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
Curry County Collaborative WUI Assessment Partnership
Phone:
FAX:
Email:
541-247-3208
541-247-2705
murphym@co.curry.or.us
Address (Street or P. O. Box, City, State, Zip
PO Box 746 94235 Moore Street , Gold Beach, Oregon 97444
Project Coordinator
Project Coordinator (Name and Title):
Michael Murphy – Curry County Emergency Services Coordinator
Organization/Jurisdiction:
Curry County WUI Assessment Partnership
Phone
FAX:
541-247-3208
Email:
541-247-2705
murphym@co.curry.or.us
Project Information
Project Title:
Curry County WUI Assessment
Proposed Project Start Date:
April 2004
Proposed Project End Date:
April 2006
Federal Funding Request
Total Project Funding:
$250,000
$300,000
Are you submitting multiple projects? If so, please explain and prioritize:
No
Brief Project Description:

To complete, refine and enhance the Structural Triage Plan for Curry County started on the Biscuit Fire with the Governor’s
invoking of the conflagration act on August 13, 2002. The Structural Triage Plan will be refined and enhanced to
incorporate all of Curry County.

The plan’s collaborative process will provide for public education and prevention opportunities, maps with roads, all
structures, target structures with hazards, identify and prioritize defensible space and fuels projects that accomplish
protection needs.

The completed plan will provide a platform to communicate with all home owners and businesses by providing them
proactive approaches to infrastructure fire safe protection.

The work completed by this plan will indirectly benefit other all risk management agencies.
Project Location (latitude/longitude if applicable):
County:
Congressional District:
4
Curry
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:
Curry County
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
 interagency partners





