INTERDISCIPLINARY TEAM CHECKLIST

Project Title: Ford Ridge Fuels Reduction and Vegetation Restoration

NEPA Log Number: DO1-BLM-UT-GO2X-20 1 2-0027-EA

File/Serial Number:

Project Leader: Kevin Cahill

DETERMINATION OF STAFF: (Choose one of thefollowing abbreviated options for the left coluinn,~I

NP = not present in the area impacted by the proposed or alternative actionsNI = present, but not affected to a degree that detailed analysis is requiredPT = present with potential for relevant impact that need to be analyzed in detail in the EANC (DNA5 only) actions and impacts not changed from those disclosed in the existing NEPA documents cited in

Section D of the DNA form. The Rationale column may include NI and NP discussions.

Determi Resource Rationale for Determination* Signature Datenation

RESOURCES AND ISSUES CONSIDERED (INCLUDES SUPPLEMENTAL AUTHORITIES APPENDIX I H-I 790-1)

Smoke from prescribed fire may affect air quality (increasedcriteria pollutant emissions) and potentially the health and

wellbeing of human populations. Prescribed burningemissions could cause visibility impacts even if air qualityAir Quality\Greenhouse standards are not violated. Overall, air quality in the project Donna Dixon 3/16/12

NIGas Emissions

area is considered to be in attainment of the NAAQS. It isanticipated that the incremental change from this project’s

alternatives would be so small as to be undetectable by bothmodels and monitors.

Areas of CriticalNP There are no ACEC’s within the project area. Josh Winkler 3-19-12Environmental Concern

There are no BLM Natural Areas present within the projectNP BLM Natural Areas** Josh Winkler 3-19-12area.

Sites identified and determined to be eligible for the NationalRegister of Historic Places (NHRP) will likely be avoided

NI Cultural Resources during the mechanical treatment portion of the project, unless Leigh Grench 4/25/12treatment options are such that it would be beneficial to the

archaeological resource to treat the vegetation on site.There are no currently identified regulatory standards for

controlling GHG emissions or generally accepted analyticalmethods for evaluating project specific impacts related toNI Greenhouse Gases Donna Dixon 3/16/12

GHG emissions. Consequently, the impacts of site-specificproposals cannot be determined and overall GHG emissions

are expected to be minimal.There are no communities with minority of low-income

NP Environmental Justice populations that would be disproportionately affected by Donna Dixon 03/05/12adverse environmental and health risks

According to the NRCS soils surveys and knowledge of theFarmlands (Prime or soils, there are no prime and unique soils mapped within the JLB 03/07/12NP

Unique) project area.

The project area includes crucial mule deer winter range,crucial yearlong elk habitat, and crucial moose yearlongFish and Wildlife

habitat (Ford Creek). Implementation of the proposed action 20 12-Mar-PT Excluding USFWS would improve habitat for big game species as well as other David L. WaIler20Designated Species

general wildlife species. No known raptor nests in the projectunits;_there is a record of a Swainson’s_hawk_nest_in_the

DetermiResource Rationale for Determination* Signature Date

nation

project area.

After an inspection of USGS 7.5 minute maps of the area, it isNI Floodplains determined no floodplains as defined by EQ 1 1988, FEMA, JLB 03/07/12

or Corps of Engineers is found on or near the project areaImplementation of the proposed action would result in a

decreased threat from severe, high-intensity wildiand fire andKevin Cahill 03/22/12P1 Fuels/Fire Management would contribute to the return to a more historic fire regime,

while_creating_a_morediverse_ecosystem.Geology / Mineral No geological resources, mineral resources or energy 05MAR20

NI Resources/Energy production will be negatively impacted by the proposed Greg Gochnour 12Production action.

No changes to groundwater function or surface runoff will

NJ Hydrologic Conditions** occur on a notable scale. Negligible new impacts from this JLB 03/07/12action to runoff patterns and other surface runoff No 402issues expected

~ny surface disturbing activities could result in theintroduction or spread of invasive species/ noxious weeds.

