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:
State of Oregon Department of Forestry
Phone:
FAX:
Email:
(503) 935-2283
(503) 935-2283
dspiesscha@odf.state.or.us
Address (Street or P. O. Box, City, State, Zip):
2600 State Street, Salem, OR 97310
Project Coordinator
Project Coordinator (Name and Title):
Dave Johnson, District Forester
Organization/Jurisdiction:
Oregon Department of Forestry, Forest Grove District
Phone:
FAX:
Email:
(503) 359-7449
(503) 357-4548
same as above
Project Information
Project Title:
Infrared cameras
Project Start:
Project End:
July 1, 2002
June 30, 2003
Federal Funding Request:
Total Project Funding:
$27,514.00
$31,759.00
Are you submitting multiple projects? If so, please explain and prioritize:
One other, Smokey bear program uniform (priority #1). This request is priority #2.
Brief Project Description:
This grant will allow the Forest Grove District (two unit offices, Columbia City and Forest Grove) to
purchase two infrared imaging cameras (one per unit) to be used to insure that escaped debris
burns, slash fires or other fires are completely extinguished so they do not rekindle in to a wildfire.
These cameras will also enable units to monitor and assess whether or not debris piles or slash
piles are completely extinguished, thus preventing wildfires in the interface.
Project Location:
County:
Congressional District:
Forest Grove District
Multiple (6)
Multiple
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:
Also includes forest interface lands from Columbia River south to Sheridan and from crest of the
Oregon Coast Range east to the Willamette River (approximately 815,000 acres)
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
 partners





project income
project time frames
specify types of activities and equipment used
amount or extent of actions (acres, number of homes, etc)
environmental, cultural and historical resource requirements
Response:
The grant will be for the purchase of two Palm IR 250 cameras by the Forest Grove District of the Oregon
Department of Forestry (one for the Columbia Unit and one for the Forest Grove Unit). ODF will partner
with the local rural fire departments, other agencies and cooperators by making this equipment and ODF
personnel available to check burn areas. This camera will help all fire fighting agencies become more
efficient in mopping up fires by reducing cost and time. Use of this equipment will be located in areas with a
potential threat of wildfire to the interface. Various activities could initiate utilization of these cameras: slash
burn activity, escaped agricultural burn activity, and recent human-caused or lightning caused fire incident.
Depending on the volume of material, and the time of year, the threat of hold-over fire increases. Infrared
imaging cameras will allow fire personnel to check burn areas for hold-over hot spots. ODF and local fire
departments will be able to minimize the loss of property, life and resources from escaped debris burns
through the use of infrared imaging cameras and early detection programs.
These cameras would be used in the geographic location that includes the following counties: Clatsop,
Columbia, Multnomah, Tillamook, Washington and Yamhill.
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.
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 fuels treatment plan or 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 (a) leads to, enhances or restores a local fire-adapted ecosystem, and/or (b) mitigates or leads to the
mitigation of hazardous fuel conditions.
F. How will the proposed treatments be maintained over time?
Response:
A. The geographic area includes 6 counties and 34 communities listed on the Community High Hazard
Interface listing. Due to the proximity to the Portland metropolitan community, there exists a high density
utilization for recreational purposes as well as non-metropolitan living environments in close proximity to the
regional forested areas.
B. The District is directly responsible for the protection of and wildland fire fighting efforts on approx.
50,000 acres of BLM forest land. The geographic area in general is most at risk for recreationist-caused fires
and urban interface residence escaped debris burns. The use of the infrared camera as a management tool is
important to reduce the risk of reburn and further escape potential from hold-over fire. The geograhic area
includes extensive unincorporated and dispersed communities throughout the forested areas.
C. This management tool provides one more cog in the wheel to strengthen the existing cooperative efforts
between ODF and 16 local rural fire departments as described in our cooperative agreements.
D. The District plans to utilize existing fire prevention/education materials to inform interface communities
of opportunities to mitigate their urban/forest interface wildfire risks
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)?
