The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutHazard Mitigation Plan Vol II Draft SECTION 8: INTRODUCTION SECTION 8: INTRODUCTION BACKGROUND Section 201.6.a(4) of Chapter 44 of the Code of Federal Regulations (44CFR) states: "Multi-jurisdictional plans (e.g. watershed plans) may be accepted, as appropriate, as long as each jurisdiction has participated in the process and has officially adopted the plan." The Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) and New York State Emergency Management Office (NYSEMO) both encourage multi- jurisdictional planning. Therefore, in the preparation of the Suffolk County (SC) Hazard Mitigation Plan (HMP), a Planning Partnership was formed to pursue grant funding for the plan and to meet requirements of the federal Disaster Mitigation Act of 2000 (DMA) for as many eligible local governments in SC as possible. SC Fire Rescue and Emergency Services (FRES) assumed the leadership role of this planning process by securing contract assistance to facilitate the planning pro.cess. The DMA defines a local government as follows: "Any county, municipality, city, town, township, public authority, school district, special district, intrastate district, council of governments (regardless of whether the council of governments is incorporated as a nonprofit corporation under State law), regional or interstate government entity, or agency or instrumentality of a local government; any Indian tribe or authorized tribal organization, or Alaska Native village or organization; and any rural community, unincorporated town or village, or other public entity." THE PLANNING PARTNERSHIP Initial Solicitation and Letters of 1 ntent SC FRES solicited the participation of all incorporated towns and villages in SC at the outset of this project. Towns and Villages that expressed interested were required to adopt an "Authorizing Resolution" in their jurisdiction and execute a contract with SC to participate in the grant and get reimbursed for their efforts. Table 8-1 lists the jurisdictions that decided to participate in the planning process, six towns, representing 60 percent of the towns in SC and nine villages, representing 29% of the Villages in SC. Please note, on February 2, 2007 the Village of Lake Grove decided not to participate further in the planning process. Jurisdictions in Suffolk Town of Babylon Village of Amityville Town of Huntington Village of Asharoken Town of Riverhead Village of Babylon Town of Shelter Island Village of Bellport Town of Smithtown Village of Head of Harbor Town of Southold Village of Huntington Bay Village of Nissequoque Village of Northport Village of The Branch DMA 2000 Hazard Mitigation Plan - Suffolk County, New York 8-1 DRAFT- September 2007 SECTION 8: INTRODUCTION Planning Partner Expectations The Planning Committee agreed to the following list of expectations: · Establish Plan development goals; · Establish a timeline for completion of the Plan; · Ensure that the Plan meets the requirements of DMA 2000 and FEMA and NYSEMO guidance; · Solicit and encourage the participation of regional agencies, a range of stakeholders, and citizens in the Plan development process; · Assist in gathering information for inclusion in the Plan, including the use of previously developed reports and data; · Organize and oversee the public involvement process; · Develop, revise, adopt, and maintain Volume I of the Plan in its entirety and the local jurisdictional annex in Volume II. Jurisdiction Annex Templates '~urisdictional annex templates were created to help the Planning Committee prepare their jurigdiction- specific annexes and ensure all criteria of Section 201.6 of 44CFR would be met, based on the parmers' capabilities and mode of operation. The template and detailed instructions were designed to lead each panner through a series of steps that would generate the DMA-required elements that are specific for each partner. The designated point-of-contact for each participating jurisdiction, as well as the County, was asked to complete the template using the detailed instructions, guidance from the consultant and technical assistance provided at the jurisdictional annex workshop (discussed below). The templates and their instructions can be found in Appendix F. Workshop A six-hour jurisdictional annex workshop was held on September 6, 2007 for the Planning Committee. Attendance at this workshop was considered mandatory. At the workshop, an overview was provided for each section in the annex. The workshop was designed to be instructional, hut also allow for open discussion and questions. In addition, personalized technical assistance was available and provided to each.jurisdiction, if needed. Topics discussed during this session included: · DMA 2000 overview · Jurisdictional Annex Templates Tools · Jurisdictional Annex Template o Overview o Risk ranking o Cost/benefit review The Planning Committee was led through an exercise to rank risk for the County as a whole. This was a collaborative effort by all workshop attendees. Concurrently, each committee member was asked to rank each risk specifically for its jurisdiction, based on probability of occurrence and estimates of potential dollar losses to structures vulnerable to the hazard. Maps illustrating hazard areas and tables estimating exposure and losses were provided to each jurisdiction as a tool, in addition to the risk assessment, to complete this exercise. DRAFT - September 2007 SECTION 8: INTRODUCTION Benefit/Cost Review Each jurisdiction's annex includes an action plan of prioritized initiatives to mitigate natural hazards. Section 201.6.c.3iii of 44CFR requires the prioritization of the action plan to emphasize the extent to which benefits are maximized according to a cost/benefit review of the proposed projects and their associated costs. As part of jurisdiction annex template completion, the Planning Committee was asked to weigh the estimated benefits of a project versus the estimated costs to establish a parameter to be used in the prioritization of a project. This benefit/cost review was qualitative; that is, it did not include the level of detail required by FEMA for project grant eligibility under the Hazard Mitigation Grant Program (HMGP) and Pre-Disaster Mitigation (PDM) grant program. This qualitative approach was used because projects may not be implemented for up to 10 years, and the associated costs and benefits could change dramatically in that time. Each project was assessed by assigning subjective ratings (high, medium, and low) to its costs and benefits, as follows: High Existing funding levels are not adequate to cover the costs of the proposed project, and implementation would require an increase in revenue through an alternative source (e.g., bonds, grants, and fee increases). Medium The project could be implemented with existing funding but would require a re- apportionment of the budget or a budget amendment, or the cost of the project would have to be spread over multiple years. Low The project could be funded under the existing budget. The project is part of or can be part of an existing, ongoing program. High Project will have an immediate impact on the reduction of dsk exposure to life-and property. Medium Project will have a long-term impact on the reduction of dsk exposure to life and property or will provide an immediate reduction in the risk exposure to property. Low Long-term benefits of the project are difficult to quantify in the short term. Using this approach, projects with positive benefit versus cost ratios (such as high over high, high over medium, medium over low, etc.) are considered cost-beneficial and are prioritized accordingly. For many of the initiatives identified in the action plans, participating jurisdictions may seek financial assistance under FEMA's HMGP or PDM programs. Both of these programs require detailed benefit/cost analysis as part of the application process. These analy~es will be performed when funding applications are prepared, using the FEMA model process. The Planning Committee is committed to implementing mitigation stxategies with benefits that exceed costs. For projects not seeking financial assistance from grant programs that require this sort of analysis, the Planning Committee reserves the right to define "benefits" according to parameters that meet its needs and the goals and objectives of this plan. Completion of the Planning Process A majority of the participating towns and villages in the County completed the planning and annex- preparation process. Some participating jurisdictions were unable to complete their jurisdiction annexes in time for submission of this draft Plan. Completed jurisdictional annexes are presented in Section 8. Any non-participating local government within the SC planning area can "dock" to this plan in the future by following the linkage procedures defined in Appendix F. DMA 2000 Hazard Mitigation Plan - Suffolk County, New York 8-3 DRAFT- September 2007 SECTION 9.1: TOWN OF BABYLON TOWN OF BABYLON This section presents the jurisdictional annex for the Town of Babylon. HAZARD MITIGATION PLAN POINT OF CONTACT Gil Hanse, Director of Emergency Preparedness 200 E. Sunrise Highway Lindenhurst, NY 11757 Phone: (631) 957-3009 E-mail: ghanse~,townofbabyIon.com Laura Feitner, Assistant Civil Engineer 200 E. Sundse Highway Lindenhurst, NY 11757 Phone: (631) 957-7408 E-mail: Ifeitner~townofbabyIon.com TOWN PROFILE PopulatiOn 211,792 as of 2000 US Census; 225,000 includes day-time working population Location Town of Babylon, including the Village of Amityville and Babylon Village, is the located on the south shore and western border of Suffolk County. The Town and Villages are bordered on the south by the Atlantic Ocean. An 8.5-mile-long inhabited barrier island prevents direct ocean wave impact along Babylon's South Shore lies between the Atlantic Ocean and the Great South Bay. This island, known as Jones Island, was created by the Long Island State Parks Commission froni several smaller islands in the early 1900s. The waterfront area of the town is highly developed, primarily with residences, as depicted in the aerial photographs below, showing portions of our frontage along the Great South Bay. Babylon Town is the most densely populated town in Suffolk County, containing 220,000 people in 52 square miles. The Town includes the hamlets of Copiague, Deer Park, East Farmingdale, North Amityville, North Babylon, North Lindenhurst, West Babylon, Wheatley Heights, and Wyandanch. Three incorporated villages are located within the geographical bounds of this plan. The Villages of Amityville and Babylon are participating partners; the Village of Lindenhurst has previously completed and adopted their own HMP. DRAFT- September 2007 SECTION 9.1: TOWN OF BABYLON The Town's population has remained relatively stable over the past 20 years, as most land in the town was densely developed by 1975. Any growth in population since that time has occurred as a result of undocumented peoples residing without local authorization, yet, under the New York State home rule system, Babylon is responsible for this population in case of natural disaster. Note Babylon has local ordinance enforcement authority only. Though FEMA may typically consider life and safety issues beyond the jurisdiction of most hazard mitigation plans, the Town of Babylon intends that this plan mathematically demonstrate that the mitigation planning initiative that is most important to the life and safety of our residents could never be accounted for within any other FEMA or DHS response or preparedness plan. Not to stray into the territory of response plans, but even a hazard mitigation plan has to remind those unfamiliar with Long Island that even during normal daily business, movement of large amounts of people is restricted because there is simply' no more room on the roads, and there no more space to expand the roads. Even with the best possible evacuation plan, and an unlimited amount of personnel to carry it out, the laws of physics still prevail. It is certainly possible, and even probable, based on documented weather patterns, that amount of time to evacuate will far exceed the amount of notice of a significant event. Thus, that is why the Town of Babylon turns to mitigation efforts, because if we do not reduce the exposure and vulnerability of our mainland population and infrastructure by securing our barrier islands, we will sustain unprecedented loss of life, destruction of essential infrastructure, and devastation of our economy from which it will take many years to recover. e: · '" Long Island's Southern Exposure to the Atlantic Ocean increases the severity .... and multitude of natural hazards. Note typical storm .... tracks (Oabrielle 2007 is shown) do not allow advance notice in excess of 24 hours .... for most coastal events Background image is a screenshot from Hurrevac, which is used by Town of Babylon Emergency Preparedness throughout hurricane season for evacuation plannin9 and decision-makin9 The Town is characterized by many areas of high groundwater, and contains a sensitive groundwater deep recharge zone. It is largely served by public water. Approximately 50% of the Town is served by a sewer district; the remainder of development relies on on-site sanitary leaching basins. Fortunately most areas of DMA 2000 Hazard Mitigation Plan - Suffolk County, New York 9.1-2 DRAFT- September 2007 SECTION 9.1: TOWN OF BABYLON the Town have predominantly sandy soil, but some northern areas contain loam and p0cke{s ~f ~iay. The climate is moderate, consistent with other coastal communities in the Northeastern United States. Climate Average temperatures range from the low 30's degrees Fahrenheit (°F) to mid 70's (°F). Precipitation averages 48.8 inches per year with the most precipitation occurring in the months of March and August (5.2 inches). On average, snowfall is limited to November through April, with highest accumulations in January. The humidity ranges from approximately 50% and 80% throughout the year. Average annual rainfall has sharply increased in the past 5-10 years. The Town Department of Environmental Control maintains local rainfall statistics for purposes of monitoring the shellfish habitat. Brief History The geographical area now known as the Town of Babylon was originally part of the Town of'Huntington, and designated "Huntington South" until 1803. In 1872, the Babylon was officially partitioned into an independent Town, responsible for all aspects of government and response under the New York State "home rule" system. It should be noted the Villages maintain zoning and building codes independent of the Town. Governing Body Format Both the Town and Villages have boards which will be responsible for the adoption of this Hazard Mitigation Plan. The Town Board consists of fin Elected Supervisor, and 4 elected Town Council members. Growth/Development Trends Based on the data tracked by the New York State Data Center, the Town of Babylon has experienced a modest rate of growth. The overall population has increased 0.89% from 2000 to 2006 has averaged 0.23% per year from 1990 to 2006.. With this rate of growth, the anticipated development trends for Babylon are considered low to moderate. Based on Town GIS analyses, there exists less than one square mile of undeveloped land that has not already been protected. While, the town's capabilities to manage and deal with future growth and development are illustrated later in this annex, mitigation measures concerning land use have no ability to be effective. NATURAL HAZARD EVENT HISTORY SPECIFIC TO THE TOWN OF BABYLON Nor'Easter/Coastal Erosion/Flooding NA Nov. 25, 1950 Not Available Nor'Easter/Coastal Erosion/Flooding NA Nov. 6-7 1953 Not Available Nor'Easter/Coastal Erosion/Flooding NA Oct. 14-16, 1955 Not Available Nor'Easter/Coastal Erosion/Flooding NA Apr. 13, 1961 Not Available Nor'Easter/coastal Erosion/Flooding DR-129 Mar. 6-8, 1962 HIGH DMA 2000 Hazard Mitigation Plan - Suffolk County, New York 9.1-3 DRAFT - September 2007 Nor'Easter/Coastal Erosion/Flooding Nor'Easter/Coastal Erosion/Flooding SECTION 9.1: TOWN OF BABYLON Nov. 12-13, 1968 Nor'Easter/Coastal NA February 1969 Erosion/Flooding NA Feb. 19, 1972 Nor'Easter/Coastal Erosion/Flooding Nor'Easter/Coastal Erosion/Flooding "The Perfect Storm") Nor'Easter/Coastal Erosion/Flooding Nor'Easter/Coastal Erosion/Flooding Nor'Easter/Coastal Erosion/Flooding Nor'EastedCoastal Erosion/Flooding - Nor'EastedCoastal Erosion/Flooding Nor'Easter/Coastal Erosion/Flooding NA NA Nov. 7,1973 Oct. 39.31, 1991 Nor'Easter/Coastal Erosion/Flooding Nor'Easter/Coastal Erosion/Flooding DR-974 Dec. 11-14, 1992 EM-3107 March 12-14, 1993 NA Jan. 1994 DR-1083 Jan 6-8. 1996 DR-1146 Oct. 19-20, 1996 NA March/April 1997 NA Mar. 5-7, 2001 Nor'Easter/Coastal NA Dec. 26, 2002 Erosion/Flooding NA February 2003 Nor'EastedCoastal Erosion/Flooding Nor'Easter/Coastal Erosion/Flooding Nor'Easter/Coastal Erosion/Flooding NA December 2003 NA February 11, 2006 DR-1692 April 14-16, 2007 NA 1779-1780 Severe Winter Storm/Hard Winter Severe Winter Storm/ NA 1888 Blizzard Severe Winter Storm/ NA Feb. 3-4, 1961 Blizzard Severe Winter Storm NA Dec. 17, 1973 Severe Winter Storm/ NA Jan. 19-20, 1978 Bli~ard Severe Winter Storm/ NA Feb. 5, 1978 Blizzard Severe Winter Storm/ NA Apr. 6, lg82 NA BJi7~ard Not Available LOW HIGH MEDIUM HIGH HIGH HIGH MHD LOW MHD MHD LOW MED LOW MHD MHD LOW NA NA NA $100,000 NA NA DMA 2000 Hazaid Mitigation Plan, Suffolk County, New York 9.1-4 DRAFT - September 2007 Severe Winter Storm/ Blizzard Severe Winter Storm/ Blizzard Severe Winter Storm/ Blizzard Severe Winter Storm/ Blizzard Severe Winter Storm/ Blizzard - "President's Day Storm" Severe Winter Storm/ Blizzard Severe Winter Storm Severe Winter Storm Severe Winter Storm/ Blizzard Severe Winter Storm/ SECTION 9.1: TOWN OF BABYLON NA Feb. 11-12 1983 FEMA EM-3107 Mar. 1993 NA Jan 6-8, 1996 (second largest) FEMA DR-1083 Dec. 1996 FEMA EM 3184 Feb. 17-18, 2003 NA Dec. 6, 2003 NA Jan. 27-28,2004 NA Jan. 19,2005 NA Jan. 22-23,2005 NA Feb. 2t - Mar. 12, 2005 (5 storms) Severe Winter Storm/ NA Feb. 11-12, 2006 Hurricane/Coastal Erosion/Flooding NA · $8,500,000 NA $21,400,000 Not Available Not Available Not Available Not Available Not Available Not Available Not Available NA August 1635 Not Available Hurricane/Coastal Erosion/Flooding NA Sept. 1821 Not Available Hurricane/Coastal Erosion/Flooding NA 8/19/1856 Not Available Hurricane/Coastal Erosion/Flooding NA Sept. 16, 1858 Not Available Hurricane/Coastal Erosion/Flooding NA 11/1/1861 Not Available Hurricane/Coastal Erosion/Flooding NA 6/17/1886 Not Available Humcane/Coastal Erosion/Flooding NA 9/6/1888 Not Available Extra Tropical Depression NA 10/14/1900 Not Available Hurricane/Coastal Erosion/Flooding NA 9/8/1934 Not Available Hurricane/Coastal Erosion/Flooding - "Long Island Express" or NA Sept. 21, 1938 HIGH "Great Hurricane of '38" Hurricane/Coasta~ Erosion/Flooding- NA Sept. 14, 1944 MEDIUM "Great Atlantic Hurricane" Hurricane Carol Coastal Erosion/Flooding DR-26 Aug. 31, 1954 LOW Hurricane - Diane Coastal Erosion/Flooding DR-45 Aug. 12-19, 1955 HIGH DMA 2000 Hazard Mitigation Plan - Suffolk County, New York 9.1-5 DRAFT- September 2007 Hurricane - Esther Coastal Erosion/Flooding SECTION 9,1: TOWN OF BABYLON 9/21 / 1961 Hurricane Agnes NA June 22, 1972 HIGH Coastal Erosion/Flooding · Hurricane Belle DR-520 Aug. 10, 1976 LOW Coastal Erosion/Flooding 1982 Hurricane - Cindy NA (1 of top 3 erosion MEDIUM Coastal Erosion/Flooding ) events) Hurricane - Gloria Coastal Erosion/Flooding DR-750 Oct. 18, 1985 LOW Hurricane Felix NA Aug. 14, 1995 LOW Coastal Erosion/Flooding Tropical Storm Bertha NA July 13, 1996 LOW Coastal Erosion/Flooding Tropical Storm Josephine Coastal Erosion/Flooding NA October 8, 1996 LOW Tropical Stm- Floyd DR-1296 Sept. 1999 LOW Coastal Erosion/Flooding Long Island was just shy of Disaster Declaration, but homeowners were offered assistance in the form of SBA Loans Remnants of Hurricane Wilma/Flooding/Shallow Groundwater October 2005 MEDIUM Tropical Storm Ernesto/ NA September 2, 2006 LOW Flooding Notes: N/A = Not applicable. Damage Estimates indicated as high (> 30% total replacement cost), medium ( 15-29% TRC), or low (<15% TRC) Number of FEMA Identified Repetitive Flood Loss Properties: 386 Due to the geographical exposure of Babylon's shoreline, and the dense development along the Great South Bay frontage, even the slightest natural events can cause extensive disruption to the economy. For example, the Town of Babylon experiences impact to its roadways and drainage infrastructure approximately once a month, when the cycle of the moon causes a "high high tide". Pictured below are the mainland results of a minor Nor'Easter, April 15, 2007 (DR-1692): DMA 2000 Hazard Mitigation Plan - Suffolk County, New York 9.1-6 DRAFT- September 2007 SECTION 9,1: TOWN OF BABYLON The damage to the mainland and to Jones Island (pictured above and below) while significant, is minor compared to the historical impact of Nor'Easters on the Town of Babylon. Due to our coastal vulnerability to north-easterly winds, 24 of the 26 events described in the Volume table entitled "Nor'Easter Events between 1931 and 2006" impacted our Town. Though precise data is not available for all storms, local emergency management officials estimate that 12 of the Nor'Easters experienced caused property, infrastructure and economic damage exceeding 30% of the Town's total replacement cost for the years of the events. Of particular note is that the Town of Babylon participated in all six of the Presidential Disaster Declarations for Nor'Easter events in Suffolk County, and even had to evacuate over 3000 people for "The Storm of the Century" which occurred March 1993 (DR-974). Accompanying Nor'Easters, and all other coastal storms, is Coastal Erosion. Due to the southerly-facing coast and the geology of the sand, erosion and accretion occur on a daily basis guided by wind and wave directions. The erosion along Jones Island exceeds the accretion, as man-made structures, erected aloog o~r coastline throughout history, have disturbed the littoral drift of necessary sediments that would ensure accretion along Jones Island. General descriptions of this hazard propagated in Volume I are not typical of Jones Island (Gilgo Beach), as we may suffer erosion losses of 5 feet per minor coastal event, including nor'easters. In fact, it is likely that Jones Island experiences one of the highest erosion rates along the entire Eastern seaboard. Erosion of Jones Island is an on-going event which can only be measured by day- to-day weather events. Refer to documentation in USACE projects from 1987 to present for further scientific analysis. The coastal erosion threatening our barrier island endangers not merely our beaches or residences or a vital New York State Commuter Route. Should the island become structurally unsound, the only sewer outfall pipe for a Suffolk County sewage treatment plant serving over half of our population and commerce will fail, requiring expensive re-routing and reconstruction. But even should the sewer pipe be lost, the safety and welfare of the number of citizens directly physically endangered by any major coastal event, including nor'easters, rises from 800 people to over 30,000 people. Depicted below is an examplb of how quickly erosion can occur. The seaward portion of dunes pictured existed just prior to DR-1692. Exposed by the recent erosion is an oil tank left behind by the US Coast Guard when the Gilgo Station was demolished in 1980s. DMA 2000 H~i~ ~iii~ii~ ~i~n i §uff~ik ~t)i ~ ~0iR ~ii~ DRAFT - September 2007 SECTION 9.1: TOWN OF BABYLON As Nor'Easters and Coastal Erosion occur quite frequently, considering the damage that may be sustained by the violent winds and flooding asgociated with hurricanes and other tropical cyclones paints an ominous picture of Long Island's future. Long Island, and the Town of Babylon in particular, has experienced only' a minor portion of the damage amounts from Presidential Disaster Declarations that affected Long Island since 1954. Many of the worst hurricane events (i.e. 1938) hit well before the majority of development in Babylon, which occurred post- World War II. In the case of Hurricane Gloria, she hit Babylon at low tide, sparing our citizens from widespread coastal flooding. While Volume I contains a complete analysis of the natural hazard for Suffolk County in general, it is important to note the population analyses contained there-in indicate that 39% of the total affected population in Suffolk County for a Category 2 or Category 3 Hurricane reside within the Town of Babylon. In the case ora Category 2, sheltering needs are approximately 30,000 people; for a Category 3, that number jumps to 124,000 people. To make matters worse, HAZUS analysig in Volume I supports local knowledge that local emergency operations and fire/rescue efforts will most likely be moderately disabled, and could possibly be severely disabled for several days. It is because of these predictions, and other local emergency planning activities and mapping that the Town of Babylon has focused extensively on encouraging existing federal and state projects to continue on Jones Island. The barrier island is the best protection the Town has to mitigate the effects of hurricanes and tropical cyclones by increasing the amount of time available to transport and shelter residents, and to reduce the amount flood waters inundating streets and critical response facilities. Pictured below is an example of a map created by Town emergency preparedness to more clearly understand affected population and aid in mitigation efforts: DMA 2000 Hazard Mitigation Plan - Suffolk County, New York 9.1-8 DRAFT - September 2007 SECTION 9.1: TOWN OF BABYLON Atlantic Ocean ] Asian Beetle Infestation (Risk Ranking #9) Though the Asian Beetle infestation has relatively low impacts on the Town and Villages compared to the other hazards, mitigation strategies for any natural hazards involving wind, and hence tree, damage must be modified to account for the infestation. Pictured below is the border (purple) of the Asian Beetle Quarantine Area, with respect to the borders (black) of both Village of Amityville and Village of Babylon. DMA 2000 Hazard Mitigation Plan - Suffolk County, New York 9.1-9 DRAFT- September 2007 SECTION 9.1: TOWN OF BABYLON DMA 2000 Hazard Mitigation Plan- Suffolk County, New York 9.1-10 DRAFT- September 2007 SECTION 9,1: TOWN OF BABYLON NATURAL HAZARD RISK/VULNERABILITY RISK RANKING 7 8 10 10 b. Nor'Easters (extra- tropical cyclones, including severe winter Iow-pressure systems) Coastal Erosion Severe Winter Storm (heavy snow, blizzards, ice storms) Hurricane (tropical cyclones, including tropical storms and tropical depressions) Flooding (riverine, flash, coastal, urban flooding and elevated groundwater) lO0-year*: $959,913,000 - $1,508,773,000 500-year*: $10,312,336,000- $11,421,625,000 Frequent 45 Damage estimate not available. Frequent Damage estima!e not available. 