DOCSLIB.ORG

Richfield Fire Management Plan Environmental Assessment

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Richfield Fire Management Plan Environmental Assessment Utah State University DigitalCommons@USU All U.S. Government Documents (Utah Regional U.S. Government Documents (Utah Regional Depository) Depository) 11-2005 Richfield Fire Management Plan Environmental Assessment U.S. Department of the Interior, Bureau of Land Management Follow this and additional works at: https://digitalcommons.usu.edu/govdocs Part of the Environmental Indicators and Impact Assessment Commons Recommended Citation U.S. Department of the Interior, Bureau of Land Management, "Richfield Fire Management Plan Environmental Assessment" (2005). All U.S. Government Documents (Utah Regional Depository). Paper 461. https://digitalcommons.usu.edu/govdocs/461 This Report is brought to you for free and open access by the U.S. Government Documents (Utah Regional Depository) at DigitalCommons@USU. It has been accepted for inclusion in All U.S. Government Documents (Utah Regional Depository) by an authorized administrator of DigitalCommons@USU. For more information, please contact digitalcommons@usu.edu. United States Department of the Interior Bureau of Land Management RICHFIELD FIRE MANAGEMENT PLAN ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT UT-050-04-045 November 2005 FINDING OF NO SIGNIFICANT IMPACT (FONSI) ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT (EA) # UT – 050- 04 -045 Richfield Fire Management Plan EA This unsigned FONSI and the attached EA #UT- 050- 04 -045 for the Richfield Fire Management Plan are available for public review and comment for 30 days beginning on January 17, 2006. Based on the analysis of potential environmental impacts in the attached EA and consideration of the significance criteria in 40 CFR 1508.27, I have determined that with required and proposed protection measures the Richfield Fire Management Plan would not result in significant impacts on the human environment. An environmental impact statement (EIS) is not required. The decision to approve or deny the Richfield Fire Management Plan, and if appropriate a signed FONSI with rationale, will be released after consideration of public comments and completion of the EA. ___________________________________ _______________ State Director Date TABLE OF CONTENTS Page CHAPTER 1 . PURPOSE AND NEED ........................................................................................... 1-1 1.1 INTRODUCTION............................................................................................................................................... 1-1 1.2 BACKGROUND .................................................................................................................................................. 1-1 1.3 NEED FOR PROPOSED ACTION.................................................................................................................. 1-3 1.4 PURPOSE OF THE PROPOSED ACTION.................................................................................................... 1-3 1.5 CONFORMANCE WITH BLM LAND USE PLANS................................................................................... 1-4 1.6 RELATIONSHIP TO STATUTES, REGULATIONS, OR OTHER PLANS ............................................. 1-5 1.7 IDENTIFICATION OF ISSUES.......................................................................................................................... 1-5 1.8 SUMMARY ............................................................................................................................................................. 1-7 CHAPTER 2 . DESCRIPTION OF ALTERNATIVES .................................................................... 2-1 2.1 INTRODUCTION............................................................................................................................................... 2-1 2.2 PROPOSED ACTION......................................................................................................................................... 2-1 2.2.6 Overall Goals.................................................................................Error! Bookmark not defined. 2.2.7 Fire Management Actions for the Proposed Action ..................................................................... 2-3 2.2.8 Resource Protection Measures.......................................................................................................... 2-5 2.3 NO ACTION ALTERNATIVE.......................................................................................................................... 2-5 2.4 ALTERNATIVES CONSIDERED BUT ELIMINATED FROM FURTHER ANALYSIS.......................... 2-8 2.4.6 Historical Fire Alternative ................................................................................................................... 2-8 2.4.7 Non-Fire Treatment Alternative........................................................................................................ 2-8 CHAPTER 3 . AFFECTED ENVIRONMENT ................................................................................. 3-1 3.1 INTRODUCTION............................................................................................................................................... 3-1 3.2 GENERAL SETTING ........................................................................................................................................... 3-1 3.3 CRITICAL ELEMENTS OF THE HUMAN ENVIRONMENT AND OTHER RESOURCES BROUGHT FORWARD FOR ANALYSIS..................................................................................................... 3-1 3.3.1 Air Quality............................................................................................................................................... 3-1 3.3.2 Areas Of Critical Environmental Concern...................................................................................... 3-4 3.3.3 Cultural Resources................................................................................................................................ 3-6 3.3.4 Invasive, Noxious and Non-Native Plants ...................................................................................... 3-7 3.3.5 Native American Religious Concerns............................................................................................... 3-8 3.3.6 Special Status Species............................................................................................................................ 