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:
Coos Watershed Association
Phone:
FAX:
Email:
(541) 888-5922
(541) 888-6111
cooswa@harborside.com
Address (Street or P. O. Box, City, State, Zip):
P.O. Box 5860 Charleston, OR 97420
Project Coordinator
Project Coordinator (Name and Title):
Jon A. Souder, Executive Director
Organization/Jurisdiction:
Coos Watershed Association
Phone:
FAX:
Email:
(541) 888-5922
(541) 888-6111
soudercooswa@harborside.com
Project Information
Project Title:
Community Fire Response Plan For the Southern Coos Bay Urban:Wildland Interface.
Proposed Project Start Date:
Proposed Project End Date:
April, 2004
March, 2008
Federal Funding Request:
Total Project Funding:
$243,648
$301,372
Are you submitting multiple projects? If so, please explain and prioritize:
No
Brief Project Description:
The purpose of this project is to develop a community response plan for 47,151 acres of high risk lands south
of Coos Bay, Oregon. The potential effects of catastrophic fires for western Oregon communities were
demonstrated by the Biscuit Fire in 2002. At risk of fire within the project area include two watersheds
providing the majority of Coos Bay & North Bend’s water (service area population 35,000), a National
Estuarine Research Reserve (5,400 acres), about 1/3 of the Coos Co. Forest that provides critical local
government revenues, a State Park, and rural residential houses and urban fringe neighborhoods.
The proposed landscape-based community response plan will provide up-to-date information to land
managers and response personnel on emergency access; identify and prioritize significant ignition risk reduction opportunities; and provide a forum and process for land managers and response personnel to share concerns, information and jointly plan emergency response measures.
The expected project outcome is a fire risk reduction program for land managers and increased institutional
capability for local emergency response organizations.
Project Location (latitude/longitude if applicable):
County:
Congressional District:
Coos, Oregon
4
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:
Project is located northwest and east of U.S. 101 (and north of County Rd. 260.) to the Coos Bay, OR urban
growth boundary. It is bounded on the west by the Pacific Ocean.
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:
Project Location: The project is located to the east and northwest of U.S. highway 101, north County Rd.
260, and extends to the southern city limit of Coos Bay, OR and its wildland:urban interface zone. Ownership
within this area is 78%% private (77.6% industrial and non-industrial timber); 10.1% South Slough National
Estuarine Research Reserve; 5.7% rural residential and rural commercial/industry; 1.8% Coquille Tribe; 3.7%
State Parks, and 2.3% Coos Bay/North Bend Water Board lands.
Project Implementation: The project will be lead, administered, and coordinated by the Coos Watershed Association, a local 501c(3) non-profit organization with a broadly-representative Board that includes the major
land owners and managers in the project area. The CWA has 10 years of experience in managing projects of
this nature, substantial technical expertise, and a reputation in the community as an effective and responsive
partner in collaborative projects. A Community Planning Working Group will be established that will include
representatives of local fire departments, municipalities, emergency response and planning, and land owners
and managers. This committee will be tasked with providing overall project direction, contributing to and reviewing work products, and acting as information and outreach brokers for their constituencies. At least two
sub-committees will be established: a GIS and mapping technical group and an education and outreach group.
A broad outreach effort will begin. once the plan and products become available.
Anticipated Outcomes: The project will provide: (1) a landscape-based community fire protection plan that
identifies and prioritizes ignition risks with potential remedial and mitigative measures; (2) an updated inventory of roads and their condition with resulting maps and digital data products; and (3) a fire risk reduction
implementation strategy. The overall project outcome will be reduced likelihood of human-caused ignition,
better response to both natural- and human-caused fires, and less resulting fire damage.
Measures and Reporting: A detailed project work plan will be prepared as an initial Working Group task.
This work plan will provide greater specificity in Section 3C’s tasks and associated timelines. The Working
Group will be responsible for monitoring project progress and determining any needed mid-course corrections. Periodic (i.e., at least quarterly) meetings will include written progress reports. Additional (or supplementary) reporting will be done as required by the Granting Agency.
Interagency Partners: We will invite, and expect to have participation by the following partners in this
project: Coos Bay District, Bureau of Land Management; Coos Forest Protective Association; Coos
Bay/North Bend Water Board; City of Coos Bay; Menasha Corporation; Coos County (Forestry and
Emergency Preparedness); OR Division of State Lands (SSNERR); Millington, Charleston, and Coos Bay
Fire Departments.
Relationship to Community or Natural Landscape Fire Plans: This project will create a Fire Plan
integrating both community and natural landscape components.
Project Time Frames and Income: We anticipate that four years will be required to adequately prepare the
project, conduct education and outreach activities, and initiate fuels reduction and access control and improvement project proposals. No income will be directly produced from this project, but partners are expected
to provide at least 20% in-kind match.
