[Congressional Record (Bound Edition), Volume 154 (2008), Part 1]
[Extensions of Remarks]
[Pages 1135-1136]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]




   INTRODUCTION OF BILLS TO REDUCE RISKS OF WILDFIRES TO FOREST-AREA 
                              COMMUNITIES

                                 ______
                                 

                            HON. MARK UDALL

                              of colorado

                    in the house of representatives

                       Tuesday, January 29, 2008

  Mr. UDALL of Colorado. Madam Speaker, Colorado and other Rocky 
Mountain States face a very real risk of severe wildfires in our forest 
lands, which directly threaten many communities and critical resources, 
including water supplies.
  There are several reasons. One is drought. Another is past management 
that over-emphasized fire suppression, even though fire is an 
inescapable part of the ecology of our western forests, with the result 
that in many parts of the forests there is an accumulation of 
underbrush and small-diameter trees greater than would be present if 
there had been more, smaller fires over the years. They provide the 
extra fuel that can turn a small fire into an intense inferno.
  The problem has been made worse by our growing population and 
increasing development in the places where communities meet the 
forests--the ``wildland-urban interface.'' And when you add the effects 
of widespread infestations of insects, you have a recipe for even worse 
to come.
  Many species of bark beetles, such as the mountain pine beetle, are 
native to our forests. They place stress on trees by burrowing through 
the bark. If a tree is healthy, it can defend itself by producing sap 
to repel and expel the invaders. But if the defense fails, the insects 
lay their eggs in the woody material below the bark. Once the eggs 
hatch, they feed on the tree's fiber and disrupt the flow of water and 
nutrients from the tree's roots to its needles and branches. In 
addition, the invading insects bring in fungi and other invaders that 
further damage the tree. If enough insects are able to penetrate the 
tree and lay eggs, the tree dies. The offspring then mature and fly to 
another tree and the cycle begins anew.
  These insects help to balance tree densities and set the stage for 
fires and thereby the generation of new tree growth. And when forests 
are healthy and there are adequate supplies of water, the insects' 
effects are relatively low-scale and isolated. But under the right 
conditions--such as drought, unusually warm winters, or when there are 
dense stands of even-aged trees--the insects can cause large-scale tree 
mortality, turning whole mountainsides and valleys rust red.
  That is what is happening in many mountainous areas in Colorado. And 
more and more our mountain communities find themselves in uncomfortable 
proximity to acres of dead trees, turned rust red by the insects and 
adding to their concerns about the danger of very severe wildfires.
  All Coloradans were reminded of this earlier this month, when the 
Federal and State foresters reported that the beetle infestation first 
detected in 1996 grew by a half-million acres last year, bringing the 
total number of acres attacked by bark beetles to 1.5 million, and has 
spread further into Front Range counties east of the Continental 
Divide.
  Last year, I introduced legislation to respond to this problem by, 
first, facilitating more rapid responses to the insect epidemic where 
that is needed to reduce the wildfire threats to our communities; and 
second, promoting research on ways to improve the health of our forest 
lands. That bill--H.R. 3072--was developed through broad consultation 
with many people in Colorado and discussions among our state's entire 
Colorado delegation. It is cosponsored by all my Colorado colleagues in 
the House, and Senators Ken Salazar and Wayne Allard introduced 
identical legislation in the Senate. I intend to continue to work for 
enactment of its provisions, as a single measure or otherwise.
  And that delegation measure would be supplemented in two different 
ways by the bills I am introducing today.
  One bill focuses on steps to help our communities act to reduce the 
potential damages their residents could suffer as a result of 
wildfires. It is cosponsored by our colleague from California, 
Representative Filner; I appreciate his support.
  A House companion to legislation, S. 2390, introduced by Senator 
Diane Feinstein, this ``Fire Safe Communities Act'' would provide 
incentives for at-risk communities to adopt a new model Fire Safe 
ordinance that will set national standards in building codes, creation 
of ``defensible space'' around homes, and reduction of hazardous fuels. 
It also would authorize new Federal grants to help communities 
integrate fire-resisting aspects into local ordinances, and would 
authorize increased Federal reimbursement of firefighting costs to 
participating communities.
  The other bill would amend the recently-enacted Energy Independence 
and Security Act of 2007, P.L. 110-140, to allow material removed from 
additional forest lands to reduce hazardous fuels to be eligible for 
some incentives for use of renewable biomass to generate energy.
  Title II of the new energy law puts new emphasis on developing 
biofuels that rely on additional sources of biomass, including 
agricultural wastes, municipal solid waste, and dedicated energy crops 
such as perennial grasses, fast-growing trees, and algae.
  Accordingly, the new law requires an expansion of the 2005 law's 
renewable fuel standard so as to require 36 billion gallons of 
renewable fuel in motor fuels annually by 2022, of which 21 billion 
gallons must be ``advanced biofuel,'' defined as biofuel produced from 
feedstocks other than corn starch and having 50 percent lower lifecycle 
emissions than petroleum fuels.
  For purposes of title II, the new energy law defines the term 
``renewable fuel'' as ``fuel that is produced from renewable biomass 
and that is used to replace or reduce the quantity of fossil fuel 
present in a transportation fuel.''
  But its definition of ``renewable biomass'' does not include material 
removed from Federal or State forest lands in order to reduce wildfire 
risks, except to the extent that the removal occurs in the ``immediate 
vicinity of buildings and other areas regularly occupied by people, or 
of public infrastructure, at risk from wildfire.''
  I think this definition is too narrow and would unnecessarily limit 
the potential incentive for private industry to assist in reducing the 
buildup of hazardous fuels that threaten forest-area communities in 
Colorado and other States.
  So, the second bill I am introducing today would revise the 
definition of ``renewable biomass'' in that part of the new energy law 
to include biomass removed in connection with a hazardous-fuel 
reduction project from lands within the wildland-urban interface, as 
defined in the Healthy Forests Restoration Act of 2003.
  Madam Speaker, since coming to Congress I have put a priority on 
reducing the wildfire risks to our communities. In 2000, with our then 
colleague, Representative Hefley, I introduced legislation to 
facilitate reducing the buildup of fuel in the parts of Colorado that 
the Forest Service, working with State and local partners, identified 
at greatest risk of fire--the so-called ``red zones.'' Concepts from 
that legislation were included in the National Fire Plan developed by 
the Clinton Administration and were also incorporated into the Healthy 
Forests Restoration Act of 2003. As a Member of the Resources 
Committee, I had worked to develop the version of that legislation that 
the committee approved in 2002, and while I could not support the 
different version initially passed by the House in 2003, I voted for 
the revised version developed in conference with the Senate later that 
year--the version that President Bush signed into law.
  Since then, in Colorado there has been very welcome progress in 
developing community wildfire protection plans and focusing fuel-
reduction projects in the priority wildland-urban interface--which we 
sometimes call the ``red zone'' areas--two important aspects of the new 
law. But the problem remains very serious, and both H.R. 3072 and the 
two additional bills I am introducing today would take important 
further steps to address it.
  We cannot eradicate insects from our forests--nor should we, because 
insects are a natural part of forest ecosystems. Instead, we can and 
should act to reduce the wildfire threats to our communities--and their 
residents' lives and property--as well as to promote research on ways 
to improve the health of our forest lands.
  That is the purpose of H.R. 3072, and it is also the purpose of the 
two bills I am introducing today. For the information of our 
colleagues, here are outlines of both bills:

                        Fire Safe Community Act

       This bill, a House companion to S. 2390, would establish 
     new incentives for communities at risk of wildfire to improve 
     fire-prevention efforts. Key components include:
       Creating a model ordinance for communities at risk of fire 
     located within the Wildland Urban Interface (WUI). Bill will 
     direct the National Institute of Standards and Technology 
     (NIST) to create a model ordinance, in partnership with the 
     U.S. Fire Administration, the U.S. Forest Service, and the 
     Bureau of Land Management. The purpose of this model 
     ordinance is to provide a baseline for communities to become 
     ``fire safe,'' including suggested water supply, construction 
     materials and techniques, defensible space, vegetation 
     management, and infrastructure standards;
       Developing a new $25 million grant program to assist local 
     communities in implementing the activities and policies of 
     the NIST model ordinance. To qualify for this

[[Page 1136]]

     grant program, communities must be located in a fire hazard 
     area and take steps toward the implementation of the model 
     ordinance. These grants, administered by FEMA, can be used to 
     enforce local ordinances and codes, develop incentive 
     programs to improve code compliance, educate local planners 
     on fire resistant planning, zoning and home construction, as 
     well as train local fire departments on emerging technologies 
     such as GIS fire mapping;
       Providing grants to States on a 50/50 cost share basis to 
     create or update fire hazard maps. Authorizes $15 million 
     annually for States to develop or update statewide fire 
     hazard maps which identify communities at risk of wildfire;
       Establishing incentives for communities that decide to 
     become more fire safe by changing the federal share of 
     firefighting and emergency expenses reimbursed under FEMA's 
     Fire Management Assistance Grants. Currently states and local 
     communities can have 75 percent of their firefighting and 
     emergency service expenses reimbursed by the federal 
     government, if FEMA determines that a fire threatened a 
     significant number of homes and structures. Under this bill, 
     communities in fire hazard areas that adopt the new model 
     ordinance would be eligible to have 90 percent of their 
     firefighting and emergency service expenses reimbursed under 
     the Fire Management Assistance Grants program;
       Authorizing the U.S. Forest Service and the Department of 
     the Interior to offer grants to local communities for fire 
     safe practices. The bill makes revisions to the authorization 
     of the U.S. Forest Service and the Department of the Interior 
     to allow them to administer grants to local communities for 
     model ordinance compliance and for responsible zoning and 
     fire protection strategies. The U.S. Forest Service would 
     administer $35 million in fire-safe grants. The Department of 
     the Interior would administer $15 million in these grants.
                                  ____


     Wildfire Risk Reduction and Renewable Biomass Utilization Act

       This bill would revise the definition of ``renewable 
     biomass'' in section 201 of the Energy Independence and 
     Security Act of 2007 so as to facilitate and encourage the 
     use of biomass removed from certain additional forest lands 
     as an energy source, in order to reduce the risk of severe 
     wildfires to communities, infrastructure, and water supplies.
       Specifically, the bill would expand the current definition 
     of ``renewable biomass'' to include biomass removed from 
     lands within the wildland-urban interface in connection with 
     an authorized hazardous fuel reduction projects.
       The bill uses the definitions of ``hazardous fuel reduction 
     project'' and ``wildland-urban interface'' that are used in 
     the Healthy Forests Restoration Act of 2003.
       That Act defines the term ``wildland-urban interface'' as 
     including ``an area within or adjacent to an at-risk 
     community that is identified ... in a community wildfire 
     protection plan'' or, with regard to a community that has not 
     developed a community wildfire protection plan, lands within 
     a specified distance from the community's boundary (a 
     distance that can vary depending on the presence of steep 
     slopes or other geographic features) as well as areas 
     adjacent to an evacuation route for an at-risk community that 
     require hazardous fuel reduction to provide safer evacuation 
     from an at-risk community.
       These definitions provide greater specificity than the term 
     ``immediate vicinity'' now used in this part of the new 
     energy law, and will broaden the scope of its applicability. 
     I supported enactment of the Healthy Forests Restoration Act, 
     and I think it is appropriate to follow its example in this 
     respect.

                          ____________________