3-9 3.3.7 Water Quality ......................................................................................................................................3-11 3.3.8 Wetlands and Riparian Zones ..........................................................................................................3-12 3.3.9 Wild and Scenic Rivers.......................................................................................................................3-15 3.3.10 Wilderness Study Areas.....................................................................................................................3-16 3.3.11 Livestock Grazing ................................................................................................................................3-18 3.3.12 Woodlands and Forestry...................................................................................................................3-18 3.3.13 Vegetation..............................................................................................................................................3-20 3.3.14 Fish and Wildlife...................................................................................................................................3-25 3.3.15 Soils .........................................................................................................................................................3-30 3.3.16 SocioEconomics ...................................................................................................................................3-31 3.3.17 Wilderness Characteristics ...............................................................................................................3-32 CHAPTER 4 . ENVIRONMENTAL CONSEQUENCES................................................................ 4-1 4.1 INTRODUCTION............................................................................................................................................... 4-1 November 2005 Table of Contents/Richfield i 4.2 PROPOSED ACTION......................................................................................................................................... 4-2 4.2.1 Air Quality............................................................................................................................................... 4-2 4.2.2 Areas Of Critical Environmental Concern...................................................................................... 4-4 4.2.3 Cultural Resources................................................................................................................................ 4-6 4.2.4 Invasive, Noxious and Non-Native Species..................................................................................... 4-7 4.2.5 Native American Religious Concerns............................................................................................... 4-7 4.2.6 Special Status Species............................................................................................................................ 4-8 4.2.7 Water Quality ......................................................................................................................................4-12
Load more

Recommended publications
  • EVALUATION REPORT Areas of Critical Environmental Concern Richfield Resource Management Plan
    EVALUATION REPORT Areas of Critical Environmental Concern Richfield Resource Management Plan Dirty Devil and Henry Mountains Potential ACECs Richfield Field Office Bureau of Land Management January 2005 Evaluation Report Richfield Field Office EVALUATION REPORT—AREAS OF CRITICAL ENVIRONMENTAL CONCERN—RICHFIELD RMP/DEIS1 BACKGROUND ...........................................................................................................................................................1 The Law: FLPMA................................................................................................................................................1 The Regulation: 43 CFR 1610.7-2 .......................................................................................................................1 The Policy: BLM Manual 1613 ...........................................................................................................................1 EVALUATION PROCESS ..............................................................................................................................................2 Existing ACECs ...................................................................................................................................................2 ACEC Nominations .............................................................................................................................................2 Potential ACECs ..................................................................................................................................................6
    [Show full text]
  • December 2012 Number 1
    Calochortiana December 2012 Number 1 December 2012 Number 1 CONTENTS Proceedings of the Fifth South- western Rare and Endangered Plant Conference Calochortiana, a new publication of the Utah Native Plant Society . 3 The Fifth Southwestern Rare and En- dangered Plant Conference, Salt Lake City, Utah, March 2009 . 3 Abstracts of presentations and posters not submitted for the proceedings . 4 Southwestern cienegas: Rare habitats for endangered wetland plants. Robert Sivinski . 17 A new look at ranking plant rarity for conservation purposes, with an em- phasis on the flora of the American Southwest. John R. Spence . 25 The contribution of Cedar Breaks Na- tional Monument to the conservation of vascular plant diversity in Utah. Walter Fertig and Douglas N. Rey- nolds . 35 Studying the seed bank dynamics of rare plants. Susan Meyer . 46 East meets west: Rare desert Alliums in Arizona. John L. Anderson . 56 Calochortus nuttallii (Sego lily), Spatial patterns of endemic plant spe- state flower of Utah. By Kaye cies of the Colorado Plateau. Crystal Thorne. Krause . 63 Continued on page 2 Copyright 2012 Utah Native Plant Society. All Rights Reserved. Utah Native Plant Society Utah Native Plant Society, PO Box 520041, Salt Lake Copyright 2012 Utah Native Plant Society. All Rights City, Utah, 84152-0041. www.unps.org Reserved. Calochortiana is a publication of the Utah Native Plant Society, a 501(c)(3) not-for-profit organi- Editor: Walter Fertig (walt@kanab.net), zation dedicated to conserving and promoting steward- Editorial Committee: Walter Fertig, Mindy Wheeler, ship of our native plants. Leila Shultz, and Susan Meyer CONTENTS, continued Biogeography of rare plants of the Ash Meadows National Wildlife Refuge, Nevada.