100-year*: $959,913,000 - $1,508,773,000 500-year*: $10,312,336,000 - $11,421,625,000 Severe Storms (windstorms, thunderstorms, hail, lightning and tornado) 100-year~: $26,599,000 500-year**:$43,412,000 Shallow Groundwater Groundwater Contamination Asian Beetle Infestation Wildfire Damage estimate not available. 39 Frequent 39 Occasional 36 Frequent 30 Frequent 27 Frequent Occasional Frequent Rare Rare 0 Damage estimate not available. 18 Damage estimate not available. 14 Damage estimate not available. Damage estimate not available. 3 Drought Damage estimate not available. Building damage ratio estimates based on FEMA 386-2 (August 2001 ) Frequent=- Hazard event that occurs more frequently than once in 10 years, Occasional--Hazard event that occurs fi.om once in 10 years to once in 100 years, Rare--Hazard event that occurs from once in 100 years to once in 1,000 years, None= Hazard event that occurs less frequently than once in 1,000 years The probability of occurrence for these events is weighted at "0" due to no exposure Estimated building replacement value (structure and contents) damaged by the 100-year and 500-year hurricane-related winds and storm surge events as calculated using HAZUS-MH (custom methodology explained in Section 5.4, Volume I in the Hurricane hazard profile). Estimated building replacement value (structure and contents) damaged by a 100-year and 500-year flood event as calculated by HAZUS-MH. CAPABILITY ASSESSMENT This section identifies the following capabilities of the local jurisdiction: · Legal and regulatory capability · Administrative and technical capability · Fiscal capability · Community classification. DMA 2000 Hazard Mitigation Plan - Suffolk County, New York 9.1~11 DRAFT - September 2007 SECTION 9.1: TOWN OF BABYLON 1) Building Code 2) Zoning Ordinance 3) Subdivision Ordinance 4) Special Purpose Ordinances (floodplain management, critical or sensitive areas) Y Y (TOB Chapter 213 and Chapter 186) Y Y Y Y SEE COMMENT Y Y Town adopted International Building Code 2003 TOB Chapter 213, adopted 1954. Suffolk County Planning Commission 'has review authority on certain actions. If they disapprove an action, Town Zoning Board must approve with a greater majodty & present findings. TOB Chapter 213, adopted. Suffolk County Planning Commission has review authority on certain actions. If they disapprove an action, Town Board/Town Zoning Board/Town Planning Board must approve with a greater majodty & present findings. NYS Subdivision laws provide a general framework, but allow room for local ordinances and interpretation. Chapter 99 - Coastal Erosion Hazard Areas (1989); Chapter 114 -Environmental Quality Review (1977); Chapter 125 Flood Damage Control (1994); Chapter 128 Freshwater Wetlands (1976); Chapter 137 Preservation of Histodc Areas (1987); Chapter 153 Multiple Dwellings (1978) Incorporated into most local 5) Growth Management Y Y N N ordinances listed above. Maintained by TOB Department of 6) Floodplain ManagementJBasin y y y. y Environmental Control; by a Plan designated TOB Flood Plain Manager Chapter 189, adopted pursuant to 7) Stormwater Management Y Y Y* Y NYS Phase II implementation of Plan/ordinance the Federal Clean Water Act 8) General Plan or Y Y N Y Completed per state mandate Comprehensive Plan 9) Capital Improvements Plan Y Y N N Y 10) Site Plan Review Requirements SEE COMMENT Suffolk County Planning Commission has review authority on certain actions. If they disapprove an action, Town DMA 2000 Hazard Mitigation Plan - Suffolk County, New York 9.1-12 DRAFT - September 2007 SECTION 9.t: TOWN OF BABYLON Boards must approve with a greater majodty & present findings 11) Habitat Conservation Plan Y Y y* y 12) Economic Development Plan Y Y y* N 13) Emergency Response Plan Y Y N N Developed 1976, updated as needed 14) Shoreline Management Plan Y Y N Y 15) Post Disaster Recovery Plan Y N N N 16) Post Disaster Recovery Ordinance Y N N N 17) Real Estate Disclosure req. N N N N 18) Other N N N N *Note: NYSDEC, NYSDOS, NYSDOT, SCDPW, SCDHS have permitting authority over some actions occurring as a result of local regulations. DMA 2000 Hazard Mitigation Plan - Suffolk County, New York 9.1-13 DRAFT- September 2007 SECTION 9.1: TOWN OF BABYLON Administrative and Technical CapabiliD, 1) Planner(s) or Engineer(s) with knowledge of land development and land management practices 2) Engineer(s) or Professional(s) trained in construction practices related to buildings and/or infrastructure 3) Planners or engineers with an understanding of natural hazards 4) Floodplain Manager 5) Surveyor(s) 6) Personnel skilled or trained in "GIS" applications 7) Scientist familiar with natural hazards in Suffolk County. 8) Emergency Manager 9) Grant Walter(s) 10) Staff with expertise or training in benefit/cost analysis Department of Planning & Development - Planners, Assistant Civil Engineers, Engineering Aides Department of Planning & Development - Building Inspectors, Assistant Civil Engineers Contract Engineers Department of Planning & Development - Fire Marshall/Assistant Civil Engineer Department of Environmental Control - Waterways Management Supervisor of Environmental Control - Waterways Management Supervisor Trained in Surveying (not licensed) -- Department of Planning & Development - Assistant Civil Engineers; Department of Public Works Highway Engineering Senior Engineering Aides Contract Surveyors Department of Planning & Development Planners, Assistant Civil Engineers, Engineering Aides Department of Environmental Control - Environmental Analysts, Waterways Management Supervisors Department of Public Works Highway Engineering - Senior Engineering Aides Department of Information Technologies - IT. Director Contract Application Developers Department of Environmental Control - Environmental Analysts, Waterways Management Supervisors Department of Planning & Development - Fire Marshall Department of Finance - Grant Wdter Department of Finance -- Comptroller DMA 2000 Hazard Mitigation Plan - Suffolk County, New York 9.1-14 DRAFT - September 2007 SECTION 9.1: TOWN OF BABYLON Fiscal Capability 1) Community development Block Grants (CDBG) Yes, have utilized in the past 2) Capital Improvements Project Funding Yes, have utilized in the past 3) Authority to Levy Taxes for specific purposes Yes, have utilized in the past 4) User fees for water, sewer, gas or electric service No 5) Impact Fees for homebuyers or developers of new Yes, have utilized for traffic safety measures, optical pre- development/homes emption, and roadway improvements 6) Incur debt through general obligation bonds - Yes, have utilized in the past 7) Incur debt through special tax bonds Yes, have utilized in the past 8) Incur debt through private activity bonds No 9) Withhold public expenditures in hazard-prone areas -- No 10) State sponsored grant programs Yes, have utilized in the past FEMA sponsored grant funding 11)Other County sponsored grant funding' for roadways improvements and stormwater remediation Communi~' Classifications Community Rating System (CRS) 10 10/1/1993 Building Code Effectiveness Grading Schedule (BCEGS) 4/4 2003 Public Protection 3/9 Storm Ready Not Participating N/A Firewise Not Participating N/A · Higher classification applies to when subject property is located beyond 1000 feet of a creditable fire hydrant and is within 5 road miles of a recognized Fire Station. · N/A = Not applicable. - = Unavailable. The above referenced classifications can be viewed as a gauge of this community's capabilities in all phases of emergency management (preparedness, response, recovery and mitigation). These classifications are used as an underwriting parameter for determining the costs of various forms of insurance. The CRS class applies to flood insurance while the BCEGS and Public Protection classifications apply to standard property insurance. Classifications range on a scale of 1 to 10 with class one being the best possible classification, and class 10 representing no classification benefit. Criteria for classification credits are outlined in the following documents: · The Community Rating System Coordinators Manual · The Building Code Effectiveness Grading Schedule · The Fire Suppression Rating Schedule DMA 2000 Hazard Mitigation Plan - Suffolk County, New York 9.1-15 DRAFT- September 2007 SECTION 9.1: TOWN OF BABYLON Proposed Hazard Mitigation Initiatives Continue existing Federal and State -authorized 2-year cycle projects and money for perpetuity to preserve, restore, and noudsh Jones Island so that it can be considered for certification as a levee under the National Flood Insurance program. Encourage Federal and State agencies to identify new reliable and consistent sources of sand for beach nourishment programs, building on recommendations of existing feasibility studies concerning coastal sand budgets. Nor'Easters, Coastal Erosion, Hurricane, Flooding Nor'Easters; Coastal Erosion; Hurricane; Flooding increase structural stability and Nor'Easters; drainage capacity Coastal of culverts Erosion; spanning tdbal Flooding; tributaries and Shallow supporting cdtical Groundwater evacuation and response routes Army Corps, Federal & State NYSDOS, Budgeted NYSDOT, $12 Million Expenses, Short- 2, 3, 5, 7, 9, NYSDEC 14, 15, 16 (existing bi- bi-annually Congressionally term OG annual -approved program) yearly Short 2, 3, 5, 7, 9, Army Corps, Medium Army Corps, Term, 14, 15, 16 NYSDOS NYSDOS DOF NYSDOT, 2, 5, 7, 12, NYS Parks, Possible PDM Long 13, 14, 15, SCDPW High Term 16 Highways, application DOF NYSDEC Increase structural stability and transport capacity of the bridges in the American Venice section of town. These bridges are cultural and aesthetic features which support critical evacuation and response routes. Their current capacity is 12 tons. Nor'Easters; Possible PDM Coastal application; 2, 5, 7, 12, Possible Long Erosion; 13, 14, 15, TOWN High State/Federal/ Term Flooding; 16 Private Historic DOF Shallow Preservation Groundwater Funds DMA 2000 Hazard Mitigation Plan - Suffolk County, New York 9.1-16 DRAFT- September 2007 SECTION 9.1: TOWN OF BABYLON Re-design and re- enforce dams/spillways supporting man- made lakes out of Nor'Easters; freshwater streams Coastal and tidal tributaries Erosion; to reduce risk of Hurricane; Flooding; failure, increase Severe stormwater retention, and Storm; Shallow reduce upstream Groundwater flooding, and protect critical evacuation and response routes Re-design and re- enforce dam/spillway at Nor'Easters; Argyle Lake to Coastal reduce risk of Erosion; failure, increase Hurricane; stormwater Flooding; retention, and Severe reduce upstream Storm; flooding, and Shallow protect critical Groundwater evacuation and response routes Dredging of mouths of tidal tributaries, established navigational Nor'Easters; channels such as Coastal Fire Island Inlet Erosion; (Deposits shall be Hurricane; used to augment Flooding; mitigation strategy Shallow concerning Groundwater engineered barrier islands mentioned above) Implement tree Nor'Easters, management Severe programs and Winter augment existing Storms, programs, including containment of the Hurricane, Flooding, Asian Beetle, and Severe measures to Storms, improve post- Asian Beetle disaster debds Infestation management Town, Town, Villages, 2, 5, 7, 8, 10, Villages, NYSDOT, 11, 'i3, 14, NYSDOT, High NYSDEC, Long 15, 16 NYSDEC, SCDPVV, Term SCDPVV possible PDM application Village of Town, Villages, 2, 5, 7, 8, 10, Babylon, NYSDOT, 11, 13, 14, Town, NYSDEC, Long 15, 16 NYSDOT, High SCDPVV, Term N¥SDEC, possible PDM SCDPW application 2, 3, 5, 7, 9, 14, 15, 16 Army Corps, Federal & State NYSDOS, Budgeted NYSDOT, Expenses, Long NYSDEC, US High Congressionally term FISH/WILDLI -approved FE yearly NYS Agriculture & Town; NYS 1, 7, 5, 10, Markets; Low Agriculture & Short 13, 15, 16 USDA Markets; USDA Term (APHIS) (APHIS) Consider adopting Nor'Easters; 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, TOWN Low Town; Short measures to Coastal 11, 13, 15, HOMEOWNER Term DMA 2000 Ha~ ~itig'~iion Finn 2 §~ffolk Co~niyl ~ York 9.1-17 DRAFT - September 2007 SECTION 9.1: TOWN OF BABYLON increase the Erosion; amount of on-site Flooding; stormwater storage Shallow for all new Groundwater construction, and additions meeting FEMA's Substantial Improvement Criteria 16 Adopt a program to increase public participation in Nor'Easters; maintenance of Coastal municipal drainage Erosion; by reducing Severe roadway/recharge Winter basin litter, Storms; dumping Hurricane; yard/household Flooding; waste into streets, Severe identification of Storms; neighborhood Shallow inlets, and notifying Groundwater DPW of drainage problems 1, 2, 3, 5, 7, TOWN 13, 15, 16 Support/enhance Building and/or Flood code enforcement programs at the local level public education and awareness of current codes All FUNDS Institute a stream- clearing program to Nor'Easters; restore habitats of Coastal tidal tributaries and Erosion; freshwater dvers by Hurricane; reducing invasive Flooding; species, trash, Severe excess sediment, Storms; etc. to increase Shallow natural and Groundwater municipal drainage capabilities Town; Community Volunteers; Short Low Federal/State Term Phase II Clean Water Act 1, 2, 4, 7, 9, TOWN Low Town; NYSDOS Short 15 Term Long 2, 5, 7, 8, 10, NYSDEC, Possible PDM, Term 11, 13, 15, SCDPW Low FMA Grant 16 Vector Control DOF Install different Nor'Easters; types of tidal flaps Coastal and valves at ten Erosion; tdal locations to Hurdcene; determine the best Flooding; ways of preventing Severe tidal backflow into Storms; municipal drainage Shallow systems Groundwater 2,3,5,7,13, Town Low Town Short 15,16 Term DMA 2000 Hazard Mitigation Plan - Suff01k County, New York 9,1-18 DRAFT- September 2007 SECTION 9,1: TOWN OF BABYLON Encourage staff and consultants in to learn FEMA- All 1, 3, 5, 7, 15, Shod sponsored cost- 16 Low Town Term benefit analysis Reconstruct roadways in Nor'Easters, Venetian Shores Coastal Erosion, area; reconstruction will Hurricane, include raising the Flooding, maximum amount Severe possible and Storms, Shallow increase drainage Groundwater capacity Nor'Easters, Design or enhance Coastal existing municipal Erosion, drainage systems Hurricane, to provide Flooding, increased capacity Severe of the drainage Storms, system Shallow Groundwater Institute a recharge basin reconstruction Nor'Easters; program, possibly Coastal by partnering with Erosion; local businesses, to Hurricane; restore & increase Flooding; drainage capacity Severe Storms; by reducing Shaltow invasive species, Groundwater trash, excess ~ediment, etc. Encourage applicable agencies to update existing CoastalView program on a yeady basis. (CoastalView is a joint venture of State and Federal agencies which has established benchmarks within erosion data in a GIS format) 2, 13, 15, 16 Town Medium Town; Possible Short PDM application Term, DOF 2,5, 10, 11, Town Medium Town; Possible Long 13, 15, 16 PDM application Term Town; possible 2, 7, 8, 10, community Short 11, 13, 15, Town Medium volunteers; 16 POSSIBLE Term, PDM DOF APPLICATION Nor'Easters; Coastal Short Erosion; 1, 3, 5, 6, 7, Hurricane; 9, 14, 15, 16 NYSDOS Medium NYSDOS Term, DOF Flooding Based on the Nor'Easters; results of tidal Coastal 2, 3, 5, 7, 13, Possible PDM Long backflow trials, Erosion; 15, 16 Medium application Term DMA 2000 Hazard Mitigation Plan - Suffolk County, New York 9.1-19 DRAFT - September 2007 SECTION 9,1: TOWN OF BABYLON retro-fit Hurricane; approximately 100 Flooding; outfall pipes to Severe prevent tidal Storms; backfiow into Shallow drainage systems Groundwater Continue a program, in Nor'easters, cooperation with Severe existing US Winter Ags/Markets Storms; programs, to inform Hurricanes, and certify Severe contractom for Storms, debris removal Asian Beetle operations in the Infestation quarantine area State 1, 2, 3, 7, 10, Agriculture & 15, 16 Markets Nor'Easters, Coastal Elevate roads that Erosion, are vital/critical to Hurricane, evacuation and Flooding, local community Severe operations Storms, Shallow Groundwater 2, 13, 14, 15, Town 16 Participate in homeowner partnership program to elevate vulnerable properties in high risk areas impacted by coastal storms, surface fiooding, and/or shallow groundwater. High risk areas include: those properties identified as "repetitive loss" by FEMA and those areas of concern identified by the Town of Babylon. Nor'Easters, Coastal Erosion, Severe Storms, Hurricane, Flooding, Shallow Groundwater 1, 2, 3, 4, 7, FEMA 9 Medium State Agriculture Short & Markets Term High Possible PDM Long application Term FEMA hazard Mitigation grant programs: PDM, Long High FMA, RFC and term SRL; Homeowner Cost Share Re-engineer and Nor'Easters, reconstruct Coastal Copiague Erosion, roadways (for Hurricane, example Coolidge Flooding, Ave) to eliminate or Severe minimize Storms, pronounced Iow Shallow points which Groundwater capture stormwater 2, 13, 15, 16 Town High Possible PDM Long application Term DMA 2000 Hazard Mitigation Plan - Suffolk County, New York 9.1-20 DRAFT - September 2007 SECTION 9,1: TOWN OF BABYLON runoff and coastal flood waters with no available dissipation outlet Develop a post- disaster action plan for coastal storm events that will address the continuity of local government operations, such as operations of the Comptroller, Town Clerk, Planning & Development, etc. post disaster Implement a permanent measure to prevent tidal backflow under overpasses along Ocean Parkway, such as at Gilgo Beach, and reduce likelihood of inlet creation at this Jones Island location All 2, 3, 7, 12, 14, 16 Encourage NYS and FEMA to document erosion rates by taking standardized aerial photographs of our shoreline on a yearly basis, and when necessary after severe storms. Nor'Easters; Coastal Erosion; 2, 5, 7, 9, 14, Hurdcane; 15 16 Flooding Nor'Easters; Coastal Erosion; 1,3 5, 6, 7, 9, Hurricane; 14, 15, 16 Flooding Consider Iow- Nor'Easters, density land use in Coastal high dsk coastal, Erosion, surface water and Hurricane, groundwater Flooding, Shallow zones. Groundwater Town High NYSDOS, Town Long Term NYSDOT, Long Town High N~'SDOT Term NYSDOS, NYSDEC, Suffolk County, NYSCSIC, NYSDOS, NYSEMO, NYSDEC, FEMA, and all NYSCSIC, other High NYSEMO, Long agencies FEMA, and all Term currently other agencies producing currently aerial producing aerial photography photography 6,7 Town Low Town Long term Continue to develop, enhance 1,3,7,12, and implement All 13, 14, 15, existing emergency 16 response plans to utilize new and Town Low Town Sho~ Term DRAFT - September 2007 SECTION 9.1: TOWN OF BABYLON developing technology/ information as it becomes available. Nor'Easters; Coastal Promote the Erosion; purchase of Flood Hurricane; Insurance Flooding; Severe Storms Short 1,7, 9, 15 FEMA NFIS Low Town Term Educate the public Nor'Easters; on ways to protect Coastal their property Erosion; before and dudng Severe natural events, and Winter what they can Storms; acquire to install Hurricane; appropriate Flooding; property protection Severe measures Storms 1, 7, 9, 15 FEMA NFIS Low Town; partner Short with community Term, organizations/ DOF businesses Implement public education programs that inform the public of local coastal hazard area zone ordinances (TOB Code Chapter 99), why this is important and how the public can help preserve and protect our managed coastal zones (i.e. Jones island) Nor'Easters; Coastal Erosion; Hurricane; Flooding FEMA NFIS OR 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, Town Low POSSIBLE Long 7, 9, 15, 16 PDM Term public education and notification concerning Asian Beetle Infestation, including production and distribution of maps of affected areas Asian Beetle Infestation 1, 3, 7, 8, 10, US Ags & Low Town, Village of Short 15 Markets Amityville Term Consider Flood, participation in Nor'Easter, incentive-based Hurricane, programs such as Severe CRS and "Storm Weather Ready." Long 1, 3, 4, 9 Town High Town Term Notes: Short term = I to 5 years. Long Term= 5 years or greater. OO = On going program. DOF = Depending on f~nding. SC = Suffolk County. PDM = Pre-Disaster Mitigation Grant Program. DMA 2000 Hazard Mitigation Plan - Suffolk County, New York 9.1-22 DRAFT- September 2007 SECTION 9.1: TOWN OF BABYLON PRIORIT1ZATION OF MITIGATION INITIATIVES B-1 High High Y B-2 High Medium Y B-3 High High Y B-4 High High Y B-5 High High Y B-6 High High Y B-7 High High Y B-8 Medium Low Y B-9 Medium Low Y B-10 Medium Low Y N N Federal & State Budgeted Expenses, High Congressionally- approved yeady N N i Army Corps, Medium NYSDOS Y N Possible PDM Low application Possible PDM application; Possible Y N State/Federal/ Medium Private Histodc Preservation Funds Town, Villages, NYSDOT, Y N NYSDEC, SCDPW, Medium possible PDM application Town, Villages, NYSDOT, Y N NYSDEC, SCDPVV, Medium possible PDM application Federal & State Budgeted N N Expenses, Medium Congressionally- approved yeady Town; NYS y y Agriculture & Medium Markets; USDA (APHIS) Town; N N HOMEOWNER Medium FUNDS Y N Town; Community Medium DRAFT - September 2007 SECTION 9.1: TOWN OF BABYLON B-11 B-12 B-13 B-14 B-15 B-16 B-17 B-18 B-19 B-20 B-21 B-22 B-23 B-24 B-25 B-26 Medium Low Y Y N Medium Low Y Y N Volunteers; Federal/State Phase II Clean Water Act Town; NYSDOS Medium Possible PDM Medium application Medium Low Y Y Y Town High Medium Low Y N N TOWN Medium Medium Medium Y Y Y Town; Possible Medium Medium Medium Y Y Y Town; Possible Medium PDM application Medium Medium Y Y N Medium Medium Y Y N Medium Medium Y Y N Town; possible community volunteers; POSSIBLE PDM APPLICATION Medium NYSDOS Med. ium Possible PDM Low application Medium Medium Y Y y State Agriculture High & Markets Possible PDM Medium High N Y N application Low Federal PDM funding; Low Medium High N N N Homeowner Cost Share Possible PDM Medium High N Y N application Low Medium High N Y N NYSDOS Medium Medium High N N N NYSDOT Medium Suffolk County, NYSDOS, NYSDEC, Medium High N Y N NYSCSIC, Medium NYSEMO, FEMA, and all other agencies DMA 2000 Hazard Mitigation Ran - Suffolk County, New York 9.1-24 DRAFT - September 2007 SECTION 9.1: TOWN OF BABYLON B-27 B-28 B-29 B-30 B-31 B-32 B-33 currently photography Low Low Y N N Low Low Low Y N Y Town High Low Low Y y Y Town Medium Town; partner N with community Medium organizations/bu sinesses Low Low Y y Low Low Y y N FEMA, NFIS or possible PDM Low Low Low Y y y Town, Village of Medium Amityville Low High N Y N Town Low' Explanation of Priorities · High Priority - A project that meets multiple objectives (i.e., multiple hazards), benefits exceeds cost, has funding secured or is an on-going project and project meets eligibility requirements for the Hazard Mitigation Grant Program (HMGP) or Pre-Disaster Mitigation Grant Program (PDM) programs. High priority projects can be completed in the short term (1 to 5 years). · Medium Priority - A project that meets goals and objectives, benefits exceeds costs, funding has not been secured but project is grant eligible under, HMGP, PDM or other grant programs. Project can be completed in the short term, once funding is completed. Medium priority projects will become high priority projects once funding is secured. · Low Priority - Any project that will mitigate the risk of a hazard, benefits do not exceed the costs or are difficult to quantify, funding has not been secured and project is not eligible for HMGP or PDM grant funding, and time line for completion is considered long term (1 to 10 years). Low priority projects may be eligible other sources of grant funding from other programs. A low priority project could become a high priority project once funding is secured as long as it could be completed in the short term. Prioritization of initiatives was based on above definitions: Yes Prioritization of initiatives was based on parameters other than stated above: Not applicable. DRAFT- September 2007 SECTION 9.1: TOWN OF BABYLON FUTURE NEEDS TO BETTER UNDERSTAND RISK~VULNERABILITY · Mitigation Plan for man-made disasters · Better building stock and cost-of-construction data to update risk assessment · Better data on coastal erosion rates localized to Jones Island · Develop a Town of Babylon government recovery continuity plan, working with villages, fire districts, school districts, and other cormnunity organizations within the Town ADDITIONAL COMMENTS None at this time. HAZARD AREA EXTENT AND LOCATION Hazard area extent and location maps have been generated for the Town of Babylon and illustrate the probable areas impacted within the Town. These maps are based on the best available data at the time of the preparation of this Plan, and are considered to be adequate for planning purposes. Maps have only been generated for those hazards that can be clearly identified using mapping techniques and technologies, and for which the Town of Babylon has significant exposure. These maps are illustrated in the hazard profiles within Section 5.4, Volume I of this Plan. DMA 2000 Hazard Mitigation Plan - Suffolk County, New York 9.1-26 DRAFT - September 2007 SECTION 9.2: VILLAGE OF AMITYVILLE VILLAGE OF AMITYVILLE This section presents the jurisdictional annex for the Village of Amityville. HAZARD MITIGATION PLAN POINT OF CONTACT Diane