B. To what extent will this project be offered to serve as a model for other communities?
C. Will biomass or forest fuels be utilized; if so, in what manner and how much?
Response:
A. Prevention is key to this proposal. The potential impact from a devasting fire event would negatively
impact local forest landowners and their employees; interface homes and residents; local recreation support
businesses (such as small stores and gas stations); and small woodland owners.
B. There is a very good chance that other ODF districts will view this as a model project and look at simlar
implementation in collaboration with their local rural fire departments.
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 plan, or creates such a plan. Describe the plan if it
already exists.
B. Explain the level of cooperation, coordination or strategic planning among federal, state, tribal, local government and
community organizations. List the cooperators.
Response:
A. The District already maintains an ongoing integration with local rural fire departments in responding to
fire events and this grant would provide an additional support to that effort. The project will be utilized
frequently in areas having an extensive wildland-urban interface, and a high frequency of fire within the
interface that borders with rural fire department jurisdictions.
B. The District: has a fully integrated mutual aid intial attack system with all rural fire departments in the
District, as well as local 911 emergency dispatch centers; is a member of the County Fire Defense Boards; is
accountable to the Bureau of Land Management for the protection of their forest lands; routinely cooperates
and coordinates with the Northwest Oregon Forest Protective Association (comprised of forest landowners)
and the local logging contractors and operators in the District. This equipment (and ODF personnel
operators) would also be available for out-of-district assignments in support of other ODF fire fighting needs
(State and Federal).
4. Expanding Community Participation. (15 Points)
A. To what extent have interested people and communities been provided an opportunity to become informed and involved in this
proposal?
B. Describe the extent of local support for the project, including any cost-sharing arrangements.
C. What are the environmental, social and educational benefits of the project?
Response:
A. ODF would make this equipment and personnel available to individual landowners and rural and city fire
departments as requested. It is anticipated that efficiency and effectiveness in mopping up wildfires and
preventing reignition will increase as prevention efforts utilizing the latest technology are introduced to the
local cooperators.
B. Local rural fire departments would be in favor of using technology to reduce the likelihood of wildlandurban interface fires. No cost share arrangements have been made with RFDs, but ODF will handle all
training costs and fund the use of the cameras.
C. All of the environmental, social and educational benefits that go along with preventing wildfires from
happening would apply.
Enclosure 3C - Project Work Form
Tasks
Time Frame
Responsible Party
Planning and purchase of equipment
Summer 2002
Mike Curry, Forest Grove Unit
Forester
Mike Simek, Columbia Unit Forester
Education and training of equipment
Summer 2002
Mike Curry, Forest Grove Unit
Forester
Mike Simek, Columbia Unit Forester
Monitoring/Evaluate effectiveness of
equipment
ongoing
Dave Johnson, Forest Grove District
Forester
Enclosure 3D Project Budget
Cost Category
Description
Personnel
all training and use in
grant year
Subtotal
Federal
Agency
$0.00
Fringe Benefits
Other Payroll Expenses
Subtotal
Applicant
$2,980.00
$2,980.00
Partner 1
$0.00
Partner 2
Total
$0.00
$0.00
$0.00
$2,980.00
$2,980.00
$0.00
$1,265.00
$0.00
$0.00
$1,265.00
$0.00
$0.00
$0.00
$0.00
$0.00
$0.00
$0.00
$26,514.00
$0.00
$26,514.00
$0.00
$0.00
$0.00
$0.00
$0.00
$0.00
$0.00
$0.00
$0.00
$0.00
$1,265.00
$0.00
$1,265.00
$0.00
Travel
Subtotal
$0.00
Equipment
two infrared cameras
$26,514.00
Subtotal
$26,514.00
$0.00
$0.00
$0.00
$0.00
Supplies
Subtotal
$0.00
$0.00
$0.00
Contractual
Subtotal
$0.00
Other
Administrative Cost
$1,000.00
Subtotal
$1,000.00
$0.00
$0.00
$0.00
$0.00
$1,000.00
$0.00
$1,000.00
Total Costs
$27,514.00
$4,245.00
$0.00
$0.00
$31,759.00
Project (Program) Income1
(using deductive alternative)
1
$0.00
$0.00
$0.00
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.