HomeMy WebLinkAbout1995-250
1
RESOLUTION NO. 95-250
2 RESOLUTION OF THE CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO AUTHORIZING THE
ACCEPTANCE OF A FEDERAL EMERGENCY MANAGEMENT AGENCY (FEMA)
3 VEGETATION MANAGEMENT GRANT FOR WILDLAND FIRE MITIGATION AND
DIRECTING THE FIRE CHIEF OF THE CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO TO
4 ADMINISTER THE GRANT PROGRAM AS LEAD AGENCY WITH THE CALIFORNIA
DEPARTMENT OF FORESTRY (CDF) AND THE UNITED STATES FOREST SERVICE
5 (USFS).
6 WHEREAS, the City of San Bernardino has historically
7 suffered the loss of lives, homes and property due to wildland
8 fires spreading into its northern wildland-urban interface; and
9 WHEREAS, current conditions to include vegetation growth,
10 climate and topography combine to make the potential for another
11 local-area wildland fire extremely high; and
12 WHEREAS, the City's Fire Department, as lead agency with
13 CDF and USFS submitted a grant application to FEMA, contained
14 herein as Attachment 1, for a vegetation management program to
15 mitigate the potential for a local-area wildland fire through
l6 prescribed burning of approximately 4500 acres of wildland
17 interface over a five-year period; and
18 WHEREAS, FEMA subsequently awarded $3l5,147 to fund the
19 vegetation management project; and
20 WHEREAS, the City of San Bernardino's 25 percent
21 contribution to the grant project will be satisfied through in-kind
22 contributions of labor and equipment;
23 NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE MAYOR AND COMMON COUNCIL
OF THE CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO AS FOLLOWS:
24
SECTION 1. The Mayor and Common Council approve the
25
acceptance of the FEMA grant and its conditions as described in the
26
Governor's Office of Emergency Services letter to the City's
27
Disaster Preparedness Coordinator dated May 3, 1995, contained
28
l' ,- j)
1 RESOLUTION OF THE CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO AUTHORIZING THE
ACCEPTANCE OF A FEDERAL EMERGENCY MANAGEMENT AGENCY (FEMA)
2 VEGETATION MANAGEMENT GRANT FOR WILDLAND FIRE MITIGATION AND
DIRECTING THE FIRE CHIEF OF THE CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO TO
3 ADMINISTER THE GRANT PROGRAM AS LEAD AGENCY WITH THE CALIFORNIA
DEPARTMENT OF FORESTRY (CDF) AND THE UNITED STATES FOREST SERVICE
4 (USFS) .
5 herein as Attachment 2,
6 SECTION 2. The Fire Chief of the City of San Bernardino is
7 hereby authorized and directed to administer and execute the FEMA
8 vegetation management grant program as lead agency with the CDF and
9 USFS.
lD I HEREBY CERTIFY that the foregoing resolution was duly
11 adopted by the Mayor and Common Council of the city of San
adjourned
12 Bernardino at an regular meeting thereof, held on the 24th
13 day of July
l4 Council Members:
15 NEGRETE
16 CURLIN
17 HERNANDEZ
18 OBERHELMAN
19 DEVLIN
20 POPE-LUDLAM
21 MILLER
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
, 1995, by the following vote, to wit:
AYES NAYS
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
ABSTAIN
ABSENT
~~~
City Clerk
;- d 'j/j
1 RESOLUTION OF THE CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO AUTHORIZING THE
ACCEPTANCE OF A FEDERAL EMERGENCY MANAGEMENT AGENCY (FEMA)
2 VEGETATION MANAGEMENT GRANT FOR WILDLAND FIRE MITIGATION AND
DIRECTING THE FIRE CHIEF OF THE CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO TO
3 ADMINISTER THE GRANT PROGRAM AS LEAD AGENCY WITH THE CALIFORNIA
DEPARTMENT OF FORESTRY (CDF) AND THE UNITED STATES FOREST SERVICE
4 (USFS) .
5
The foregoing resolution is
. 1995.
hereby approved this JL7~ day
/'j~~J~
\fom Minor, Mayor
City of San Bernardino
of
July
6
7
8
Approved as to
9 form and legal content:
10 JAMES
City
11
By:
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
", /.,
. ,STATE OF CALIFORNIA
95-250
PETE WILSON, Governor
DISASTER ASSISTANCE BRANCH
RISK MANAGEMENT SECTION
Governor's Office of Emergency Services
Post Office Box 239016
Sacramento, California 95823-9016
916262-1718 Fax 916-262-2852
OES
jiii
"-",,,om..of
~StnD6
May 3, 1995
Richard McGreevy
Disaster Preparedness Coordinator
200 E. Third Street
San Bernardino, CA 92410
Fax: 909-384-5470
Dear Mr. McGreevy:
This office is pleased to notify you that the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) has
obligated funding for the project listed below:
Project Name:
FEMA-1Q05-20-DR-CA,
San Bernardino Vegetation Management Project
Requested Funding:
$315,147
HMGP Funds
Obligated 4/20/95
$157,573
The following conditions apply:
In the Project Eligibility Checklist contained in the grant application you indicate that this project
will address a local hazard mitigation plan objective and that it has manageable maintenance
requirements. Prior to receiving payment of your final claim and disbursement of subgrantee
administrative costs we request that you submit documentation which demonstrates:
1. The long-term maintenance requirements associated with this project. Who will be
responsible for maintaining the project? What do you estimate it wiil cost to maintain the project
so that it remains an effective fire hazard mitigation tool? What funding sources wiil be used to
support the long-term maintenance of the project?
2. How the project meets a local hazard mitigation planning objective? How does it
contribute to a comprehensive solution to reduce wildfire hazards in your community?
3. FEMA must secure clearances necessary under the NEPA prior to your initiation of ground
disturbance activities under this grant. The US Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) has indicated
that the project area may contain habitat for federally-listed threatened or endangered species. To
/- - - ;;;.
expedite their review, USFWS has set aside May 16, 1995, for a meeting on this project. The
balance of the grant request will be obligated upon FEMA 0 s completion the required NEP A
documentation.
Payment and Reporting Requirements:
A quarterly report schedule has been established for all HMGP projects, Quarterly reports are
due April 15, July 15, October 15, and December 15 until the project has been finalized, The
milestones detailed on your approved work schedule (provided in your project application) will
be used to measure project progress through the quarterly report process.
Paym,ents to sub grantees are made on a reimbursement basis. Reimbursements are for costs to
date or expenditures to be incurred within five (5) days of receipt of funds. Project expenditures
will be reimbursed at 75 % of eligible costs to date. This transaction is initiated using the attached
form, "Request for Reimbursement." All reimbursements will be calculated at 75% of eligible
costs. Final claims will be filed using the attached "Final Claim" form. At that time,
administrative costs for the project will be calculated and disbursed.
The attached "Notification to Sub grantees" provides guidance regarding HMGP regulations on
time extensions, inspections, audits, reporting procedures, the appeal process and cost over-runs.
Award documents enclosed with this letter include the following:
*
HMGP (FEMA-I005-DR-CA) Notification to Subgrantees
Sub grantee Quarterly Report Form
Request for Reimbursement Form
Final Claim Form
*
*
*
If there are any conditions or determinations contained in this letter that you feel need to be
discussed further please contact Rob Ferry at (916) 262-1788. Unless there is further
correspondence modifying these conditions, acceptance of the grant funds constitutes acceptance
of the conditions outlined in this letter.
Sincerely,
~~~reB~
Enclosures
cc: Paula Schulz
.r;r; ",0
Tenninology:
Grantor:
Grantee:
Sub grantee:
HAZARD MITIGATION GRANT PROGRAM
NOTIFICATION TO SUBGRANTEES
Section Description
I Time Extensions
2 Inspections
3 Audits
4 Reporting Procedures
5 Appeals Process
6 Cost Over-runs
Level:
Agency:
Individual:
Federal
Federal Emergency Management Agency
Regional Director
Federal Hazard Mitigation Officer
Level:
. Agency:
Individual:
State
Governor's Office of Emergency Services
Governor's Aulhorized Representative
Stale Hazard Mitigation Officer
Level:
Local Jurisdiction, State Agency or Private
Non-Profit Organization
c'
,,....,..J)
1. Time Extensions
Time extensions up to six months for project completion may be granted by the
state, upon written request. Requests must detail the circumstances requiring an
extension and indicate a projected completion date.
Requests for time extensions beyond the authority of the State will be submitted
to the Regional Director (FEMA, Region IX) for approval and must include:
*
*
the dates and provisions of all previous extensions on the project; and
a detailed explanation for the delay and a projected completion date.
Following the Regional Director's review and determination, the State will be
notified in writing of lhe time extension request. The State, in lurn, shall notify
the subgrantee of FEMA's determination.
If the extension is denied, the sub grantee can submit a second request to be
considered by the FEMA National Office. If the second time extension request is
denied, upon completion of the project, the subgrantee will be aulhorized
expenditures for eligible project costs incurred prior to the latest approved
completion date only. No federal funding will be provided for any project which
is not completed.
2. Inspections
The State reserves the right to inspect all projects for compliance. If inspeclions
and review of subgrantee support documentation reveal problems in performance
of work .and/or the documentation of such work, the State shall require the
sub grantee to correct the deficiencies before project closeout.
3. Audits
The State may request, at any time, an audit for any monies disbursed to a
subgrantee. Audits of subgrantees receiving federal grants will be conducted in
conformance with the requirements of the Single Audit Act of 1984 (pL 98-502)
and OMB Circulars A-110 and A-128, as well as related FEMA regulations and
instructions.
Grants under $25,000 are exempt from compliance with Circular A-128 and other
federal audits and shall be governed by audit requirements prescribed by the
State, local law, or regulation.
Grants between $25,000 to $100,000 will be audited in accordance with Circular
A-128,
/!-.
" (~.:.)
Federal Grants of $100,000 or more received by state or local governments shall
be audited in conformance of Circular A-128.