Sheridan, Administrator/Clerk 21 Greene Avenue Amityville, NY 11701 Phone: (631) 264-6000 E-mail: ds h eirid a n(~,am itwille.com Carol Lagano, Deputy Clerk 21 Greene Avenue Amityville, NY 11701 Phone: (631) 264-6000 E-maih d clef k~,arnitwille.com VILLAGE PROFILE Popula~on 9,441 as of 2000 Location The Village of Amityville is the located on the south shore and western border of Suffolk County. The Village is bordered on the south by the Atlantic Ocean. An 8.5-mile-long inhabited barrier island prevents direct ocean wave impact along Amityville's South Shore lies between the Atlantic Ocean and the Great South Bay. This island, known as Jones Island, was created by the Long Island State Parks Commission from several smaller islands in the early 1900s. The waterfront area of the village is highly developed, primarily with residences, as depicted in the aerial photographs below, showing portions of our frontage along the Great South Bay. DMA 2000 Hazard Mitigation Plan - Suffolk County, New York 9.2-1 DRAFT - September 2007 SECTION 9,2: VILLAGE OF AMITYVILLE The Village of Amityville contains 9,441 people in 2.5 square miles. The Village has 30.4 ]niles of roads. Electric service is provided by the Long Island Power Authority (LIPA); water service is supplied by the Suffolk County Water Authority. The entire village is served by SCDPW Sewer District 3, with lift stations (one in the Village and one in Town of Babylon) serving as the only mechanisms to carry sewage upgrade to the treatment plant in West Babylon. The Village is characterized by many areas of high groundwater, and is served by public water. Most of the Village has predominantly sandy soil. The climate is moderate, consistent with other coastal communities in the Northeastern United States. Average annual rainfall has sharply increased in the past 5-10 years. Following are pictures from the Village of Amityville's website illustrating the quaint seaside village: Credit: Billy Lozowski The Village's population has increased 4% over the past 20 years, as most land in the village was densely developed by 1975. Any growth in population since that time has occurred as a result of undocumented peoples residing without local authorization, yet, under the New York State home role system, the Village is responsible for this population in case of natural disaster. Amityville Village maintains its own fire service, as well as a professional police force. The Villages have boards which will be responsible for the adoption of the Hazard Mitigation Plan. Though FEMA may typically consider life and safety issues beyond the jurisdiction of most hazard mitigation plans, the mitigation planning initiative that is most important to the life and safety of our residents could never be accounted for within any other FEMA or DHS response or preparedness plan. Not to stray into the territory of response plans, even with the best possible evacuation plan, and an unlimited amount of personnel to carry it out, the laws of physics still prevail. It is certainly possible, and even probable, based on documented weather patterns, that amount of time to evacuate will far exceed the amount of notice of a significant event. Thus, that is why the Village of Amityville turns to mitigation efforts, because if we do not reduce the exposure and vulnerability of our mainland population and infrastructure by securing our barrier islands, we will sustain unprecedented loss of life, destruction of essential infrastructure, and devastation of our economy from which it will take many years to recover. DMA 2000 Hazard Mitigation Plan - Suffolk County, New York 9.2-2 DRAFT- September 2007 SECTION 9.2: VILLAGE OF AMITYVILLE Long Is and's Southern Exposure to the Adantic Ocean increases thc severity ~nd multitude of natural hazards Note typical storm ' ' tracks (Cabnelle 2007 ~s shown) do not allow advance not~ce m excess of 24 hours .... for most coast&l events Emergency Preparednes~ throughout hurr~c&ne season for evacuation planning and decision-making Climate Average temperatures range from the low 30's degrees Fahrenheit (°F) to mid 70's (°F). Precipitation averages 3 to 4 inches per month. On average, snowfall is limited to November through April, with highest accumulations in January. The humidity ranges from approximately 55% and 80% throughout the year. Brief History The Village of Amityville's website describes the Villages history as follows: First settled in the 1600's, it was not until March 3rd, 1894 that it became the Incorporated Village of Amityville. In its infancy, the "friendly bay village", as it has come to be known, was primarily a farming community that had strong ties to the fishing and boating industries. Salt hay was an important agri- product that was grown to feed livestock. But the farms and marine industries slowly gave way to the needs of summer visitors in search of comforts afforded by the cool breezes and beaches of the Great South Bay. Hotels, long since gone, supplanted the farms and marine industries that were located along the waterfront. The hordes of summer visitors that discovered early Amityville included stage and theater personalities, prominent members of society including businessmen, artists, writers and the so-called "rich and famous" Manhattanites. Although within the geographical boundaries of the Town of Babylon, residents of the Village enjoy the benefits of a local police force, fire department and public works department. Residents are taxed by the Village for these services and by the Town and County for school taxes and other public services, such as trash removal. The Village is part of the Amityville Public School District. Within the Village boundaries, there are numerous parks and public spaces for all to enjoy. They include: · Village Triangle and Gazebo ~ on Broadway between Sunrise Highway and Merrick road · Avon Lake - landscaped area at East and West Lake Drives · Delano Nature Trail - Union Avenue, East of Broadway DMA 2000 Hazard Mitigation Plan -Suffolk County, New York 9.2-3 DRAFT- September 2007 SECTION 9,2: VILLAGE OF AMITYVILLE · Edmund Wl Pearsali Park - natural rest area on Bayview Avenue · James A. Caples Memorial Park - Southern end of Bayview Avenue, with a playground, lighted softball fields, boat ramp · Peterkin Park - Oak Street, with playground, pond and footpath · 9/11 Memorial Park - center of the Village on Broadway · Nautical Park - Southeast comer of Merrick Road and Ocean Avenue, waterside park with benches, paths and band-shell · Maxine Postal Memorial Park - Unqua Place on the Great South Bay, in memory of Legislator Maxine Postal, 15th Leg. District · Amityville Beach Complex - Southern end of Bayview Avenue, with concession stand, beach and fishing pier Governing Body Format The Village has a board which will be responsible for the adoption of this Hazard Mitigation Plan. Village Board consists of an elected Mayor and 4 elected Trustees. The Growth/Development Trends Based on the data tracked by the New York State Data Center, the Village of Amityville's residential population has decreased 0.25% from 2000 to 2006. Based on US Census figures, the population increased 4% from 1980 to 2000. Most of the Village's land has been developed for many years; however, the Village's capabilities to manage and deal with future growth and development are illustrated later in this annex. NATURAL HAZARD EVENT HISTORY SPECIFIC TO THE VILLAGE OF AMITYVILLE Nor'Easter/Coastal Erosion/Flooding NA Nov. 25, 1950 NA Nor'Easter/Coastal NA Nov. 6-7 1953 NA Erosion/Flooding Nor'Easter/Coastal NA Oct. 14-16, 1955 NA Erosion/Flooding Nor'Easter/Coastal NA Apr. 13, 1961 NA Erosion/Flooding Nor'Easter/Coastal DR-129 Mar. 6-8, 1962 HIGH Erosion/Flooding Nor'Easter/Coastal NA Nov. 12-13, 1968 NA Erosion/Flooding Nor'Easter/Coastal NA February 1969 LOW Erosion/Flooding Nor'Easter/Coastal NA Feb. 19, 1972 HIGH Erosion/Flooding Nor'EasteflCoastal NA Nov. 7, 1973 MEDIUM Erosion/Flooding Nor'Easter/Coastal Erosion/Flooding NA Oct. 30-31, 1991 HIGH 'q'he Perfect Storm") Nor'Easter/Coastal DR-974 Dec. 11-14, 1992 HIGH DMA 2000 Hazard Mitigation Plan - Suffolk County, New York 9.24 DRAFT- September 2007 Erosion/Flooding Nor'Easter/Coastal Erosion/Flooding Nor'Easter/Coastal Erosion/Flooding Nor'Easter/Coastal Erosion/Flooding - Nor'Easter/Coastal Erosion/Flooding EM-3107 NA DR- 1083 Nor'Easter/Coastal Erosion/Flooding DR-1146 Nor'Easter/Coastal Erosion/Flooding NA Nor'Easter/Coastal Erosion/Flooding NA NA SECTION 9,2: VILLAGE OF AMITYVILLE Nor'Easter/Coastal Erosion/Flooding March 12-14, 1993 HIGH Jan. 1994 MED Jan 6-8. 1996 Oct. 19-20, 1996 March/April 1997 Mar. 5-7, 2001 Dec. 26, 2002 Nor'Easter/Coastal Erosion/Flooding NA February 2003 NA December 2003 Severe Winter Storm/ Blizzard LOW MED MED LOW MED LOW MED Nor'Easter/Coastal Erosion/Flooding NA February 11, 2006 MED Nor'Easter/Coastal Erosion/Flooding DR-1692 April 14-16, 2007 LOW Severe Winter Storm/Hard Winter NA 1779-1780 NA Severe Winter Storm/ Blizzard NA 1888 NA Severe Winter Storm/ Blizzard NA Feb, 3-4, 1961 NA Severe Winter Storm NA Dec. 17, 1973 $100,000 Severe Winter Storm/ Bli~Tard NA Jan. 19-20, 1978 NA Severe Winter Storm/ Blizzard NA Feb. 5, 1978 NA NA Apr. 6, 1982 NA Severe Winter Storm/ Blizzard NA Severe Winter Storm/ Blizzard FEMA EM-3107 Feb. 11-12 1983 NA Mar. 1993 $8,500,000 Severe Winter Storm/ Jan 6-8, 1996 (second Blizzard NA largest) NA severe Winter Storm/ Blizzard FEMA DR-1083 Dec. 1996 $21,400,000 Severe Winter Storm/ Blizzard - "President's Day FEMA EM-3184 Storm" Severe Winter Storm/ NA Feb. 17-18,2003 NA Dec. 6,2003 NA i DRAFT - September 2007 Blizzard SECTION 9.2: VILLAGE OF AMITYVILLE Severe Winter Storm NA Jan. 27-28, 2004 NA Severe Winter Storm NA Jan. 19, 2005 NA Hurricane/Coastal Erosion/Flooding Jan.~2-23,2005 NA Feb. 21 - Mar. 12, 2005 NA (5 stonms) Feb. 11-12,2006 NA Not Available Severe Winter Storm/ NA Blizzard Severe Winter Storm/ NA Severe Winter Storm/ NA NA August 1635 Hurricane/Coastal NA Sept. 1821 Not ~,vailable Erosion/Flooding NA 8/19/1856 Not Available Hurricane/Coastal Erosion/Flooding Sept. 16, 1858 Not Available 11/1/1861 Not Available 6/17/1886 Not Available 9/6/1888 Not Available Hurricane/Coastal NA Erosion/Flooding Hurricane/Coastal NA Erosion/Flooding Hurricane/Coastal NA Erosion/Flooding NA Hurricane/Coastal Erosion/Flooding Extra Tropical Depression NA 10/14/1900 Not Available Hurricane/Coastal NA 9/8/1934 Not Available Erosion/Flooding Hurricane/Coastal Erosion/Flooding- NA Sept. 21, 1938 HIGH "Long Island Express" or "Great Hurricane of '38" Hurricane/Coastal Erosion/Flooding- NA Sept. 14, 1944 MEDIUM "Great Atlantic Hurricane" Humcane Carol DR-26 Aug. 31, 1954 LOW Coastal Erosion/Flooding Hurricane- Diane DR-45 Aug. 12-19, 1955 HIGH Coastal Erosion/Flooding Hurricane- Esther NA 9/21/1961 LOW Coastal Erosion/F~ooding Hurricane Agnes NA June 22, 1972 HIGH Coastal Erosion/Flooding Hurricane Belle DR-520 Aug. 10, 1976 LOW Coastal Erosion/Flooding 1982 Hurricane - Cindy NA (1 of top 3 erosion MEDIUM Coastal Erosion/Flooding ) events) Hurricane - Gloria Coastal Erosion/Flooding DR-750 Oct. 18, 1985 LOW DMA 2000 Hazard Mitigation Plan - Suffolk County, New York 9.2-6 DRAFT - September 2007 Hurricane Felix Coastal Erosion/Flooding SECTION 9.2: VILLAGE OF AMITYVILLE NA Aug. 14, 1995 LOW Tropical Storm Bertha Coastal Erosion/Flooding NA July 13, 1996 LOW Tropical Storm Josephine Coastal Erosion/Flooding NA October 8, 1996 LOW Tropical Stm- Floyd Coastal Erosion/Flooding DR-1296 Sept. 1999 LOW) Long Island was just shy of Disaster Declaration, but homeowners were offered assistance in the form of SBA Loans October 2005 Remnants of Hurricane Wilma/Flooding/Sh allow Groundwater MEDIUM Tropical Storm Ernesto/ Flooding NA September 2, 2006 LOW Notes: N/A = Not applicable. Damage Estimates indicated as high (> 30% total replacement cost), medium ( 15-29% TRC), or low (<15% TRC) Number of FEM.,I Identified Repetitive Flood Loss Properties: 74' Due to the geographical exposure of Amityville's shoreline, and the dense development along the Great South Bay frontage, even the slightest natural events can cause extensive disruption to the economy. For example, the Village of Amityville experiences impact to its roadways and drainage infrastructure approximately once a month, when the cycle of the moon causes a "high high tide". Pictured below are the mainland results of a minor Nor'Easter, April 15, 2007 (DR- 1692): The damage to the mainland and to Jones Island (pictured above and below) while significant, is minor compared to the historical impact of Nor'Easters on the Village of Amityville. Due to our coastal vulnerability to north-easterly winds, 21 of the 26 events described in the Volume table entitled "Nor'Easter Events between 1931 and 2006' impacted our Village. Though precise data is not available for all storms, local emergency management officials estimate that 12 of the Nor'Easters experienced caused property, infrastructure and economic damage exceeding 30% of the Town's total replacement cost for the years of the events. Of particular note is that the Village of Amityville participated in all six of the DMA 2000 Hazard Mitigation Plan - Suffolk County, New York 9.2-7 DRAFT - September 2007 SECTION 9.2: VILLAGE OF AMITYVILLE Presldent~al Disaster Declarat ons for Nor Easter events ~n Suffolk County, and even had to evacuate o er 400 people for "The Storm of the Century" which occurred March 1993 (DR-974). Accompanying Nor'Easters, and all other coastal storms, is Coastal Erosion. Due to the southerly-facing coast and the geology of the sand, erosion and accretion occur on a daily basis guided by wind and wave directions. The erosion along Jones Island exceeds the accretion, as man-made structures, erected along our coastline throughout history, have disturbed the littoral drift of nec6ssary sediments that would ensure accretion along Jones Island. General descriptions of this hazard propagated in Volume I are not typical of Jones Island (Gilgo Beach), as we may suffer erosion losses of 5 feet per minor coastal event, including nor'easters. In fact, it is likely that Jones Island experiences one of the highest erosion rates along the entire Eastern seaboard. Erosion of Jones Island is an on-going event which can only be measured by day- to-day weather events. Refer to documentation in USACE projects from 1987 to present for further scientific analysis. The coastal erosion threatening our barrier islahd endangers not merely our beaches or residences or a vital New York State Commuter Route. Should the island become structurally unsound, the only sewer outfall pipe for a Suffolk County sewage treatment plant serving over half of our population and commerce will fail, requiring expensive re-routing and reconstruction. But even should the sewer pipe be lost, the safety and welfare of the number of citizens directly physically endangered by any major coastal event, including nor'easters, rises from a few hundred people to our entire population. Depicted below is an example of how quickly erosion can occur. The seaward portion of dunes pictured existed just prior to DR-1692. Exposed by the recent erosion is an oil tank left behind by the US Coast Guard when the Gilgo St&tion was demolished in 1980s. As Nor'Easters and Coastal Erosion occur quite frequently, considering the damage that may be sustained by the violent winds and flooding associated with hurricanes and other tropical cyclones paints an ominous picture of Long Island's future. Long Island, and the Village of Amityville in particular, has experienced only a minor portion of the damage amounts from Presidential Disaster Declarations that affected Long Island since 1954. Many of the worst hurricane events (i.e. 1938) hit well before the majority of development in Babylon, which occurred post- World War II. In the case of Hurricane Gloria, she hit Amityville at low tide, sparing our citizens from widespread coastal flooding. While Volume I contains a complete analysis of the natural hazard for Suffolk County in general, it is important to note the population analyses contained there-in indicate that all of the population within the Village would require evacuation to a jurisdiction north of the Village for a Category 2 or greater Hurricane. Amityville's Fire and Police operations would be very limited during a significant coastal event, and we would have to rely on the Town of Babylon for their support. HAZUS analysis in Volume I supports local knowledge that local emergency operations and fire/rescue efforts will most likely be severely disabled for several days. DMA 2000 Hazard Mitigation Plan - Suffolk County, New York 9.2-8 DRAFT- September 2007 SECTION 9.2: VILLAGE OF AMITYVILLE it is because of these predictions, and other local emergenc3 planning acti¢ities and ~hppingl thai Jones Island is the best protection the Village has to mitigate the effects of hurricanes and tropical cyclones by increasing the amount of time available to transport and shelter residents, and to reduce the amount flood waters inundating streets and critical response facilities. Pictured below is are examples of maps created by Town of Babylon emergency preparedness, on the Village's behalf, to more clearly understand affected population and aid in mitigation efforts: Asian Beetle Infestation (Risk Rankim[ #9) Though the Asian Beetle infestation has relatively low impacts on the Town and Villages compared to the other hazards, mitigation strategies for any natural hazards involving wind, and hence tree, damage must be modified to account for the infestation. Pictured below is the border (purple) of the Asian Beetle Quarantine Area, with respect to the borders (black) of both Village of Amityville and Village of Babylon. DMA 2000 Hazard Mitigation Plan - Suffolk County, New York 9.2-9 DRAFT - September 2007 SECTION 9.2: VILLAGE OF AMITYVILLE NATURAL HAZARD RISK/VULNERABILITY RISK RANKING Nor'Easters (extra- tropical cyclones, including severe winter Iow-pressure systems) 100-year*: $63,874,000 - $91,0O3,O00 500-year*: $583,168,000 - $645,012,000 Frequent 45 Coastal Erosion Damage estimate not available. Frequent Severe Winter Storm (heavy snow, Damage estimate not available. Frequent blizzards, ice storms) Hurricane (tropical 100-year*: $63,874,000 - cyclones, including $91,003,000 tropical storms and 500-year*: $583,168,000 - Occasional tropical depressions) $645,012,000 Flooding (riverine, flash, coastal, urban 100-year**: $6,558,000 flooding and elevated 500-year**: $7,817,000 Frequent groundwater) Severe Storms (windstorms, Damage estimate not available. Frequent thunderstorms, hail, lightning and tornado) Shallow Groundwater Damage estimate not available. Frequent Groundwater Contamination Damage estimate not available. Occasional Asian Beetle Infestation Damage estimate not available. Frequent 39 39 36 3O 27 18 14 3 Wildfire Damage estimate not available. Rare 0 Drought Damage estimate not available. Rare 0 a. Building damage ratio estimates based on FEMA 386-2 (August 2001 ) b. Frequent=- Hazard event that occurs more frequently than once in 10 years, Occasional=Hazard event that occurs from once in 10 years to once in 100 years, Rare=Hazard event that occurs from once in 100 years to once in 1,000 years, None= Hazard event that occurs less frequently than once in 1,000 years c. The probability of occurrence for these events is weighted at "0' due to no exposure * Estimated building replacement value (structure and contents) damaged by the 100-year and 500-year hurricane-related winds and storm surge events as calculated using HAZUS-MH (custom methodology explained in Section 5.4, Volume I in the Hurricane hazard profile). ** Estimated building replacement value (structure and contents) damaged by a 100-year ~nd 500-year flood event as calculated by HAZUS-MH. CAPABILITY ASSESSMENT This section identifies the following capabilities of the local jurisdiction: · Legal and regulatory capability · Administrative and technical capability · Fiscal capability · Community classification. DMA 2000 Hazard Mitigation Plan - Suffolk County, New York 9,2-10 DRAFT- September 2007 SECTION 9.2: VILLAGE OF AMITYVILLE 1) Building Code 2) Zoning Ordinance 3) Subdivision Ordinance 4) Special Purpose Ordinances (floodplain management, critical or sensitive areas) N Y Y Y Y Y Y SEE COMMENT Y Village has adopted International Building Code Suffolk County Planning Commission has review authority on certain actions. If they disapprove an action, Village Zoning Board must approve with a greater majodty & present findings, Suffolk County Planning Commission has review authority on certain actions. If they disapprove an action, Village Board/ Village Zoning Board/ Village Planning Board must approve with a greater majodty & present findings. NYS Subdivision laws provide a general framework, but allow room for local ordinances and interpretation. 5) Growth Management Y Y N N 6) Floodplain Management/Basin y. Plan Y Y Y adopted pursuant to NYS Phase II 7) Stormwater Management y. Plan/ordinance Y Y Y implementation of the Federal Clean Water Act 8) General Plan or Completed per state mandate Comprehensive Plan Y Y N Y 9) Capital Improvements Plan Y Y N N Suffolk Coqnty Planning 10) Site Plan Review SEE Commission has review authority Requirements Y N COMMENT N on certain actions. If they disapprove an action, Village Boards must approve with a greater majodty & present findings 11) Habitat Conservation Plan Y Y Y* y 12) Economic Development Plan Y Y Y* N 13) Emergency Response Plan Y Y N N 14) Shoreline Management Plan Y Y N Y DMA 2000 Hazard Mitigation Plan - Suffolk County, New York 9.2-11 DRAFT - September 2007 SECTION 9,2: VILLAGE OF AMITYVILLE 15) Post Disaster Recovery Plan 16) Post Disaster Recovery Y N N N Ordinance 17) Real Estate Disclosure req. N 18) Other Y *Note: NYSDEC, NYSDOS, NYSDOT, SCDPW, SCDHS have permitting authority over some actions occurring as a result of local regulations. DMA 2000 Hazard Mitigation Plan - Suffolk County, New York 9.2-12 DRAFT - September 2007 SECTION 9,2: VILLAGE OF AMITYVILLE Administrative and Technical Capabili~, 1) Planner(s) or Engineer(s) with knowledge of land development and land management practices 2) Engineer(s) or Professional(s) trained in construction practices related to buildings and/or infrastructure 3) Planners or engineers with an understanding of natural hazards 4) Floodplain Manager 5) Surveyor(s) 6) Personnel skilled or trained in "GIS" applications 7) Scientist familiar with natural hazards in Suffolk County, 8) Emergency Manager 9) Grant Walter(s) 1~)) Staff with expertise or training in benefit/cost analysis Contract Planners/Engineers Contract Engineers Contract Planners/Engineers Contract Surveyors Town supplies GIS Maps on an informal basis for emergency preparedness and fire protection needs Contract GIS available Volunteer to reporting to Village Clerk Village Clerk & staff Village Clerk & staff DMA 2000 Hazard Mitigation Plan - Suffolk County, New York 9.2-13 DRAFT - September 2007 SECTION 9,2: VILLAGE OF AMITYVILLE Fiscal Capabili~, 1) Community development Block Grants (CDBG) Yes, have utilized in the past 2) Capital improvements Project Funding Yes, have utilized in the past 3) Authority to Levy Taxes for specific purposes Yes, have utilized in the past 4) User fees for water, sewer, gas or electric service No 5) Impact Fees for homebuyers or developers of new Yes, have utilized for traffic safety measures, optical pre- development/homes emption, and roadway improvements 6) Incur debt through general obligation bonds · Yes, have utilized in the past 7) Incur debt through special tax bonds . Yes, have utilized in the past 8) Incur debt through pdvate activity bonds No 9) Withhold public expenditures in hazard-prone areas No 10) State sponsored grant programs Yes, have utilized in the past FEMA sponsored grant funding 11) Other County sponsored grant funding for roadways improvements and stormwater remediation Communi~, Classifications Community Rating System (CRS) Not Participating N/A Building Code Effectiveness Grading Schedule (BCEGS) 4/4 2005 Public Protection 4 Storm Ready Not Participating N/A Firewise Not Participating N/A · Higher classification applies to when subject property is located beyond 1000 feet of a creditable fire hydrant and is within 5 road miles of a recognized Fire Station. · N/A -- Not applicable. - = Unavailable. The above referenced classifications can be viewed as a gauge of this community's capabilities in all phases of emergency management (preparedness, response, recovery and mitigation). These classifications are used as an underwriting parameter for determining the costs of various forms of insurance. The CRS class applies to flood insurance while the BCEGS and Public Protection classifications apply to standard property insurance. Classifications range on a scale of 1 to 10 with class one being the best possible classification, and class 10 representing no classification benefit. Criteria for classification credits are outlined in the following documents: The Community Rating System Coordinators Manual The Building Code Effectiveness Grading Schedule The Fire Suppression Rating Schedule DMA 2000 Hazard Mitigation Plan - Suffolk County, New York 9.2-14 DRAFT- September 2007 SECTION 9.2: VILLAGE OF AMITYVILLE Proposed Hazard Mitigation Initiatives Increase structural stability and drainage Nor'Easters; NYSDOT, capacity of culverts Coastal spanning tribal Erosion; 2, 5, 7, 12, NYS Parks, 13, 14, 15, SCDPW tributaries and Flooding; 16 supporting cdtical Shallow Highways, evacuation and Groundwater NYSDEC response routes Re-design and re- enforce dams/spillways Nor'Easters; supporting man- Coastal made lakes out of freshwater streams Erosion; and tidaltdbutaries to Hurricane; Flooding; reduce risk of failure, Severe increase stormwater retention, and reduce Storm; Shallow upstream flooding, Groundwater and protect cdtical evacuation and response routes Dredging of mouths of tidal tdbutades Possible PDM Long High application Term Town, 2, 5, 7, 8, Villages, Town, Village, NYSDOT, Long 10, 