    [Show full text]
  • Beaver County, Utah Resource Management Plan
    BEAVER COUNTY, UTAH RESOURCE MANAGEMENT PLAN Beaver County Commissioners Michael F. Dalton, Chair Mark S. Whitney Tammy Pearson Planning & Zoning Commission Darrel Davis, Chairman Kyle Blackner, Administrator Von Christiansen, Attorney Jamie Kelsey, Secretary Steve Kinross Mike Riley Walter Schofield Kolby Blackner Drew Coombs Don Noyes Public Lands Keven Whicker, Public Lands Administrator County Staff Scott Albrecht, Michelle Evans, Tracy McMullin, Heidi Eyre Adopted June 6, 2017 (ordinance 2017-03) Amended December 17, 2019 (ordinance 2019-06) i TABLE OF CONTENTS INTRODUCTION .......................................................................................................................... v LEGAL BASIS FOR COUNTY RESOURCE MANAGEMENT PLANNING .......................... ix SOCIAL-ECONOMIC LINKAGES ............................................................................................. xi CURRENT RESOURCE MANAGEMENT SETTING .............................................................. xv DESIRED RESOURCE MANAGEMENT SETTING .............................................................. xvii 1. LAND USE ............................................................................................................................. 1 2. ENERGY, MINING, MINERAL & GEOLOGICAL RESOURCES .................................... 9 2.1 Mining and Mineral & Geological Resources .................................................................. 9 2.2 Energy Resources ...........................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Incident Management Organization Succession Planning Stakeholder Feedback
    Incident Management United States Department Organization Succession Planning of Agriculture Forest Service Stakeholder Feedback Rocky Mountain Research Station General Technical Report RMRS-GTR-297 Anne E. Black January 2013 Black, Anne E. 2013. Incident Management Organization succession planning stakeholder feedback. Gen. Tech. Rep. RMRS-GTR-297 Fort Collins, CO: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Rocky Mountain Research Station. 322 p. ABSTRACT This report presents complete results of a 2011 stakeholder feedback effort conducted for the National Wildfire Coordination Group (NWCG) Executive Board concerning how best to organize and manage national wildland fire Incident Management Teams in the future to meet the needs of the public, agencies, fire service and Team members. Feedback was collected from 858 survey respondents and 57 email comments. In order to facilitate a more comprehensive understanding of the affected community and issues of relevance for implementation, the report includes: a final overview, complete narrative and survey responses, relevant statistical results and interpretation. Keywords: Incident Management, wildland fire, National Wildfire Coordinating Group (NWCG), IMT succession planning AUTHOR Anne E. Black, is a Social Science Analyst with the Human Factors and Risk Management RD&A, part of the USDA Forest Service, Rocky Mountain Research Station. Stationed in Missoula, Montana, she focuses on understanding the theory and practice of high performance, risk management and organizational learning at team and organizational levels, particularly in the wildland fire community. She received her PhD from the University of Idaho in Forest Resources with an emphasis in landscape ecology, a Masters in Environmental Studies from Yale Scholl of Forestry and Environmental Studies, and a Bachelor’s of Science in Resource Conservation from the University of Montana.