In each case where the subgrantee is provided $25,000 or more funds in the fiscal
year, the state agrees to:
.
determine whether subgrantees have met the applicable audit requirements
of the Single Audit Act as outlined in OMB Circulars A-110 and A-128;
.
determine whether the subgrantee spent HMGP funds in accordance with
the Act, 44 CFR, part 14, and 44 CFR 206.207. This may be accomplished
by reviewing the audit performed under the Single Audit Act or through
other means (e,g, program reviews) if the subgrantee has not yet had such
an audit;
.
ensure that appropriate corrective action is taken within six (6) months
after receipt of the single audit report in instances of non-compliance; and,
.
provide copies of the audit performed under the Single Audit Act to the
FEMA Inspector General.
4. Report Procedures
Proe:ress Reoorts
Subgrantees are required to submit progress reports to the State on a quarterly
basis until project closeout. Quarterly reports will not be required of projects wilh
a duration o( less than three months. A single report for such short-term projects
will satisfy reporting requirements.
The first quarterly report is due to the state three months following the project
initiation. Quarterly reports will thereafter be numbered consecutively (e.g. 24
month project is required to submit 8 quarterly reports),
Reports shall include, at a minimum:
a. the status and completion dates for each project funded, including any
problem or circumstances affecting lhe completion dates, scope of work, or
project costs which are expected to result in noncompliance with the
approved grant conditions;
b. a description of milestones completed in accordance wilh schedule
provided in lhe grant application, The milestones declared in the
subgrantee's application will be applied as a standard of the project's
progress.
(1<- _ ' ..- .-)
The State will review and approve subgrantee reports prior to submittal to
FEMA, identifying projects requiring special attention or inspection. The
Governor's Authorized Representative will review and forward lhe reports with
comments to the FEMA Regional Director.
Final Report
The subgrantee shall submit a final program report package to the state when all
sub grants have been closed. The package will include the following:
* Certification that all funds have been expended in accordance wilh all
signed assurances; and
* A listing of all projects and final expenditures.
5. Appeals Process
A subgrantee/applicant may appeal any determination relative to grant assistance
by submitting justification in writing to the State within sixty (60) days of the
action being appealed. Local appeals are submitted through the Governor's
Authorized Representative (GAR). Applicants must provide sufficient
information to allow the GAR to determine the facts and validity of the request.
All appeals will be handled through the State.
The State will review the appeal materials submitted, make any additional
investigations necessary and forward lhe appeal with a written recommendation to
the FEMA Regional Director (RD) within sixty (60) days.
The Regional' Director shall notify the State as to lhe disposition of the
subgrantee's appeal or need for additional information within ninety (90) days
following receipt of all related information and shall notify the GAR, in writing,
as to a decision within ninety (90) days of receipt of all information. If the
decision is to grant the appeal, the RD will take appropriate implementing action,
If the Regional Director denies lhe appeal, the subgrantee may submit a second
appeal in writing to the GAR. The second appeal is ultimately forwarded to the
Associate Director (FEMA) through the Regional Director. Such appeals shall be
made in writing and shall ):>e submitted not later than sixty (60) days after receipt
of notice of the RD' s deniar of the first appeal. The Associate Director shall
render a determination on the GAR's appeal within ninety (90) days following
receipt of all related information. Action by the Associate Director is final.
In rendering such determinations, lhe Associate Director may, in those cases
involving appeals of a highly technical nature, refer the appeal to an independent
scientific or technical body for review. The GAR must first agree to such a
,.
process, including a waiver of the ninety (90) day time limitation for appeal
resolution, as well as, sharing the cost of such reviews.
6. Cost Over-Runs
Cost over-runs under ten (10) percent of the approved project cost are allowed
when offset by cost under-runs on other projects, as determined by the State.
Cost over-runs will be indicated by quarterly progress reports and subsequently
verified by project inspections and audits. All cost over-runs must be justified by
the subgrantee. Unjustified over-runs will be denied by the State.
Cost over-runs exceeding ten (10) percent of the approved project cost require
that the State submit a request and recommendation to the Regional Director for
final determination.
/,-
r,:;,'
OES 400 <814/93)
REQUEST FOR REIMBURSEMENT OF FUNDS
HAZARD MITIGATION GRANT PROGRAM (HMGp)
FEMA-IOOS-DR-CA
FROM: FIPS #: HMGP PROJECT #: -
TO: ' Stale of California
Governor's Office of
Emergency Services APPLICANT:
Disaster Assistance Division ADDRESS:
2800 Meadowview Road
Sacram.ento, CA 95832
It is requested that a teimbursement of funds in the amount of $
accordance with the following conditions:
beapproved in
Type of Payment Requested: [] Partial
[] Final
1. Funds shall be credited to a special and separate account.
2, Funds shall be used solely for the work approved in the project application.
3. Funds advanced which are in excess of the approved actual expenditures, as accepted by
finaJ audit by the State, shall be refunded promptly to the Stale.
4. Accounting records will be kept which adequately identify the source and application of
HMGP funds and be supported by such source documentation as cancelled checks, paid
bills, payrolls, time and attendance.ecords, contract and subgrant awards, ejc. Support
documentation of all soft match dollars, such as force account labor and use of existing
inventory, shall also be included.
5, Progress reports shall be submitted to the State on a quarterly basis until project closeout,
ReportS will indicate the status and completion dales for each project funded as per Stale
requirements.
Total Amount Approved in Project Application . $
Amount Expended to Dale on Eligible Work ... $
I certify that to the best of my knowledge and belief, the data presented above and 00 the attached
worksheet are correct, that all outlays were made io accordance. with the grant conditions and that
payment is due and has not been previously requested, I further certify that I am the authorized
applicant's ageot, designated by the above referenced applicant to enter into this agreement for, and
00 behalf of, said applicant.
at
Authorized Applicant's Ageot
Date
City
(For Internal U.. Only)
Muimum Allowahle Reimburacmcnl....................S
Total Amount of Prior RcimhuncmcnIJ...............S
AMOUNT APPROVED THtS REQUEST.....,..$
Olle R~viewer Title
Date Approval Title
AREV I I
/1
HAZARD MITIGATION GRANT PROGRAM
FINAL CLAIM
Upon completion of all work, and payment of expenditures, please submit this sheet with your
final Request for Reimbursement to:
Nancy Ward, Chief
Disaster Assistance Branch
Governor's Office of Emergency Services
2800 Meadowview Road
Sacramento, CA 95832
Applicant Name:
Phone Number:
Hazard Mitigation Project No.:
FIPS No.:
Federal Disaster No.:
Subgrantee Certification:
I HEREBY CERTIFY THAT TO THE BEST OF MY KNOWLEDGE AND BELIEF
ALL WORK AND COSTS CLAIMED ARE ELEGEBLE IN ACCORDANCE WITH
THE GRANT CONDITIONS, ALL WORK CLAIMED HAS BEEN COMPLETED,
AND ALL COSTS CLAIMED HAVE BEEN P AID IN FULL.
SIGNED:
DATE:
Authorized Applicant's Agent
State of California Certification:
I CERTIFY THAT ALL FUNDS WERE EXPENDED IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE
PROVISIONS OF THE FEMA-ST ATE AGREEMENT AND I RECOMMEND AN
APPROVAL AMOUNT OF $
SIGNED:
DATE:
Governor's Authorized Representative (GAR)
'-j
c::i
Z
1:: ..
8.~
Cl) os
c.:O
~ ~
-< 0
f3 r..
o E-
Cll: Cll:
c. ~
E--<~
ZuCll:
-<ci:....
Cll:O..l
C , Cll:
~g~
...-Cll:
,.. , -<
-<-<;;J
::a~
E-r..~
... ~
~ E-
~ ~
-< Cll:
N C
-< ==
::: ;;J
en
c::i
Z
CI:l
C.
...
u..
~
o
~
...
c.
~
::E
:::
--
,.-..
-<
::E
I.tl
u..
~
""
c.
~
::E
:::
0;
5
os
Z
!l
~
OIl
.0
::l
CI:l
c
.9
-
os
.3
-g
"=
e
c.
~.
t)-;
8::;:
g ~
z:z:
]
" E
o "
:E 2
~ -
.- "?
" c
""0
~Z
6 "'a ~
.::: ....u..
(\l E 0
8 ":::
-2""
.:!<ii~
,.-..
~-
Q..<::
Q..~~~
-<"'::>l1J
~
oC
E-
o
on
:;;:
...:
on
8
a(:l
.;.;
...
o
~
'-
o
~
1;1
on
Cl)
c
B
on
~
.s
on
<Il~
!Z{3r!"
,,' c ::l
.... 0 on
::s.~.~
::E~t;l
o Q...-
uEl[
(.l on
OIl "0
,3 ~
& ::l
'- Cl)
os ...
~ eo
u Q..
~ on
on Cl)
E ::l
::l Cl)
~ e
.u ~
... on
o C
on Cl)
E E
Cl) Cl)
- >
~ .~
...oc
Q..(.l
Cl) os
.0 Cl)
'C .0
(.l "C
~ ~
e..g
I
~
~
......
......
~I
J
~
~
......
......
J
~
~
......
......
I
~
~
......
......
8J
;n
-
c
Cl)
E
E
~O
U
......
;n
"5
5
E
~O
......u
0;
5
~
-
al
"=
e
c.
---
:(--
~
] 6 J
u.=~ t'lI
,-,oQt.J..
2 - "
&;:.20;
.......=::0>
~8~;t
-
~
"e-
c.
c
o
OIl
c
]
e
c.
"~
_ Cl)
~'3
"0'13
...oc
c. (.l
<Il
~
......
o
Z
~
......
on
Cl)
><
j
--
13 ...
~~
- ::l
Q..C"
:G.~
6-5
U;"O
~~
.- Cl)
50.
U; E
:::l 8
.
-
N
'-;/ /'
,
t.
-.