project relationship to community or natural landscape fire plans
project time frames and income
specify types of activities and equipment used
amount or extent of actions (acres, number of homes, etc)
environmental, cultural and historical resource requirements
Response:
1) Project location - All privately owned and federally, state or county managed lands in Curry County west and north of
the Biscuit fire.
2) Project implementation – The project was initially implemented on August 14, 2002 after the conflagration act was
invoked by the Governor on August 13, 2002. The Partnership wants to refine and expand upon the plan to include all of
Curry County identified in 1 above. The sooner we implement the project the better it will tie in with existing Biscuit fire
assessment efforts and community outreach in Curry County. The fresher the memories and lessons learned from the
Biscuit fire are the more effective the Partnership can be.
3) Anticipated outcomes – A written plan that provides for public education and prevention opportunities, maps with roads,
identifies all structures, targets structures with hazards, and identifies and prioritizes defensible space and fuels projects
that accomplish protection needs. Develop a web-based database, for use by local jurisdictions with consumer level hardware and
software. Though the plan is fire and fuels driven the Partnership anticipates that all risk management agencies will also benefit.
4) Measures and reporting – Quality control and effectiveness monitoring will be accomplished through regular meetings
of the Partnership board. Timelines outlined in Section 3C will be monitored and discussed by the board. The board will
also adhere to any and all reporting requirements established by the Granting Agency.
5) Interagency partners – The Partnership board composed with the support of the County Commissioners will include the
Curry County Emergency Services Coordinator, Curry County Fire Chief and a representative each from CFPA (Coos
Forest Protective Association), USFS (Siskiyou National Forest) and the BLM (Coos Bay District). This Partnership
board represents numerous partners that include 10 rural, 1 volunteer, 3 city fire departments, (all members of the Pacific
Cal-Ore Fire Chiefs Association), Curry County Commissioners, South Coast Watershed Association, CFPA, US Forest
Service, Bureau of Land Management and other public and private landowners in Curry County.
6) Project relationship to community or natural landscape fire plans - Besides the Structural Triage Plan started by the
Biscuit Fire this project will compliment and may influence the Fire Management Plans for the Siskiyou National Forest
Powers, Gold Beach and Chetco Ranger Districts and the Coos Bay District BLM Fire Management Plan. This project
will identify and propose mitigation of hazardous fuels in WUI areas as outlined in the National Fire Plan and 10 Year
Comprehensive Plan
7) Project time frames and income - We anticipate the project to be completed within two years once funding is received.
We are looking at grant funding of $250,000 supplemented by 20%+ in kind services provided by the numerous partners
involved with the project.
8) Specify the types of activities and equipment used – Activities will include but not limited to structural assessments,
GPS and GIS mapping work, public information, prevention and education meetings,. Examples of equipment to be used
includes GIS compatible computers, laptop computers for data input in the field, and GPS data collectors.
9) Amount or extent of actions (acres, number of homes, etc.) – Approximately 500,000 acres of Curry county’s
1,054,720 will be assessed in this project. The remaining acres are contiguous lands within the Siskiyou National Forest
that do not have rural urban interface fire issues.
10) Environmental, cultural and historical resource requirements - Phase I will not create any ground disturbing
activities, and will therefore not have any environmental, cultural and historic requirements. These requirements will be
addressed in the plan and all such impacts would occur in Phase II of the project; during the actual creation of defensible
space and fuels projects that accomplish protection needs.
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, or natural landscapes.
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 (1) fuels treatment plan or (2) 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 (1) leads to, enhances or restores a local fire-adapted ecosystem, and/or (2) mitigates or leads to the
mitigation of hazardous fuel conditions.
F. How will the proposed treatments or programs be maintained in future years?
Response:
A. All landowners will receive copies of their assessment and provided information through workshops and brochures on
how to reduce fuel loads and to make their property fire safe, and provide guidance on long-term management.
B. Where private, state, county, city or tribal lands abut USFS and BLM lands, joint strategizing to enhance mutual fire safety
will be encouraged.
C. The project will build on the Structure Triage Plan started in August 2002 as a result of the Biscuit Fire to further develop
a community fire prevention and defense strategy, defensible space and fuels treatment plans for individual landowners.
D. A portion of the communities of Curry impacted by the Biscuit Fire were involved from the ground floor with defensible
space literature and assessments done for the Structural Triage Plan. This project will continue to build on this by
providing all communities further educational materials and opportunities such as Fire Wise workshops. The plan will
give everyone a functional assessment to implement protection measures around homes and community infrastructure.
E. This plan will provide information and direction to mitigate hazardous fuels conditions and provide defensible space in
Curry county’s wildland urban interface.
F. The plan will supply information and guidance for the people in Curry county to identify short term mitigation and provide
for long term maintenance. This plan will be the first step towards providing more comprehensive fire plans that will help
communities and cooperators become firewise. When the structural assessment is completed it is then the goal of the plan
to identify hazardous fuels projects and begin steps to implement them.
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)? How will this proposal link to the projects (or proposed projects) to create year-round jobs?
B. To what extent will this project be offered to serve as a model for other communities or natural landscapes?
C. Will biomass or forest fuels be utilized; if so, in what manner and how much?
Response:
A. Accomplishment of gathering the assessment information/data will provide the communities with job and funding
opportunities. Initially these opportunities will be short term; 6 to 18 months, and be accomplished through a variety of
local organizations or businesses. Longer term economical benefits and job opportunities will come when fuels projects
are implemented. The amount of benefit and the number of jobs will be a reflection of the number of projects that the