    [Show full text]
  • Emery County Pre-Disaster Hazard Mitigation Plan 2018
    Emery County Pre-Disaster Hazard Mitigation Plan 2018 Emery County Page 1 Emery County Pre-Disaster Hazard Mitigation Plan 2018 Table of Contents Emery County 4 PDM Project Quick Reference 5 PDM Introduction 7 Demographics and Population Growth 13 Economy 15 Transportation and Commuting Trends 16 Land Use and Development Trends 17 Risk Assessment (Working Group) 19 Critical Facilities 20 Natural Hazards Profiles 28 Dam Failures 37 Flood 45 Landslides 48 Wildland Fires 53 Problem Soils 55 Infestation 58 Severe Weather 59 Earthquake 64 Drought Hazard History 68 Mitigation Goals, Objectives and Actions 77 Drought 77 Flood 80 Wildland Fires 92 Severe Weather 93 Earthquake 95 Landslides 96 Dam Failure 97 Problem Soils 99 Infestation 100 Hazus Report Appendix 1 Plan Maintenance, Evaluation and Implementation Appendix 2 PDM Planning Process Appendix 3 General Mitigation Strategies Appendix 4 Environmental Considerations Appendix 5 Research Sources Appendix 6 Emery County Community Wildfire Preparedness Plan (CWPP) Appendix 7 Emery County Page 2 Emery County Pre-Disaster Hazard Mitigation Plan 2018 Utah Information Resource Guide Emery County Page 3 Emery County Pre-Disaster Hazard Mitigation Plan 2018 Emery County Emery County is located where the desert meets the mountains in Southeastern Utah. It encompasses 4,452 square miles making it Utah’s seventh largest county. On the western side of the County is the Wasatch Plateau, which is the major water supply for the County. The San Rafael Swell dominates the County’s center with its rugged reefs, “castles”, and gorges. East of the San Rafael Swell is the Green River Desert, an arid district which has been historically important to ranching operations located in the lower San Rafael Valley.
    [Show full text]
  • Bronco Utah Operations LLC, Emery Underground Mine FSSOB UT0022616 Page 1
    Bronco Utah Operations LLC, Emery Underground Mine FSSOB UT0022616 Page 1 FACT SHEET AND STATEMENT OF BASIS BRONCO UTAH OPERATIONS LLC, EMERY UNDERGROUND MINE RENEWAL PERMIT: DISCHARGE & STORM WATER UPDES PERMIT NUMBER: UT0022616 UPDES MULTI-SECTOR STORM WATER GENERAL PERMIT NUMBER: UTR000000 MAJOR INDUSTRIAL FACILITY CONTACTS Person Name: Dan R Baker Position: CEO/President, Bronco Utah Operations LLC Phone Number: (801) 286-2301 Person Name: John C. (Kit) Pappas Position: Environmental Manager Phone Number: (435) 650-7339 DESCRIPTION OF FACILITY Facility Name: Emery Underground Mine Mailing and Facility Address: P.O. Box 527 Emery, Utah 84522 Telephone: 435-650-7339 Actual Address: 3300 North 1200 West Classification (SIC): 1222 - Bituminous Coal Underground Mining (NAICS 212112) Bronco Utah Operations, LLC (Formerly Consol Coal) owns and operates an underground coal mine located 4 miles south of the town of Emery in Emery County, Utah, Township 22 South, Range 6 East. In 2009, the Emery Mine produced about 1.2 million short tons of coal. Production at the mine ceased. The mine has been idle for several years, but recent progress is being made to re-open the mine and resume the mining operation. It is anticipated that within this permit cycle, Emery Underground Mine will be operational. Bronco Utah Operations LLC, Emery Underground Mine FSSOB UT0022616 Page 2 SUMMARY OF CHANGES FROM PREVIOUS PERMIT Biomonitoring requirements have changed to remove Acute WET testing, with the addition of Chronic WET testing being required quarterly. DISCHARGE Over the last 5 years, Emery Mine has only had need to discharged from Outfall 003. There has not been enough accumulated storm water to discharge from any of the storm water settling ponds for over 15 years.