HAZARD MITIGATION GRANT PROGRAM
JOINT .A.PPLICATION
FEMA-I005-DR-CA
US FOREST SERVICE CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT OF FORESTRY
CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO
1;' "
'"
HAZARD MITIGATION GRANT PROGRAM APPLICATION
FEMA- 1005 . DR - CA
Date Submitted 16 Dee 94
J. SUMMARY INFORMATION
A. Project tide: San RF'r~;::Jr~;n(") iTP'Jp.....~.....;f"'ln 1\'.::4M.::4iJ~m~n,... P"""je.,..,...
B. Grant amount requested: S 315,147
C. Applicant organization/agency: Joint Applicant: Citv of San Bernardi:1o.
and California Dept. of Forestry, US Forest Service is non-gran:
D. Applicant's agent (project director or project manager!. funded partner.
~ame: Richard McGreevy
Title: Disaster E'reparedness Coordinator
.-\dJreL 200 E. Third Street
San Bernardino, CA 92410
BUSiness Phone: (909) 384-5115
Fax:
(909) 384-5470
Alternate Contact Person
~ame: 'F'r!':v~ rr'1 ~r(""ltvn
Tirle: Battalion Chief
Address: 200 E. Third Street
San Bernardino, CA 92410
BUSiness Phone: (909) 384-5286
Fax: (909) 384-5470
E. Project address or location description laLso auach maps ill ActacJlmenr ]);
See attached maps in Attachment H
,
tj ',:r)
II. PROJECT DESCRIPTION
A, Project Objective:
Sionificantl.; ~educe the threat 0
"
r
i~to the historically vul~erable Northern San Bernardino!
Highland urban area.
B. Summary of Preferred Project (attach more detailed description. if available.
as Attachment A): Objecti','e ,.,ill be achieved bv conducting
ore scribed ~urns over ~ ~ive vear ~er1 d
"
4500 acres of ~he 9000 acre wildland/urban interface procect
area as descr'bed on ~aD i~ Attac~uent H.
C. Summarv of alternative strate!!ies considered for meetin!! the same objectiwS
as the p~eferred project (you may attach' more detailed description. if available.
as Attachment AI: 1. 80 r:ot:-.i~a, aopl? sufficient force wnen
.:: ~ rp nrr"....-q
1'""') i c:::--' i r:;::::::::p,; ~';p +-1""'\ .'nC'r""\~'tr?11-21g firtH; li~:ol:/
under Santa .:;na T.vind conditions.
2. 'land clear
\!
nical
clear. Dismissed due to steer slopes, environmental concerns
and cost.
See detailed description of alternatives in Attachment A.
III. COST ESH\lATE SUMMARY (provide details in Attachment D)
l. Hazard ;..liu~auon Grant p~,'g:ram Funds Requesleu:
(nore: mav ~e no more than '5':c ,If wtal dlg:lbk cUSlSI: $315,147
Other funding: sources. {.vore: [/lei"".! rile dolfuT "a/lie of ,lIZ\' In-kind (omniJllilO'~5 [0
rhe project. "ail deral!s .aTOnd"J ill .iuuchmem IT
, Citv and CDF Labor & Eauioment 5105,049
3.
Towl Funds Required to Complete Project:
$420,196
2
(I'
,-::-'
IV. PUBLIC ASSISTANCE ElIGIBILITY
Note: Hazard Mitif5aIion pro.,ects associated with a public or non-profit facility that suffered
damaf5e during the federalLv-declared disaster mav be elif5ible for suppon under the Public
Assistance Program. which can proVide more .financial suppon to applicants than the Hazara
.I1itif!atlOn Grant Program. Contacr .,'our state hazard mitigation officer or public asSIStance
officer jar more informatlOn.
A. Is the project related to a public or non-profit facility that suffered
disaster damage'? . . . . . . . . . . . NO
B. If yes. has there been a State or federal determination whether this project
could be fun tied under the Public Assistance Program'! Explain briefly,
V. PRO/ECT ElIGIBILITY CHECKLIST
Please "Je the followmg checklist [Q scree:J :-,~r a""'iicatlon [Q c'nsure ,hat It IS eligIble wr
Hazard .\Iitigatlon Gram Program runamil. ?ederal and state renewers wiil use a similar
checklist when evaluating the proposaL
'(our altachmems should proVide suiiiclent Information ior state and federal reviewers [Q
determme whether the appiication meets elcn ,1f these criterIa.
Does the proposed proJect..
l. .-\ddress a local hazard mitigation pian llbleCtlVe'
YES
2. Have a beneficial impact on [he federallv-Jecl:1reCl disaster area)
YES
3. Cause a long-term. significam reduction In a repetitive hazard when
implememation IS completed'.
YES
~. Represem the best alternative of 1 range ceJnsldered'
YES
5. Have manageable maimenance reqUirements -' I Provide details of
maimenance requiremems. as approprIlte. In .-\ttachmem Al
YES
6. Provide greater net benefits than it com' IComplete Amchmem Dl
YES
7. Comply with tloodplain managemem guidelines' (Complete Attachmem F)
YES
3
,
/1.'
VI. COMPLIANCE CONDITIONS
Agreement to the following conditions is required for consideration of the grant applicauon.
Failure (0 fulfill any of these conaitions may Jeopardize receIpt of federal funds. pursuant (0
-14 CFR. Section 13..+3.
1. Code compliance (check those that apply):
[X] The project will meet all applicable local. state, and federal law. rezulations.
codes and slJlI1dards.
The project reqUIres an exemplI"n or variance from one or more codes.
Please explain. usmg :!dditiona! sheers as necessary
~, Local Funding Participation
:!. \latchmg runds and resources are l\':!liable 10 supplemem the requested H\IGP
gr:!m with a \'alue of S 1" 0; 'J q
b. The :;?plicam pledges [0 rund and ;mole" .ent :!1I necessary maimenance ['or [he
prolect oyer the expected life of rhe prOJect.
J. Other Conditions
.VOIe: C<rrazn of rhese assurances 1I1iI\' 1101 be c:ooiicable ro your Drolecr or pro~ralll. Ir \011
hal'e quesnolls. alease comacrwllr Swre or FE.\fA Ha::.ard .~firl~anon Officer,
.-\s rhe duiv aurhorlzed agem of the JopiIcam [ .:emf\' rhar rhe subgramee named above:
a. Has the legal authonry [0 apply for federal assistance. ,md the instilUlIona!.
manageria!. and finanCIal capabiliry I induding funds sufficiem (0 pay (he non-federal
share of prolect costS) (0 ensure proper ~Ianning. managemem and complelIon of rhe
proJeclls) deSCribed in m\ aophcllIon
b. Will give the awarding agency'. [he CL1mprroller General of rhe L'nited Srates. through
anv authOrized repreSemalI\'e. access [0 and rhe right 10 examme all records. books.
papers. or documems related [0 [he asslsrance: and wIll establish a proper accouming
system in accordance with generally accepted accouming srandards (0 permit the
tracing of funds (0 a level of expendilUres adequate ro establish [hat such funds have
not been used in violauon of [he restricllons and prohibitions of applicable stalUtes.
c. Will maintain records which adequately Identify the source and application of funds.
This responsibility rests emirely with rhe subgrantee. and failure to keep and maintain
proper documentation will result in disallowing reimbursement of final claimed costs
~
,
at tune of final inspection or audit and the refunding of funds previously reimbursed
or advanced: and will retam such records for three (3) vears followml!: anv final
. - .
payments and project closure.
d. Will submit progress repom on a quarteriy basis until project closeout. Repom will
indicate the starus and completIon dates for each project funded. Any problems or
CIrcumstances affecting the comDletlOn dates. scope of work. or project costs which
are expected (0 result in noncomDiiance with the approved grant conditions shall be
described in the report.
~
..
Will cause (0 be perfonned [he reaulred financial and compiiance audits in accordance
with ,he Sinl!:ie .-\udit .-\ct of 198-1
t
"
Will comply WIth all federal srarutes relatIng (0 nondiscnmmatIon, These mciude. bur
Jre not limHed (0. [he followmg: i al Ti[le \'1 of [he Civil Righrs .-\ct of 196..\ ,P L.
38-3521 which prohibits disCrImmatIon on [he basis of race. ~olor Dr natIonal ,'ngm:
,bl Title IX of rhe EducaIlon .-\mendmems Ilf 1972. as amenaed 120 ese. 1681-
1683 and 1685.1686) which Nombirs discrimmatIon on (he bJSIS of sex: ICI SeWI1n
50-1 of the RehabilirarlOn Act ,'f 19-:3. .is Jmended 129 eSc. -9-11 which prohibns
J:':rm;inatIon on rhe baSIS e1f hanaicaD' 'u 'he .'.ge Discnmm 'J"n .-\ct of 19-5. JS
amended 1-12 ese.: 6101-6iO-', wnlch prombHs dlscnmmaIlon on rhe baSIS or age:
'el [he Drug .-\buse Office Jna Trea[mem .-\ct of 1972 IPL. 91-6161 as amended.
reiaIlng (0 nondlscnmmaIlon on [he baSIS elf Jrug abuse: I fJ (he Comprehenslv'e
.-\leohol .-\buse Jnd AlcohoiIsm PrevenIlon. Trearmem and RehabIli(aIlOn .-\ct of 19-:0
IP.L. 91-6161 JS amended. rc!JIlng [0 nondIscrImmation on [he basis of alcohol abuse
IX alcoholism: Igl 523 Jna 52- ,If [he PubliC Health Service .-\ct of 1912 (-12 C.S,e.
290 dd-3 and 290 ee-31. JS amended, relaung IO confidenualitv of alcohol and drug
abuse patiem records: Ih) Ti[1e \'III elf [he (iv'll nghts Act of 1968 (-12 l'.S.e.: 3601
et seq, I. as amended. relaung [0 nonaiscllmmaIlon In the sale. remal or finanCing of
housmg: (i1 Jnv mher nondiSCrImination provisions In the specific slatuletSI under
which applicaIlon for federal aSSlSlance is being made. and IJ) [he requiremems on
any other nondiscnminat.un srarurel S I which may apply IO (he applicalion.
g. \Vill complY. JS JppiIcable. I\un (he ;-fL'\',,"'nS elf rhe Da\'I,-Bacon :\cr 1-10 l'.S.e..