Invasive Species/Noxious fhis project has the potential to create niches in the Stephanie Bauer 03/26/12PTWeeds (EQ 13112) vegetation where invasive species/noxious weeds could

become established. Musk thistle and hounds tongue arenoxious weeds that are present within the project area.A review of LR2000 and the Master Title Plats showed thatthe proposed action is compatible with the existing land useand authorized right-of-ways which include a railroad line,NI Lands/Access Connie Leschin 3/14/12water pipeline, Highway 6 and apowerline. Avoidance of

these facilities will ensure no impact to these existing rights.There are no conflicts with other land use authorizations.

The proposed project is within an active grazing allotment,Price Canyon West. Changes in vegetation or grazingPT Livestock Grazing . Dana Truman 3/16/20 12restrictions could affect the livestock management.

There are mapped important migratory bird habitat areas inthe project area (riparian-cottonwood areas), according toELM files and as per GIS/Map review... Although birds David L. WaIler 2012-Mar-NI Migratory Birds, would use the project area, no special status migratory birds 20

are known to be in those mapped habitat areas, which wouldrequire_special_consideration_or_stipulations.

Native American tribes were contacted in May, 2012. ToNative AmericanNI date, no tribes have identified concerns or submitted Leigh Grench 4/25/12

Religious Concernscomments_regarding_the_proposed_project.

Minimal surface disturbance associated with this project andMichael Leschin 3.16.12NI Paleontology so there is little danger of harm to paleontological resources.

Rangeland health standards evaluate indicators for uplandsoils, riparian areas, vegetation, and water quality. Waterquality and riparian areas are addressed in other sections ofthis checklist. The proposed action will remove some

Rangeland Health vegetation in the short term, but in the long term it isNI Dana Truman 3/16/20 12Standards expected that the native plant community will benefit and

persist and the soil resource will be protected. The proposedaction is expected to continue to allow the land to meetrangeland health standards, thus minimal impacts expected.

This project area is part of the Price ERMA. Recreational useNI Recreation is limited. Short-term impacts on dispersed recreation would Josh Winkler 3-19-12

be_minimal.

DetermiResource Rationale for Determination* Signature Date

nation

~ . . Implementation of the Proposed Action would have noNP Socio-Economics . . Donna Dixon 03/OD/12

measureable social or economic impacts...

Implementation of the proposed action could increase soilcompaction, reduce infiltration, and remove vegetative coverin the short term, which could decrease herbaceous growth

. and increase erosion rates. Hand cutting and minimal use ofNI Soils . . . JLI3 03/07/12large mechanical methods would reduce this impact.

Long-term impacts may include improved soil health andproductivity with improved infiltration and reduced erosion

rates.Threatened, Endangered There are no known populations or habitat for T and E plants

NP or Candidate Plant within the project area, as per review of ELM records. DanaTruman 3/16/2012Species

No effect — because, there are no known occurrences offederally listed or candidate species in the project area

following GIS review and review of BLM files. There is nodesignated critical habitat present either. The project area has

modeled Mexican Spotted Owl habitat. Due to the highelevations of the units and the smooth, uniform, non-cliffs’

Threatened, Endangered. . canyon walls, the area would not be suitable habitat for . 20 12-Mar-

NP or Candidate Animal . David L. Wailer. Mexican Spotted Owls. There would be no surface water 20Species

depletion that would affect federally listed fish species thatoccur downstream. The project units are not located within

habitat (either PPH or PGH) for greater sage-grouse.However, the project area contains crucial winter and brood

habitat for sage grouse, but that habitat would be in sagebrushareas without trees, therefore the units are not habitat.

~o chemicals subject to reporting under SARA Title III willbe used, produced, stored, transported, or disposed of

~ annually in association with the project. Furthermore, noNP as es extremely hazardous substances, as defined in 40 CFR 355. in JLB 03/07/12

(hazardous or solid) . .threshold planning quantities, will be used, produced, stored,transported, or disposed of in association with the project.

Some increase of surface run off could occur due to reduction

NI Water Resources/Quality of vegetation, creating increased soil erosion and associated ILE 03/07/12(drinking/surface/ground) increase in sediment load in the stream. This will be

temporary.Wetlands/Riparian zones are present along Ford Creek.

P1 Wetlands/Riparian Zones Implementation of fuels treatments within the riparian zone Karl Ivory 03/16/12could result in a change in functioning condition.