plan identifies that become funded.
B. The project will develop a long term county wide strategy and provide new information for the USFS and BLM to update
and assimilate into their fire management plans and possibly amend their land management plans. The Coastal zone has a
unique fire situation in its brush component that has the potential to contribute to large fire growth when conditions are
right. This plan can be utilized by other communities that have similar conditions.
C. Depending upon the funded projects and treatment methods biomass by products could be utilized. Examples of biomass
by products could be yard mulch, hog fuel for co-generation plants and fire wood for the local communities.
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 or plan, or creates such a plan. Describe the plan if it
already exists.
B. Explain the level of cooperation, coordination or strategic planning through a “Local Coordination Group” for wildland fire
activities, or among federal, state, tribal, local government and community organizations. List the cooperators (a detailed list
of cooperators will be required for projects that are funded).
Response:
A. This project will build on and enhance the Structural Triage Plan initiated in August 2002 on the Biscuit Fire. It ties in
with goals of reducing risks to community infrastructure and reducing fire costs related to this type of protection.
B. The Partnership is using the collabrative process to build on and enhance the Structural Triage Plan. With the support of
the county commissioners a Partnership board has been formed. This board will work for the betterment of the entire
county and provide for the plans quality control and effectiveness monitoring .
Partnership Board
Curry County Emergency Services Coordinator
Curry County Fire Chief
USFS – Siskiyou National Forest (Chetco, Gold Beach and Powers Ranger Districts)
CFPA – Coos Forest Protective Association (Coos Bay and Gold Beach offices)
BLM - Bureau of Land Management (Coos Bay District)
Other Partners – 10 Rural Fire Departments, 1 Volunteer Fire Department and 3 City Fire Departments, all members of the Pacific
Cal-Ore Fire Chiefs Association, South Coast Watershed Coordinating Council, Curry County Commissioners, South Coast
Timber, Federal Register Notice August 2001 - Urban Interface Communities Within the Vicinity of Federal Lands that are at High
Risk from Wildfire – Agness, Brookings/Harbor, Gold Beach, Port Orford and Langlois and numerous small outlying settlements.
The Partnership is in the process of contacting the tribal council for the Confederated Tribes of Selitz to seek their participation as
a partner.
Other benefactors would include county based law enforcement and emergency medical systems.
4. Expanding Community Participation. (15 Points)
A. To what extent have interested individuals, groups, and communities been provided an opportunity to become informed and
involved in this proposal?
B. Describe the extent of local support or opposition for the project, including any cost-sharing arrangements.
C. What are the environmental, social and educational benefits or concerns of the project?
Response:
A. Curry county communities initial exposure to the rural urban interface fire, fuels and defensible space issues came to light
during the Biscuit Fire. A prevention team initiated a Structural Triage Plan that this project would like to enhance and
expand upon. The Partnership feels that the county is still very receptive to a project of this type. If grant money is
received town hall meetings will allow public involvement , interaction and ownership in the project. Public meetings and
input have been ongoing since the Biscuit fire and this proposal will easily tie into the Biscuit Fire Outreach and
Communications group that is already serving communities affected by the fire.
B. The project proposes a minimum of 20% cost share/in kind services to be provided by the cooperating partners. The grant
would be for $250,000 with minimum cost share/in kind services to be $50,000. There is opposition and concern that
exists because the project (Structural Triage Plan) was stopped and only covered the SW corner of Curry County. The
public expects all agencies to follow through and complete what was started; this plan hopes to accomplish that.
C. The Partnership views this project as environmentally, socially and educationally beneficial. The communities of Curry
county will do nothing but grow in a positive direction as a result of this project. At this phase of the project there are no
environmental concerns. Social and educational opportunities are ripe and will feed those current endeavors occurring in
public schools and clubs within the communities impacted by the Biscuit fire.
Enclosure 3C - Project Work Form
Tasks
Time Frame
Responsible Party
Town hall meetings – public education and
involvement.
Winter of 2003
Partnership Board
Identify standards for data and data input.
Start work in spring 2003
Partnership Board
Development – standard assessment form
Start work in spring 2003
Partnership Board
Identify, select and train the field going
assessment people/teams.
Early 2004
Assessment standards working team
Quality control check of assessment inputs
Early 2004 (after one week of
assessments)
After one week of assessment work
Assessment standards working team
GIS standards working team
GIS quality control check of inputs
Started after adjustments have been made
to assessment inputs.
After one week of input
Adjustments to GIS inputs if needed
After one week of input
GIS standards working team
Assessment complete
October 31, 2004
Assessment standards working team
GIS Input complete
November 30, 2004
GIS standards working team
Review and correct any assessment or GIS
work (quality control)
February 1, 2005
Assessment and GIS standards
working teams
Review draft for 2006 grant projects
Continue public education and plan
Review
and corrections complete
development.
February 1, 2005
Partnership Board
March 1, 2005
Assessment and GIS standards
working teams
Rough draft of plan
Rough draft completed
June 1, 2005
Partnership Board
Draft corrections made and completed
July 31, 2005
Partnership Board
Draft out for public comment
October 1, 2005
Public input incorporated
December 15, 2005
Partnership Board
Final product – including web-based database
January 15, 2006
Partnership Board
Review plans project proposals for 2007
grants.
February 1, 2006
Partnership Board
Follow up and presentations to the public,
commissioners and interested parties.
April 2006
Partnership Board
Adjustments to assessment inputs if needed.
GIS input
Assessment standards working team
GIS standards working team
Enclosure 3D Project Budget
Cost Category
Description
Personnel
Labor
In Kind Services
Subtotal
Federal
Agency
Partnership
Partner 1
Partner 2
Total
0
100,000
50,000
100,000
50,000
0
10,000
10,000
0
20,000
20,000
0
20,000
20,000
0
100,000
100,000
Fringe Benefits
Subtotal
Travel
Subtotal
Equipment
GPS/laptops
Subtotal
Supplies
Subtotal
Contractual
Workshops/GIS Work
Printing & Web site work
Subtotal
Other
Subtotal
Total Costs
300,000
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.