276a to 276.-\--:). rhe CopeiaITLI .-\C[ e'f lU-:3 ,-10 l'.S.e.276c and 18 l'.S.e.:S7-1\. (he
Contract Work Hours and SJfel\' Srandards ,\ct I-In l',SC 32~-333) regarding labor
standards for federally asslsleJ ~ell,srrucIlon ;ubagreemems,
h. Will comply with federal and ;rare env'lronmemal regulations. These include. bur are
not limited to. the followmg: la) en\'ironmemal review under the National
Environmemal Policy Act of 1969 IPO, I)I-l90) and Execullve Order (EO) 1151-k
(b\ notificallon of violating facilities pursuam to EO 11738: (c\ proteclion of wetlands
pursuant to EO 11990: (d1 evaluation of nood hazards in r100dplains in accordance
Wilh EO 11988: (e) assurance uf prolecl conSIStency with the approved stale
5
t
,<'
management program developed under the Coastal Zone :v1anagement .-\ct or 197: i 16
u.s.e.: 1451 et seq.); (f) comormlty of federal actions to State [Clean AIr)
Implementation Plans under Section 1761c) of the Clean Air Act of 1955. as amended
(42 U.s.e.: 7401 et seq.): Ig) protectIon of underground sources of drinking water
under the Safe Drinking Water .-\ct of 1974. as amended. (P.L. 93-5.23): (h)
protectIon of endangered species and habitat under the Endangered Species Act 01
1973. as amended. (P.O. 93-:051: ana Ii) reqUIrements under the CalifornIa
Environmental Quality Act ICEQAi and CEQA Guidelines.
I. Will comply with the Wild and ScenIc Rivers Act of 1968 116 C.se.: 1:71 C[ seu. [
related to protecting components or potential components of the natIonal \\tid and
scenIC nvers svstem.
Will assIst the awarding agenc:; :n assunng compiIance with SectIOn 106 Ilf the
:\atlonaJ HistUflC Preservatlon .-\Ct 011966. as amended 116 l' SC .nJI. EO l ':cl~
I identificatIon and preservatlon or histOrIC oropemesJ. and the .-\rchaeIJlllg!cal .(nu
Hismnc PreservatIon .-\ct of 19-4 116 l',S,e. 469a-1 et seU.1
~, Will compiy with manda[O[\ 'tanuarGS and 20ilcles relatIng to energy emc:enc\
which are contaIned in the state energy :on ;,\'atIcn plan Issueu in comoilance ',\ Itn
the Energy Policv and Conservatlon .-\CI ,PL. 9+-1631,
: Will minImize the time elapsIng remeen the tranSfer Ilf funds and rhelr ulsbursement
whenever pOSSible: and \\ iil oromPtt\. but at least quarterl\', remit Interest earneu .'n
advances to the state, Subgrantees may ~eeo interest amounts up [I) 5100 dollars per
year for admInlstratlve expenses,
m. Will proVide assurances [0 \)braIn reasQnabi\' avatiabIe. adeuuate. :Ind necessarv
insurance for the type or tvpes ,If hazanJ for which the malar disaster was declareu.
n, \"-ill initiate and complete the w,'r~ \\lthin the appiicable lime frame after receipt I)f
approval Ilf the awarding agency
Q. Will provide and maIntain .:.'mrerent .Ind .idequa[e engIneerIng 'Urer\'ISI\'n at Ihe
constructIon site !ll ensure that the CllIllplele \\I)f~ ':Imforms with [he 'Ippro\'ed pians
and speCIfications,
p, Will establish safeguards flJ rfl'hlDI1 cmOlil\'eeS I'rom uSll1g rhelr positions I'or a
purpose that constItutes ilr presems the :Iprearance Ilf rersonal Ilr organizatIonal
contlict of imerest. ilr personal gall1s,
q. Will .:omply with the Lead-Based Paim Poisoning Act (+2 l'.s.e.: 4801 e[ seq.1
which prohibits fhe use of lead hased pall1t in construction or rehabilitatIon or
reSidentIal structures.
6
,
iJ"
r. Will comply. or has already compiied. with the requirements of Titles II and III ot
the Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Properry AcquIsition Act of 1970 (P.L.
91-646) which provides for fair and equitable treatment of persons displaced or whose
properry is acquired as a result ot federal and federally assisted programs. These
requirements apply to all interests in real properry acquired for project purposes
regardless of federal pamcipatlon In purchases.
s. Will comply with all appiicable requirements of all other federal laws. Executlve
orders. regulations and policies goverrung [his program.
[. Has requested. through the State ot CalifornIa. federal finanCial assistance to be used
to perT'(\rm eligible work approv'ed In rhe sllrgrantee application for federal aSSlSlance.
Will. after [he receipt of federal finanCial aSSlSrance. rhrough the State of Califorma.
agree to rhe following:
t. The srate warrant covenng [:mnc:ai aSSlsrance Will be depOSited In a >pec:ai ami
,eoarate account. and will be l1sea [0 pay onlv eligible com tor prolecrlsl JescnbeLl
!TI rhe appiic:mon:
~ To r~rurn to rhe State of California ud. ~"rl of 'he funds so reimbursed pursuant
[0 rhe above numbered appiicauon wnlcn are excess to the approved. acrua!
exoendirures as accepted bv linal aud!r or [he federal ~overnment or rhe Srare
. . -
Controller. or both: and.
~. In the event [he approv'ed amount c'f rhe above numbered prolecr appiicallon IS
reduced. rhe reimbursement appllcabk [0 Ihe amount of rhe reduction wli! be
promprly refunded 10 rhe Srare.'[ Callforma.
The underSIgned represents rhat he IS aurhonzed bv rhe above named subgrantee to enter Into
rhis agreement for and on behalf of the said subgrantee.
- k?~fi~ './1;' ,h <"6/>....:.:e,,-,"-' - 16 Dec 94
. . of
SIGNA Tl"RE OF .\l'THORIZED .\PPUc.\:\T"S .\GE:\T OA TE
Richard McGreevy, City of San Bernardino Disaster Preparedness
PRINTED :-.lAME .\:--l0 TITLE Coordinator
-
I
,
c
~ .;()
VII. ATTACHMENTS:
...... Detailed Project Descnpuon
B. ProJect Costs
C. Work Schedule
D. Cost-Effectiveness Analvsls
E. Environmental Concerns Checklisr
F. Floodplain Management Review lntormauon I for projects Involving
~onstruction or modificauon of strucrures,.
G. Copy of Articles of Incorporation and tax exempt ruling.
I If Appilcant is an Non-ororit orgamzationl
H. \laps
8
,
/7
"
ATTACHMENT A
DETAILED PROJECT DESCRIPTION
PROJECT OBJECT:C'lE
The project objec~ive is to significantly reduce the threat of a
wildland fire spreading in~o the northern San Bernardino/Highland
urban area. This will be accomplished by conducting prescribed
burns over a 5 year period on approximately 4500 acres of the
9000 acre wildland/urban interface as depicted on the project
area map in Attachmen~ H.
PROJECT JUSTIFICATION
The San Bernardino Valley foo~hills have a long history of
disas~rous fires. Fire his~ory maps included in AttachmentD
detail the locale and frequency of such fires. The mos~ notable
fires in recen~ times are the Bear Fire of 1970 and the Panorama
Fire of 1980. The Bear Fi=e burned 53,100 acres and destroyed 51
homes and 11 structures. The Panorama Fire took four lives,
consumed 23,600 acres, des~royed 325 homes and damaged 55 other
homes. Direc~ costs for ~he Panorama Fire were $40 million in
property damage, $12 million in natural resources and $6 million
in suppression efforts.
Today, local conditions to include vegetation, climate and
topography combine to make the potential for another devastating
fire extremely high. Firs~, fourteen years of vegetation growth
provide the fuel for such a fire. The most common vegetation in
the San Bernardino foo~hil1s is chapparal which includes chamise,
manzanita, scrub oak and sagebrush. As this chapparal ages the
percentage of dead material within plants increases. The oil
content of leaves and dead fuel combine to make these plants
highly flammable, particularly during the fall.
Another component of the local fire potential is Mediterranean
type climate. This climate is characterized by short, wet
winters and long dry summers followed by strong winds in the
fall. The Santa Ana winds which blow in the fall often reach 50-
100 miles per hour. These winds quickly dry the vegetation,
preheat fuels and are capable of carrying firebrands long
distances into built up housing areas. Turbulent wind conditions
also hinder firefighters on the ground as well as tanker
operations in the air.
The third factor intensifying the local fire potential is
topography. The san Bernardino foothills are typically abrupt
and extremely steep. The steep slopes spread fire rapidly
because as heat rises, it drys out and preheats upslope fuels.
Structures in narrow canyons are especially at risk as the narrow
A - 1
,
/
J )'J
canyons act as chimneys. In addition, the steep slopes severely
limit the use of firefighters and fire apparatus.
Local conditions as described above put approximately 10,000
homes valued over $1 billion at risk. Given the fact that
costly wildland fires have spread into the urban area in the past
and conditions are ripe today for another such fire, funding of
this fire mitiga~ion gran~ request is indeed prudent.
In addition, since this is a joint project of CDF, USFS and the
City of San Bernardino, the project will promote the type of
training and interaction necessary to coordinate response to any
actual wildland fire in the local area.
Finally, since project costs will be held to the minimum through
the use of the following s~rategies, grant monies will be highly
leveraged. Firs~, since USFS is not eligible for grant monies,
it will use its own funds to pay for its participation. In
addition, USFS will conduct environmental studies on federal
lands at no cos~ to the gran~ fund. Second, CDF will use
prisoner help at ~uch reduced wages, to minimize its project
costs. Third, the City of San Bernardino will use up to three
crews (9 persons) per projec~ day without charge to grant funds.
Only a supervisory crew on over~ime plus equipment and supplies
will be charged to the grant project. Project applicants thus
believe that federal mitiga~ion funds for this project will buy
considerable protection for a minimal amount of money.
PROJECT ACTIONS
The following major actions are included in this project.