NP Wild and Scenic Rivers There are no Wild and Scenic Rivers in the project area. Don Kranendonk 3/21/12

. There are no Wilderness Study Areas in the Project area perNP Wilderness/WSA . Don Kranendonk 3/21/12review of the 2008 RMP

Implementation of the project would result in the loss ofwoodland/forestry products within the project area, however.he long term effects of the project could increase the overall

PT Woodland / Forestry health of the woodlands/forestry by releasing aspen from Stephanie Buaer 03/26/12competition with other encroaching pine and fir trees, byminimizing high-intensity stand replacing fires and increasinghe resistance of residual trees to insect caused mortality.Existing vegetation could be altered through this action. In

Vegetation Excluding the short term, the proposed treatments would removeP1 USFW Designated woodland vegetation and alter the vegetative community. Dana Truman 3/16/20 12

Species In the long term, the proposed action could increase grasses,forbs and shrubs.

Determi Resource Rationale for Determination* Signature Datenation

The project area is designated as VRM Class Ill, whichDon StephensNI Visual Resources allows for moderate levels of change. The changes to the 3-16-12Josh Winklerlandscape_would_be_within_the_acceptable_limits.

As per GIS RMP review the project area is not within a WildNP Wild Horses and Burros Mike Tweddell 03 14 12Horse or Burro HMA.

Areas with Wilderness here are no Lands with wilderness Characteristics in theNP Don Kranendonk 0321 12Characteristics** Project area per review of the 2008 RMP

FINAL REVIEW:

Reviewer Title Signature

Environmental Coordinator

Authorized Officer

Date

viAlComments

INTERDISCIPLINARY TEAM NEPA DOCUMENTATION

TRACKING CHECKLIST

Project Title: Ford Ridge Fuels Reduction and Vegetation Restoration

NEPA Log Number: DOI-BLM-UT-GO2X-20 I 2-0027-EA

File/Serial Number:

Project Leader: Kevin Cahill

STAFF DOCUMENTATION REVIEW:

I FINAL DOCUMENATION REVIEW IRESOL RCE SPECIALIST I DATE

SIGNATURE IRESOL RCES AND ISSUES CONSIDERED

(INCLL DES St PPLEMENTAL At THORITIES APPENDIX I H-I790-I)

Fish and Wildlife Excluding Jared ReeseUSFW Designated Species

Fuel Fire Management Kevin Cahill ~f,51 I)Weeds (EO 13112)

Invasive Species/Noxious Stephanie Bauer

~

Livestock Grazing Dana Truman ~ &J~/~I~’t/~~~Wetlands/Riparian Zones Karl lvoiy ~

Woodland Forestry Stephanie Bauer

Vegetation Excluding USFW ‘a ~‘ ~Dana Truman ~/J~/ /~oL

Designated_Species

FINAL REVIEW:

REVIEWER TITLE FINAL REVIEWDATEAND NAME SIGNATL RE

Environmental Coordinator ,,/~3t ,/fSAuthorized Officer: ~ ,..~ ) 6~’/~e//,

/,*‘

2498

1

I

/

/fl’

Spnng2901

N

Ford RidgeProject Boundary

NATIONAL

PUBUC LANDS

State of Utahcfu~,d No,,mb.~ II. toi’

l,~s Ia4~fl,Ga

0 0.3 06

Ib~Ies

1:50,000

Legend= Foid

2192

C nyoRec Area

C,,~0’

2737Radio

Tow

Qz

r,992

o•~•_ ~7

C)

SI..

IL

o

.7.:

••~..•• /:

:.~/

.1~’

I.

L—: ~ I

•.,.-,--.• ..-~. ~L

~1 ~ )

(

/

I

NATI•NAL JSYSTEM OF/.

,~ ,~f.3t..~•, ;•~

,•••.~

/‘ .~“

PU~UC LANDS!

:y

I.

I

0

4-•1 -

/

•1

...cI

../.-•

1

~~i• ~

II’

7

I.

I

I

I

IV:

~

;• ‘--I..

Legend

FordRidgeUnitstitjimIEJu~n

~KIt3

~Ju1t*lilt 5

‘I •~

A

ICE CAN

I

Appendix C:Fuels Management Best Management Practices

Fuels Management ActivitiesStandard Operating Procedures and Best Management Practices

These Standard Operating Procedures (SOPs) and Best Management Practices (BMP5)are designed to achieve resource management mitigation proposed by various disciplinesspecifically for fuels management-related activities. Because fuels management activitiesare dynamic and largely dictated by budget and contracting constraints, the majority ofthese mitigation measures are based on site-specific conditions and implemented whennecessary to meet resource objectives for fuels management actions. Primary SOPs andBMPs that apply to all fuels management-related activities are listed as items 1, 2, and 3below.