11, 13, NYSDOT, High NYSDEC, SCDPW, Term 14, 15, 16 NYSDEC, possible PDM application SCDPW Nor'Easters; Hurricane; Flooding; 2, 3, 5, 7, SCDPW High Suffolk County Long Shallow 9, 14, 15 term Groundwater NYS 1, 7, 5, 10, Agriculture Village; NYS Agriculture Short 13, 15, 16 & Markets; Low & Markets; USDA Term USDA (APHIS) (APHIS) Implement tree management Nor'Easters, programs and Severe augment existing Winter programs, including Storms, containment of Asian Hurricane, Beetle, and Flooding, measures to improve Severe post-disaster debris Storms management 1, 2, 4, 7, Short All Hazards 9, 15 VILLAGE Low Village; NYSDOS Term Support/enhance Building and/or Flood code enforcement programs at the local level public education and awareness of current codes institute a stream- Nor'Easters; clearing program to Coastal restore habitats of Erosion; 2, 5, 7, 8, NYSDEC, SCDPW tidal tdbutades and Hurdcane; 10, 11, 13, Vector freshwater dvers by Flooding; 15, 16 Control reducing invasive Severe species, trash, Storms; Possible PDM Long Low application Term DMA 2000 Hazard Mitigation Plan - Suffolk County, New York 9.2-15 DRAFT- September 2007 SECTION 9.2: VILLAGE OF AMITYVILLE excess sediment, etc. Shallow to increase natural Groundwater and municipal drainage capabilities Encourage staff and consultants in to learn FEMA- All Hazards 1, 3, 5, 7, Low Village Short sponsored cost- 15, 16 Term benefit analysis Nor'Easters, Coastal Design or enhance existing municipal Erosion, drainage systems to Hurricane, provide increased Flooding, Severe capacity of the Storms, drainage system Shallow Groundwater 2,5, 10, 11, Village Medium Village; Possible PDM Long 13, 15, 16 application Term Continue a program, Nor'easters, in cooperation with Severe existing US Winter Ags/Markets Storms; programs, to inform Hurricanes, and certify Severe contractors for debris Storms, removal operations in Asian Beetle the quarantine area Infestation State 1, 2; 3, 7, Agriculture Medium State Agriculture & Short 10, 15, 16 & Markets Markets Term Nor'Easters, Coastal Elevate roads that Erosion, are vital/critical to Hurricane, evacuation and local Flooding, community Severe operations Storms, Shallow Groundwater 2, 13, 14, Village High Possible PDM Long 15, 16 application Term Participate in Nor'Easters, homeowner Coastal partnership program Erosion, to elevate vulnerable Severe properties in high risk Storms, areas impacted by Hurricane, coastal storms, Flooding, surface flooding, Shallow and/or shallow Groundwater groundwater 1, 2, 3, 4, Federal PDM funding; Long 7, 9 FEMA High Homeowner Cost Share term Develop a post- disaster action plan for coastal storm events that will address the local government operations post disaster. All Hazards 2, 3, 7, 12, Long 14, 16 Village High NYSDOS Term DMA 2000 Hazard Mitigation Plan - Suffolk County, New York 9.2-16 DRAFT - September 2007 SECTION 9.2: VILLAGE OF AMITYVILLE Nor'Easters, Consider Iow-density Coastal land use in high dsk Erosion, coastal, surface Hurricane, water and Flooding, groundwater zones. Shallow Groundwater 6,7 Continue to develop, enhance and implement existing emergency response plans to utilize new and developing technology/ information as it becomes available. All Hazards 1,3,7,12, 13, 14, 15, 16 Low Village Long term Short Village Low Village Term Nor'Easters; Coastal Promote the Erosion; purchase of Flood Hurricane; Insurance Flooding; Severe Storms 1,7,9,15 Nor'Easters; Educate the public on Coastal ways to protect their Erosion; property before and Severe during natural events, Winter and what they can Storms; acquire to install Hurricane; appropriate property Flooding; protection measures Severe Storms 1,7,9,15 FEMA Short NFIS Low Village Term FEMA Village; partner with Short NFIS Low community Term organizations/businesses Increase public education and notification concerning Asian Beetle Infestation, including production and distribution of maps of affected areas Asian Beetle 1, 3, 7, 8, US Ags & Low Village Short Infestation 10, 15 Markets Term Consider non- structural flood hazard mitigation alternatives for at dsk properties within the floodplain, including those that have been identified as repetitive loss, such as acquisition/relocation, or elevation depending on Nor'Easter, 1, 2, 7, 9, General Fund, FEMA Long Hurricane, 15 Village High Hazard Mitigation Grant term, Severe Funding DOF Weather DMA 2000 Hazard Mitigation Plan - Suffolk County, New York 9.2-17 DRAFT- September 2007 SECTION 9.2: VILLAGE OF AMITYVILLE feasibility. The parameters for feasibility for this initiative would be: funding, benefits versus costs and willing participation of property owners. Consider participation in incentive-based programs such as CRS and "Storm Ready" Develop a post- disaster action plan for coastal storm events that will address the continuity of local government operations, such as operations of the Village Clerk, post disaster Flood, Nor'Easter, Long Hurricane, 4, 9 Village High Village Term Severe Weather Long All Hazards 7, 12, 13 Village, High Village, Town term, Town DOF Notes: Short term = I to 5 years. Long Term= 5 years or greater. OG = On going program. DOF = Depending on fimding. SC = Suffolk County. PDM ' = Pre-Disaster Mitigation Grant Program. DMA 2000 Hazard Mitigation Plan - Sulfolk County, New York 9.2-18 DRAFT- September 2007 SECTION 9.2: VILLAGE OF AMITYVILLE PRIORITIZATION OF MITIGATION INITIATIVES VA-1 VA-2 VA-3 VA-4 VA-5 VA-6 VA-7 va-8 VA-9 VA-10 VA-11 VA-12 VA-13 High High Possible PDM High Y Y N application Low Town, Village, NYSDOT, NYSDEC, High Y Y N SCDPW, Medium possible PDM application Federal & State Budgeted High High Y N N Expenses, Medium Congressionall y-approved yearly Town; Village, NYS Medium Low Y Y Y Agriculture & Medium Markets; USDA (APHIS) Medium Low Y Y N Village; Medium NYSDOS Medium Low Y Y N Possible PDM Medium application Medium Low Y N N Village Medium Village; Medium Medium Y Y Y Possible PDM Medium application State Medium Medium Y Y Y Agriculture & High Markets Medium High N Y N Possible PDM Low application Federal PDM funding; Medium High N N N Homeowner Low Cost Share Medium High N Y N NYSDOS Medium Low Low Y N N Village Low VA-14 Low Low Y N Y Village High DMA 2000 Hazard Mitigation Plan - Suffolk County, New York 9.2-19 DRAFT- September 2007 SECTION 9.2: VILLAGE OF AMITYVILLE VA-15 Low Y Y Y Village Medium Village; par/net with VA-16 Low Y Y N community Medium organizations/b VA-17 Low Y Y y Town, Village Medium of Amityville VA-18 High Y Y N Medium VA-19 High N N N Low VA-20 High Y Y N Town, Villages Medium Explanation of Priorities *High Priority - A project that meets multiple objectives (i.e., multiple hazards), benefits exceeds cost, has funding secured or is an on-going project and project meets eligibility requirements for the Hazard Mitigation Grant Program (HMGP) or Pre-Disaster Mitigation Grant Program (PDM) programs. High priority projects can be completed in the short term (1 to 5 years). *Medium Priority - A project that meets goals and objectives, benefits exceeds costs, funding has not been secured but project is grant eligible under, HMGP, PDM or other grant programs. Project can be comPleted in the short term, once funding is completed. Medium priority projects will become high priority projects once funding is secured. *Low Priority - Any project that will mitigate the risk of a hazard, benefits do not exceed the costs or are difficult to quantify, funding has not been secured and project is not eligible for HMGP or PDM grant funding~ and time line for completion is considered long term (1 to 10 years). Low priority projects may be eligible other sources of grant funding from other programs. A low priority project could become a high priority project once funding is secured as long as it could be completed in the short term. Prioritization of initiatives was based on above definitions: Yes Prioritization of initiatives was based on parameters other than stated above: Not applicable. DMA 2000 Hazard Mitigation Plan - Suffolk County, New York 9.2-20 DRAFT - September 2007 SECTION 9,2: VILLAGE OF AMITYVILLE FUTURE NEEDS TO BETTER UNDERSTAND RISK/VULNERABILITY · Mitigation Plan for man-made disasters · Better building stock and cost-of-construction data to update risk assessment · Become part of a Town of Babylon government recovery continuity plan, working with Town, fire districts, school districts, and other community organizations within the Village ADDITIONAL COMMENTS None at this time. HAZARD AREA EXTENTANDLOCATION' Hazard area extent and location maps have been generated for the Village of Amityville and illustrate the probable areas impacted within the Village. These maps are based on the best available data at the time of the preparation of this Plan, and are considered to be adequate for planning purposes. Maps have only been generated for those hazards that can be clearly identified using mapping techniques and technologies, and for which the Village of Amityville has significant exposure. These maps are illustrated in the hazard profiles within Section 5.4, Volume I of this Plan. Dk, IA 2000 Hazard Mitigation Plan - Suffolk County, New York 9.2-21 DRAFT- September 2007 SECTION 9.3: VILLAGE OF BABYLON VILLAGE OF BABYLON This section presents the jurisdictional annex for the Village of Babylon. HAZARD MITIGATION PLAN POINT OF CONTACT Charles Gardner, DPW 153 West Main Street Babylon, NY 11702 Phone: (631) 669-4878 Email: Mary Beth Wright, Administrative Assistant 153 West Main Street Babylon, NY 11702 Phone: (631) 669-1212 Emaih VILLAGE PROFILE Population 12, 615 as of 2000 U.S. Census Location The Village of Babylon is the located on the south shore and western border of Suffolk Coumy. The Village is bordered on the south by the Atlamic Ocean. An 8.5-mile-long inhabited barrier island prevents direct ocean wave impact along Babylon's South Shore lies between the Atlantic Ocean and the Great South Bay. This island, known as Jones Island, was created by the Long Island State Parks Commission from several smaller islands in the early 1900s. The waterfront area of the village is highly developed, primarily with residences, as depicted in the aerial photographs below, showing our frontage along the Great South Bay. DMA 2000 Hazard Mitigation Plan -Suffolk County, New York 9.3-1 DRAFT- September 2007 SECTION 9.3: VILLAGE OF BABYLON The Village of Babylon contains 12,615 people. Electric service is provided by the Long Island Power Authority (LIPA); water service is supplied by the Suffolk County Water Authority. The entire village is served by SCDPW Sewer District 3. The Village of Babylon's fire department provides protection for village residents, as well as two fire protection districts in the Town of Babylon, on the outer beach (see below): The Village is characterized by many areas of high groundwater, and is served by public water. Most of the Village has predominantly sandy soil. The climate is moderate, consistent with other coastal communities in the Northeastern United States. Average annual rainfall has sharply increased in the past 5-10 years. Following are pictures from the Village of Babylon's Chamber of Commerce website illustrating this "treasure on the bay": The Village's population has increased little over the past 20 years, as most land in the village was densely developed by 1975. Any growth in population since that time has occurred as a result of undocumented peoples residing without local authorization, yet, under the New York State home rule system, the Village is responsible for this population in case of natural disaster. Though FEMA may typically consider life and safety issues beyond the jurisdiction of most hazard mitigation plans, the mitigation planning initiative that is most important to the life and safety of our residents could never be accounted for within any other FEMA or DHS response or preparedness plan. Not to stray into the territory of response plans, even with the best possible evacuation plan, and an unlimited amount of personnel to carry it out, the laws of physics still prevail. It is certainly possible, and DMA 2000 H~aid Mitiga{ioh ~i~n ~ §~ffolk ~Ouhiy, N~ Yoik 9.3-2 ~ DRAFT-September2007 SECTION 9.3: VILLAGE OF BABYLON even probable, based on documented weather patterns, that amount of time to evacuate will far exceed the amount of notice of a significant event. Thus, that is why the Village of Babylon turns to mitigation efforts, because if we do not reduce the exposure and vulnerability of our mainland population and infrastructure by securing our barrier islands, we will sustain unprecedented loss of life, destruction of essential infrastructure, and devastation of our economy from which it will take many years to recover. Lon9 Island's Southern Exposure to the Atlantic Ocean increases the severity and multitude of natural hazards Note typical storm tracks (Cabrielle 2007 is shown) do not allouv advance notice in excess of 24 hours Climate Average temperatures range from the low 30's degrees Fahrenheit (°F) to mid 70's (°F). Precipitation averages 3 to 4 inches per month. On average, snowfall is limited to November through April, with highest accumulations in January. The humidity ranges from approximately 55% and 80% throughout the year. Brief History The Village of Babylon's website describes the Villages history as follows: The location of our Village on the Great South Bay and it's accessibility to the Atlantic Ocean has involved the lives of those who lived here from the beginning to the present. The area known as Village of Babylon was purchased from the Sumpwam Indians in 1670. It was known as Huntington South. The farmers came down from Huntington to the South Bay area to harvest "salt" hay for bedding and feed for their live stock. It was a journey so the farmers would stay a period of time before returning home. Travelers would stop in Babylon on their three day trip to Southampton from New York City, creating the need for stores and services. Flounder, blue fish and shellfish were abundant in the bay providing income and sustenance for the settlers. Fresh streams from the North provided power for mills that produced grain, lumber and paper. By 1800, Babylon became a hub of activity. Nathanial Conklin foresaw Babylon as a thriving town He built a home for his mother on the northeast corner of Main Street and Deer Park Avenue in 1803. Legend has it that Nat's mother was unhappy with her home across from a tavern and compared the town with the biblical Babylon. The house now stands [OMA 2000 Hazard Mitigation Plan - Suffolk County, New York 9.3-3 BRAFT- September 2007 SECTION 9.3: VILLAGE OF BABYLON on th~ Northwest side'of Dee~ Park Avenue where it ~vas moved in 1871 with a cornerstone that reads "New Babylon, This House. Built by Nat Conklin, 1803". When the railroad arrived in the Village in 1867, it became a thriving resort area. A trolley ran from the depot to the steamship dock where ferries sailed to the beaches. At one time there were eleven hotels in Babylon Village. The area called Huntington South became Town of Babylon with it own governing board in 1872. The Village of Babylon incorporated in 1893. Following World War Il, the area burst with activity providing homes for returning veterans. With convenient train service to New York City, commuters , then and now, find Babylon a great place to live and raise a family. People of renown who have lived here are Guglielmo Marconi, Robert Moses, and Robert Keeshan. Governing Body Format The Village has a board which will be responsible for the adoption of this Hazard Mitigation Plan. The Village Board consists of an elected Mayor and 4 elected Trustees. Growth/Development Trends Based on the data tracked by the New York State Data Center, the Village of Babylon's population has. Most of the Village's land has been developed for many years; however, the Village's capabilities to manage and deal with future growth and development are illustrated later in this annex. NATURAL HAZARD EVENT HISTORY SPECIFIC TO THE VILLAGE OF BABYLON Nor'Easter/Coastal Erosion/Flooding Nor'Easter/Coastal Erosion/Flooding Nor'Easter/Coastal Erosion/Flooding NA Nov. 25, 1950 NA NA Nov. 6-7 1953 NA NA Oct. 14-16, 1955 NA Nor'Easter/Coastal Erosion/Flooding Nor'Easter/Coastal Erosion/Flooding NA Apr. 13, 1961 NA Nor'Easter/Coastal Erosion/Flooding DR-129 Mar. 6-8, 1962 HIGH NA Nov. 12-13, 1968 NA Nor'Easter/Coastal Erosion/Flooding Nor'Easter/Coastal Erosion/Flooding NA February 1969 LOW Nor'Easter/coastal Erosion/Flooding NA Feb. 19, 1972 HIGH NA Nov. 7, 1973 MEDIUM Nor'Easter/coastal Erosion/Flooding "The Perfect Storm") Nor'Easter/Coastal Erosion/Flooding NA Oct. 30-31, 1991 HIGH Nor'Easter/Coastal Erosion/Flooding DR-974 Dec. 11-14, 1992 HIGH EM-3107 March 12-14, 1993 HIGH DMA 2000 Hazard Mitigation Plan - Suffolk County, New York DRAFT- September 2007 9.3-4 Nor'Easter/Coastal Erosion/Flooding SECTION 9.3: VILLAGE OF BABYLON NA Jan. 1994 Nor'EastedCoastal DR-1083 Jan 6-8. 1996 Erosion/Flooding - Nor'EasteflCoastal DR-1146 Oct. 19-20, 1996 Erosion/Flooding Nor'Easter/Coastal NA March/April 1997 Erosion/Flooding Nor'Easter/Coastal NA Mar. 5-7, 2001 Erosion/Flooding Nor'Easter/Coastal NA Dec. 26, 2002 Erosion/Flooding Nor'Easter/Coastal NA February 2003 Erosion/Flooding No~'Easter/Coastal NA December 2003 Erosion/Flooding Nor'EasteflCoastal NA February 11, 2006 Erosion/Flooding Nor'Easter/Coastal DR-1692 April 14-16, 2007 Erosion/Flooding Severe Winter Storm/Hard NA 1779-1780 Winter Severe Winter Storm/Blizzard NA 1888 MED LOW MED MED LOW MED LOW MED MED LOW NA NA NA $100,000 NA NA NA NA $8,500,000 NA Severe Winter Storm/Blizzard NA Feb. 3-4, 1961 Severe Winter Storm NA Dec. 17, 1973 Severe Winter Storm/Blizzard NA Jan. 19-20, 1978 Severe Winter Storm/Blizzard NA Feb. 5, 1978 Severe Winter Storm/Blizzard NA Apr. 6, 1982 Severe Winter Storm/Blizzard NA Feb. 11-12 1983 Severe Winter Storm/Blizzard FEMA EM-3107 Mar. 1993 Severe Winter Storm/Blizzard NA Jan 6-8, 1996 (second largest) Severe Winter Storm/Blizzard FEMA DR-1083 Dec. 1996 $21,400,000 Severe Winter Storm/Blizzard - FEMA EM-3184 Feb. 17-18, 2003 NA "President's Day Storm" Severe Winter Storm/Blizzard NA Dec. 6, 2003 NA Severe Winter Storm NA Jan. 27-28, 2004 NA Severe Winter Storm NA Jan. 19, 2005 NA Severe Winter Storm/Blizzard NA Jan. 22-23, 2005 NA Severe Winter Storm/ NA Feb. 21 - Mar. 12, 2005 NA (5 storms) Severe Winter Storm/ NA Feb. 11-12, 2006 NA Hurricane/Coastal NA August 1635 Not Available Erosion/Flooding Hurricane/Coastal NA Sept. 1821 Not Available Erosion/Flooding DMA 2000 Hazard Mitigation Plan - Suffolk County, New York 9.3-5 DRAFT - September 2007 Hurricane/Coastal Erosion/Flooding Hurricane/Coastal Erosion/Flooding Hurricane/Coastal Erosion/Flooding NA Hurricane/Coastal NA Erosion/Flooding NA SECTION 9.3: VILLAGE OF BABYLON 8/19/1856 Not Available Not Available Not Available Not Available Hurricane/Coastal NA Not Available Erosion/Flooding Extra Tropical Depression NA Not Available Hurricane/Coastal Erosion/Flooding NA Not Available Hurricane/Coastal Erosion/Flooding - "Long Island Express" or "Great NA HIGH Hurricane of '38" Hurricane/Coastal Erosion/Flooding - NA MEDIUM "Great Atlantic Hurricane' Hurricane Carol Coastal Erosion/Flooding DR-26 LOW Hurricane - Diane Coastal Erosion/Flooding DR-45 HIGH Hurricane - Esther Coastal Erosion/Flooding NA LOW Hurricane Agnes NA HIGH Coastal Erosion/Flooding Hurricane Belle Coastal Erosion/Flooding DR-520 LOW Hurricane- Cindy Coastal Erosion/Flooding ) NA MEDIUM Hurdcane - Gloda Coastal Erosion/Flooding DR-750 LOW Hurricane Felix Coastal Erosion/Flooding NA LOW Tropical Storm Bertha Coastal Erosion/Flooding NA LOW Tropical Storm Josephine Coastal Erosion/Flooding NA LOW Tropical Stm - Floyd DR-1296 LOW) Coastal Erosion/Flooding Sept. 16, 1858 11/1/1861 6/17/1886 9/6/1888 10/14/1900 9/8/1934 Sept. 21, 1938 Sept. 14, 1944 Aug. 31, 1954 Aug. 12-19, 1955 9/21 / 1961 June 22, 1972 Aug. 10, 1976 1982 (1 of top 3 erosion events) Oct. 18, 1985 Aug. 14, 1995 July 13, 1996 October 8, 1996 Sept. 1999 October 2005 Remnants of Hurricane Wilma/Flooding/Shaltow Groundwater Long Island was just shy of Disaster Declaration, but homeowners were offered assistance in the form of SBA Loans DMA 2000 Hazard Mitigation Plan - Suffolk County, New York DRAFT- September 2007 MEDIUM 9.3-6 SECTION 9.3: VILLAGE OF BABYLON Notes: N/A = Not applicable. Damage Estimates indicated as high {> 30% total replacement cost), medium ( 15-29% IRC). or low (<15% IRC) Number of FEMA Identified Repetitive Flood Loss Properties: 114 Due to the geographical exposure of Babylon's shoreline, and the dense development along the Great South Bay frontage, even the slightest natural events can cause extensive disruption to the economy. For example, the Village of Babylon experiences impact to its roadways and drainage infrastructure approximately once a month, when the cycle of the moon causes a "high high tide". Pictured below are ' the mainland results of a minor Nor'Easter, April 15, 2007 (DR-1692): The damage to the mainland and to Jones Island (pictured above and below) while significant, is minor compared to the historical impact of Nor'Easters on the Village of Babylon. Due to our coastal vulnerability to north-easterly winds, 21 of the 26 events described in the Volume table entitled "Nor'Easter Events between 1931 and 2006" impacted our Village. Though precise data is not available for all storms, local emergency management officials estimate that 12 of the Nor'Easters experienced caused property, infrastructure and economic damage exceeding 30% of the Town's total replacement cost for the years of the events. Of particular note is that the Village of Babylon participated in all six of the Presidential Disaster Declarations for Nor'Easter events in Suffolk County, and even had to evacuate over people for "The Storm of the Century" which occurred March 1993 (DR-974). Accompanying Nor'Easters, and all other coastal storms, is Coastal Erosion. Due to the southerly-facing coast and the geology of the sand, erosion and accretion occur on a daily basis guided by wind and wave directions. The erosion along Jones Island exceeds the accretion, as man-made structures, erected along our coastline throughout history, have disturbed the littoral drift of necessary sediments that would ensure accretion along Jones Island. General descriptions of this hazard propagated in Volume I are not typical of Jones Island (Gilgo Beach), as we may suffer erosion losses of 5 feet per minor coastal event, including nor'easters. In fact, it is likely that Jones Island experiences one of the highest erosion rates along the entire Eastern seaboard. Erosion of Jones Island is an on-going event which can only be measured by day- to-day weather events. Refer to documentation in USACE projects from 1987 to present for further scientific analysis. The coastal erosion threatening our barrier island endangers not merely our beaches or residences or a vital New York State Commuter Route. Should the island become structurally unsound, the only sewer outfall pipe for a Suffolk County sewage treatment plant serving over half of our population and commerce will fail, requiring expensive re-routing and reconstruction. But even should the sewer pipe be lost, the safety and welfare of the number of citizens directly physically endangered by any major coastal event, including [DMA 2000 Hazard Mitigation Plan - Suffolk County, New York 9.3-7 DRAFT - September 2007 SECTION 9.3: VILLAGE OF BABYLON nor'easters, rises from a few hundred people to our entire population. Depicted below is an example of how quickly erosion can occur. The seaward portion of dunes pictured existed just prior to DR-1692. Exposed by the recent erosion is an oil tank left behind by the US Coast Guard when the Gilgo Station was demolished in 1980s. As Nor'Easters and Coastal Erosion occur quite frequently, considering the damage that may be sustained by the violent winds and flooding associated with hurricanes and other tropical cyclones paints an ominous picture of Long Island's future. Long Island, and the Village of Babylon in particular, has experienced only a minor portion of the damage amounts from Presidential Disaster Declarations that affected Long Island since 1954. Many of the worst hurricane events (i.e. 1938) hit well before the majority of development in Babylon, which occurred post- World War II. In the case of Hurricane Gloria, she hit Babylon at low tide, sparing our citizens from widespread coastal flooding. While Volume I contains a complete analysis of the natural hazard for Suffolk County in general, it is important to note the population analyses contained there-in indicate that ail of the population within the Village would require evacuation to a jurisdiction north of the Village for a Category 2 or greater Hurricane. Babylon's Fire operations would be very limited during a significant coastal event, and we would have to rely on the Town of Babylon for their support. HAZUS analysis in Volume I supports local knowledge that local emergency operations and fire/rescue efforts will most likely be severely disabled for several days. It is because of these predictions, and other local emergency planning activities and mapping, that Jones Island is the best protection the Village has to mitigate the effects of hurricanes and tropical cyclones by increasing the amount of time available to transport and shelter residents, and to reduce the amount flood waters inundating streets and critical response facilities. Pictured below is are examples of maps created by Town of Babylon emergency preparedness, on the Village's behalf, to more clearly understand affected population and aid in mitigation efforts: DMA 2000 Hazard Mitigation Plan- Suffolk County, New York 9.3-8 DRAFT - September 2007 SECTION 9.3: VILLAGE OF BABYLON Asian Beetle Infestation (Risk Ranking Though the Asian Beetle infestation has relatively low impacts on the Town and Villages compared to the other hazards, mitigation strategies for any natural hazards involving wind, and hence tree, damage must be