    [Show full text]
  • Sunrise Fire Salvage Environmental Assessment Superior and Ninemile Ranger Districts, Lolo National Forest Mineral County, Montana
    United States Department of Agriculture Sunrise Fire Salvage Environmental Assessment Superior and Ninemile Ranger Districts, Lolo National Forest Mineral County, Montana U.S. Forest Service Region 1 May 2018 For More Information Contact: Project Leader Pat Partyka (ppartyka@fs.fed.us) Telephone: 406-826-4314 Superior District Ranger Carole Johnson (cajohnson01@fs.fed.us) Superior Ranger District P.O. Box 460 Superior, MT 59872 Telephone: 406-822-3928 Fax: 406-822-3903 Ninemile District Ranger Erin Phelps (ephelps@fs.fed.us) Ninemile Ranger District 20325 Remount Road Huson, MT 59846 Telephone: 406-626-5408 Fax: 406-626-5403 In accordance with Federal civil rights law and U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) civil rights regulations and policies, the USDA, its Agencies, offices, and employees, and institutions participating in or administering USDA programs are prohibited from discriminating based on race, color, national origin, religion, sex, gender identity (including gender expression), sexual orientation, disability, age, marital status, family/parental status, income derived from a public assistance program, political beliefs, or reprisal or retaliation for prior civil rights activity, in any program or activity conducted or funded by USDA (not all bases apply to all programs). Remedies and complaint filing deadlines vary by program or incident. Persons with disabilities who require alternative means of communication for program information (e.g., Braille, large print, audiotape, American Sign Language, etc.) should contact the responsible Agency or USDA’s TARGET Center at (202) 720-2600 (voice and TTY) or contact USDA through the Federal Relay Service at (800) 877-8339. Additionally, program information may be made available in languages other than English.
    [Show full text]
  • 12-Month Finding on a Petition to List Astragalus Hamiltonii
    Vol. 76 Wednesday, No. 36 February 23, 2011 Part IV Department of the Interior Fish and Wildlife Service 50 CFR Part 17 Endangered and Threatened Wildlife and Plants; 12-Month Finding on a Petition To List Astragalus hamiltonii, Penstemon flowersii, Eriogonum soredium, Lepidium ostleri, and Trifolium friscanum as Endangered or Threatened; Rule VerDate Mar<15>2010 18:17 Feb 22, 2011 Jkt 223001 PO 00000 Frm 00001 Fmt 4717 Sfmt 4717 E:\FR\FM\23FER4.SGM 23FER4 srobinson on DSKHWCL6B1PROD with RULES4 10166 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 36 / Wednesday, February 23, 2011 / Rules and Regulations DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR FWS–R6–ES–2010–0087. Supporting endangered or threatened. The petition documentation we used in preparing included the five plant species Fish and Wildlife Service this finding is available for public addressed in this finding. The petition inspection, by appointment, during incorporated all analysis, references, 50 CFR Part 17 normal business hours at the U.S. Fish and documentation provided by Docket No. [FWS–R6–ES–2010–0087; MO and Wildlife Service, Utah Ecological NatureServe in its online database at 92210–0–008] Services Field Office, 2369 West Orton http://www.natureserve.org/. The Circle, Suite 50, West Valley City, UT document clearly identified itself as a Endangered and Threatened Wildlife 84119. Please submit any new petition and included the petitioners’ and Plants; 12-Month Finding on a information, materials, comments, or identification information, as required Petition To List Astragalus hamiltonii, questions concerning this finding to the in 50 CFR 424.14(a). We sent a letter to Penstemon flowersii, Eriogonum above address.
