 community partners and their
 project timeline and matching or contributed funds
role(s)
 proponent’s ability to complete project
For this project, explain the level of cooperation, coordination or strategic planning, through a “Local Coordination
Group.” If you haven’t worked with a local coordination group, why not?
Project location: Fuels reduction work will be accomplished in the 44 square-mile Keno Rural Fire
Protection District (KRFPD) in and adjacent to Keno. The community of Keno is a rural community
surrounded by public and private forest land. Keno, which has been identified in the Federal
Register as a community at risk, is located within 1.5 miles of a National Wildlife Refuge. The
species composition of the forest is predominantly Ponderosa pine, with Douglas-fir and western
juniper and associated brush and grass. The fire district bounds directly with the Bear Valley
project of U.S. Fish and Wildlife.
Anticipated outcomes: Continue fuels reduction treatments on a priority basis to meet the
objective of reducing overall fire behavior potential throughout the fire district. Properties for
treatment will be prioritized by the Keno Fire Chief based on fuel loading, arrangement and
alignment with other hazardous fuel pockets. A strategic philosophy will drive the prioritization of
treatment sites.
Community Partners and their roles: Planning was initiated between the Keno Fire Protection
District and personnel from the U.S. Forest Service, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Bureau of Land
Management, Klamath County and the Oregon Department of Forestry. KRFPD has coordinated
fuels treatments with adjacent U.S. Fish and Wildlife projects and has extended the treatments
across property boundaries.
Project relationship to the community risk and mitigation plan: The KRFPD has obtained Title
III grant monies to develop a community risk assessment and mitigation plan. This plan is in
progress via contracted services and will result in a long-term fuels management plan for the fire
district to maintain the effectiveness of hazard fuel treatments into the future.
Extent of actions: Since 2002 184 home sites have been treated resulting in 373 acres of
hazardous fuels reduced to a low fire spread potential.
Project timeline and matching or contributed funds: If funded, this project would be
accomplished during the 2005 field season. As a cost-share resource the KRFPD would provide a
wildland engine to assist other agencies in fire suppression efforts.
Proponent’s ability to complete project: The KRFPD has made steady progress in 2002 and
2003 with available funds. Personnel and equipment have been added to the department to
accomplish completed work. With additional funding, additional work will be accomplished.
Enclosure 3A (Page 2 of 3) - Project Evaluation Criteria
Applications for funding must include narrative responses that address the following three criteria. Be sure you address every one
briefly, yet thoroughly. Limit your responses to the area provided.
1. Reducing Hazardous Fuels (50 points)
A. Describe the community infrastructure that will be protected.
B. Explain how the proposal reduces fire behavior in high hazard areas by describing the fuels to be disposed or
removed, and the techniques and timing of the treatments.
C. How will the proposed treatments be maintained in future years?
D. How will you use multi-party monitoring to improve this and future projects?
Response:
A. The community of Keno is a rural community located in a fire-dependent Ponderosa
pine ecosystem. Keno is located in south-central Oregon, a region of high annual wildfire
occurrence from natural and human ignitions. Succession of associated tree and brush species
has developed to a stocking level and condition class that can readily support high intensity
wildfires. A fuel condition class of high 2 and 3 exists throughout the district. This hazard is
exacerbated by the presence of over 2000 homes, related structures and property.
B. The focus of the fuels reduction work in this project has been to strategically identify the sites of
highest priority (highest hazard) and reduce the fuel loading and arrangement on those parcels.
Adjacent parcels of high hazard fuels were identified for treatment to “connect” the treatment acres
into larger blocks of reduced fire hazard. The project priority has been to treat logical locations that
create future tactical opportunities, while moving toward more treatment acres in the future.
C. The long term goal is to maintain the effectiveness of the current treatment investments and
enable lower cost maintenance treatments into the future that are affordable to the fire district.
Project accomplishment has moved the vegetation to a state that would promote a healthy,
vigorous vegetative community. Stocking level has been reduced through thinning, ladder fuels
reduced by pruning, and surface fuel loading and continuity reduced by hand piling, chipping and
burning of hand piles and fuel concentrations. The result is a forest plant community that is much
more likely to survive a wildfire event while reducing the ultimate threat to people, property and
natural resources.