1. Perform hazard/risk/value study to determine a)
location, age, fuel loading and potential fire intensity of
vegetation in project area b) opportunities for and likelihood
of fire starting in various sec~ions of the project are and
c) value of structures and improvements in the project area.
2. Determine owners of property parcels in the project area
and procure their permission to burn.
3. Conduct field studies to determine the specific
environmental and archaeological items of concern in the project
area.
4. write proiect definition for NEPA/CEOA studies, reviews
and hearings.
5. write burn plans to include vegetation management
objective, prescribed burn objectives, desired effects and
tolerable deviations, public notification and involvement plan,
project description, fire prescription, organization and
communications plan, escape fire contingency plan, safety plan,
GO - NO GO checklists and post-fire evaluation responsibilities.
A - 2
,
6. Perforn prepara~orv work to delineate and construct
control lines.
7. Implement plans in prescribed order over the project
duration of five years.
PROJECT ALTERNATIVES
The following alternatives were considered in the development of
this project.
a. Do nothinq. Allow fires to burn in the project area as
they naturally and historically occur. Respond with sufficient
forces at time of burns to prohibit fires from destroying urban
developments. This alternative was dismissed due to the high
potential for uncontrollable fires under Santa Ana wind
conditions.
b. Crea~e a fire break ~hrouqh hand clearinq of prescribed
sections of the proJec~ area. This alternative was dismissed due
to the high costs involved in hand clearing which, according to
USFS sources, could run as high as $2000 per acre.
c. Create a fire break ~hrouqh mechanical clearinq of
prescribed sections of the projec~ area. This alternative was
dismissed due to problems involved in operating heavy equipment
on steep slopes and the possibility of environmental damage to
sensitive areas. In addition, costs, according to USFS sources,
could run as high as $150 per acre.
d. Create a fuel break throuqh prescribed burns in specific
sections of the project area. This alternative was selected due
to its minimum cost, realistic training opportunities and minimal
impact on the environment. Costs for this alternative are
estimated by the CDF to run approximately $70 per acre.
PROJECT K~INTENANCE
The project will be initially completed over a five-year period
of prescribed burns. During that period the effectiveness of the
burns will be evaluated and planning and budgeting considered for
maintenance through follow-on prescribed burns in specific area
as required.
A - 3
,
ATTACHMENT B
PROJECT COSTS
PLANNING COSTS
$105,196
- Biological Assessments (For NEPA/CEQA)
$44,100
Literature review - $2,500
Initial Field Survey - $19,600
Post-survey Repor~ of Findings -
4-Annual follow-on focus surveys
$8,000
- $14,000
- Fees
$ 1,280
California Fish &
(assumes negative
County filing fee
Game - $1,250
declaration)
- $30
- City Planning
$43,032
Planning Department - $1,923
60 hours at $32.05/hr for work with RFP
process and prepara~ion of environmental
initial study
Fire Depar~ment - $41,109
To backfill lQ shifts to free up a Battalion level
lead project officer to plan and coordinate all
project actions for firs~ year of project plus 10
shifts for each follow-on year (2,3,4 & 5).
Total of 70 shifts at $587.27 per shift based on
regular pay for backfill Battalion Chief
_ California Department of Forestry
$15,284
Based on 80 hours per year planning for each of five
years at $27.29 per hour salary plus 40 percent
benefit rate for a Division Chief - Resource Manager.
- Administrative Costs
$
500
Cost for
area and
burn.
notifying owners of parcels in project
receiving their written permission to
- GIS Costs
$ 1,000
Based on 40 hours at $25.00 per hour to produce
project maps and legal owner listings.
B-1
,
,
PRESCRIBED BURN COSTS
$315,000
- 4500 acres at $70.00 per acre
(actual cost average for recen~ local burns)
_ 4500 acres = 50 percent trea~ment of 9000 acre
projec~ area
- $70.00 per acre includes cos~s for
labor (City & CDF supervisory crews and prisoners)
equipmen~ (water tenders, fire engines, helicopters,etc)
supplies (fuels, foams, flares, meals, etc)
TOTAL PROJECT COST
$420,196
- Planning Costs
$105,196
- Prescribed Burn Cost
$315,000
B-2
,
~
APPENDIX 1 to ATTACHMENT B
VALUATION OF AGENCY CONTRIBUTIONS
PRESCRIBED 3URNS
Although costs for prescribed burns were figured at $70.00 per acre for
computing gran~ request amoun~. costs for actual labor, equipment and
supplies used to conduct the burns will be charged to the grant as
follows:
a. City/CDF supervisory crew personnel:
$25.46 per hour
Based on 1994 Mutual Aid Cooperative Agreement
rate of $611.00 per person for 24 hours
b. Prisoner fire crew personnel:
Based on CF ccnt:-:lct
$1. 00 per hour
c. Fire Apparatus
Based on horsepower ra~ings in accordance
with ?EMA Schedule of Equipnent Rates
(includes fuel)
0-175 HP
176-190 HP
191-275 HP
276-up HP
$13.00/hr
$16.00/hr
$24.00/hr
$28.00/hr
d. Helicopters
$600.00 per hour
Includes helitorch operations but not fuel,
alumagel and any other supply costs
e. supplies
Based on actual costs at time of purchase
f. Meals
Based on actual costs at time of purchase
PLANNING
a. City Associate Planner
$ 32.00 per hour
Based on actual wage of $22.42 per hour
plus benefit rate of 28.5 percent plus
overhead rate of 11.3 percent
B-1 - 1
,
b. city Lead Project Officer
Based on actual wage of Battalion Chief
of $24.47 per hour to pay for the actual
number of shifts filled while planning
and coordinating the project
c. CDP Planner
Based on actual wage of $27.29 per hour
plus benefit ra~e of 40 percent
d. Administrative Costs
Based on actual costs for ~ailing letters
to/from parcel owners to obtain written
permlsslon to burn on their land
e. GIS Cost
Based on City cost to City departments
B-1 - 2
$ 24.47 oer hour
$ 38.21 per hour
$ 25.00 per hour
,
~,
/
tnI
e-J
e-J
-
U ;
/-oJ
Z...;j
:;;:J :=1
~=
=f:
u~-
~.....
~
~:::::I
~
- ,
IJ I I I i I I I I
I I I , ~ I
0
Ul 1::1 ;. I I Ul Ul Ul
"'I '" U '" '" '"
.. Ul Ul Ul '" Ul Ul Ul
CJ :> :> :> '" :> :> :>
z e-
'" '" '" '" '" Z '" '" '"
" C C C C 0 C C C
oC U U U U U U U U
- .
,. ,. >- >- ,. Ul >- >- ,. >- >- >- >- ,.
Eo< Eo< Eo< Eo< Eo< '" Eo< e- Eo< '" Eo< Eo< Eo< Eo< ....
.... .... .... .... .... ~ .... .... .... C .... .... .... .... .;
U U U U U U UI U u U U U U u
I ~I , I I , I I I I I I
l> I I I I I I I I I
0 I
z
I I I I I , I I ,
.. I >-
Eo<
CJ ....
0 u
I I I I I I I /) >- '" I
.. I .. e,~
.. tll
.. I
I I I I I I I I l' I '" ~I I I
" I c
" u
oC
I I 1.1 ~ 1 I Ul I
Ii 'l' '"
... Ul
'"
~ I I TI I,: I I I I I
... I
~I I liT I I I I I I
0: I I. 1 II I I I I I
..
oC
t { ol' I I
~ J . I
)( I I I I I I
..
'"
..
~ I I I I
..,
c ~I
0
'" '"
" ~
" 2. ~
~ ... ., :1 'C
~ C 0. ~j ~ ~
~ .. '" " ~
" ~ B '" III . U
.. ti .. " ~ g '" 0
Ul " 'C ., .... c ...
... .. ~ ... ~I . " ..
" .. . ... " .. .... ... ... a
" '" ~ .. " 3 Co .. 0. a 0 "
.... '" " 3 '" '" " ... 0 .. c
.. ~ <( 0 c :. u ...
> .... '" .... 'C U .... '" ~
- .. . .. c .... u .c '"
" .... '" ... " .. .. .... ... '"
... " c " ... c ,., .. " .... " "
. ... ~ c ~ ~ 3 " ., " .c '" .... "
Z 3 a: a 3 c " " > c ... " " ... .c
0 <( - c 0 3 c ... ~ " .... .. .... c 0 ...
.. " 0 0 0 > " " '" ." .. :. ...
fj .. ... ... .... ... " Ul C U .. U .... ~ u
c .. ... .. .... ... a: 0 " c .. "
oC . N > '" . > 0 ... .c " " ~
... .. c ~ '" c ... ... CJ " 0 c ... ...
" '" OJ ..l ~ OJ " .. > " u ... .. ..
" c u "
" .. " .. t ., ... .. OJ > 0 " .. .. ..
~ u " u u .. u c ... .. u u
.. " " " " ~ " " OJ .. ... " " "
" " u " ... " " " .. ~ .. .., "
u c 0 c .. c > c .. c U .. C C
" 0 ... 0 0 0 .., 0 ... " Ci u .. 0 0
0: U .. CJ Z CJ <( CJ :>: 0: <( :>: CJ CJ
0 .. N M ... .. \D r- ../ '" " .. N M ... on
III .. .. .... .. .. ...
ATTACHMENT C
,
~
..,
El
-
-
~~
z~
[;::l .j
~r.;1
,... "
....9
~~
~;:
<9
=
CI
Sl
, i " I .' I I I 1
I I I I
I i I I I : I
I , , I ! I
I "'I ",I '" "'I "" "" "'; "'I
401401 tl.o tz..! tz..j;....1 tz../ "'"
>< '" '" '" "'I "" '" "'I "'I
u =1::: ,::) 0 :J1:::I = :::
~ ~! ~ ~ ~ ~) ~I ~ ~
" 0 0 0 0 01 01 0 0
~ u u u u u u u u
.. .. .. .. "I ..j .. ..