modified to account for the infestation. Pictured below is the border (purple) of the Asian Beetle Quarantine Area, with respect to the borders (black) of both Village of Amityville and Village of Babylon. NATURAL HAZARD RISK/VULNERABILITY RISK RANKING 1 Nor'Easters (extra- lO0-year*: $63,874,000 - Frequent 45 tropical cyclones, $91,003,000 DMA 2000 Hazard Mitigation Plan - Suffolk County, New York 9.3-9 DRAFT- September 2007 SECTION 9.3: VILLAGE OF BABYLON including severe winter Iow-pressure systems) Coastal Erosion Severe Winter Storm (heavy snow, blizzards, ice storms) Hurricane (tropical cyclones, including tropical storms and tropical depressions) 500-year*: $583,168,000 - $645,012,000 Damage estimate not available. Frequent Damage estimate not available. Frequent 100-yea~:$63,874,000- $91,003,000 500-yea~:$583,168,000- $645,012,000 39 39 Occasional 36 Flooding (riverine, flash, coastal, urban 100-year**: $6,558,000 flcoding and elevated 500-year**: $7,817,000 Frequent 30 groundwater) Severe Storms 6 (windstorms, thunderstorms, hail, Damage estimate not available. Frequent 27 lightning and tornado) 7 Shallow Groundwater Damage estimate not available. Frequent 18 8 Groundwater Contamination Damage estimate not available. Occasional 14 9 Asian Beetle Infestation Damage estimate not available. Frequent 3 10 Wildfire Damage estimate not available. Rare 0 10 Drought Damage estimate not available. Rare 0 a. Building damage ratio estimates based on FEMA 386-2 (August 2001) b. Frequent=- Hazard event that occurs more frequently than once in 10 years, Occasional=Hazard event that occurs from once in 10 years to once in 100 years, Rare=Hazard event that occurs from once in 100 years to once in 1,000 years, None= Hazard event that occurs less frequently than once in 1,000 years c. The probability of occurrence for these events is weighted at "0" due to no exposure * Estimated building replacement value (structure and contents) damaged by the 100-year and 500-year hurricane-related winds and storm surge events as calculated using HAZUS-MH (custom methodology explained in Section 5.4, Volume I in the Hurricane hazard profile). * * Estimated building replacement value (st~'ucture and contents) damaged by a 100-year and 500-year flood event as calculated by HAZUS-MH. CAPABILITY ASSESSMENT This section identifies the following capabilities of the local jurisdiction: · Legal and regulatory capability · Administrative and technical capability Fiscal capability · Community classification. DMA 2000 Hazard Mitigation Plan - Suffolk County, New York 9.3-10 DRAFT - September 2007 SECTION 9.2: VILLAGE OF BABYLON ~abilitv 1) Building Code Z) Zoning Ordinance 3) Subdivision Ordinance Y Y Y 4) Special Purpose Ordinances (floodplain management, critical ¥ Y or sensitive areas) 5) Growth Management Y N 6) Floodplain Management/Basin y y Plan 8) General Plan or Comprehensive Plan Village has adopted International Building Code Suffolk County Planning Commission has review authority on certain actions. If they disapprove an action, Village Zoning Board must approve with a greater majodty & present findings. Suffolk County Planning Commission has review authority on certain actions. If they disapprove an action, Village Board/ Village Zoning Board/ Village Planning Board must approve with a greater majority & ~resent findings. NYS Subdivision laws provide a general framework, but allow room for local ordinances and interpretation. adopted pursuant to NYS Phase II 7) Storrnwater Management y Y implementation of the Federal Plan/ordinance Clean Water ACt y y Completed per state mandate 9) Capital Improvements Plan 10) Site Plan Review Requirements SEE Y COMMENT y y* y y* Y N y y* ¥ Y* Y N Y N SEE N COMMENT y y* y y* Y N Y N N N Y 14) Shoreline Management Plan Y 11 ) Habitat Conservation Plan Y Y 12) Economic Development Plan Y N 13) Emergency Response Plan Y N Y Y Suffolk County Planning Commission has review authority on certain actions. If they disapprove an action, Village Boards must approve with a greater majodty & present findings DMA 2000 Hazard Mitigation Plan - Suffolk County, New York 9.3-1 DRAFT- September 2007 SECTION 9.2: VILLAGE OF BABYLON 15) Post Disaster Recovery Plan 16) Post Disaster Recovery Ordinance Y N N N 17) Real Estate Disclosure req. N 18) Other y *Note: NYSDEC, NYSDOS, NYSDOT, SCDPW, SCDHS have permitiing authority over some hctions occurring as a result of local regulations. DMA 2000 Ha~aid ~iti~ii~n Pi~ 9.3-12 DRAFT - September 2007 SECTION 9.2: VILLAGE OF BABYLON Administrative and Technical Capabili~' 1) Planner(s) or Engineer(s) with knowledge of land development and land management practices 2) Engineer(s) or Professional(s) trained in construction practices related to buildings and/or infrastructure 3) Planners or engineers with an understanding of natural hazards 4) Floodplain Manager 5) Surveyor(s) 6) Personnel skilled or trained in "GIS" applications 7) Scientist familiar with natural hazards in Suffolk County. 8) Emergency Manager 9) Grant Writer(s) 10) Staff with expertise or training in benefit/cost analysis Contract Planners/Engineers Contract Engineers Contract Planners/Engineers Contract Surveyors Town supplies GIS Maps on an informal basis for emergency preparedness and fire protection needs Contract GIS available Mayor Assistant to'Mayor Assistant to Mayor DMA 2000 Hazard Mitigation Plan - Suffolk County, New York 9.3-13 DRAFT- September 2007 SECTION 9.2: VILLAGE OF BABYLON Fiscal CapabiliD, 1) Community development Block Grants (CDBG) Yes, have utilized in the past 2) Capital Improvements Project Funding Yes, have utilized in the past 3) Authority to Levy Taxes for specific purposes Yes, have utilized in the past 4) User fees for water, sewer, gas or electric service No 5) Impact Fees for homebuyers or developers of new Yes, have utilized for traffic safety measures, optical pre- development/homes eruption, and roadway improvements 6) Incur debt through general obligation bonds Yes, have utilized in the past 7) Incur debt through special tax bonds Yes, have utilized in the past 8) Incur debt through private activity bonds No 9) Withhold public expenditures in hazard-prone areas No 10) State sponsored grant programs Yes, have utilized in the past FEMA sponsored grant funding ~1) Other County sponsored grant funding for roadways improvements and stormwater remediation Community. Classifications Community Rating System (CRS) Not Participating N/A Building Code Effectiveness Grading Schedule (BCEGS) 4/4 2005 Public Protection 3/9 Storm Ready Not Participating N/A Firewise Not Participating N/A · Higher classification applies to when subject property is located beyond 1000 feet of a creditable fire hydrant and is within 5 road miles of a recognized Fire Station. · N/A = Not applicable. - = Unavailable. The above referenced classifications can be viewed as a gauge of this community's capabilities in all phases of emergency management (preparedness, response, recovery and mitigation). These classifications are used as an underwriting parameter for determining the costs of various forms of insurance. The CRS class applies to flood insurance while the BCEGS and Public Protection classifications apply to standard property insurance. Classifications range on a scale of 1 to 10 with class one being the best possible classification, and class 10 representing no classification benefit. Criteria for classification credits are outlined in the following documents: · The Community Rating System Coordinators Manual · The Building Code Effectiveness Grading Schedule · The Fire Suppression Rating Schedule DRAFT- September 2007 SECTION 9.2: VILLAGE OF BABYLON Proposed Hazard Mitigation Initiatives increase structural stability and drainage Nor'Easters; capacity of Coastal culverts spanning Erosion; tribal tributaries Flooding; and supporting Shallow critical evacuation Groundwater and response routes Re-design and re- enforce dams/spillways supporting man- made lakes out of Nor'Easters; freshwater Coastal streams and tidal Erosion; tributaries to Hurricane; reduce risk of Flooding; failure, increase Severe stormwater Storm; retention, and Shallow reduce upstream Groundwater flooding, and protect critical evacuation and response routes NYSDOT, NYS 2, 5, 7, 12, Parks, Possible PDM Long 13, 14, 15, SCDPW High application Term 16 Highways NYS'DEC Town, Town, Village, 2, 5, 7, 8, Villages, NYSDOT, Long 10, 11, 13, NYSDOT, High NYSDEC, SCDPW, Term 14, 15, 16 NYSDEC, possible PDM SCDPW application Re-design and re- enforce dam/spillway at Nor'Easters; Argyle Lake to Coastal reduce risk of Erosion; failure, increase Hurricane; atormwater Flooding; retention, and Severe reduce upstream Storm; flooding, and Shallow protect critical Groundwater evacuation and response routes Village of Town, Villages, Babylon, NYSDOT, 2, 5, 7, 8, Town, 10, 11, 13, NYSDOT, High NYSDEC, SCDPW, 14, 15, 16 possible PDM NYSDEC, application SCDPW Long Term Nor'Easters; Dredging of Hurricane; mouths of tidal Flooding; 2, 3, 5, 7, 9, SCDPW High Suffolk County Long term tributaries Shallow 14, 15 Groundwater Implement tree Nor'Easters, NYS management Severe Agricultur Village; NYS programs and Winter 1, 7, 5, 10, e & Low Agriculture & augment existing Storms, 13, 15, 16 Markets; Markets; USDA programs, Hurricane, USDA (APHIS) including Flooding, (APHIS) Short Term DMA 2000 Hazard Mitigation Plan - Suffolk County, New York 9.3-15 DRAFT- September 2007 SECTION 9.2: VILLAGE OF BABYLON containment of Severe Asian Beetle, and Storms measures to improve post- disaster debris management Support/enhance Building and/or Flood code enforcement programs at the local level public education and awareness of current codes All Hazards 1,2, 4, 7, 9, VILLAGE Low Village; NYSDOS Short 15 Term Institute a stream- clearing program to restore habitats Nor'Easters; of tidal tributaries Coastal and freshwater Erosion; rivers by reducing Hurricane; invasive species, Flooding; trash, excess Severe sediment, etc. to Storms; increase natural Shallow and municipal Groundwater drainage capabilities Encourage staff and consultants in to learn FEMA- sponsored cost- benefit analysis Ail Hazards 2, 5, 7, 8, NYSDEC, SCDPVV Possible PDM Long 10, 11, 13, Vector Low application Term 15, 16 Control 1,3, 5, 7, Short 15, 16 Low Village Term Nor'Easters, Design or Coastal enhance existing Erosion, municipal Hurricane, drainage systems Flooding, to provide Severe increased capacity of the Storms, Shallow drainage system Groundwater 2,5, 10, 11, Village Medium Village; Possible Long 13, 15, 16 PDM application Term Continue a program, in Nor'easters, cooperation with Severe existing US Winter Ags/Markets Storms; programs, to Hurricanes, inform and certify Severe contractors for Storms, debris removal Asian Beetle operations in the Infestation quarantine area State 1, 2, 3, 7, Agricultur Medium State Agriculture & Short 10, 15, 16 e & Markets Term Markets Elevate roads that Nor'Easters, 2, 13, 14, Village High Possible PDM Long DMA 2000 Hazard Mitigation Plan - Suffolk County, New York 9.3-16 DRAFT- September 2007 SECTION 9.2: VILLAGE OF BABYLON are vital/critical to Coastal evacuation and Erosion, local community Hurricane, operations Flooding, Severe Storms, Shallow Groundwater 15, 16 application Term Participate in homeowner Nor'Easters, partnership Coastal program to Erosion, elevate vulnerable Severe properties in high Storms, risk areas impacted by Hurricane, Flooding, coastal storms, Shallow surface flooding, Groundwater and/or shallow groundwater Develop a post- disaster action plan for coastal storm events that All Hazards will address the local government operations post disaster. Federal PDM 1, 2, 3, 4, 7, FEMA High funding; Long term 9 Homeowner Cost Share 2, 3, 7, 12, Village High NYSDOS Long 14, 16 Term Consider Iow- Nor'Easters, density land use Coastal in high risk Erosion, coastal, surface Hurricane, water and Flooding, groundwater Shallow zones. Groundwater 6, 7 Low Village Long term Continue to develop, enhance and implement existing emergency response plans to utilize new and developing technology/ information as it becomes available. 1, 3, 7, 12, Short All Hazards 13, 14, 15, Village Low Village Term 16 Nor'Easters; Coastal Promote the Erosion; FEMA Low Village Short purchase of Flood Hurricane; 1, 7, 9, 15 NFIS Term Insurance Flooding; Severe Storms DMA 2000 Hazard Mitigation Plan - Suffolk County, New York 9.3-17 DRAFT- September 2007 SECTION 9.2: VILLAGE OF BABYLON Educate the public on ways to Nor'Easters; protect their Coastal property before Erosion; and dudng natural Severe events, and what Winter they can acquire Storms; to install Hurricane; appropriate Flooding; property Severe protection Storms measures Increase public educatlt)n and notification concerning Asian Beetle Infestation, including production and distribution of maps of affected areas Consider non- structural flood hazard mitigation alternatives for at risk properties within the floodplain, including those that have been identified as repetitive loss, such as acquisition/relocat ion, or elevation depending on feasibility. The parameters for feasibility for this initiative would be: funding, benefits versus costs and willing participation of property owners. Consider participation in Flood, incentive-based Nor'Easter, Hurricane, programs such as CRS and "Storm Severe Ready." Weather Village; partner FEMA with community Short 1, 7, 9, 15 Low NFIS organizations/busin Term esses Asian Beetle 1,3, 7, 8, US Ags & Short Infestation 10, 15 Markets Low Village Term Flood, Nor'Easter, General Fund, Hurricane, 1, 2, 7, 9, FEMA Hazard Long Severe 15 Village High Mitigation Grant term, DOF Weather Funding Long 1, 3, 4, 9 Village High Village Term Develop a post- disaster action All Hazards 7, 12, 13 Village, High Village, Town Long plan for coastal Town term, DOF DMA 2000 Hazard Mitigation Plan - Suffolk County, New York 9.3-18 DRAFT- September 2007 SECTION 9.2: VILLAGE OF BABYLON storm events that will address the continuity of local government operations, such as operations of the Village Clerk, post disaster Notes: Short term I to 5 years. Long Term= 5 years or greater. OG = On going program. DOF Depending on funding. SC = Suffolk County. PDM Pre-Disaster Mitigation Grant Program. DMA 2000 Hazard Mitigation Plan - Suffolk County, New York 9.3-19 DRAFT - September 2007 SECTION 9.2: VILLAGE OF BABYLON PR1OR1TIZATION OF MITIGATION INITIATIVES 8 High High Y Y N Possible PDM Low application NYSDOT, 10 High High Y Y N NYSDEC, SCDPW, Medium possible PDM application Federal & State Budgeted 8 High High Y N N Expenses, Medium Congressionall y-approved yearly Town; Village, NYS 7 Medium Y Y Y Agriculture & Medium Markets; USDA (APHIS) 6 Medium BV-6 8 Medium BV-7 6 Medium BV-8 7 Medium BV-9 7 Medium BV-10 5 Medium BV-11 BV-12 BV-13 BV-14 Medium High High Y Y N Village; Medium NYSDOS Y Y N Possible PDM Medium application Y N N Village Medium Village; Y Y Y Possible PDM Medium application State Y Y Y Agriculture & High Markets N Y N N Possible PDM application Federal PDM funding; Homeowner Cost Share Low Low Medium High N Y N NYSDOS Medium Low Low Y N N Village Low Low Low Y N Y Village High DMA 2000 Hazard Mitigation Plan - Suffolk County, New York 9.3-20 DRAFT- September 2007 SECTION 9.2: VILLAGE OF BABYLON BV-15 BV-16 BV-17 BV-18 BV-19 BV-20 Low Low Low Low Y Y Y Village Medium Village; partner with Y Y N community Medium organizations/b usinesses Low Low Y Y y Town, Village Medium of Babylon High High Y' Y N Medium Low High N N N Low High High Y Y N Town, Villages Medium Explanation of Priorities · High Priority - A project that meets multiple objectives (i.e., multiple hazards), benefits exceeds cost, has funding secured or is an on-going project and project meets eligibility requirements for the Hazard Mitigation Grant Program (HMGP) or Pre-Disaster Mitigation Grant Program (PDM) programs. High priority projects can be completed in the short term (1 to 5 years). · Medium Priority - A project that meets goals and objectives, benefits exceeds costs, funding has not been secured but project is grant eligible under, HMGP, PDM or other grant programs. Project can be completed in the short term, once funding is completed. Medium priority projects will become high priority projects once funding is secured. · Low Priority - Any project that will mitigate the risk of a hazard, benefits do not exceed the costs or are difficult to quantify, funding has not been secured and project is not eligible for HMGP or PDM grant funding, and time line for completion is considered long. term (1 to 10 years). Low priority projects may be eligible other sources of grant funding from other programs. A low priority project could become a high priority project once funding is secured as long as it could be completed in the short term. Prioritization of initiatives was based on above definitions: Yes Prioritization of initiatives was based on parameters other than stated above: Not applicable. DMA 2000 Hazard Mitigation Plan - Suffolk County, New York 9.3-21 DRAFT - September 2007 SECTION 9.2: VILLAGE OF BABYLON FUTURE NEEDS TO BETTER UNDERSTAND RISK/VULNERABILITY · Mitigation Plan for man-made disasters · Better building stock and cost-of-construction data to update risk assessment · Become part of a Town of Babylon government recovery continuity plan, working with Town, fire districts, school districts, and other community organizations within the Village ADDITIONAL COMMENTS None at this time. HAZARD AREA EXTENT AND LOCATION Hazard area extent and location maps have been generated for the Village of Babylon and illustrate the probable areas impacted within the Village. These maps are based on the best available data at the time of the preparation of this Plan, and are considered to be adequate for planning purposes..Maps have only been generated for those hazards that can be clearly identified using mapping techniques and technologies, and for which the Village of Babylon has significant exposure. These maps are illustrated in the hazard profiles within Section 5.4, Volume i of this Plan. DMA 2000 Hazard Mitigation Plan - Suffolk County, New York 9.3-22 DRAFT- September 2007 SECTION 9.4: VILLAGE OF BELLPORT VILLAGE OF BELLPORT This section presents the jurisdictional annex for the Village of Bellport. HAZARD MITIGATION PLAN POINT OF CONTACT Donald A. Mullins, Director of Code Enfomement 29 Bellport Lane Bellport, NY 11713 Phone: (631) 286-0327 E-mail: cod e~,bellport villacle.orq Roger A. Terrel, Village Clerk 29 Bellport Lane Bellport, NY 11713 Phone: (631) 286-0327 E-maih clerk~bellportvillaqe.org ~qLLAGE PROFILE Population Approximately 2,363 residents (U.S. Census 2000); Increases in summer months LocaNon Bellport Village is located on the south shore within the Town of Brookhaven, Suffolk County, N.Y. The Village is on the Great South Bay only 2.2 miles from the Atlantic Ocean. Climate The Village of Bellport enjoys a moderate climate with average low temperatures in the 30's degrees Fahrenheit (°F) and average high temperatures in the mid 70's (°F). Precipitation averages between 3.0 to 4.5 inches per month with the most precipitation occurring in the month of March. On average, snowfall is limited to November through April, with highest accumulations in January. The humidity ranges between 55 and 80% throughout the year. Brief History Bellport was named after the Bell family, early settlers. The village which consists of 1.5 square miles was incorporated in 1910. The Village Golf Course and Country Club over look the Great South Bay. The Village Golf Course was established in 1899. The newly renovated course is rated as one of the finest on Long Island. Memberships are open to residents and non-residents. The Village is a center stage for art, culture and recreation such as sailing, tennis, golf and a fine array of homes, new and old. The business district is a quaint downtown shopping area consisting of shops, art galleries, antique stores, and essential stores for all your needs and many fine restaurants. A Village owned ferry provides transportation to the ocean beach and marina. Located on the bay side is 'the Bellport Village Marina where slips are provided for private boats. Also located on the bay side is "Mother's Beach". It is au ideal facility for children as well as adults. A band shell provides quality entertainment throughout the summer months. DMA 2000 Hazard Mitigation Plan - Suffolk County, New York 9.4-1 DRAFT - September 2007 SECTION 9.4: VILLAGE OF BELLPORT Governing Body Format The local governing body consists of the Mayor and a Board of Trustees consisting of 4 trustees. The Mayor and Trustees each get I vote. This governing body will assume the responsibility of adopting and implementing the pre-disaster mitigation plan. Growth/Development Trends Based on the data tracked by the New York State Data Center, The Village of Bellport has experienced a declining rate o£ growth over the past 15 years. The overall population has decreased by 1.27% since 2000 and has averaged 0.58% decrease per year from 1990 to 2006. Even though the resident population has been decreasing, Bellport's "serviced" population significantly increases during the summer months due to tourism. With this rate of growth, the anticipated development trends for Bellport are considered low. The Village's capabilities to manage and deal with future growth and development are illustrated later in this annex. NATURAL HAZARD EVENT HISTORY SPECIFIC TO THE VILLAGE OF BELLPORT Coastal Storm/Erosion/Flooding N/A 7/18/07 $56,000 4/14- 4/18/07 Nor'Easter/Erosion/Flooding DR 1692 $484,000 Coastal 1/18- Storm/Erosion/Flooding N/A 1/19/06 Not Available Hurricane Bob/Erosion/Flooding DR 918 9/16/91 Not Available Hurricane Gloria/Erosion~Flooding DR 750 10/18/85 Not Available Notes: N/A = Not applicable. Number of FEMA Identified Repetitive Flood Loss Properties: 2 DMA 2000 Hazard Mitigation Plan - Suffolk County, New York 9.4-2 DRAFT- September 2007 SECTION 9.4: VILLAGE OF BELLPORT NATURAL HAZARD RISK~VULNERABILITY RISK RANKING 100-year*: $42,771,000- $44,523,000 Nor'easters Frequent 54 500-year*: $224,556,000 - $229,422,000 Severe Winter Storms Not available/unable to quantify Frequent Severe Storms Not available/unable to quantify Frequent $229,4 million 54 48 100-year*: $42,771,000 - Hurricane $44,523,000 Occasional 500-year*: $224,556,000 - $229,422,000 36 Coastal Erosion Not available/unable to quantify $41.18 million Occasional 24 18 Flooding 100-year**: $121,000 Frequent Shallow Groundwater Groundwater contamination Infestation Drought Wildfire 500-year**: $315,000 Not available/unable to quantify Frequent 18 Not available/unable to quantify Frequent 12 Not available/unable to quantify Occasional 8 Not available/unable to quantify Occasional 3 Not available/unable to quantify Rare 0 a. Building damage ratio estimates based on FEMA 386-2 (August 2001 ) b. Frequent=- Hazard event that occurs more frequently than once in 10 years, Occasional-Hazard event that occurs from once in 10 years to once in 100 years, Rare-Hazard event that occurs from once in 100 years to once in 1,000 years, None= Hazard event that occurs less frequently than once in 1,000 years c. The probability of occurrence for these events is weighted at "0" due to no exposure * Estimated building replacement value (structure and contents) damaged by the 100-year and 500-year hurricane-related winds and storm surge event as calculated using HAZUS-MH (custom methodology explained in Section 5.4, Volume I in the Hurricane hazard profile). ** Estimated building replacement value (structure and contents) damaged by a 100-year and 500-year flood event as calculated by HAZUS-MH. CAPABILITY ASSESSMENT This section identifies the following capabilities of the local jurisdiction: · Legal and regulatory capability · Administrative and technical capability · Fiscal capability · Community classification. {DMA 2000 Hazard Mitigation Plan - Suffolk County, New York 9.4-3 DRAFT- September 2007 SECTION 9.4: VILLAGE OF BELLPORT Legal and Regulato~ Capabili~' 1) Building Code 8) General Plan or Comprehensive Plan NY State Code and Bellport Village Code Chapter 21, revised June 2007 Bellport Village Code Chapter 21, revised June 2007 2) Zoning Ordinance Y N N Y 3) Subdivision Ordinance Y N N N Bellport Village Code Chapter 18, revised 1992 4) Special Purpose Ordinances Flood Damage Prevention Ord- (floodplain management, critical Y N N N Bellport Village Code Chapter 6, or sensitive areas) adopted 1998 5) Growth Management N N N N 6) Floodplain Management/Basin Plan N N N N 7) Stormwater Management Y Planning and 'code in progress P~an/ordinance Y N (NYS Y Bellport Village Code Chapter 7 DEC) Article 1 Y N N N Plan, adopted 1989 9) Capital Improvements Plan N N N N 10) Site Plan Review Bellport Village Code Chapter 21 & Requirements Y N N Y IBC 11) Habitat Conservation Plan N N N N 12) Economic Development Plan N N N N 13) Emergency Response Plan Y N N N Plan, adopted Oct 23, 1997 14) Shoreline Management Plan Y N N N Bellport Village Code Chapter 23 15) Post Disaster Recovery Plan N N N N 16) Post Disaster Recovery Ordinance N N N iN 17) Real Estate Disclosure req, N N N N 18) Other N Y N Y DMA 2000 Hazard Mitigation Plan - Suffolk County, New York 9.4-4 DRAFT- September 2007 SECTION 9.4: VILLAGE OF BELLPORT Administrative and Technical CapabiliD' 1) Planner(s) or Engineer(s) with knowledge of land development and land management practices 2) Engineer(s) or Professional(s) trained in construction practices related to buildings and/or infrastructure 3) Planners or engineers with an understanding of natural hazards 4) Floodplain Manager 5) Surveyor(s) 6) Personnel skilled or trained in "GIS" applications 7) Scientist familiar with natural hazards in Suffolk County. 