SOPs and BMPs Applicable to All Fuels Management-Related Activities

1. Areas with sensitive cultural or historical resources will be identified utilizingflagging or GPS/GIS technology prior to project implementation, and will be avoided orprotected utilizing buffer zones, hand treatment of vegetation, or other non-grounddisturbing actions. If undocumented historic, archaeological, or paleontologicalresources are encountered during treatment, activities will be stopped until the authorizedofficer and appropriate field office staff members determine the best option formitigation.

2. Fuels management activities in designated wilderness and/or Wilderness StudyAreas (WSA) will require application of techniques to minimize surface disturbance andpermanent impacts to naturalness. Activities in designated wilderness will follow themanagement prescriptions included as part of the enabling legislation. Activities inWSA’s will follow the procedures and guidelines incorporated in H-8550-l, InterimManagement Policy for Lands under Wilderness Review. Activities in BLM NaturalAreas will follow the prescriptions outlined in the Resource Management Plan for theField Office in which the project is being implemented.

3. Work may be conducted by BLM crews with coordination and potentialassistance from other federal and Utah state agencies and/or BLM-contracted crews. Inthe event a contract is utilized for fuel management activities, the following stipulationswill be included in the contract language:

• The Government will identify unit boundaries for the work executed under thecontract and will include all known locations of cadastral markings. Thecontractor will, immediately upon entering a project area, begin to locate and takeaction to protect all known survey monuments found within the project area. Inaddition, contractors will be directed to protect any previously unknown surveymonuments that are discovered during the duration of the project. Surveymonuments include but are not limited to: General Land Office and BLM

44

Cadastral Survey monuments and accessories (including bearing trees, bearingobjects, posts marked with scribing, or bearing tags), reference corners, witnesspoints, U.S. Coastal and Geodetic benchmarks and triangulation stations, militarycontrol monuments, and recognizable civil (both public and private) surveymonuments. In the event obliteration or disturbance of any of the above shouldoccur, the incident will be immediately reported, in writing, to the authorizedofficer. Where General Land Office or BLM right-of-way monuments orreferences are obliterated during operations, a registered land surveyor or BLMcadastral surveyor will be contacted to restore the monument.

o Contractors and all contracted representatives will prevent the pollution of air, soiland/or water throughout operations. The contract will include a cleanup and/orrestoration clause in the event that operations or equipment failure or other actionsby the contractor, contracted employees and/or representatives result in thepollution of public lands. Contract language will also define a “hazardoussubstance,” specify a “reportable quantity” of released hazardous substance, anddescribe notification regulations in the event a reportable quantity of hazardoussubstance is released.

o Contract specifications will include federal regulations regarding sanitaryfacilities for staging areas and/or worker campsites, trash disposal requirements,clean-up requirements, and other pertinent regulations.

4. All fences constructed or repaired for the purposes of fire and fuels or fire andfuels-related projects will conform to BLM Manual Handbook H-l721-l design andconstruction standards. Fencing details will be determined on a project-specific basis bythe purpose and use for the fence (type of animal, topography, season of use, intensity ofanimal pressure against the fence, etc.).

Site-Specific SOPs and BMPsGeneral Wildlife(Note: Other stipulations and/or mitigation in addition to those listed below may berequired for site-specific treatments.)1. Trees containing obvious nesting cavities and/or stick nests will be avoided whenfeasible.

2. Active nest sites will be monitored by a qualified biologist during authorizedtreatment activities that may impact the behavior or survival of raptors at a nest site.

Range/Livestock1. Grazing permittees will be given advance notice prior to broadcast burning andwhen workers with chainsaws and/or mechanical mastication equipment are expected tobe in pastures. No fencing will be altered during the project implementation period

45

unless a specific plan is included in the proposed action. Gates normally kept closed oridentified as such will be closed to prevent impact to cattle if they are scheduled to be in atreatment area at the time work is ongoing.