)ol > > )ol )011 >1/)01 >t
E-< E-t E-4 e-. E-< €-II e-. ~
)-4 H t-l H 1-1 1-1 t-l I-t
0. U U u U! u u u
I I I I II n I I I I
u
'" I
0
I I I I I I I I
5 I
!J I I I
0
.. I II I I I
..
lD
" I I I I I I I I
Q
oC
s I I I~I~ I I I
., ,
I I'" ... I I I ..
I I I ,
~ I ~ ~
., ,
>< I I I I I ~ , I I I
oC
:0:
0: I I II ] I I I
..
oC
, 'J I I ,
~
,
lD I~ jJ 11 I I I I I I I I i
'" I I
..
z 1 ,.;, ,.. I I I I
oC
.,
I
I
,..
'tl
~ C
'" 0
'" ,~
-
~ " - -
m ~ '" .~ c
c ~ - E "
" ~ .... - ~
~ :> '" ~ ,.. '"
'" "" ~
'" " > 'tl
a _ ~ " " '" ~
Z ~ ,~ c ~ ~ " " .a
0 o a: ~ c '" " 0 ,~
... .... - 0 ~ ~ 3: "
f< > 'tl 0 'tl ~ u
U a " ~ .... "" c. _
.. " ~ '" ~ ~ ~ ~
"" N tl' ~ .... " " "
~ ~ tl' ... " 0. 0.
.. '" '" ~ ~
.. '" .. '" '" ..
II ~ ~ U U U
" " .. .. " .. ~ "
.... ... ~ .... 'tl .. 'tl 'tl
II ow 'tl ~ " .... " "
> .. c. ~ a " a a
.. a: :J ... U 3: U U
0 .. N M .. .... '" .... '"
:II
,
ATTACHMENT D
BENEFIT-COST ANALYSIS
EXPECTED USEFUL LIFE OF ?ROJECT
According to US Fores~ service personnel, the expected life of
this project is approxlmately 30 years. This project's objective
and useful life es~imate thus coincides with the San Bernardino
National Forest Fuel Managemen~ Plan goal of preventing thirty-
year-and-older chaparral buildups through annual burning of a
certain percentage of chaparral. In addition, USFS experience
indicates prescribed burning of chaparral older than 30 years is
too dangerous. Thus, an ideal window of opportunity exists over
the next five year proJect period to burn 15 - 20 year old
chaparral while the risks of such a burn are still manageable.
FREOUENCY OF DISASTERS
The City's General Plan (extract attached as Appendix 1 to Annex
0) refers to US Oepart~ent of Forestry data which indicates that
fires occur in the project area on a regular basis almost every
year and "very large fires occur fairly regularly every ten
years." The largest recent fires are indicated on Figure 60 of
the General Plan extract. Given that the latest large fire, the
Panorama Fire, occurred in 1980, the project area is overdue for
another disastrous fire.
EXPECTED BENEFITS
Census tract data indicate there are approximately 10,000 homes
in the northern San Bernardino/Highland area within the moderate
or higher fire hazard area depicted on Figure 61 of the General
Plan extract. The value of these homes is conservatively
estimated to be 10 billion dollars. In addition to the present
housing stock at risk, Table 13 of the city's General Plan
indicates there is available land for another 10,000 potential
dwelling units (DUs) in the Northeast and Northwest quadrants of
the City, closest to the project area. Although it is improbable
that the total number of homes at risk would be involved in any
one fire, another Panorama-type fire is a distinct possibility
without proactive mitigation measures. That fire, as mentioned
earlier, took four lives, destroyed 325 homes and cost $58
million dollars in 1980. Such a fire today would cost at least
twice that amount. Thus estimated project cost of $420,196 would
result in a high benefit to cost ratio.
0-1
,
ri - : ,- r,
__.:;~\~<=:~\ l ~~ .:.~.-\C-:',iE\l D
:" ~"\ :::?:~:\RD;\O (E.\H\l PLl..\ EXT!)~;CT
15.0 WIND AND FIRE
INTRODUCTION
Historically, extreme wind conditions and wildfires have resulted in the loss of life and
property in the planning area. As such. these hazards are an appropriate concern of the
Citv's mandated Safety Element.
, .
OVERVIEW OF EXISTING CONDITIONS
A. Wind
Historicailv, hign velocity ',vinds in the planning area have resulted in considerable
structural damage. Portions of roois have been broken and blown awav and public util-
ity structures s';ch as power lines and traffic signals have been damaged. . Structural
damage has been most prevalent ;'tear the mouths of canyons of the San Bernardino
},four.tains,
HIgh winds exacerbate brusn fire conditions. Of the maior fires in the San Bernardino
:-"10umains. all have ocrurred during ;:.'enoos of high winds.
Tne highest velocities area associated with downslope canvon and Santa Ana winl:s.
The canyon winds blow OUt of the higher elevations of the mountains into the valley
when there is an extreme temperature difference between the two areas. Canyon wmd
velocities over 90 lmles per hour dur:r.g the Panorama Fire and over 100 mile~ per hour
during the 1970 fire have been recorded.
The Santa Ana wind conditions .;re a reversal of the prevailing southwesteriy wmL1s
and usually occ.:r on a region-wide 6asis Juring late summer and early fall. Thev.lrt?
dry, warm winds that How irom the i\igher desert elevations in the north through the
mountain passes and canyons, As they converge through the canyons. their velocities
increase, Conseqt:ently. peak velOCIties are highest at the mouths of the canyons and
dissipate as they spread across the vailev Hoor, Santa Ana winds generallv coinciLi,-
with the drought peflod in the region ::md the period of highest fire danger in the adia-
cent San Bernardino :-"lountains,
Extrerne wind velocities for the CI\' are listed in Table 66 (page 5-137) of the Gener~l
Plan T echmcal B.lckground Rl?port.
The high wind velocitv and property damage pLltential have resulted in the northern
half of the City. .1djacent to the mountains being classified by the City as a "High Wind
Area" (Figure 59), In this area the City apFlie~ stringent conditions for the construction
of buildings and public f;1cilities,
D - 1 - 1
,
ell
c --3
:= 3
0) <C
"' "
<C
W
a: C
::l
~ Z
u. :;
,
,
.,-
h '
, ......../
,
-,'
:.....
- ,
,)
~IJ "~I
I' I':)
i.r~n
~:
rr7
-.
,.
--~
~.
1___-'
f__.
: -.-..-. -- .-- --_..-
t.:lC
~i ,U5=
2/ ~:i:
>
, - I-
~u
, _I'a",." ~
, " i..,,~,,\.I\'
. \' ~'
--~--------..., ,,---'
....., ---
"/ ,,";'.....,1-
i'/
.:/ ,...,,,,
. ~':;we;;-,io~-
Cl,,\<':'.::--.-' '
~
.
-/
...... /
,-~
~/ .r::./....
1/ /
/
/ ,
/:/ / ,.,,'.-.
)! ,/.'
'-- . ",;.-
.~~.....
, .'
/--' , ,..'.
, '~.'
-........i
/
/
r- ~--
-, -
,;.;; ~ \
.
o.
., C
W
1--
:::
I
~>,
<3:
.,
..
~
;;;
~,
"
2
/
,;
41ft'IS
/
L
,.
t/
. /
Qo.,..y
<!'/ . '"
"../ "
/' "
.'
...
.'
/;~---~
w'" .'
~
................
,"--.-
Z! ~
Si t ~ '-
a;;; \\ '\
... .".,,'~; /1' '-
ff9 ~I \\ .
,--~.,~?,.\
~~ I~~\ \\
, ".\
\ ...'----
\J ,....~ '
..,
/!
/;'0
~\~
"
""'---
U't'lIIlla
_.~ -
~.
~.
..,O\lIU.1
-' ,
.__._~!--
--j!
'...---
Vi,-.---..;;~
..
.;;,..-
Ii
\
....-j
,
,.
\
, -.
~
_0.__:--
::;i
~,
=1
=,
~!
~,
.1, C:~
.S '\lI'OII,
I
~!~
'"
,
.
1
.
.
.
.
......,-WOU".OG1l....__ .
..' '1
- --, l
, 1-
.~. ll'llI~IIM
'-." .l.
,~
'----:
...
.~~/~~- ,,-
-.
".
U,1I0l,tI'I\ I"
I
J
1__.oI..,oll)Ullt (
I
ISj'oo,.,~-
.,. -
..
"'
.,
.,,,
li.i
~,
~i
~
_0
~z
<::
~
""
)
<:::
:::
~
""
:::
~
v
C
..".
"'"
.~
V
U
"
->
<::
.
.
~.
~
W
I
,
,
B. Fire
The San Bernardi=:o pianning area IS subject to wiidland fires due to the steep terrain
and highlY t1ammable chaparral vegetation of the foothills of the San Bernardino
Ylountains and r.ig:; winds that correspond with seasonal dry periods. ~1ajor fires have
endangered :l1e C::; of numerous occasions in the past and in several instances. have
spread into the Ct'; and caused extensive damage.
The C.s, Depar:::-,en: of Forestry has records of wiidland fires dating back to the begi=:-
ning of the 20th ce!'.turv, The data mdicates that fires occur on a regular basis almosr
every year and :na: \'ery large fires occur fairly regularly every ten years. According to
the Department of Forestrv, the large fires correspond to the age of the vegetation
which, if not buro.ed regulariv, begins to accumulate dead material that is more easiiv
ignited and spreads fire faster than :'.ewer growth.
Conseauentlv, a decade will pass with few fires foilowed by a decade with several large
fires, The occ..:rre:Ke of the iargest ~ires also corresponds to periods of extremely high
wind conditions, The largest fires in recent history are indicated on Figure 60, ~fuch or
::-.e 'Jt.:::t: areas o\'er:ap, Consequent!v for some fires only the extremities are depicted.