8) Emergency Manager 9) Grant Writer(s) 10) Staff with expertise or training in benefit/cost analysis Available if needed by contract Building Department- Chief Building Inspector Available if needed by contract Chief Building Inspector Available if needed by contract Village Clerk DMA 2000 Hazard Mitigation Plan - Suffolk County, New York 9.4-5 DRAFT- September 2007 SECTION 9.4: VILLAGE OF BELLPORT Fiscal Capabili~' 1) Community development Block Grants (CDBG) Yes, have used in past 2) Capital Improvements Project Funding Done by Federal, State and Local Grants 3) Authority to Levy Taxes for specific purposes Yes 4) User fees for water, sewer, gas or electric service No 5) Impact Fees for homebuyers or developers of new No development/homes 6) Incur debt through general obligation bonds Yes 7) Incur debt through special tax bonds No 8) Incur debt through pdvate activity bonds No 9) Withhol~l public expenditures in hazard-prone areas No 10) State sponsored grant programs No 11) Other Yes Community Classifications Community Rating System (CRS) Not Participating N/A Building Code Effectiveness Grading Schedule (BCEGS) 5/5 2005 Public Protection 4 Storm Ready Not Participating N/A Firewise Not Participating N/A · Higher classification applies to when subject property is located beyond 1000 feet of a creditable fire hydrant and is within 5 road miles ora recognized Fire Station. · N/A = Not applicable. - = Unavailable. The above referenced classifications can be viewed as a gauge of this community's capabilities in all phases of emergency management (preparedness, response, recovery and mitigation). These classifications are used as an underwriting parameter for determining the costs of various forms of insurance. The CRS class applies to flood insurance while the BCEGS and Public Protection classifications apply to standard property insurance. Classifications range on a scale of 1 to 10 with class one being the best possible classification, and class 10 representing no classification benefit. Criteria for classification credits are outlined in the following documents: · The Community Rating System Coordinators Manual · The Building Code Effectiveness Grading Schedule · The Fire Suppression Rating Schedule DMA 2000 Hazard Mitigation Plan - Suffolk County, New York 9.4-6 DRAFT- September 2007 SECTION 9.4: VILLAGE OF BELLPORT Proposed Hazard Mitigation Initiatives VBL-1 VBL-2 Update tree management and increase trimming program Update and increase drainage maintenance program Hurricane, Severe Storms, Nor'easter, Severe Winter Storms Hurricane, Flood, Severe Storms, Severe Winter Storms, Nor'easter 1,3,5,10,14,18 1,3,5,10,14,15,16 Village Highway Dept Village Highway Dept. Low Low General Fund General Fund Short term, OG Short term, OG Hurricane, FEMA Install coastal erosion Severe and Long VBL-3 control at municipal golf Storms, 2,5,15,16 Clerks Office $417,000 NYSEMO term course Nor'easter Grant VBLo4 Hurricane, Severe Storms, Severe Winter Storms, Nor'easter, Flood Alt Hazards All Hazards All Hazards All Hazards Hurricanes, Severe Winter Storms, Floods and Severe Weather, Nor'easter All Hazards VBL-5 VBL-6 1,3,5,10,11,14,15 1,3,5,7,12,14,15 2,14,15 7,12,13,14,15 1,5,14,15 5,7,14,15 All objectives VBL-7 VBL-8 VBL-9 Clerks Office Emergency Manager Emergency Manager Emergency Manager Clerks Office Village Board Village Council/ Update and implement a storm water management plan to increase storm water management capability Develop public emergency preparedness awareness pro~lram Install emergency generators at critical facilities (Village Hall, Community Center, & Highway Maintenance Building/ Increase communications within the Village and outside agencies Low Low Low Low Low Low Low Develop a debris management plan in cooperation with the Town, and Count~ Appoint a flood plain manager to coordinate with the Town and County General Fund General Fund State Legislator member grant Municipal Bond General Fund General Fund Existing Support County-wide VBL-10 Short Term Sho~ Term Sho~ term Short Term Short Term Short Term Short DMA 2000 Hazard Mitigation Plan - Suffolk County, New York 9.4-7 DRAFT- September 2007 SECTION 9.4: VILLAGE OF BELLPORT VBL-11 VBL-12 initiatives identified in Section 6, Volume I of the Suffolk County Hazard Mitigation Plan. Consider the development of a post -disaster action plan, including a debds management plan. This to be incorporated into existing emergency mana~]ement plans. Consider participation in incentive-based programs such as, CRS and "Storm-Ready". All Hazards Nor'Easter, Hurricane, Severe Weather 7,12,13 1,2,3,7,13 MPC/Suffolk County Emergency Management Public Safety/ Suffolk Co. Emergency Management Village Council Medium Low programs and grant funding where applicable General Fund, FEMA Hazard M!tigation Grant Funding General fund trough existing programs Long term, DOF Long Term Notes: Short term = I to 5 years. Long Term= 5 years or greater. OG = On going program. DOF = Depending on funding. SC = Suffolk County. PDM = Pre-Disaster Mitigation Grant Program. DMA 2000 Hazard Mitigation Plan - Suffolk County, New York 9.4-8 DRAFT- September 2007 SECTION 9.4: VILLAGE OF BELLPORT PRIORITIZATION OF MITIGATION INITIATIVES VBL-1 High Low No Yes High VBL-2 High Low No Yes High VBL-3 High High Yes No High VBL-4 High Low No Yes High VBL-5 Low Low No Yes High VBL-6 Low Low Yes Yes/State No High VBL-7 Low Low Yes Yes/State No High VBL-8 Low Low Yes No Yes High VBL-9 Low Low Yes No Yes High VBL-10 High Low Yes ' Yes Yes High VBL-11 Medium Medium Yes Yes No Medium VBL-12 Low Low Yes No Notes: H = High. L = LOW. M = Medium. N = No. N/A = Not applicable. Y = Yes. No Low Explanation of Priorities · High Priority - A project that meets multiple objectives (i.e., multiple hazards), benefits exceeds cost, has funding secured or is an on-going project and project meets eligibility requirements for the Hazard Mitigation Grant Program (HMGP) or Pre-Disaster Mitigation Grant Program (PDM) programs. High priority projects can be completed in the short term (1 to 5 years). · Medium Priority - A project that meets goals and objectives, benefits exceeds costs, funding has not been secured but project is grant eligible under, HMGP, PDM or other grant programs. Project can be completed in the short term, once funding is completed. Medium priority projects will become high priority projects once funding is secured. Low Priority - Any project that will mitigate the risk of a hazard, benefits do not exceed the costs or are difficult to quantify, funding has not been secured and project is not eligible for HMGP or PDM grant funding, and time line for completion is considered long term (1 to 10 years). Low priority projects may be eligible other sources of grant funding from other programs. A low priority project could become a high priority project once funding is secured as long as it could be completed in the short term. Prioritization of initiatives was based on above definitions: Yes Prioritization of initiatives was based on parameters other than stated above: Not applicable. DMA 2000 Hazard Mitigation Plan - Suffolk County, New York 9.4-9 DRAFT- September 2007 SECTION 9.4: VILLAGE OF BELLPORT FUTURE NEEDS TO BETTER UNDERSTAND RISK/VULNERABILITY · Consider participating in a comprehensive update to the intra-jurisdictional County-wide Emergency Management Plan. · Consider participating in a comprehensive update to the intra-jurisdictional County-wide Debris Management Plan. ADDITIONAL COMMENTS None at this time. HAZARD AREA EXTENT AND LOCATION Hazard area extent and location maps have. been generated for the Village of Bellport and illustrate the probable areas impacted within the Village. These maps are based on the best available data at the time of the preparation of this Plan, and are considered to be adequate for planning purposes. Maps have only been generated for those hazards that can be clearly identified using mapping techniques and technologies, and for which the Village of Bellport has significant exposure. These maps are illustrated in the hazard profiles within Section 5.4, Volume I of this Plan. DMA 2000 Hazard Mitigation Plan - Suffolk County, New York 9.4-10 DRAFT- September 2007 SECTION 9.5: TOWN OF HUNTINGTON TOWN OF HUNTINGTON This section presents the jurisdictional annex for the Town of Huntington. HAZARD MITIGATION PLAN POINT OF CONTACT Betty Walsh, Special Assistant to the Supervisor 100 Main Street Huntington, NY Phone: (631) 351-3001 E-mail: bwalshC, town.huntinqton.ny,us Ross Baldwin, GIS Manager 100 Main Street Huntington, NY Phone: (631) 351-3148 E-maih TOWN PROFILE Population 195,289 (U.S. Census as of 2000) Location Huntington is a town located on the North Shore of Long Island, directly east of the county line in Suffolk County. The town is 87,753.6 acres, which includes four (4) incorporated villages that have a combined area of 9,873.5 acres (Village of Northport 1,609.48 acres, Village of Lloyd Harbor 6,730.49 acres, Village of Huntington Bay 603.77 acres, Village of Asharoken 929.76 acres). Climate The Town of Huntington's climate is warm during summer when temperatures tend to be in the 70's (o Fahrenheit) and very cold during winter when temperatures tend to be in the 30's (° Fahrenheit). The warmest month of the year is July with an average maximum temperature of ~2.80° Fahrenheit, while the coldest month of the year is January with an average minimum temperature of 25.40° Fahrenheit. Temperature variations between night and day tend to be fairly limited during summer with a difference that can reach 17° Fahrenheit, and fairly limited during winter with an average difference of 13° · Fahrenheit. The annual average precipitation at Huntington is 46.36 inches. Rainfall in is fairly evenly distributed throughout the year. The wettest month of the year is March with an average rainfall of 4.28 inches. Brief History On April 2nd, 1653, when Richard Holbrook, Robert Williams and Daniel Whitehead, all of Oyster Bay, bought from Raseokan, Sachem of the Matinecock tribe, a parcel of land that is now known as "the First Purchase." The Oyster Bay men immediately turned the land over to a group of white men who had already settled within its boundaries. This first purchase was bordered on the west by Cold Spring Harbor, on the east by Northport Harbor, on the south by what is now known as Old Country Road and on the north by Long Island Sound. As time went on, other land was purchased from the Indians, gradually extending the limits of the town from Long lsland Sound on the north to Great South Bay on the south, and from Oyster Bay on the west to Smithtown and Islip on the east. In 1872, part of the town was removed to form the Town of Babylon. DMA 2000 Hazard Mitigation Plan - Suffolk County, New York 9.5-1 DRAFT - September 2007 SECTION 9.5: TOWN OF HUNTINGTON When in i 664 the Duke of York became proprietor of the area formerly known as New Netherlan& he (in the person of Governor Richard Nicholls) informed Connecticut that by virtue of his royal patent they no longer had any claim to any territory on Long Island. Governor Nicholls summoned representatives of each town on Long Island to meet in Hempstead early in 1665. The representatives were required to bring with them evidence of title to their land and to receive new grants affirming that title. The Hempstead Convention also adopted the "Duke's Laws," which regulated virtually every area of life. At this thne, too, Long Island, Staten lsland and Westchester were formed into an entity called "Yorkshire," which was divided into three parts, or "ridings," as land was divided in England. Suffolk County, including Huntington, became part of the East Riding. With some modifications, including the abolition of "Yorkshire" and "ridings." this was the form that the government of New York retained until the Revolution. Governor Thomas Dongan issued a patent in 1688 that confirmed the earlier Nicholls Patent. In addition, it mandated the creation of "Trustees" to manage and distribute town-owned land. The Trustees, like other town officials, were chosen at a Town Meeting. The Dongan Patent also authorized the creation and use of a seal, which is still in use today. In the years between the first settlement of the town and the start of the American Revolution, Huntington became an established community. The earliest settlers clustered near what became known as the "town spot", the site of the present Village Green. As the town prospered and grew, people moved to fill the outlying areas. In addition to the many farms that were established in remote as well as central portions of the town, the town included a school, a church, flour mills, saw mills, brickyards, tanneries, a town dock and a fort. Huntington's fine harbor meant that shipping became an importam part of the economy. The harbor was a busy place, with vessels traveling not only to and from other ports along the Sound but also as far as the West Indies. Ship making and related nautical businesses prospered, since water was for many years by fpr the most efficient way to transport both goods and people. In the first half of the nineteenth century, Cold Spring Harbor was a busy whaling port, second on Long Island only to Sag Harbor. In June 1774 Huntington adopted a "Declaration of Rights" affirming "that every freemans property is absolutely his own" and that taxation without representation is a violation of the rights of British subjects. The Declaration of Rights also called for the colonies to unite in a refusal to do business with Great Britain. Two years later, news of the Declaration of Independence was received with great enthusiasm in Huntington, but the euphoria was short-lived. Following the defeat of the rebel forces at the Battle of Long Island on August 27, 1776 Long Island was occupied by the British Army. Residents were required to take oaths of allegiance to the Crown. If a man refused to take the oath, he and his family could be turned off their property, losing everything. In 1782 the occupying army established an encampment in Huntington's Old Burying Ground, razing tombstones to clear the site. Not surprisingly, many townspeople resisted, waging guerilla warfare until the war was over and the British left in 1783. Nathan Hale landed at Huntington in 1776, coming by boat from Norwalk, Connecticut on a spying mission for George Washington. Sent to gather information about the British forces on Long Island and in New York City, he was captured and executed in New York City in September 1776. A memorial stands at the approximate site of his coming ashore in Huntington, an area now known as Halesite. Huntington's best-known resident, Walt Whitman, was born in West Hills in 1819. His family moved to Brooklyn when he was a child but he returned to Long Island as a young man. At the age of 19 he founded The Long-Islander, a Huntington newspaper still in existence. When World War II ended in 1945 the population of Huntington, like that of Long Island as a whole, exploded. After almost 200 years of gradual growth, the population of the town mushroomed. Huntington had approximately 32,000 residents in 1940. By 1960 there were 126,000 inhabitants. By the 1980s the DMA 2000 Hazard Mitigation Plan - Suffolk County, New York 9.5-2 DRAFT- September 2007 SECTION 9.5: TOWN OF HUNTINGTON p~pniafi0n had gone over the -~001000 mm-kl ~iih ihe enormous ~0~h 0f ihe i0~n its rural i~nd~cfipe changed. Farms and vacant land disappeared, replaced by housing, schools, highways, recreational facilities and new and expanding business and industry. Huntington was named an Ali-American City in 2002 by the National Civic League. It was also a finalist in 2001. Governing Body Format The Town of Huntington is governed by a five-member Town Board, comprised of the Town Supervisor and 4 Council members. This body will assume the responsibility for the adoption and implementation of this Plan. The Town of Huntington consists of 17 departments: Accessory Apartments, Assessor, Audit and Control, Citizen Services, Community Development, Engineering Services, Environmental Waste Management, General Services, Highway, Historian, Human Services, Information Technology, Maritime Services, Parks and Recreation, Personnel, Planning and Environment, Public Safety, Receiver of Taxes and the Supervisor's Office. Growth/Development Trends Based on the data tracked by the New York State Data Center, Huntington has experienced a modest rate of growth. The overall population has increased only 0.73% since 2000 and has averaged 0.16% per year from 1990 to 2006. With this rate of growth, the anticipated development trends for Huntington are considered low to moderate. The majority of recent development within the Town of Huntington has been infill development. Residentially, there has been a focus on senior housing. The town's capabilities to manage and deal with future growth and development are illustrated in "Legal and regulatory capability Assessment" section of this annex. NATURAL HAZARD EVENT HISTORY SPECIFIC TO THE TOWN OF HUNTINGTON Hurricane Gloria DR-750 9/27/1985 Not Available Tropical Storm Henri N/A 9/24/1985 Not Available Tropical Depression Chris N/A 8/29/1988 Not Available Tropical Depression Beryl N/A 8/18/1994 Not Available Tropical Depression Bertha N/A 7/13/1996 Not Available Tropical Storm Floyd DR-1296 / 9/16/1999 Not Available EM-3149 Nor'easter DR-1692 4/15/2007 Not Available Nor'easter N/A 4/9/1996 Not Available Nor'easter N/A 3/19/2004 Not Available Severe Thunderstorm N/A 7/18/2007 Not Available resulting in Flooding Notes: N/A = Not applicable. Number of FEMA Identified Repetitive Flood Loss Properties: 47 DMA 2000 Hazard Mitigation Plan - Suffolk County, New York 9.5-3 DRAFT- September 2007 SECTION 9.5: TOWN OF HUNTINGTON NATURAL HAZARD RISK/VULNERABILITY RISK RANKING - WORK IN PROGRESS 100-year*: $656,946,000- Nor'easter $707,078,000 500-year*:$9,810,107,000- Frequent $9,893,479,000 Coastal Erosion Loss estimation not available Frequent Severe Winter Storm $13,138,440,000 Frequent $624,125,000 Flood 100-year**: $17,748,000 Frequent 500-year**: $29,537,000 Severe Storm Loss estimation not available Frequent Infestation No measurable impact to Frequent structures Shallow Groundwater Loss estimation not available Frequent lO0-year*: $656,946,000 - Hurdcane $707,078,000 500-year*: $9,810,107,000 - Frequent $9,893,479,000 Groundwater Loss estimation not available Occasional Contamination Wild Fire Loss estimation not available No measurable impact to Drought structures a. Building damage ratio estimates based on FEMA 386-2 (August 2001) b. Frequent=- Hazard event that occurs more frequently than once in 10 years, Occasional=.Hazard event that occurs from once in 10 years to once in 100 years, Rare=Hazard event that occurs from once in 100 years to once in 1,000 years, None= Hazard event that occurs less fi'equently than once in 1,000 years c. The probability of occurrence for these events is weighted at "0" due to no exposure * Estimated building replacement value (structure and contents) damaged by the 100-year and 500-year hurricane-related winds and storm surge event as calculated using HAZUS-MH (custom methodology explained in Section 5.4, Volume I in the Hurricane hazard profile). * * Estimated building replacement value (structure and contents) damaged by a 100-year and 500-year flood event as calculated by HAZUS-MH. CAPABILITY ASSESSMENT This section identifies the following capabilities of the local jurisdiction: Legal and regulatory capability Administrative and technical capability · Fiscal capability · Community classification. DMA 2000 Hazard Mitigation Plan - Suffolk County, New York 9.5-4 DRAFT- September 2007 SECTION 9,5: TOWN OF HUNTINGTON Legal and Regulator3, Capabili~' 1) Building Code 2) Zoning Ordinance 3) Subdivision Ordinance Y Y N N N Y N Y Y Y Y Building and Engineering Town has adopted NYS Building Code 9/1/1967 (which now contain the, International Code) Suffolk County Dept. of Health Services First Zoning Ordinance in the Town of Huntington was adopted 1934 the most recently adopted Zoning Ordinance was adopted by the Town 1979 § 198-1 of the Code of the Town of Huntington states" Purpose. The zoning regulations and districts as herein established have been made in accordance with a comprehensive plan for the purpose of promoting health, safety, morals and general welfare in the Town of Huntington. They have been designed to lessen congestion in the streets; to secure safety from fire, panic and other dangers; to provide adequate light and air; to prevent the overcrowding of land; to avoid undue concentration of population; to facilitate the adequate provision of transportation, water supply, sewage disposal, schools, parks and other public requirements. They have been made with reasonable consideration, among other things, to the character of the distdct and its peculiar suitability for particular uses, and with a view to conserving the value of buildings and encouraging the most appropriate use of land throughout the Town." Planning The Town of Huntington first adopted the current Subdivision Regulations and Site Improvement Specifications first established 1960 with latest amendment August 23, 2005. These regulations are also referred to in DMA 2000 Hazard Mitigation Plan - Suffolk County, New York 9.5-5 DRAFT- September 2007 SECTION 9.5: TOWN OF HUNTINGTON 4) Special Purpose Ordinances (floodplain management, critical or sensitive areas) Y N Y Y §A202 of Town Code. Dept of Engineering & §198-12.2 of the Town of Huntington's Zoning Ordinance Originally added in 1988 Amended 12-6-1994 by Ord. No. 94-ZC-21; 6-11-1996 by Ord. No. 96-ZC-11; 5-5-1998 by EL No. 19- 1998 Planning reviews steep slope areas as per ARTICLE X, The Steep Slopes Conservation Law [Added 8-23-2005 by EL. No. 30-2005 last Amended 1-9-2007 by Lb No. 4- 2007] NYS Department of Environmental Conservation-Federal Emergency Management Agency Dept of Engineering & §198-12.2 of the Town of Huntington's Zoning Ordinance Originally added in 1988 Amended 12-6-1994 by Ord. No. 94-ZC-21; 6-11-1996 by Ord. No. 96-ZC-11; 5-5-1998 by Lb No. 19- 1998 New York State Dept of Environmental Conservation/ Federal Emergency Management Agency 5) Growth Management Y N N N Planning 6) Floodplain ManagementJBasin N N Y N Plan Reviewed for conformance with §198-72 dudng Site plan and/or building permit process 7) Stormwater Management Y N Y Y New York State Dept, of Plan/ordinance Environmental Conservation / Federal Environmental Protection Agency Latest version Adopted 1993, 8) General Plan or Y N N N currently have a consulting firm Comprehensive Plan preparing a new comprehensive plan §12 of the Town Code which was 9) Capital Improvements Plan Y N N N amended in its entirety 7-6-1976 by L.L No. 3-1976 Degt's of madne Services and 10) Site Plan Review Y N N N Engineering and planning Requirements The Town of Huntington first DMA 2000 Hazard Mitigation Plan - Suffolk County, New York 9.5-6 DRAFT- September 2007 SECTION 9.5: TOWN OF HUNTINGTON 11) Habitat Conservation Plan N N N adopted the current Subdivision Regulations and Site Improvement Specifications first established 1960 with latest amendment August 23, 2005 Tree Ordinance as per §186 of the Town Code last revised in 2002 (revisions pending) There is an Econ Dev Component 12) Economic Development Plan N N Y N in the Comprehensive Plan 13) Emergency Response Plan N N Y 14) Shoreline Management Plan Y Y Y Y All Hazards Plan was accepted by the Town Board (Res.2003-128) Suffolk County Fire,. rescue and Emergency Services/State Emergency Management Office/ Federal Emergency Management Agency Department of Maritime Services, madne conservation law; coastal erosion management; marine conservation law Chapter 134, LOCAL WATERFRONT CONSISTENCY REVIEW Adopted by the Town Board of the To.wn of Huntington 4-18-2000 by L.L. No. 9-2000 New York State Dept. of Environmental Conservation All Hazards Plan accepted by the Town 2003 (Res. 2003-128) Suffolk County Fire, rescue and 15) Post Disaster Recovery Plan Y N Y N Emergency Services, State Emergency Management Office Federal Emergency Management Agency 16) Post Disaster Recovery N N Y N Ordinance 17) Real Estate Disclosure req. N N N N 18) Other DMA 2000 Hazard Mitigation Plan - Suffolk County, New York 9.5-7 DRAFT- September 2007 SECTION 9.5: TOWN OF HUNTINGTON Administrative and Technical CapabiliD' 1) Planner(s) or Engineer(s) with knowledge of land development and land management practices 2) Engineer(s) or Professional(s) trained in construction practices related to buildings and/or infrastructure 3) Planners or engineers with an understanding of natural hazards 4) Floodplain Manager 5) Surveyor(s) 6) Personnel skilled or trained in "GIS" applications 7) Scientist familiar with natural hazards in Suffolk County. 