2. Livestock will be excluded from seeded portions of pastures for at least twogrowing seasons or until management objectives have been accomplished. Coordination,cooperation and consultation with the affected grazing permittees would be followed asoutlined in 43 CFR 4130.4 — Authorization of Temporary Changes in Grazing Use withinthe Terms and Conditions of Permits, including Temporary Nonuse, and under 43 CFR4180 — Fundamentals of Rangeland Health and Standards and Guidelines for GrazingAdministration. Prior to the implementation of seeding treatments, it is recommendedthat a Grazing Use Agreement or other written agreement be completed. The writtenagreement would outline the two year growing season rest requirement and subsequentactions agreed to by both the affected grazing permittees and the BLM.

SOPs and BMPs Applicable to Specific Fuels Reduction ActivitiesMechanical Treatment1. The use of heavy machinery such as mechanical masticators will be discontinuedat the discretion of the project inspector during periods of precipitation when soilmoisture content could increase the potential for deep ruts and/or excess soil compaction.

2. Prior to mobilization in a new project area, all heavy equipment will be powerwashed off-site to remove potential contaminants. Cleaned equipment will be inspectedby the authorized contracting officer to assure that equipment used in mechanicaltreatment is free of soil and other debris that could contain invasive weed seed or otherplant parts prior to transport and use at the project site.

3. Heavy equipment will generally not be utilized within 100 meters of riparianareas. In areas of special concern such as those requiring removal of dense invasivespecies, a resource advisor will be consulted. Mechanical fuel removal may be allowedto reduce fuels and/or invasive species in areas of special concern. Native riparianvegetation such as willows and cottonwoods are plant species targeted for restoration andwill continue to be selectively avoided during riparian treatment.

Prescribed Fire1. Prescribed fire is normally conducted in the early spring, late fall, and wintermonths, and only under specific conditions dictated by humidity, wind speed, moisturelevels, and time of day. A detailed burn plan delineates weather and fuel moistureconditions required to meet resource objectives. A test fire is typically conducted prior tofull ignition to ensure resource objectives can be met. Ignition of burns are conducted byhand (drip torches using a diesel/gasoline mixture), aerial ignition, or by truck-mountedterra torch (utilizing a gasoline/alumagel mixture). Mitigation measures associated withburning-related hazardous materials are included in the risk assessment, job hazardanalyses appendix in each authorized burn plan.

2. All prescribed fire will be conducted consistent with the regulations and policiesset forth by the Utah Division of Air Quality permitting process as specified in UtahAdministrative Code Rule R307-204, Emission Standards: Smoke Management, and the

46

Utah Smoke Management Plan. The goal of this process is to minimize the impacts to airquality from prescribed fire projects. These rules and procedures are designed tocoordinate multiple burning projects conducted by multiple agencies to assure thatprescribed fires are permitted at a time when weather and atmospheric conditions allowfor adequate smoke dispersal.

Manual Treatment (Lop and Scatter and/or Hand Piling)1. Manual thinning is typically used in areas not suitable for mechanical treatmentsuch as steep, rocky slopes, in areas with resources that require mitigation such ascultural or riparian, or in areas where biomass utilization (firewood permitting) isdesirable. Cut trees and brush from hand thinning is either scattered across the ground orstacked into piles to add surface fuels for follow-up prescribed fire. Contract stipulationsstate that pile size will be no larger than six feet by six feet to mitigate potential heat-related soil damage from burned piles.

2. Piles are burned during peak soil moisture conditions, preferably during periodsof light snow cover or during precipitation events, to minimize soil sterilization and todecrease mortality risk to nearby live trees. In riparian areas, piles will not beconstructed within the center of the draw or in areas that could be impacted by normalflood flows.

Herbicide Use1. The use of specific herbicide active ingredients and formulations on BLM lands inUtah are authorized by the Final Environmental Impact Statement and Record ofDecision (Utah) for Vegetation Treatment on BLM Lands in Thirteen Western States(BLM 1991b), and the Record of Decision for the 17 Western States VegetationManagement Programmatic Environmental Impact Statement, September, 2007. Both ofthese documents identify potential impacts to the natural and human environment fromthe use of herbicides, incorporate standard operating procedures and mitigation measuresto ensure the protection of resources, and approve for use on western BLM lands specificherbicide active ingredients. Standard operating procedures (SOPs) are the managementcontrols and performance standards intended to protect and enhance natural resourcespotentially affected by vegetation treatments that include the use of herbicides. The useof a specific list of herbicide active ingredients and formulations is approved contingentupon uses and application rates as specified in an approved Pesticide Use Proposal (PUP)and on individual herbicide product labels. Application of active ingredients is allowedonly where state registration permits the use of these ingredients.