The large fires tr.at are spread bv WInds periodicailv approaching and exceeding 90-100
miles per hour arc considered unconrroilable by the California Department of Forestry
and C.5. Forest SeT\'JCe, Other areas in southern C.llifornia are being burned off period-
icaiiv bv waY or conrrolled burns to remove older vegetation. The controlled burn ~'fl'-
cess is not used ::1 the San Bernardi=:o ~[ountains because of the unrredictability and
rorce of the winds in the area which could make controlled burns a potential hazard,
,....s a consequence, ::-.e San Bernanii:1o \lount.lins will experience wildland fires on a
regular basis and approxlmatciv even' [en vears it can be expected to experience a \'E'r\'
:.In;e tire that will burn out of control :'or an extended period of time,
in recognition Ot ~hese hazards, ~l;e Citv vf San B..,rnardino participated in the
preparation or the Foothill Cornmun;t!cs Protective "GrL'enbelt" Progr..lm in 1983 in col-
laboration with :he Countv or San Bernardino, California Department 01 Forestrv,
Foothill Fire Protection District, West End Resource Conservation District. East Valley
Resource Consen':lticn District C.s, Soii Consen'ation S..,rvices. and C.5. Forest Service,
The t't;rt'05c l1r t:,c program :s lLl ~L'dun' fire. flood. anc.i erosion 1055es in the wild-
land/urban mtertace in the roothiils ot the San Bernardino Valley, The program W;]S
prornpted. in rart, bv the Panorama l'ire which occurred in 1980.
The interface zone is ,iivided into three categories Ilf fire hazard ;]s shown all Fi~un' ('],
These relate to tc!rrall'., accessibilitv, soil stability, and vegetati,m. The. program pre-
SCrIbes development standards to ~educe fire risks; including roadway characteristics,
area accessibiJitv, building construcriun (materials and configuration), location and sit-
ing of structures, landscape and irrigation. vegetation management, and establishment of.l "greenbelt".
D - 1 - 3
,
..,
.\
I~\ \
-., ""!/~
__j; i~'''?\.'
, 0 /0.&\\ ~,
~- ".'
,." ~1l'lj'IS ''L.\.. ~ "':,',;-';;;"T'
c".
ff, -----
>- >- >- >-
" '"
(j) -g -g -
<::: 5 '5
w 0 ~
a: co co := ~
<::: '" '" ," ,"
~ OJ 2 CJ
~ <:
z ..: ..: ..:
~ :: ::
..... :5
CD co ~ ~
~ ~
w '" CJ CJ CJ
.: ~ - -
a:
'. 0 ::::l
0 C1l
0 C '" r-- ."- '"
C1l C1l ::l ::l
tJ;l a: - -
w 0
cr
::l ~
S2 (j) ~lliilllitl.
"'j ....
"" ~ ggg '::"r:
<J)
'::I G
- :;
C/Jo
__C/J
CJ
<J)
":= ::J
=0
~
v'J
.;;,
~i'
.-~
,
'r
1
1
->\
/'
.
];,
<.
~:
/
,~
"
/
/
/
/
'" ---"-..
,
.-
/
.5.,I,S
._--.
.,..j~----v~:
CJ
-
..,
,,'
,.~"
r----
\
,
=--l'SiUiiiirli-
...,..",,13..011
1 ,
~";. ,
,.
'-,
, ,
"
U'.II'III~lr~
"
"',J~~'" -
/~,,}.
, .s..._
....., WCIU'" I"
r.....-...
,j
..
. ,
l___
...o;;lI~
I
I
i
\
:1
<
--?
,
we ttS
,
-^
-Q
~z
2:
Q
-
<:::
"-
;:;
~
::::
0
) u
:::
I 0
I
1._ r.J
I "
I ..->
2:
0' w...
-, .
- ~ ii,
I .
Ir
~.
..
,~
1
,
.
.
I
.
.
\
----;-.. lII..i '1
I
t;;i
;1:
~., '"01~1"
"
~
. .
.::i,---"u~i,_
I,
I
,
~--
\
\
,
"--' (
c
o
;;;
o
e-
o
o
E
o
u
:>
C
W
.. ~. 'S 11001.
" " -
~ ,", :r ---+~ _.'
. "' ..
<, 51 ., ..
". _c' =. .:: .1
iil :i
......
.......~~:..
"':...~..'o "
"
~
~
.""...,'''''..,'
.:.~:a.. ,:
..,..;r,o
"
D
1
TO
<.
~.
,,", f-
"
,
./ I
I
'I
---_.--~.
\ \
/--
>-
.a
'C'
'"
a.
E
o
j.)
7,-
- 1:
,- ca
?l ....
.... ca 4l
" ~ J:
<Jl J: ,"
<<: 4l u.. 4l
.... ~
OJ - ,.
w ~ " ~ .c....l
0:: ~
- ,!<'."
<<: :S '8 J:...
)( "
Q w J: ::E >0 ....
0:: I I I ::: "
<<: <<: !Xl u U J:
~ N l ,
<0 <<:
w J: HJ . . . l .
0:: .
.
~ W .
- .
S2 g: .
................ .
u.. u.. .
I
I
.
I
,
.
.
.
~"-'" "...."'.../
./
/
/
/~
,:/
'.-._....0
...;~.O
~:.;..:'.;'~.
"
.
./
--(
.^'
fA" ;..."
.A" WI'd .,
;;,.
.,
~
.- :-~' ~;-." .ilO.,I,,--
.." jjUII'.I~'"
,/
I
I
"
"
..
,.
-.-.-.-
.:;;, .
i
I
I
. '-~..~ ~:...:...!-- .
- ---:-~!!:A:rIl'r1;
'--.
,
I
,.
~ \
,
.......
"
/
/
/
/'
./
,.~ ,
.....,.;
.'~ I
"
"
'.
..
~.
n _
~
-
e
<lI
...
>oCl
- 0
c ...
::Ie.
e.
e=
o 4l
U-@
. 4l
.c !
eel
o ,
I.l. 4l
>
4l;
" "
=!
o 0
<Jl ...
_e.
------
,,;~ a~
~.WrQ""
Vii
.'
......"i~,;.
--"'7---
'."
'f..~..;":.._ ~,
-+ "'.;,
---~y'
,.,,1I0UleA I'"
lA,",O".,.""
:-z:
.ii.
~~
~;
....2......___
i IS IrOO'd
"
I
~ i/ \\
~ ,,,,, .'?~.
It Jf.: .11.-'
'. .......,1\ ..'
. . '\ ...::; _.h~ ;...........~
:
.
.
.
.
.
u"II"OVII,.aOll ' - ---;.-
\
\
,
..
'"
"
"---..." .
-:
I
/
I
I
\
:1
=
-~
>
,"",'
2:
o
-
<r
~
'-'
~
i2
(j
:2
o
(j
"
~
2:
-
.'
:.;,;
, ~
I ~
I'
1- ~-
\-._~
I
~
c:
,2
-
"
...
o
c.
...
o
u
e
o
.!,!
:>
c:
W
>0
.Q
."
~
C.
E
o
P
.
TABLE 13
Potential New Residential Development Within City Umits
by Quadrant
c:;,., C7ie-~arr.. ~i v .\1ulti-familv Total
_.4"'~~. ...
Ouac~:;1t .....cres Dt: s Acres DUs Acres DUs
Soutr.east 107.7 784 544.6 6,150 652.3 6,735
Sou tl:.....es t 808,1 3,658 262.5 2,708 1,070.6 5,857
:\' ortr.eas t 3,301A 2,777 129,8 1,553 3,431.2 3,951
:\'orthwest ..... ""-... .... 6,426 90,9 1,134 3,342.6 6,727
:;,.:..::; 1..
Total 7,468.9 13,645 1,027.8 11,545 8,496.7 25,190
Source: ::nvicorn Curporation.
D - 1 - 6
,
ATTACHMENT E
ATTACHMENT E. Environmental Concerns Checklist
All project elements must compiy with the C'iarionai Environmenral Policy Act in order to
assure thar potenuai environmental and soclai unpactS are considered before rederai funds are
granted to a proJect. The ievei or revIew re~U1red wiil depend on the project.
The C::.liforrua Environmental Quality Act iCEQAl may also appiy [Q many orojeclS, To
avoid duplication of effort. applicants are erlcouraged ro work with rhe Office, of Emergenc\'
ServIces to conduct combined :-.IEPAiCEQA reviews rhat meet rhe requirements of both lawS
simultaneously.
ProjectS rr;a~ reqUIre pubiic ::eanngs a:1q coorc:nallOn among se\'eral agencies [Q assure rr:at
important concerns are addressed, Appllcams C:1::.y ::.sk OES to oblain FE"IA partWlpauon in
such disc;;SSlOns or meermgs :n order :0 5ceec 'olD re'new of the project ::.opiicauon.
The ['ollowmg crlecklist :s intended as a~rcaQ 5',,-ye\' of corentlai impacts ;~,at may ~e
-~nsla."""''''''''; "T"'q'er \EP'" ~nOl'I'C"ntc: n_Q ........,..,..."..aneri r" ~....nC:Uj'r "'I'['n alJ""'nc'e' rn' ar ma\' ,c".<1\:->
>..Wl ....__....u . ... .-.. '''''\7'. ....... cl..... _....'-.... := '"" .l.. ...v.._ .'" ::\... , ... I... ..
expertIse :n ::. QartIcuiar issue '."hile ccmc:e:lr.g the c::ecklist. ?1e3se I1sr t::e contact cerSl'r:,
at "j'l "CfeMC'es -~nsul'[ea' ".. r;..e .MQ' 'r' ..:...'" '~Q,..i':l';'t
..1 ...= ...... 'wU .;;.~ ... ..... l ".... ........... .- .
For '{ es cerermrnallons. pie3se Include 3~r:el cescr:ctlcn or how [he Issue WOUld re
addressed, .\[tach addillonal paper if r:eedec.
A. Land Cse and Socioeconomic Effects
1. \Vouid ihe orcposed crClect :e :nCO;1S!Sier,: '.\ nh c:.:rrenr land :.:se or zoning.'
Ye, :\"
No
CommentS: See attachea supporting information package.