8) Emergency Manager 9) Grant Walter(s) 10) Stag with expertise or training in benefit/cost analysis Department of Planning and Environment: Environmental Planner, Environmental Analyst, Senior Planner, Director Department of Building and Engineering: Engineers, Plans Examiners and Inspectors; Highway Engineers Department of Building and Engineering:' Engineers Department of Madtime Services: Director Department of Building and Engineering; Highway Department of Planning and Environment: GIS Manager; Highway We do have environmental analysts Office of the Supervisor, Special Assistant to the Supervisor - Office of the Fire Marshall/Dept of Engineering -Chie[ Fire Marshall Most Departments in town have capable grant wdters Comptrollers Off~ce DMA 2000 Hazard Mitigation Plan - Suffolk County, New York 9.5-8 DRAFT- September 2007 SECTION 9.5: TOWN OF HUNTINGTON Fiscal Capabili~' 1) Community development Block Grants (CDBG) 2) Capital Improvements Project Funding 3) Authority to Levy Taxes for specific purposes 4) User fees for water, sewer, gas or electric service 5) Impact Fees for homebuyers or developers of new development/homes Yes Yes Yes Water No 6) Incur debt through general obligation bonds Yes 7) Incur debt through special tax bonds Yes 8) Incur debt through private activity bonds No 9) Withhold public expenditures in hazard-prone areas No 10) State sponsored grant programs Yes 11) Other Community Classifications Community Rating System (CRS) Not Participating N/A Building Code Effectiveness Grading Schedule (BCEGS) 99/99 2000 ' Public Protection 5/9 Storm Ready Not Participating N/A Firewise Not Participating N/A · Higher classification applies to when subject property is located beyond 1000 feet of a creditable fire hydrant and is within 5 road miles of a recognized Fire Station. · N/A = Not applicable. - = Unavailable. The above referenced classifications can be viewed as a gauge of this community's capabilities in all phases of emergency management (preparedness, response, recovery and mitigation). These classifications are used as an underwriting parameter for determining the cos.ts of various forms of insurance. The CRS class applies to flood insurance while tho BCEGS and Public Protection classifications apply to standard property insurance. Classifications range on a scale of I to 10 with class one being the best possible classification, and class 10 representing no classification benefit. Criteria for classification credits are outlined in the following documents: · The Community Rating System Coordinators Manual · The Building Code Effectiveness Grading Schedule · The Fire Suppression Rating Schedule DMA 2000 Hazard Mitigation Plan - Suffolk County, New York 9.5-9 DRAFT- September 2007 SECTION 9.5: TOWN OF HUNTINGTON Proposed Hazard Mitigation Initiatives At the Flanagan Senior Center, reinforce all vulnerable areas (windows, doors, atdum) to wind (thru Laminate, Storm shutters Dade City glass) to secure the building from damage and return its use as a shelter for families of town response personnel/special needs. Federal Hazard Hurricane, Mitigation Nor'Easter, . Dept of Human $196,383 Grant Funds Severe Storm, 2, 7, 15, 16 Approximate Federal Severe Winter Services Medium Disaster #1692 Storm Mitigation Funds Short Term Expand Public Information/Education (pdnt, web and electronic media) by updating the Town of Huntington Website and GIS to reflect IT & Planning General Fund and through All Hazards 1, 7 Environment Low existing GIS Division programs Update Floodplain mapping throughout the Town. Participate in FEMA's Map IT & Planning Modemization Flood 1, 3, 7 GIS Division Low Initiative when it reaches Short Term Long Tem DOF Annual NIMS and ICS Training for Town and 4 villages response personnel. To better prepare all response personnel with regard to system and protocol changes and updates to benefit the public health and General Fund Ail Hazards 12, 13, 14 Engineering & through Public Safety Low existing programs Short Term OG Develop mitigation initiative to mitigate flooding at Mill Rd, Phase 1: Town Creek Rd., Rt. 110. funds Through Flood, NYS DOT and general fund or Mitigate road and Hurricane, ClP allocations. property flooding at 1, 2, 3, 7, 16 SC High these locations. Nor'Easter, Phase 2: FEMA Project to be Severe Storm Transportation Hazard completed in 2 Mitigation phases. Phase 1 Grant feasibility and project selection. Phase 2 Long term DOF DMA 2000 Hazard Mitigation Plan - Suffolk County, New York 9.5~10 DRAFT- September 2007 SECTION 9.5: TOWN OF HUNTINGTON Im prove alternative communication capabilities. Mitigate potential loss Town and of communication All Hazards 1, 12, 13, 14 Fire marshal Medium Fire/Ambulance Short between town depts., Dept term response organizations, SCFRES and the Raise flood prone areas that are adjacent to major thorough fares. Elevate Vulnerable Roadways and implement culverts or alternative flood redirection where plausible. FEMA Hazard Mitigation Flood, programs Long Hurricane, 2, 7, 16 Highway High grant. Town Term Nor'Easter, general fund to DOF Severe Storm be utilized for cost share. Upgrade facility and equipment for the Emergency Operations Center to aid readiness, response and recovery efforts. Improve overall operations for the benefit for the public and emergency responders and coordinating All Hazards 1, 7, 12, 13, LongTerm 14, 16 Supervisor m~dium Town DOF Prepare a debris management Plan. OR Consider the development of a post -disaster action plan, including a debris management plan. This to be incorporated into existing emergency managementJ hazard mitigation plans. Department of Suffolk County Environmental & FEMA All Hazards 7, 12, 13 Waste Medium Hazard Long Management & Mitigation term DOF Suffolk County planning grant Town-wide Flood, 1, 3, 7, 11 Est. 1 million TBD DMA 2000 Hazard Mitigation Plan - Suffolk County, New York 9.5-11 DRAFT - September 2007 SECTION 9.5: TOWN OF HUNTINGTON Inventory including GPS location and elevation data. An Accurate Drainage inventory would enable the town to create a proactive flood prevention plan which would mitigate storm damage loss to several billion dollars worth of private and cture. Hurricane, Nor'Easter, Severe Storm Department High Term Town-wide tree inventory and removal program including risk assessment and GPS data for trees. Identification and removal of trees which pose a significant threat to public and pdvate infrastructure during a storm event would mitigate storm damage loss to several billion dollars Hurricane, Nor'Easter, Severe Storm, Severe Winter Storm 1,3,4 Highway Est. Department - $600,000 Planning Medium Department TBD Long Term Engineered Beaches: continue our on-going beach nourishment program for all Town beaches. Nourishment plans and re-grading help to maintain the beaches Coastal Erosion, Hurricane, Nor'Easter, Severe Storm Survey all town beaches and maritime Coastal facilities and maintain Erosion, survey of these Hurricane, facilities as baseline Nor'Easter, to determine loss of Severe Storm sand and structures. 5,15 '07 $174,000 Town general Maritime '08 $100,000 fund through Services Medium existing programs 2,5,15 Short term OG Maritime Town general Services $82,700 fund Medium Reduced bus route plan for each school Hurricane, distdct within the Nor'Easter, TBD; in town. Severe Storm, 3, 7, 12, 13, Highway $100,000 association Severe Winter 15 Department Medium with school The sooner a school Storm grants district can be Short term Longterm DMA 2000 Hazard Mitigation Plan - Suffolk County, New York 9.5-12 DRAFT- September 2007 SECTION 9.5: TOWN OF HUNTINGTON event the greater return to normalcy and return to economic productivity and security within the community. Protect major feeder route for Lloyd Harbor during a storm: Bulkhead Shore Road, Cold Spring Harbor. Hurdcane, Nor'Easter, Highway $1.5 Million Long Severe Storm, 2, 3, 7, 16 TBD term, Severe Winter Department High DOF Storm Consider non- structural flood hazard mitigation alternatives for at risk properties within the floodplain, including those that have been identified as repetitive loss, such as acquisition/relocation, or elevation depending on feasibility. The parameters for feasibility for this initiative would be; funding, benefits versus costs and willing participation of property owners. Flood, General Fund, Long Nor'Easter, 2, 7, 13 Huntington High FEMA Hazard term, Hurricane, Town Council Mitigation DOF Severe Storm Grant Funding Support county-wide Huntington Existing initiatives identified in Town Council/ programs and Section 6, Volume I of All MPC/Suffolk Short the Suffolk County All Hazards objectives County Low grant funding Term OG where Hazard Mitigation Emergency applicable Plan. Consider participation in incentive-based Flood, Nor'Easter, programs such as, CRS and "Storm- Hurricane, Severe Storm General fund Huntington Low trough existing Long 1,2,3,7,13 Town Council Term programs Notes: Short term = I to 5 years. Long Term= 5 years or greater. OG = On going program. DOF = Depending on funding. SC = Suffolk County. PDM = Pre-Disaster Mitigation Grant Program. DMA 2000 Hazard Mitigation Plan - Suffolk County, New York 9.5-13 DRAFT- September 2007 SECTION 9.5: TOWN OF HUNTINGTON PRIOR1TIZATION OF MITIGATION INITIATIVES H-1 High H-2 Medium Yes Yes No Medium High Low Yes No Yes High High Low Yes Yes No Medium High Low Yes No Yes High High High Yes Yes Yes Medium H-3 H-4 H-5 H-6 H-7 H-8 H-9 H-10 H-11 H-12 H-13 H-14 H~15 H-16 H-17 High Medium Yes No Yes High High High Yes Yes No M6dium High Medium Yes Yes No Medium Medium Medium Yes Yes No Medium High High Yes No No Low Medium Medium Yes Yes No Low High Medium Yes Yes Yes High High Medium Yes No Yes High High Medium Yes No No Low High High Yes Yes No Low High High Yes Yes No Medium High Low Yes Yes Yes High Low Low Yes No No Low H-18 Explanation of Priorities · High Priority - A project that meets multiple objectives (i.e., multiple hazards), benefits exceeds cost, has funding secured or is an on-going project and project meets eligibility requirements for the Hazard Mitigation Grant Program (HMGP) or Pre-Disaster Mitigation Grant Program (PDM) programs. High priority projects can be completed in the short term (1 to 5 years). · Medium Priority - A project that meets goals and objectives, benefits exceeds costs, funding has not been secured but project is grant eligible under, HMGP, PDM or other grant programs. Project can be completed in the short term, once funding is completed. Medium priority projects will become high priority projects once funding is secured. · Low Priority - Any project that will mitigate the risk of a hazard, benefits do not exceed the costs or are difficult to quantify, funding has not been secured and project is not eligible for HMGP or PDM grant funding, and time line for completion is considered long term (1 to 10 DMA 2000 Hazard Mitigation Plan - Suffolk County, New York 9.5-14 DRAFT - September 2007 SECTION 9.5: TOWN OF HUNTINGTON years). Low priority projects may be eligible other sources of grant funding from other programs. A low priority project could become a high priority project once funding is secured as long as it could be completed in the short term. Prioritization of initiatives was based on above definitions: Yes Prioritization of initiatives was based on parameters other than stated above: Not applicable. FUTURE NEEDS TO BETTER UNDERSTAND RISK/VULNERABILITY · Consider participating in a comprehensive update to the intra-jurisdictional county-wide Emergency Management Plan. ADDITIONAL COMMENTS The general building stock replacement values used to estimate exposure and damages in the Risk Assessment were U.S. Census 2000 data obtained from HAZUS-MH MR-2. The Planning Committee feels these replacement costs underestimate the replacement costs for Suffolk County and therefore exposure and damage estimates are believed to be below actual. HAZARD AREA EXTENT AND LOCATION Hazard area extent and location maps have been generated for the Town of Huntington and illustrate the probable areas impacted within the Town. These maps are based on the best available data at the time of the preparation of this Plan, and are considered to be adequate for planning purposes. Maps have only been generated for those hazards that can be clearly identified using mapping techniques and technologies, and for which the Town of Huntington has significant exposure. These maps are illustrated in the hazard profiles within Section 5.4, Volume I of this Plan. DMA 2000 Hazard Mitigation Plan - Suffolk County, New York 9.5-15 DRAFT- September 2007 SECTION 9.6: VILLAGE OF ASHAROKEN VILLAGE OF ASHAROKEN The Village of Asharoken did not prepare their jurisdictional annex in time for submission of this draft Plan to NYSEMO. DMA 2000 Hazard Mitigation Plan - Sulfolk County, New York 9.6-1 DRAFT - September 2007 SECTION 9.7: VILLAGE OF HUNTINGTON BAY VILLAGE OF HUNTINGTON BAY This section presents the jurisdictional annex for the Village of Huntington Bay. HAZARD MITIGATION PLAN POINT OF CONTACT Raymond Hubbs, Chief of Police 244 Vineyard Road Huntington, NY 11743 Phone: (631) 427-2020 E-mail: hbpdchief~aol.com Lynn Pincomb, Village Administrator 244 Vineyard Road Huntington, NY 11743 Phone: (631) 427-2843 E-mail: lynnvhb@aol.com VILLAGE PROFILE Population 1,496 (U.S. Census, 2000) Location The Village of Huntington Bay is a residential community approximately 1.2 square miles in size. The Village is located along the water (Huntington Bay) in the northwest section of Suffolk County within the Town of Huntington. Climate The Village of Huntington Bay enjoys a moderate climate with average low temperatures in the 30's degrees Fahrenheit (°F) and average high temperatures in the mid 70's (°F). Precipitation averages between 3.0 to 4.5 inches per month, receiving the highest amount of precipitation during the spring (March through May). On average, the Village receives over 28 inches of average snow fall per year, with highest accumulations in January. The humidity ranges between 55 and 80% throughout the year. Brief History The Village was incorporated in 1924 and has approximately 600 homes and 1 yacht club, 1 beach and tennis club and five beach associations. Governing Body Format The local governing body consists ora mayor and 4 trustees who will be responsible for the adoption and implementation of this Plan. Growth/Development Trends Based on the data tracked by the New York State Data Center, The Village of Huntington Bay has experienced a declining rate of growth over the past 15 years. The overall population has decreased by 1.40% since 2000 and has averaged 0.18% decrease per year from 1990 to 2006. With this rate of growth, the anticipated development trends for the Village are considered low. The Village's capabilities to manage and deal with future growth and development are illustrated later this annex. DRAFT- September 2007 SECTION 9.7: VILLAGE OF HUNTINGTON BAY NATURAL HAZARD EVENT HISTORY SPECIFIC TO THE VILLAGE OF HUNTINGTON BAY Hurricane Gloria DR-750 9/27/85 Not available at this time. Nor-Easter DR-974 12/11/92 Not available at this time. Nor'easter DR-1146 10/19/96 Not available at this time. DR- 1296 / Tropical storm Floyd EM-3149 9/16/99 Not available at this time. 2/17/2003 $7,550 Severe Winter Storm EM-3184 2/18/2003 Notes: N/P~ = Not applicable. Number of FEMA Identified Repetffive Flood Loss Properties: 5 DMA 2000 Hazard Mitigation Plan - Suffolk County, New York 9.7-2 DRAFT- September 2007 SECTION 9.7: VILLAGE OF HUNTINGTON BAY NATURAL HAZARD RISK/VULNERABILITY RISK RANKING lO0-year*: $5,479,000 - $7,687,000 Nor'Easters Frequent 54 500-year*: $83,503,000- $87,772,000 Damage estimate not available Frequent Severe Storms Winter Storms Damage estimate not available Frequent 100-year**: $768,000 Flooding Frequent 500-year**: $863,000 100-year*: $5,479,000 - Hurricane (tropical $7,687,000 storms) etc, Occasional 500-year*: $83,503,000 - $87,772,000 54 54 36 36 Coastal Erosion Damage estimate not available Frequent Shallow Groundwater Damage estimate not available Frequent Groundwater contamination Damage estimate not available Occasional (natural) Infestation (ALB, Lyme, WNV) Damage estimate not available Occasional Drought Damage estimate not available Occasional 18 18 14 8 0 Wildfire Damage estimate not available None 0 a. Building damage ratio estimates based on FEMA 386-2 (August 2001 ) b. FrequenW Hazard event that occurs more frequently than once in l 0 years, Occasional=Hazard event that occurs from once in 10 years to once in 100 years, Rare=Hazard event that occurs from once in 100 years to once in 1,000 years, None= Hazard event that occurs less frequently than once in 1,000 years c. The probability &occurrence for these events is weighted at "0' due to no exposure * Estimated building replacement value (structure and contents) damaged by the 100-year and 500-year hurricane-related winds and storm surge event as calculated using HAZUS-MH (custom methodology explained in Section 5.4, Volume I in the Hurricane hazard profile). ** Estimated building replacement value (structure and contents) damaged by a 100-year.and 500-year flood event as calculated by HAZUS-MH. CAPABILITY ASSESSMENT This section identifies the following capabilities of the local jurisdiction: · Legal and regulatory capability · Administrative and technical capability · Fiscal capability · Community classification. DMA 2000 Hazard Mitigation Plan - Suffolk County, New York 9.7-3 DRAFT- September 2007 SECTION 9.7: VILLAGE OF HUNTINGTON BAY Legal and Regulato~ Capabili~' 1) Building Code The Village Enforces New York State building code. Chapter 9, Section 9-1. Adopted July 1967 The Village has a Zoning Code in 2) Zoning Ordinance Y place that is enforced. Chapter 91 of Village Code. Adopted December 1935 Subdivision regulations and 3) Subdivision Ordinance Y procedures as per Village code Chapter 77 Adopted Feb. 18,. 1958 4) Special Purpose Ordinances Floodplain management as per {floodplain management, critical Y Village code chapter 34 Adopted or sensitive areas) May 11, 1998 5) GroWth Management N 6) Floodplain Management/Basin y 1996 Plan Storm water management (Building 7) Stormwater Management y code. 6 inch rain fall for all Plan/ordinance impervious surfaces) chapter 73A Adopted Dec. 21, 2001 8) General Plan or Comprehensive Plan N 9) Capital Improvements Plan N 10) Site Plan Review y Site plan review as per Village Requirements code. 11 ) Habitat Conservation Plan N 12) Economic Development Plan N 13) Emergency Response Plan Y County 14) Shoreline Management Plan N 15) Post Disaster Recovery Plan N 16) Post Disaster Recovery N Ordinance 17) Real Estate Disclosure red. N 18) Other N DMA 2000 Hazard Mitigation Plan - Suffolk County, New York 9.7-4 DRAFT - September 2007 SECTION 9.7: VILLAGE OF HUNTINGTON BAY Administrative and Technical Capabili .ty 1) Planner(s) or Engineer(s) with knowledge of land development and land management practices 2) Engineer(s) or Professional(s) trained in construction practices related to buildings and/or infrastructure 3) Planners or engineers with an understanding of natural hazards 4) Floodplain Manager 5) Surveyor(s) 6) Pereonnel skilled or trained in "GIS" applications 7) Scientist familiar with natural hazards in Suffolk County. 8) Emergency Manager 9) Grant Walter(s) 10) Staff with expertise or training in benefit/cost analysis Planning Board, Village Engineers, Building Inspector Building inspector Village Engineer Jeffrey Vollmuth, Village Engineer Richard Kinch, Village Building Inspector Building inspector Chief of Police DMA 2000 Hazard Mitigation Plan - Suffolk County, New York 9,7-5 DRAFT - September 2007 SECTION 9.7: VILLAGE OF HUNTINGTON BAY Fiscal Capability 1) Community development Block Grants (CDBG) Y 2) Capital Improvements Project Funding NA 3) Authority to Levy Taxes for specific purposes Y 4) User fees for water, sewer, gas or electric service N 5) Impact Fees for homebuyers or developers of new development/homes N 6) Incur debt through general obligation bonds N 7) Incur debt through special tax bonds N 8) Incur debt through private activity bonds N 9) Withhold public expenditures in hazard-prone areas N 10) State sponsored grant programs Y 11) Other N Communi~' Classifications Community Rating System (CRS) Not Participating N/A Building Code Effectiveness Grading Schedule (BCEGS) 3/3 2004 Public Protection 3/9 Storm Ready Not Participating N/A Firewise Not Participating N/A · Higher classification applies to when subject property is located beyond 1000 feet of a creditable fire hydrant and is within 5 road miles of a recognized Fire Station. · N/A = Not applicable. - = Unavailable. The above referenced classifications can be viewed as a gauge of this community's capabilities in all phases of emergency management (preparedness, response, recovery and mitigation). These classifications are used as an underwriting parameter for determining the costs of vorious forms of insurance. The CRS class applies to flood insurance while the BCEGS and Public Protection classifications apply to standard property insurance. Classifications range on a scale of 1 to 10 with class one being the best possible classification, and class 10 representing no classification benefit. Criteria for classification credits are outlined in the following documents: · The Community Rating System Coordinators Manual · The Building Code Effectiveness Grading Schedule · The Fire Suppression Rating Schedule DMA 2000 Ha~;d Miiigati0~ ~l~n2 Suffolk Ceuniyl N~ %;k 9.7-6 DRAFT - September 2007 SECTION 9.7: VILLAGE OF HUNTINGTON BAY Proposed Hazard Mitigation Initiatives Designate, prepare and announce Emergency Assembly points in conjunction with a public awareness plan. Village Council/ MPC/Suffolk General All Hazards 1, 12, 14 County Low Emergency fund Management Short Term Complete the project to capture first 1" of rain on village streets by surface grates; storm water goes into drywells and discharge into the subsoil Flooding, Village $1,112,843 50% Long term. to be Coastal Storms, 5, 8, 11, 15 Huntington Bay (funded) Matching completed severe storms state grant 2009; OG Raise or retrofit developed flood-prone Flooding, 2,13,16 Village High areas along East Coastal Storms Huntington Bay Shore Road and Shore Drive Long Term DOF Institute a tree tdmming program to help keep roadways All Hazards 5, 13, 16 Village Me~Jium and communications Huntington Bay open Enhance drainage maintenance program General Short fund term ~OF Flooding, 5, 8, 11 Village Medium General Short Coastat Storms Huntington Bay fund term OG? VHB-8 Village Council/ Increase interagency MPC/Suffolk communication All Hazards 12, 13 County Low capabilities Emergency Management Retrofit Police facility / Village Hall for the possible impacts of Huntington Bay's only essential facility Village High All Hazards 12, 13, 16 Huntington Bay increase rainfall capture on village streets from one inch to two inches (See VHB-2) Flooding, Coastal Storms, Severe Storms, 5,8,11,15 Village Huntington Bay High Support County-wide Village Council/ initiatives identified in MPC/Suffolk VHB-9 Section 6, Volume I of All Hazards All objectives County Low the Suffolk County Emergency Hazard Mitigation Plan. Management VHB- Consider the All Hazards 7, 12, 13 Public Safety/ Medium General Fund, DHS Short program term Grant Funding General Fend, FEMA Long term Hazard DOF Mitigation Grant Long Grant Term DOF Existing programs and grant Short funding Term OG where applicable General Long DMA 2000 Hazard Mitigation Plan - Suffelk County, New York 9.7-7 DRAFT- September 2007 SECTION 9.7: VILLAGE OF HUNTINGTON BAY development of a post Suffolk Co. Fund, -disaster action plan, Emergency FEMA including a debris Management Hazard management plan. Mitigation This to be incorporated Grant into existing Funding emergency management plans. tern3, DOF Consider participation General in incentive-based Flood, fund programs such as, Nor'Easter, 1,2, 3, 7, 13 Village Council Low trough Long CRS and "Storm- Hurricane, Term Severe Weather existing Ready". programs Notes: Short term = 1 to 5 years. Long Term= 5 years or greater. OG = On going program. DOF = Depending on funding. SC = Suffolk County. PDM = Pre-Disaster Mitigation Grant Program. DMA 2000 Hazard Mitigation Plan - Suffolk County, New York 9.7-8 DRAFT- September 2007 SECTION 9.7: VILLAGE OF HUNTINGTON BAY PRIORIT1ZATION OF MITIGATION INITIATIVES VHB-1 High Low Yes No Yes High VHB-2 High Low Yes Yes Yes High YHB-3 High High Yes Yes No Medium VH, B-4 Medium Medium Yes No Yes High VHB*5 Medium Medium Yes No Yes Medium VHB-6 High Medium Yes No No Medium VHB-7 High High Yes Yes No Mediun~ VHB-8 High High Yes Yes No Medium VHB-9 High Low Yes Yes Yes High VHB-IO Medium Medium Yes Yes No Medium VHB-11 Low Low Yes No No Low Explanation of Priorities High Priority - A project that meets multiple objectives (i.e., multiple hazards), benefits exceeds cost, has funding secured or is an on-going project and project meets eligibility requirements for the Hazard Mitigation Gram Program (HMGP) or Pre-Disaster Mitigation Grant Program (PDM) programs. High priority projects can be completed in the short term (1 to 5 years). Medium Priority - A project that meets goals and objectives, benefits exceeds costs, funding has not been secured but project is grant eligible under, HMGP, PDM or other grant programs. Project can be completed in the short term, once funding is completed. Medium priority projects will become high priority projects once funding is secured. Low Priority ~ Any project that will mitigate the risk of a hazard, benefits do not exceed the costs or are difficult to quantify, funding has not been secured and project is not eligible for HMGP or PDM grant funding, and time line for completion is considered long term (1 to 10 years). Low priority projects may be eligible other sources of grant funding from other programs. A low priority project could become a high priority project once funding is secured as long as it could be completed in the short term. Prioritization of initiatives was based on above definitions: Yes Prioritization of initiatives was based on parameters other than stated above: Not applicable. DMA 2000 Hazard Mitigation Plan - Suffolk County, New York 9.7-9 DRAFT- September 2007 SECTION 9.7: VILLAGE OF HUNTINGTON BAY FUTURE NEEDS TO BETTER UNDERSTAND RISK/VULNERABILITY · Consider participating in a comprehensive update to the Intra-jurisdictional County-wide Emergency Management Plan. · Consider participating in a comprehensive update to the lntra-jurisdictional County-wide Debris Management Plan. ADDITIONAL COMMENTS None at this time. HAZARD AREA EXTENT AND LOCATION Hazard area extent and location maps have been generated for the Village of Huntington Bay and illustrate the probable areas impacted within the Village. These maps are based on the best available data at the time of the preparation of this Plan, and are considered to be adequate for planning purposes. Maps have only been generated for those hazards that can be clearly identified using mapping techniques and technologies, and for which the Village of Huntington Bay has significant exposure. These maps are illustrated in the hazard profiles within Section 5.4, Volume I of this Plan. DMA 2000 Hazard Mitigation Plan - Suffolk County, New York 9.7-10 DRAFT - September 2007 SECTION 9.8: VILLAGE OF NORTHPORT VILLAGE OF NORTHPORT The Village of Northport did not prepare their jurisdictional annex in time for submission of this draft Plan to NYSEMO. DMA 2000 Hazard Mitigation Plan - Suffolk County, New York 9.8-1 DRAFT- September 2007 SECTION 9.9: TOWN OF RIVERHEAD TOWN OF RIVERHEAD This section presents the jurisdictional annex for the Town of Riverhead. HAZARD MITIGATION PLAN POINT OF CONTACT David J. Hegermiller, Program Manager/Chief of Police 210 Howell Avenue Riverhead, NY 11901 Phone: (631) 727-4500 x 335 E-mail: policechieft~, riverh ea dli.com Edward Frost, Sergeant 210 Howell Avenue Riverhead, NY 11901 Phone: (631) 727-4500 x 329 E-mail: frost~riverheadli.com TOWN PROFILE PopulatiOn 33,098 (as of 2006) Location The Town of Riverhead is located on the east end of Long Island in Suffolk County, approximately 75 miles east of Manhattan. It has a land area of 67.4 square miles and is bounded on the west by the Town of Brookhaven, on the north by the Long Island Sound with Connecticut on the opposite shore, on the east by the Town of Southold, and on the south by Southampton Town with the dividing line being the Peconic River and the Great Peconic Bay. The eastern terminus of Interstate 495~ the Long Island Expressway, brings you close to the center of our Town. The Long Island Railroad services the Town with one station located in downtown. Climate Because the Town is situated on an island located between the Long Island Sound and the Atlantic Ocean, it enjoys a moderate climate. Minimum average low temperatures of 24 degrees Fahrenheit occur in January, while July sees maximum average high temperatures of 84 degrees Fahrenheit. Precipitation for the year is approximately 46.8 inches averaging between 3.21 to 4.40 inches per month with the most precipitation occurring in the month of January. The relative humidity level varies greatly with each season throughout the year. The average annual relative humidity is 70 percent. The prevailing wind directions in Riverhead are northwest and southerly and reflect the dominance of cold arctic air masses in the winter and cooling ocean breezes in the summer. The average annual wind velocity is 9 miles per hour. Brief History The Town was originally part of Southold Town and became its own township when it was incorporated in 1792 at which time it also became the County Seat. It remains the County Seat until this date. The name signifies that the Town is the mouth of the Peconic River. Governing Body Format The five member Riverhead Town Board is the governing legislative body and consists of a supervisor and four council members, all of whom are elected at large. This body will assume the responsibility for the adoption and implementation of this Plan. The Town consists of numerous departments and divisions encompassing Police, Juvenile Aid Bureau, Emergency Management, Emergency Medical Services, Accounting, Highway, Community Development, Planning, Personnel, Information Technology, [DMA 2000 Hazard Mitigation Plan - Suffolk County, New York 9.9-1 DRAFT - September 2007 SECTION 9.9: TOWN OF RIVERHEAD Engineering, Building and Grounds, Recreation, Assessors, Animal Control, Empire Development Zone, Industrial Development Agency, Fire Marshal, Justice Court, Municipal Garage, Purchasing, Sanitation, Seniors, Sewer, Tax Receiver, Town Attorney, Town Attorney Investigations Unit, Town Clerk, Youth Bureau and Water District. The Town Board will assmne responsibility for the adoption of this plan. Growth/Development Trends Riverhead's population continues to grow at a significant pace. The Long lsland Power Authority estimated that in 2005 the population in the Town was 32,028. The increase represented a 15.7 percent increase over the 2000 population of 27,680. In percentage terms, Riverhead is currently the fastest growing of Suffolk County's ten towns. Riverhead's population is projected to increase by approximately 33 percent between 2005 and full build-out to between 41,000 and 43,000. The following table lists Riverhead's population and change per decade since 1970. 