2. The BLM will comply with all Utah state registration requirements for the use ofherbicides. In herbicide treatment applications, the BLM Canyon Country Fire Zone willfollow SOPs for herbicide use identified in the 2007 Vegetation Management PETS toensure that risks to human health and the environment from treatment actions are kept toa minimum. In addition to using the SOPs identified in Appendix A, the BLM will alsoimplement mitigation measures described in the 2007 Vegetation Management PETS toalleviate potential adverse environmental effects as a result of vegetation treatmentactivities using herbicides. Herbicides may be applied manually with hand-held devices,aerially, or with broadcast sprayers from an ATV. In fuel management activities that

47

include the use of herbicides, both the SOPs and mitigation measures mentioned abovewill be attached to the environmental assessment as appendices.

Seeding1. Fuels management actions may include seeding portions of or an entire projectarea following or prior to treatment with both native and selected non-native grasses,forbs and browse species. Seed selection is determined through collaboration withresource specialists and from monitoring results in similar vegetative communities. Seedselection is also based upon the most current data regarding the establishment of specieslikely to promote successional changes toward the desired vegetative community.

2. Seeding can be accomplished with a broadcast spreader or drill seeder, harrow orharrow chain dragged behind mechanized equipment, roller chopper, tractor/dozer, orthrough aerial application. Seeded portions of treated areas will be rested from grazingfor a minimum of two growing seasons following seeding.

Monitoring1. Transects to document fuel bed characteristics and vegetation composition areestablished prior to implementation within selected proposed treatment areas. Whenfeasible, transect readings and/or photo plots are documented pre-treatment and at one,three and seven year intervals following treatment completion. Monitoring results areincorporated into management decisions regarding future resource actions that mayinvolve maintenance burning, additional seeding, reintroduction and/or adjustment ofgrazing seasons or numbers, additional mechanical or herbicide treatment and otheractions.

2. Management decisions requiring treatments not previously analyzed wouldinitiate further environmental assessment.

Miscellaneous1. In select areas, slash and debris from fuel management activities along designatedroads or other accessible areas may be made available to the public for wood harvest.

2. All-terrain vehicles (ATVs) may be utilized at various times by BLM and/orcontract crews throughout the project area to transport fuel, supplies and equipment.ATV’s will avoid disturbance to any identified archaeological sites and/or other bufferedareas.

3. BLM personnel will periodically observe ongoing treatments to ensure no adverseeffect to nesting raptors or other bird species or to cultural and/or historic remains.

48

Fireline Rehabilitation GuidelinesThe following guidelines can be used in whole or in part depending on ecological siteneeds, severity of disturbance and management directive within the Canyon Country FireZone fuels program(CYFZ).:

Fireline:1.) Pull soil, duff, litter and rocks over line

o Rake the line to scarify the soil surface; pull soil, duff, litter and rocks

back into original position and mimic natural gradeo Rehabbed line should blend with surrounding contours.

2.) Scatter Brush over the Lineo Cover at least 50% of the fire line

• Scattered duff, needle litter, and brush should appear random toeliminate the appearance of a straight line disturbance. In general theamount and type of duff, litter, and brush should match thesurrounding area.

3.) Construct water bars or berms to reduce channeling and deflect erosion on slopeso Temporary berms are preferable to water bars. When constructing

water bars utilize local woody materialo Use the following table to create water bars or berms:

Slope % Spacing (Ft.)2 2505 13510 8015 6020 4525 4030 35

• Construct at 45 degree angles to the contour

Aesthetic Considerationso When replacing larger rocks in the fireline, place the weathered side

upo Obliterate cup trenches and ditcheso Flush cut all stumpso Remove all flagging, signs, and garbage associated with activity

Walk through adjacent undisturbed areas to take a look at your rehab efforts to determineyour success at returning the area to as natural as possible.

49