Activities and Equipment: Most of the assessment and strategy will be based on GIS data and modeling. A
critical project component will be technology needs and transfer for emergency fire responders.
Amount or Extent of Actions: The plan will include the 47,151 acre project area described above.
Environmental, Cultural and Historical Resource Requirements: None, although these areas will be
mapped as part of the project and incorporated into protective measures.
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. This project will develop a coordinated fire risk reduction and response plan for the project area that includes significant natural and community landscapes. Introduction highly flammable exotic plants (principally gorse), unrestricted access, and poor maps and coordination have lead to increased fire risk. The
road inventory, identification and prioritization of remedial actions will all lead to decreased hazardous
conditions in the future. In addition, through the collaborative process, coordination among fire responders and local land owners and managers will be increased to reduce the effects of catastrophic fires.
B. Federal resources at risk include the South Slough National Estuarine Research Reserve, isolated parcels
of BLM-managed lands; portions of the Coos Co. Forest (currently under discussion for BLM land exchange to increase the SSNERR). The communities of Coos Bay, North Bend, surrounding unincorporated areas and the regional municipal water supply are also at risk.
C. The project will create a community fire strategy where none presently exists.
D. The Biscuit Fire in 2002 provided evidence to the local community that it needs to prepare and implement
a fuels reduction and education program. This project will provide the framework to do so.
E. The project area is naturally a high-intensity, infrequent fire recurrence ecosystem. Hazardous fuels will
be identified and their treatment prioritized in the Community Fire Plan.
F. The commitment of the Working Group partners and the long-term perspective of the CWA will increase
the likelihood that the project will be maintained.
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 other 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. This project will protect the local economy by reducing fire risk to local municipal water supplies, protect
high water quality needed by commercial oyster growers, crabbers and fishermen, and maintain the
aesthetic landscape on the Oregon coast known world-wide for its scenic beauty. The project will directly
support two road surveyors for two years at family wage jobs, provide one year of GIS technician and 0.5
year of GIS analyst employment. Project funding will supplement watershed assessment funds presently
available, and thus increase job security, develop marketable skills, and provide enhanced future
employment possibilities for these individuals. Based on our past experience, probably 85% of project
funds will stay within Coos County, and 95% within the state of Oregon.
B. We expect the project to provide a model for a landscape-based approach to protecting municipal water
supplies, unique natural areas, and higher-density urban areas. This is especially the case where road access is both a potential ignition source but also needed for fire response. The results from this project
should be directly transferable to other surrounding areas, including east of Coos Bay, Coquille, and
Bandon.
C. Commercial and non-commercial thinning can be expected to provide wood fiber for chips and sawlogs
over the longer term as fuel reduction strategies are identified.
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 create a local intergovernmental plan and strategy for both fire risk reduction as well as
increase the level of coordinated fire response.
B. Most of the local cooperators already work together through the Coos Watershed Association on a broad
range of assessment and watershed restoration projects. This project will bring additional partners to the
table representing wildland, rural, and urban fire and emergency response agencies, as well as other local
governmental entities. The landscape perspective for the proposed Community Fire Plan will provide the
common linkage and goals between these two groups.
Expected Community Fire Plan Working Group partners:
Coos Watershed Association
Coos Bay District, Bureau of Land Management
Coos Forest Protective Association
Coos Bay/North Bend Water Board
Coquille Indian Tribe
Menasha Forest Products Corporation
Oregon Division of State Lands, South Slough National Estuarine Research Reserve
Oregon State Parks Department
Charleston, Coos Bay, and Millington Fire Departments
Coos County (Forestry and Emergency Preparedness)
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. This project proposal has been developed in cooperation with the Coos Bay District BLM Fire Management Officer. It was presented in concept to the Board of the Coos Watershed Association, who supported
its continuing development. The principal land managers in the project area reviewed this proposal. The
BLM Fire Management Officer conducted the initial project concept development and outreach to local
fire organizations over the past year. Additional outreach and coordination will be conducted prior to receipt of funding.
B. As described above, the Board of the Coos Watershed Association was informed of this proposal and supported its continued development based on the compatibility between the landscape perspective anticipated for the Coos Bay Community Fire Response Plan and existing and proposed watershed assessments.
These watershed assessments will provide portions of the 20% match, with in-kind contributions of time,
data, and equipment by the Working Group providing the remainder.
C. Reducing catastrophic fire risk in the Coos Bay area will be the primary social benefit resulting from this
project. We saw how the Biscuit Fire wrecked havoc on local community well-being. Research, and local
surveys, have indicated that the natural resources and beauty of the area are second only to jobs as a reason for people living here. Successfully implemented, this project will contribute to both.