:, Would the proposed project in\'oi"e rhe reiocauon or e:mung srrucrures'
No
Comments; See attached supporting information package
J. \Voujd the proposed ~roJc~r Jr'!cct -:~cncn;;:..: ::'':U\"lUCS";
No
Comments: See attached supportinG information package
... Would rhe proposed proJecr JrreCl t'JrKS ,'r reCreJllOn areas ~
No
Comments: See attached supporti ng i nformati on package
5, Would rhe proposed project Jlfect coasral cone envIronments'
No
Comments: See attached supporti ng information package
E-l
,
fA c;-~)rp
Attachment G. Project Title: Prescri bed Burn Proqram
6. Other iand use! socioeconomic i.'11pact concerns?
. . ., . . . . . . .
No
Corrunen~: See attached suooor!inq information package
B. Air/Water Quality
1. Wouid the proposed project aiter a:r quaiity)
. . . . . . . .
Yes
Corrunents: See attached suoportinq inf~rmation package
2. \Vouid the proposed project :::\'0:\: ::::ecgmg disposal in water'
No
Corrunenrs: See attached suoportinq information package
:. \Vouid :he proposed pro}ect :rl\'l'i\"c :::cdjr'ic:.::on of .1 waterway).
Maybe
Corrunents: See attached suoportino information package
.+, Other air/water quaiity conce~s?
Yes
Corruner.rs: See attached suooort i no i nformati on package
C. :\atural Resources
1. \Vould the prcpos~d proj~c( :-emc\'e \~get.1r~cn.J
Yes
Comments: See attached suoportinq information package
:, Would the proposed pro.1ect affect a \\e~iand'
Comments: See attached suoportino information package
3, Would the proposed pro.1ect arrect an endJn~ered specIes,'
No
Mavbe
Comments: See attached supportinq information package
4, Would the proposed project arfecr a wlldlire, conservauon area,' ""',"" No
Comments: See attached suoporti no i nformati on package
E-2
,
"1;-----) C):/
Attachment t,;, Project Title: Prescri bed B~rn Proqram
5. Would the proposed project aIfec: aquIfers or streamrlows?
Yes
Conunen~: See attached SUDDortinq information package
6. Other natural resource concerns? ",.
No
Conunen~: See attached SUDDortinq information package
D. Archeological and Historic
,
1. Would the proposed project affec: an archeological. culrural or historic site) No
Conunen~: See attached SUDDortinq information package
2, Other archeological or historic concer::s,'
No
Conunents: See attached sUDDortino information package
E. Othel Is.;;ues (describe belowl,
Persons consulted on environmental concerns
1.
Tom Dodson, President
Tom Dodson & Associates
Environmental Consultants
.+63 :'i. Sierra i\'a\'
San Bernardino, CA 92410
(909) 884- 9700
,
Tom Leslie, Phd, C~ En~ R.E.A.
The v~lA Group
Natural Resources & Environmental Assessments
26461 Cro~n Valley Paria,a\- Ste. 200
:-lission Viejo, C-\' 92691 '
(il4) 367-1000
E-3
Q5r).':)0
.~.?PE\DlX "
ATIACH1\1ENT E. ENVIRONMENTAL CONCERNS CHECKLIST
SUPPORTING DOCUMENTATION
As the local lead agency, the City or San Bernardino is aware of the need to comply with
environmental requirements. including the National Environmental Policy Act (NEP A) and
California Environmental Quality Act ICEQA). Based on the proposed project. controlled
bum in areas bordering the northern urban boundary of the City, the City believes that an
Environmental Assessment (EA) and Finding of No Significant Impact (FONS!) can be
prepared and adopted to comply with NEPA. For CEQA compliance, the City intends to
adopt a Mitigated Negative Declaration as it's environmental determination. The City will
conduct any necessary public hearings and has extensive experience in coordinating similar
programs with several agencies.
The following supplemental information supports the conclusions in Attachment E, the
Environmental Concerns Checklist. The information is presented in the same order as the
Checklist, be~nning with Section A Land Use and Socioeconomic EffectS.
A. Land Use and Socioeconomic Effects
1. The proposed project is consistent \\ith the relevant general plan and zoning land use designations. The
proposed controlled burn project wiil be conducted in the extreme and high fire hazard areas of the City
md adjacent areas. This management acthity is consistent with land use policies for minimi7ing tire
hazards \\ithio these tire hazard areas,
2, As far as is known. no structures are located in areas where the controlled burns will be conducted.
If my structures are inadvertentiv encountered special precautions will be implemented to protect them
and no relocation of structures is proposed,
3, :-<0 economic acti\iries are conducted in these transition fire hazard areas and no potential to effect
economic acti\ity has been identiried.
-+, >10 parks or recreation areas are contained in the controlled burn area and no potential to effect such
area has been identified.
5, The project is located in the foothills more than .j() miles from the ocem. No potential to effect a
coastal zone environment exists.
6, No other lmd use/socioeconomic have been identified. other than ensuring controlled bums do not
escape the area within which thev are conducted,
B. Air/Water Quality
1. For the short.term increased emissions from the controlled bums will affect air quality. Controlled burn
activities \vill be coordinatcd \\ith the South Coast Air Quality Management District to minimize
contributions to PMIO violations of ambient air quality standards.
E-l-l
,
C7S-JSD
,
No dredging or disposal aC[lvmes are proposed by this project and no adverse impacts to water
resources from implementing the project are forecast to occur.
3,
~o watcl'VIay modification activities are proposed by this project and no adverse impacts to water
resources from implementing the project are forecast to occur.
~,
The controlled burn acti,ities could reduce ground cover to such an extent that erosion may occur on
the foothill slopes. This issue will be examined in detail in the EA/lnitial Study that will be prepared
for this project.
C. Natural Resources
1.
The controlled burn goal is to moriify and manage vegetation within the area of impact. This Issue will
be examined in detail in the EA/Initial Study that will be prepared for this project.
,
Controlled burns in wetlands will nO[ occur because all burn activities will designed to protect such
areas. Wetland areas do not pose a significant tire hazard and no impact to wetland resources is
forecast to occur,
3,
The controlled burns will occur in areas with known sensitive biological resources. These resources will
be surveyed in some detail. and appropriate consultations and mitigation will be implemented to
minimize impacts on sensitive species and related habitat.
~,
No formally designated \viidlife/conservation areas are located within the proposed control burn area;
therefore. no potential impact to such areas is possible.
5.
It is possible that the controlled burn could reduce vegetation cover to such an extent that streamflows
would increase. This issue "ill be examined in detail in the EA/lnitial Study that will be prepared for
this project. No aquifers are located within the proposed control burn area and any increase in runoff
could result in increased recharge to area aquifers located downstream of the proposed conrrolled burn
areas.
b,
No other natural resource issue ha\'e been identified.
D. ,.\rchaeological and Historic
1.
There are known cultural resources within the controlled burn area and these will be avoided or
otherwise protected during controlled burns. These cultural resources will be identified and measures
for avoiding them will be identified in the EA/lnitial Study that will be prepared for this project.
,
No other cultural resource concerns have been identified for this project.
E-l-2
,
CJ S'- .2 '70
ATTACHMENT F. Floodplain Management Review Iniormation
Executive Order 11988 requires the federai government to assure [hal the rloodplain
management impacts are considered of all federally-assisted projects that take piace in or
affect a rloodplain.
To assist FE\1A with this review, piease answer the following:
1. Does the projec; invoive construction or modification of existing srrucr..:res:
No
-
(If no. skip [he :-emaining questions in ~' is lltacr.rnentl,
" Is the project locate'; .n an a:ea mapped :-y rhe ;-; ational Flood Insuranc~
Program?
JIlL
If yes. attach a capy c[ :::e :-ele':ant ramon or the map. IdenurYlng :::~ map name ~nd
number and [he project :ocatlon,
(You shouid be able to get mrormauon on r100dpiain maps irom your !unsdictlOn;
pianning. zoning. or code e:1torce:ne::r :lgency).
j, If the project is located in or affecrs a ilaodolain. are any speciai measures bemg tncluded
in the project design to protect against porentlai Impacts rrom furure [ioods) Please ~xpiaIn
below.
No floodplain impacts will occur.
F-l
,
1"'-:;'':;0
ATTACHMENT G
NON-PROFIT ORGANIZATION DOCUMENTATION
This attachment is not applicable to the applicants.
G - 1
.
t;<;r:>SU
ATTACHMENT H
MAPS
PAGE
H - 2
H - 3
H - 4
H - 1
Maf
Project Area, GIS Projection
proj ect Area, USGS Topo Map
San Bernardino North
Project Area, USGS Topo Map
Harrison Mountain
,
,1 ')-~ )'~t?
,
II
....
:-,
:-,
-
-:--
.
"
.~
"'.
,.
~..
-
.....
'"'
...
'J
..
..
..
'.,l
'-
::'
-
....
-
..
.-
-
-
~
-
..
-
-
'-
--
-
.,;:
"
~
.
~j
- ...
-
'"
~
..
..
,-
-
'"
..
.~
-
~
..
'J
....
-
-
'"
-
-.".~
.
95-250
~
"
"
l:i
..
'"
'"
'"
..
~ I
-~~
..;J:';';oI'J
.. ~
Cl_ ~
ca~~
>-1'-
.. - ..
--.,
c.:: ~
0.....
" ..
U""
"'<!:
:>
~ ~~ ~
~ o~~
~ u;:: ....
'C: --- ~
r-... ~ '=
-~ ~
...; ~ t-'Q
."",:;:::
'::. ::: ~~::a:
=- ~...,
:;~~ ~
..."" '..l
! I ~'c
i::"'! ~ ~
~...._:;,o.
::a oS ~~
-.::Q;.o:
;.~::a: ~
~.... '-r~
'--~ ~ ::...
--'"
~.'::..~~
e-,:t..:.:::.Q
~~,:.::a:~
........-
~
~
!-
~
~
t'--
-
~
Q\'"
-~
5r...I~_l:t
~:
t! J;....
~;...o
"'.3-
.
l"..-
... .-....
.,------::::-----
-'~!~.~ -1f~~:
,-'-
..,"-,::."
-.
orril--
.1'L.r
~
-/'
- !
z~ c;;
;;
~
a.
~-
~
.~
;;
.
L
;;
~
~
.~~
",,]l
un
11m