    [Show full text]
  • Appendix F3.5 Vegetation Resources
    Appendix F3.5 Vegetation Resources Clark, Lincoln, and White Pine Counties Groundwater Development Project Draft Environmental Impact Statement BLM June 2011 Contents Table F3.5-1 Wildfire Frequency and Succession Information for Vegetation Communities Common in the ROW Figure F3.5-1 Fire Regime Condition Classes in the Study Area Fire Regime Condition Class Attributes Weed Species Known to Occur Within the Study Area Table F3.5-2 Noxious Weed Species Documented in ROW Areas, Groundwater Development Areas and Associated Hydrologic Basins Risk Assessment for Noxious and Invasive Weeds: Clark, Lincoln and White Pine Counties Groundwater Development Project – Right of Way for Main Pipeline Table F3.5-3 Cactus and Yucca Species Inventoried Within the ROW Table F3.5-4 Special Status Plant Species Potentially Occurring Within the Project Area Culturally Significant Plants and Animals Lists • Confederated Tribes of the Goshute Reservation • Ely Shoshone Culturally Sensitive Plants • The Paiute Indian Tribe of Utah Figure F3.5-2 No Action - Cumulative Projected Drawdown Greater Than 10’ Phreatophytes, Springs and Streams Figure F3.5-3 Proposed Action - Cumulative Projected Drawdown Greater Than 10’ Phreatophytes, Springs and Streams Figure F3.5-4 Alternative A - Cumulative Projected Drawdown Greater Than 10’ Phreatophytes, Springs and Streams Figure F3.5-5 Alternative B - Cumulative Projected Drawdown Greater Than 10’ Phreatophytes, Springs and Streams Figure F3.5-6 Alternative C - Cumulative Projected Drawdown Greater Than 10’ Phreatophytes,
    [Show full text]
  • 12-Month Finding on a Petition to List
    Vol. 76 Wednesday, No. 36 February 23, 2011 Part IV Department of the Interior Fish and Wildlife Service 50 CFR Part 17 Endangered and Threatened Wildlife and Plants; 12-Month Finding on a Petition To List Astragalus hamiltonii, Penstemon flowersii, Eriogonum soredium, Lepidium ostleri, and Trifolium friscanum as Endangered or Threatened; Rule VerDate Mar<15>2010 18:17 Feb 22, 2011 Jkt 223001 PO 00000 Frm 00001 Fmt 4717 Sfmt 4717 E:\FR\FM\23FER4.SGM 23FER4 srobinson on DSKHWCL6B1PROD with RULES4 10166 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 36 / Wednesday, February 23, 2011 / Rules and Regulations DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR FWS–R6–ES–2010–0087. Supporting endangered or threatened. The petition documentation we used in preparing included the five plant species Fish and Wildlife Service this finding is available for public addressed in this finding. The petition inspection, by appointment, during incorporated all analysis, references, 50 CFR Part 17 normal business hours at the U.S. Fish and documentation provided by Docket No. [FWS–R6–ES–2010–0087; MO and Wildlife Service, Utah Ecological NatureServe in its online database at 92210–0–008] Services Field Office, 2369 West Orton http://www.natureserve.org/. The Circle, Suite 50, West Valley City, UT document clearly identified itself as a Endangered and Threatened Wildlife 84119. Please submit any new petition and included the petitioners’ and Plants; 12-Month Finding on a information, materials, comments, or identification information, as required Petition To List Astragalus hamiltonii, questions concerning this finding to the in 50 CFR 424.14(a). We sent a letter to Penstemon flowersii, Eriogonum above address.