Educational benefits will result both from the outreach opportunities during plan preparation and implementation, as well as through information on local conditions used for other purposes such as watershed
assessments.
Enclosure 3C - Project Work Form
Tasks
Convene Coos Bay Fire Reduction
Community Plan Working Group
Create detailed Work Plan for the project.
Hold quarterly, facilitated, Community
Plan Working Group progress meetings
Conduct needs assessment with local fire
and emergency responders.
Identify and collect information on
existing fire response strategies.
Create desired fire response strategy
Determine inventory protocol.
Compile base GIS layers.
Conduct access and fuels inventory.
Identify potential ignition sources and
areas.
Create and test digital terrain model for
project area.
Obtain detailed meteorological
information (wind speed, direction, etc.)
Model potential fire spread patterns.
Model (game) fire responses based on
ignition site, access, and weather
conditions.
Identify potential actions that could
reduce risk or increase effectiveness of
response.
Prepare draft Coos Bay Fire Reduction
Community Plan.
Circulate Plan among stakeholders.
Finalize Coos Bay Fire Reduction
Community Plan.
Distribute Community plan and identify
potential project partners
Prepare funding strategy and requests for
access control/improvement and fuels
reduction projects.
Prepare and submit final project report.
Identify partners for educational
programs.
Transfer technology to emergency
response organizations
Prepare funding requests for education
and information transfer.
Time Frame
Responsible Party
April, 2004
Finalize July, 2004
Coos Watershed Association
Community Plan Working Group
April, 2004 – March, 2008
Coos Watershed Association
April, 2004 – December, 2004
Community Plan Working Group
April, 2004 – December, 2004
Finalize, February, 2005
Community Plan Working Group
Community Plan Working Group
Finalize July, 2004
June, 2004 – December, 2004
August, 2004 – July, 2006
Technical Committee
Coos Watershed Association
Coos Watershed Association
January, 2005 – May, 2005
Community Plan Working Group
September, 2005 December, 2005
Coos Watershed Association
June, 2004 July, 2006
August, 2006 December, 2006
Coos Watershed Association
Coos Watershed Association
November, 2006 April, 2007
Technical Committee assisted by
consultant
February, 2007 June, 2007
June, 2007 August, 2007
Technical Committee assisted by
consultant
Coos Watershed Association lead,
Community Plan Working Group.
Education/Outreach Committee
September, 2007
Community Plan Working Group.
October, 2007
Education/Outreach Committee
October, 2007 February, 2008
March, 2008
Community Plan Working Group
and individual partners
Coos Watershed Association
June, 2007 September, 2007
Education/Outreach Committee
September, 2007 March, 2008
Education/Outreach Committee
Education/Outreach Committee
and individual partners
January, 2007 April, 2007
October, 2007 February, 2008
Enclosure 3D Project Budget
Cost Category
Description
Federal
Agency
Applicant
Working
Group
Total
Personnel (inc. Fringe Benefits)
Field Inventory Crew (2 FTE, 2 yrs.)
GIS Analyst (0.25 FTE, 2yrs.)
GIS Technician (0.5 FTE, 3 yrs.)
Project Manager (0.15 FTE, 4 yrs.)
Working Group Partners (20 meetings)
Subtotal
$138,860
$17,691
$34,715
$4,532
$195,798
$24,000
$138,860
$17,691
$52,073
$6,798
$24,000
$24,000
$239,422
$17,358
$2,266
$19,624
Travel
Road Inventory (2 years)
Fire Behavior Consultant (2 trips)
Subtotal
$3,000
$1,500
$3,000
$1,500
$4,500
$4,500
Equipment
GPS Receivers
Field Data Collector
Computers & Printers
Subtotal
$1,500
$3,500
$1,000
$5,000
$2,500
$3,500
$5,000
$5,000
$6,000
$11,000
$1,500
$1,000
$1,200
$1,500
$5,000
$600
$3,000
$6,000
$1,800
$3,700
$6,000
$600
$10,800
Supplies
Misc. Office Supplies & Copying
Computer Software (& updates)
Report Printing & Distribution
Subtotal
Contractual
Fire Behavior Consultant
Technical Writing/Editing
Meeting Facilitator
Subtotal
$7,500
$2,500
$2,500
$12,500
$7,500
$2,500
$2,500
$12,500
Other
Meeting Room & Refresh. (20 meetings)
Administration (10%)
Subtotal
Total Costs
Project (Program) Income1
(using deductive alternative)
1
$500
$1,000
$1,500
$22,150
$22,150
$500
$1,000
$23,650
$243,648
$32,124
$25,600
$301,372
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
$22,150
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.