D. Coordination with U.S. Fish and Wildlife fire managers continues to guide monitoring. This
projects shares boundary with the Bear Valley USFWS fuels management project.
Enclosure 3A (Page 3 of 3) - Project Evaluation Criteria
2.
Increasing Local Capacity (25 points)
A. How would the proposal improve or lead to the improvement of the local economy in terms of jobs and
sustainable economic activity?
B. How many jobs are expected to be created or retained and for how long? (Please distinguish between
essentially year-round and seasonal jobs).
C. What tools and skills will be gained or utilized as a result of this project?
D. Will biomass be utilized; if so, in what manner and how much?
Response:
This project will lead to improvement of the local economy by continuing to offer work opportunities
for a growing number of local contractors engaged in fuels reduction activities. The contract
“Slashbuster” work employed local contractors. Local public support of the project has resulted in
more landowners participating.
The KRFPD employed a 5-6 person fuels crew (3-4 effective/day) through the 2003 field season.
These seasonal employees gained skills in fuels reduction work with chain saws, pruning saws, and
a chipper. Professional sawyers administered training for the crew. This crew also received
wildland fire training and responded to wildland fires and other public assistance calls. These job
skills have prepared these employees to better compete for more permanent fire employment.
Although the material being removed from the fuels profile is not of merchantable value, any
opportunity to utilize biomass would be considered. Landowners would be directed to local
industrial utilization opportunities via Oregon Department of Forestry foresters.
3.
Demonstrating Community and Intergovernmental Collaboration (25 Points)
A. How will this project implement a community risk assessment and mitigation plan? Include name of plan, date
it was prepared, and local contact to get a copy of the plan if requested.
B. How has this treatment been coordinated with adjacent landowners and local/State/Tribal/Federal agencies?
C. Identify the cooperators/partners involved in implementation of this project.
D. Describe the extent of current local support for the project, including any cost-sharing agreements.
Response:
A. The KRFPD has contracted the development of a risk assessment and mitigation plan. This plan
is in-progress and expected to be completed in 2004. Information about this plan can be acquired
from John Ketchum, Fire Chief, KRFPD.
B. The fuels treatments have been coordinated with the adjacent Federal landowner, the U.S. Fish
and Wildlife Service. Arrangements were made to utilize equipment under contract to that agency
on private land across the boundary saving move-in costs to the department. Local and Regional
personnel from the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service have actively supported and visited the project
sites.
C. The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service has been involved with this project since the start. The chief
was invited to the Region 1 FWS FMO meeting in 2003 to present this project as an example of a
successful WUI effort. This project was featured in several federal WUI publications.
D. As more acres have been treated the local support for the project has grown. Many citizens
have contacted the Chief to inquire about acquiring fuels treatment on their property after viewing
the results of completed work sites. Constituent support for the fire district has never been higher.
Enclosure 3A - Project Work Form
Tasks
Time Frame
Responsible Party
Continued Fuels Treatments:
establish list of properties to treat
in FY 05
As FY 04 treatments are being
completed in Summer 2004.
KRFPD
Maintain text and photodocumentation of fuels reduction
activities for use in public
education and project
documentation.
As FY 04 treatments are being
completed in Summer 2004.
KRFPD
Continue and maintain the
monitoring and collaboration with
other county, state and federal
agencies.
On-going
KRFPD
Maintain contact and education
opportunities with the public.
On-going
KRFPD
Enclosure 3D Project Budget
Cost Category
Description
Federal
Agency
Applicant
Partner 1
Partner 2
Total
Personnel
Keno RFPD personnel
75000.00
Subtotal
75000.00
75000.00
Fringe Benefits
Keno RFPD OPE 20%
Subtotal
15000.00
15000.00
15000.00
Travel
Subtotal
Equipment
Vehicles
Subtotal
15000.00
10000.00
25000.00
28800.00
28800.00
53800.00
Supplies
2000.00
Subtotal
2000.00
2000.00
Slash Buster /Contractors
Landowner Cost Share
Subtotal
27000.00
4000.00
31000.00
3000.00
3000.00
34000.00
148,000.00
31,800.00
179,800.00
Contractual
Other
Subtotal
Total Costs
Project (Program) Income1
(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.