    [Show full text]
  • Hydrology and Effects of Mining in the Quitchupah and Pines Coal-Lease Tracts, Central Utah U.S
    HYDROLOGY AND EFFECTS OF MINING IN THE QUITCHUPAH AND PINES COAL-LEASE TRACTS, CENTRAL UTAH U.S. GEOLOGICAL SURVEY Water-Resources Investigations Report 90-4084 COVER: Sketch by Charles E. Turner depicting fracturing in the Castlegate Sandstone and the potential for coal mining in the Quitch- upah and Pines coal-lease tracts. HYDROLOGY AND POTENTIAL EFFECTS OF MINING IN THE QUITCHUPAH AND PINES GOAL-LEASE TRACTS, CENTRAL UTAH By S.A. Thiros and G.E. Cordy U.S. GEOLOGICAL SURVEY Water-Resources Investigations Report 90-4084 Prepared in cooperation with the U.S. BUREAU OF LAND MANAGEMENT Salt Lake City, Utah 1991 U.S. DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR MANUEL LUJAN, JR., Secretary U.S. GEOLOGICAL SURVEY Dallas L. Peck, Director For additional information Copies of this report can be write to: purchased from: District Chief U.S. Geological Survey U.S. Geological Survey, WRD Books and Open-File Reports Section Room 1016 Administration Building Federal Center, Bldg. 810 1745 West 1700 South Box 25425 Salt Lake City, Utah 84104 Denver, Colorado 80225 ii CONTENTS Page Abstract ............................................................. 1 Introduction ......................................................... 2 Purpose and scope ............................................... 2 Methods of investigation ........................................ 2 Ground-water site-numbering system .............................. 5 Acknowledgments ................................................. 5 Physical setting ................................................ 5 Topography
    [Show full text]
  • CALIFORNIA STATE FIRE MARSHAL Page: 1 FIRE EXTINGUISHER CONCERNS LICENSE 3/24/2016 LIST of ACTIVE RECORDS (SORTED by COMPANY NAME)
    CALIFORNIA STATE FIRE MARSHAL Page: 1 FIRE EXTINGUISHER CONCERNS LICENSE 3/24/2016 LIST OF ACTIVE RECORDS (SORTED BY COMPANY NAME) ID#/TYPE COMPANY NAME TELEPHONE RENEW DATE MAIL ADDRESS CONTACT PERSON EXPIRES LABEL COUNTY CITY STATE ZIP CODE STATUS 1ST LICENCE REGION 1708-D 1-SHOT (209) 826-9113 12/8/2015 2210 IMPERIAL DR JAMES RUIZ 12/31/2016 V00193 24 LOS BANOS CA 93635 A 12/11/1990 C 1341-BCD 1ST AMERICAN FIRE SAFETY (951) 737-5904 12/9/2015 P.O. BOX 2436 CHUCK BYRNE 12/31/2016 V00230 33 CORONA CA 91718-0000 A 5/6/1985 S 2432-BCD 1ST IN FIRE PROTECTION (909) 217-3473 12/9/2015 10700 JERSEY BLVD #740 LARRY SLEIGH 12/31/2016 V00231 36 RANCHO CUCAMONGA CA 91730 A 8/4/2010 S 2456-BCD 200PSI FIRE PROTECTION (213) 763-0612 12/11/2015 11453 YOLANDA AVENUE DONG LEE 12/31/2016 V00348 19 NORTHRIDGE CA 91326 A 10/6/2011 N 2275-BCD 24 HOUR FIRE PROTECTION (760) 940-0821 12/21/2015 3840 OCEANIC DR #512 JEFF MILLER 12/31/2016 V00410 37 OCEANSIDE CA 92056 A 11/19/2003 C 2236-D 24 SEVEN FIRE PROTECTION (530) 906-0606 12/11/2015 190 BUENA VISTA LINDA DONNELLY 12/31/2016 V00347 31 AUBURN CA 95603 A 11/12/2002 C 2318-BCD 3 ALARM FIRE & SAFETY (909) 841-8860 1/6/2016 7560 KEMPSTER CT SCOTT DODDS 12/31/2016 V00471 36 FONTANA CA 92336 A 12/28/2005 C 2195-BCD A & A FIRE PROTECTION (323) 343-8726 12/21/2015 PO BOX 2096 ANGELISSA MOSCO 12/31/2016 V00406 19 LANCASTER CA 93539 A 5/17/2001 S 1416-A A & B FIRE PROTECTION & SAFETY (831) 422-4404 12/9/2015 PO BOX 1211 TODD H.
    [Show full text]