20,243 7% Riverhead has averaged a 2.028 percent increase in population per year from 1970 to 2006 and is also the most densely populated Town out of the five eastern Towns in Suffolk County. Riverhead is currently the home to Tanger Outlet Mall, the largest outlet mall in the nation, Splish Splash, one of the top five water parks in the nation, Atlantis Marine Aquarium and Enterprise Park at Calverton, the former 2,900 acre naval facility that was deeded over to the Town in 1998. The Route 58 corridor, originally established as a bypass to former downtown Main Street shopping mecca for the east end of Suffolk County, has seen major growth over recent years. It continues to attract major proposals. Tanger Outlet has applied for a 137,000 square foot expansion. A proposed 35,000 square feet of outlet stores adjacent to Tanger has been made. There is a proposal for a 146,000 square foot Wal-Mart, a 68,000 square foot Stop&Shop, a 110,000 square foot Lowe's (reuse of an existing building), a 200,000 square foot shopping center and a separate 475,000 square foot shopping center. A major redesign of Route 58 is planned. With all this development Riverhead still holds fast to its roots. With its wineries, greenhouses and huge tracks of farmlands, some of which are preserved forever, the Town helps keep Suffolk County as a leader in agricultural production in New York State. NATURAL HAZARD EVENT HISTORY SPECIFIC TO THE TOWN Rain Event N/A 7/18/2007 $20,000.00 Nor'easter DR 1692 4/15/2007 $13,485.74 Excessive Heat N/A 8/1/2006 None reported Snow Storm N/A 2/12/2006 None reported Hurricane Wilma 10/24/2005 None reported Rain/Flood Event N/A 10/12/2005 $324,000.00 Snow Storm N/A 1/23/2005 $135,000.00 Snow Storm N/A 1/27/2004 None reported Snow Storm N/A 1/15/2004 None reported DMA 2000 Hazard Mitigation Plan - Suffolk County, New York 9.9-2 DRAFT- September 2007 Snow Storm N/A SECTION 9.9: TOWN OF RIVERHEAD 12/5/2003 Hurricane Isabel N/A 9/18/2003 Power Outage DR 3186 8/14/2003 Snow Storm EM-3184 2/17/2003 Tropical Storm Floyd DR 1296/ 9/16/1999 EM 3149 Nor'easter DR-1146 10/19/1996 $11,449.00 Hurricane Edward N/A 9/1/1996 None reported Hurricane Luis N/A 9/9/1995 None reported Hurricane Felix N/A 8/14/1995 None reported Hurricane Bob DR-918 8/19/1991 $21,921.00 Notes: N/A = Not applicable. None reported None reported $17,318.56 '$106,868.76 $20,565.56 Number of FEMA Identified Repetitive Flood Loss Properties: 38 DMA 2000 Hazard Mitigation Plan - Suffolk County, New York 9.9-3 DRAFT - September 2007 SECTION 9.9: TOWN OF RIVERHEAD NATURAL HAZARD RISK/VULNERABILITY RISK RANKING lO0-year*: $307,238,000 - $333,924,000 Nor'easter 500-year*: $1,661,043,000- Frequent 54 $1,722,917,000 Severe Winter Storm Damage estimate not available Frequent Severe Storm Damage estimate not available Frequent 100-year*: $307,238,000 - $333,924,000 Occasional Hurricane 500-year*: $1,661,043,000- $1,722,917,000 100-year**: $12,021,000 Freqdent Flood 500-year**: $20,211,000 Coastal Erosion Damage estimate not available Frequent Shallow Groundwater Damage estimate not available Frequent Wildfire Damage estimate not available Occasional 54 48 36 21 21 18 12 Infestation Damage estimate not available Occasional 12 Groundwater Contamination Damage estimate not available Occasional 8 Drought Damage estimate not available Occasional 6 a. Building damage ratio estimates based on FEMA 386-2 (August 2001 ) b. Frequen~ Hazard event that occurs more frequently than once in 10 years, Occasional=Hazard event that occurs from once in 10 years to once in 100 years, Rare=Hazard event that occurs from once in 100 years to once in 1,000 years, None= Hazard event that occurs less frequently than once in 1,000 years c. The probability of occurrence for these events is weighted at "0" due to no exposure * Estimated building value (structure and contents) damaged by the 100-year and 500-year hurricane-related winds and storm surge as calculated using HAZUS-MH (custom methodology explained in Section 5.4, Volume 1 in the Hurricane hazard profile). ** Estimated building value (structure and contents) damaged by the 100-year and 500-year flood events as calculated by HAZUS-MH. CAPABILITY ASSESSMENT This section identifies the following capabilities of the local jurisdiction: Legal and regulatory capability · Administrative and technical capability · Fiscal capability · Community classification. DMA 2000 Hazard Mitigation Plan - Suffolk County, New York 9.9-4 DRAFT- September 2007 SECTION 9,9: TOWN OF RIVERHEAD Legal and Regulatory Capabilit3., 1) Building Code 2) Zoning Ordinance 3) Subdivision Ordinance 4) Special Purpose Ordinances (floodplain management, critical or sensitive areas) Y Y Y Y N Y Y Y Y Building, Planning, Engineering & Fire Marshal Depts. Town has adopted International Building Code 1984 - NYS Executive Law 381 Planning Board SC Planning Commission has the authority to review certain actions. Town ZBA can present findings and disapprove the action, if they have the greater majority. · Riverhead Town Code Chapter 108 Suffolk County Charter Planning Board SC Planning Commission has the authority to review certain actions. Town ZBA can present findings and disapprove the action, if they have the greater majority. Riverhead Town Code Chapter 108 Riverhead Town Code Chapter 108-76 Building Dept. Riverhead Town Code Chapter 65 NYS DEC 5) Growth Management Y N N Y Building Dept. 6) Floodplain Management/Basin y y y y Building & Planning Depts. Plan Riverhead Town Code chapter 108 7) Stormwater Management y y y y Planning Dept. Plan/ordinance NYS DEC Phase II Permits 8) General Plan or Planning Dept. & Town Board Comprehensive Plan Y Y Y Y 9) Capital Improvements Plan Y N N N P~anning Dept. & Town Board Building & Planning Depts. 10) Site Plan Review Federal ADA compliance required. Requirements Y Y Y Y Riverhead Town Code Chapter 108-129 11) Habitat Conservation Plan Y Y Y y NYS DEC & Conservation Advisory Council 12) Economic Development Plan Y N N N Community Development 13) Emergency Response Plan Y Y Y Y Supervisor's Office & Police Dept. DMA 2000 Hazard Mitigation Plan - Suffolk County, New York 9.9-5 DRAFT- September 2007 SECTION 9.9: TOWN OF RIVERHEAD 14) Shoreline Management Plan Y Y Y Administration - Planning Board Review - ZBA Riverhead Town Code Chapters 12 & Chapter 108-76 15) Post Disaster Recovery Plan Y Y Y N Supervisor's Office & Police Dept. Y Y 16) Post Disaster Recovery Ordinance Supervisor's Office, Building, Planning, Engineering, Police & Fire Marshal Depts. 17) Real Estate Disclosure req. N Y Y Y Tax Assessors & Receivers 18) Other DMA 2000 Hazard Mitigation Plan - Suffolk County, New York 9.9-6 DRAFT- September 2007 SECTION 9,9: TOWN OF RIVERHEAD Administrative and Technical Capabili~, 1) Planner(s) or Engineer(s) with knowledge of land development and land management practices 2) Engineer(s) or Professional(s) trained in construction practices related to buildings and/or infrastructure 3) Planners or engineers with an understanding of natural hazards 4) Floodplain Manager 5) Surveyor(s) 6) Personnel skilled or trained in "GIS" applications 7) Scientist familiar with natural hazards in Suffolk County. 8) Emergency Manager 9) Grant Walter(s) 10) Staff with expertise or training in benefitJcost analysis Planning & Engineering Depts. Planning, Engineering, Fire Marshal & Building Depts. Engineering & Building Depts. Leroy Barnes, Head of the Building Dept. Private Contractors IT/GIS Dept. Private Contractors Supervisor's Office & Police Dept. Community Development Accounting, Community Development, Engineering & Planning Depts. DMA 2000 Hazard Mitigation Plan - Suffolk County, New York 9.9-7 DRAFT- September 2007 SECTION 9.9: TOWN OF RIVERHEAD Fiscal Capability 1) Community development Block Grants (CDBG) Yes 2) Capital improvements Project Funding Yes 3) Authority to Levy Taxes for specific purposes Yes 4) User fees for water, sewer, gas or electric service Yes 5) Impact Fees for homebuyers or developers of new Yes development/homes 6) Incur debt through general obligation bonds Yes 7) Incur debt through special tax bonds Yes 8) Incur debt through private activity bonds Yes 9)oWithhold public expenditures in hazard-prone areas Don't Know 10) State sponsored grant programs such as FCAAP Don't Know 11) Other Not aware of any Communi~' Classifications Community Rating System (CRS) Not participating N/A Building Code Effectiveness Grading Schedule (BCEGS) 4/4 2004 Public Protection 4/9 Storm Ready Not participating N/A Firewise Not participating N/A · Higher classification applies to when subject properly is located beyond 1000 feet of a creditable fire hydrant and is within 5 road miles of a recognized Fire Station. · N/A = Not applicable. - = Unavailable. The above referenced classifications can be viewed as a gauge of this community's capabilities in all phases of emergency management (preparedness, response, recovery and mitigation). These classifications are used as an underwriting parameter for determining the costs of various forms of insurance. The CRS class applies to flood insurance while the BCEGS and Public Protection classifications apply to standard property insurance. Classifications range on a scale of 1 to 10 with class one being the best possible classification, and class 10 representing no classification benefit. Criteria for classification credits are outlined in the following documents: · The Community Rating System Coordinators Manual · The Building Code Effectiveness Grading Schedule · The Fire Suppression Rating Schedule DMA 2000 Hazard Mitigation Plan - Suffolk County, New York 9,9-8 DRAFT - September 2007 SECTION 9.9: TOWN OF RIVERHEAD Proposed Hazard Mitigation Initiatives R-1 R-2 R-3 R-4 R-5 R-6 R-7 R-8 R-9 R-10 All 12 SC High DHS,General Long- Fund term Develop and Implement a County-Wide Eady Warning System to alert All 1,12 SC High General Long- the public of potential Fund term hazards Retrofit existing PD PDM, Short- HDQTS to establish a All 1,12,14 RHD High General dedicated EOC Fund term Create a Point of Distribution Plan to establish locations, personnel, training and procedures to streamline distribution of vital necessities post disaster All Nor'Easter, Hurricane, Severe Winter Storm, Severe Storm, Flood, Wildfire Nor'Easter, Hurricane, Severe Winter Storm, Severe Storm, Coastal Erosion Nor'Easter, Hurricane, Severe Winter Storm, Severe Storm, Coastal Erosfon All All 1,12 Create a Generator Plan to designate personnel, guide distribution of equipment from County and pre-wire facilities to accommodate generators. Establish Jetties at the mouth of the Wading Creek to diminish the constant depositing of sand 7,16 2,5,15 2,5,15 1,7 1,7,14 RHD RHD RHD RHD RHD RHD Medium Establish Jetties at the Town Boat Ramp at Iron Pier to diminish the depositing of sand onto one of the only maintained emergency accesses to the LI Sound thereby reducing the weekly removal of the sand by the Highway Department Create a Public Awareness Program natural disasters and emergency preparedness Conduct Joint Annual Drills for all facets of emergency services in the Town and their partner agencies Create a Volunteer Program to help recruit Medium High High Medium Low General Fund General Fund General Fund General Fund General Fund General Fund Short- term Short- term Long- term Short- term Short- term Short- term Nor'Easter, 1,7 RHD Low General Short- Hurricane, Fund term DMA 2000 Hazard Mitigation Plan - Suffolk County, New York 9.9-9 DRAFT- September 2007 SECTION 9.9: TOWN OF RIVERHEAD R-11 R-12 R-13 R-14 R-15 R-16 R-17 volunteers for Red Cross and Town Shelters, POD's and Ham Radio Operation during a disaster Relocation/Acquisition Residences on the North Shore Bluffs that are at risk of distruction from bluff erosion Elevation of Residences on the South Shore that are in designated flood prone areas Create County-Wide Debris Removal Plan to develop protocols and designate shared sights to manage debris removal Road Elevation on flood prone South Shore Roads & Creek Road Build a new Salt Storage Barn to house and maintain a larger quantity of road salt thereby requiring less deliveries during severe conditions Town Hail Basement and Records Storage Facility Remediation from Groundwater and Flooding Consider participation in incentive-based programs such as, eRS and "Storm- Ready". Severe Winter Storm, Severe Storm. Flood, Wildfire Nor'Easter, Hurricane, Severe Winter Storm, Severe Storm, Coastal Erosion Nor'Easter, Hurricane, Severe Winter Storm, Severe Storm, Flood, Coastal Erosion Nor'Easter, Hurdcane, Severe Winter Storm, Severe Storm Nor'Easter, . Hurricane, Severe Winter Storm, Severe Storm, Flood, Coastal Erosion Severe Winter Storm Nor'Easter, Hurricane, Severe Winter Storm, Severe Storm. Flood, Shallow Groundwater Flood, Nor'Easter, Hurricane, Severe Weather 1,2,15 1,2, 15 7,12,13 13,15,16 12,14 2,16 1,2,3,7,13 RHD RHD SC RHD RHD RHD RHD High High Medium High Medium High Low PDM, General Fund PDM, General Fund General Fund PDM, General . Fund General Fund, Capital Project - Municipal Bonds PDM, General Fund, Capital Project - Municipal Bonds General fund trough existing programs Long- term- DOF Long- termDOF Short- term Long- ~rm DOF Short- term Long term DOF Long Term Notes: Short term = I to 5 years. Long Term= 5 years or greater, OG = On going program. DOF = Depending on funding. RHD = Riverhead. SC - Suffolk CounW. PDM Pre-Disaster Mitigation Grant Program. DMA 2000 Hazard Mitigation Plan - Suffolk County, New York 9.9-10 DRAFT - September 2007 SECTION 9.9: TOWN OF RIVERHEAD PRIORITIZATION OF MITIGATION INITIATIVES H H Y Y N Medium H H Y N N Medium H H Y N N Medium M M N N Y High M M Y N Y High H H Y N N Medium H H Y N N Medium M M Y N N Low L L Y N Y High L L Y N Y High H H Y Y N Medium H H Y y N Medium M M Y Y N Medium H H Y Y N Medium M M Y N N Low H H Y y N Medium L L Y N N Low Notes: H High. L - Low. M = Medium. N = No. N/A Not applicable. Y = Yes. Explanation of Priorities · High Priority - A project that meets multiple objectives (i.e., multiple hazards), benefits exceeds cost, has funding secured or is an on-going project and project meets eligibility requirements for the Hazard Mitigation Grant Program (HMGP) or Pre-Disaster Mitigation Gram Program (PDM) programs. High priority projects can be completed in the short term ( 1 to 5 years). · Medium Priority - A project that meets goals and objectives, benefits exceeds costs, funding has not been secured but project is gram eligible under, HMGP, PDM or other gram programs. Project can be completed in the short term, once funding is completed. Medium priority projects will become high priority projects once funding is secured. · Low Priorit~ - Any project that will mitigate the risk of a hazard, benefits do not exceed the costs or are difficult to quantify, funding has not been secured and project is not eligible for HMGP or PDM grant funding, and time line for completion is considered long term (1 to 10 years). Low priority projects may be eligible other sources of grant funding from other DMA 2000 Hazard Mitigation Plan - Suffolk County, New York 9.9-11 DRAFT - September 2007 SECTION 9.9: TOWN OF RIVERHEAD programs. A low priority project could become a high priority project once funding is secured as long as it could be completed in the short term. Prioritization of initiatives was based on above definitions: Yes Prioritization of initiatives was based on parameters other than stated above: Not applicable. FUTURE NEEDS TO BETTER UNDERSTAND RISK/VULNERABILITY Consider participating in a comprehensive update to the Intra-jurisdictional County-wide Emergency Management Plan. · Consider participating in a comprehensive update to the lntra-jurisdictional County-wide Debris Management Plan. ADDITIONAL COMMENTS None at this time. HAZARD AREA EXTENT AND LOCATION Hazard area extent and location maps have been generated for the Town of Riverhead and illustrate the probable areas impacted within the Town. These maps are based on the best available data at the time of the preparation of this Plan, and are considered to be adequate for planning purposes. Maps have only been generated for those hazards that can be clearly identified using mapping techniques and technologies, and for which the Town of Riverhead has significant exposure. These maps are illustrated - in the hazard profiles within Section 5.4, Volume I &this Plan. DMA 2000 Hazard Mitigation Plan - Suffolk County, New York 9,9-12 DRAFT - September 2007 SECTION 9,10: TOWN OF SHELTER ISLAND TOWN OF SHELTER ISLAND This section presents the jurisdictional annex for the Town of Shelter Island. HAZARD MITIGATION PLAN POINT OF CONTACT James J. Read Jr., Chief of Police c/o Shelter Island Police Department P.O. Box 1056 Shelter Island, NY 11964-1056 Phone: (631) 749.0600 E-mail: iread(~,shelterislandtown.us Jay Card Jr., Police Officer c/o Shelter Island Police Department P.O. Box 1056 Shelter Island, NY 11964-1056 Phone: (631) 749-0600 E-mail: icard~,,shelterisla n dt own.us TOWN PROFILE Population: 2,441 (as of July 1, 2006) Current year-round population: 2,500; Summer population: 15,000 (an approximate 299% increase in population). Shelter Island's year round population growth, based on U.S. Census information, has increase from 1,644 people, in 1970, to 2,228 people, in 2000. Location The Town of Shelter Island is located in eastern Suffolk County, between the North and South Forks. The island covers an area of 12 square miles. The Village of Dering Harbor is the Town's only village, with a population of 12 and a land area of 0.2 square miles. Climate The climate is that of our New England neighbors. Average temperatures range from the low 30's degrees Fahrenheit (°F) to mid 70's (°F). Precipitation averages between 3.0 to 4.5 inches per month with the most precipitation occurring in the month of January. On average, snowfall is limited to November through April, with highest accumulations in January. The humidity ranges from approximately 50% and 80% throughout the year. Brief Hiswry The Town of Shelter Island was incorporated in 1730. The Nature Conservancy's Mashomack Preserve comprises one-third of the island's area, preserving natural forests, wetlands, and habitat for native species. Shelter Island has more than 25 miles of coastline, including many saltwater marshes and tidal wetlands. Summer tourism is the Island's primary industry. Tourists visiting the island enjoy its many parks, public beaches, marinas, and the Heights Historic District. Shelter Island has several unique qualities that enhance its sensitivity to natural hazards. These include its small aquifer, large amount of coastline, and isolation from mainland resources. The island relies on a small aquifer as the sole source of water. The aquifer is sensitive to drought, decreased infiltration due to development, and saltwater intrusion near the coast. The island's extensive coastline is subject to erosion and flooding in many areas. Transportation on and off of the island is provided by two privately owned ferry companies: North Ferry provides access from Shelter Island Heights to Greenport on the North Fork, DMA 2000 Hazard Mitigation Plan -Suffolk County, New York 9.10-1 DRAFT - September 2007 SECTION 9.10: TOWN OF SHELTER ISLAND ahcl go,ih ~rry provicl~ acee~ to the §OUch ~ork via North Haven. During severe storm events, the island may be isolated from the mainland, and additional emergency resources could become unavailable. Governing Body Format The Town's government is comprised of a Town Supervisor and four counsel persons. The Town's government is elected by its citizens. This governing body will assume responsibility for adoption and implementation of this plan. Many committees support the Town Board in an advisory capacity. The police department is responsible for emergency management operations, with in the Town of Shelter Island and the Village of Dering Harbor. Growth/Development Trends Based on the data tracked by the New York State Data Center, Shelter Island has experienced a modest rate of growth. The overall population has increased by 9.66% since 2000 and has averaged 0.46% per year from 1990 to 2006. Shelter Island is currently controlling development by purchasing open space. During the past 10 years, approximately 35 homes have been built per year. As stated earlier, Shelter Island's serviced population can increase by as much as 300% due to tourism. With this rate of growth, the anticipated development trends for Shelter Island are considered low to moderate. The town's capabilities to manage and deal with future growth and development are illustrated later in this annex. NATURAL HAZARD EVENT HISTORY SPECIFIC TO SHELTER ISLAND Nor'Easter DR- 1692 4/15/07- 4/16/07 Erosion Shell Beach-Ram Island causeway, Trees- wires down, Flooding $1.5M 16-22" Snow, Wind, Trees down, store flooding; Severe Storm N/A 1/22/05 Damage assessment not available. Drought N/A 8/2000 Emergency water restrictions; Damage assessment not available. Hurricane Floyd DR-1296/ 9/16/99 Erosion, Flooding, trees, Damage assessment not EM 3149 available. Severe Storm DR-1083 1/7/96- Snow- $22,000 1/8/96 Nor'Easter DR-1146 10/19/96 Flooding, trees, erosion $65,825 Drought N/A 8/22/95 Emergency water restrictions; Damage assessment not available. Drought N/A 7/12/94 Emergency water restrictions; Damage assessment not available. Severe Storm N/A 3/13/93 Lost shoulder on Ram Island Causeway $32,450 Nor'Easter DR-974 12/11/92 Erosion, road damage, trees, flooding $83,619 Tropical Storm Grace N/A 10/30/91- Road damage, docks damaged, erosion $37,255 10/31/91 Hurricane Bob DR-918 8/19/91 Trees down, erosion $114,632 Since Ticks Diseases N/A Not available. 1980's Flood N/A Continuous Flooded roadway Ram Island Causeway, West Neck Road, Ram island Road, Bridge Street, Cedar Ave; [DMA ~000 ha~ Miiig-~ii0n Pi~n ~ S~ffoi~ ~o~ni~i N~ ~ork 9710-2 DRAFT - September 2007 Shallow Ground Water N/A Severe Storm N/A Groundwater Contamination N/A Notes: N/A Not applicable. SECTION 9.10: TOWN OF SHELTER ISLAND Damage assessment not available. Continuous Congdon Road, Brander Parkway areas; Damage assessment not available. 3/2/07 Flooding; Damage assessment not available. Nitrogen, STOP (Stop Thro~ng Out Pollutants) Continuous program established; Damage assessment not available. Number of FEM.4 Identified Repetitive Flood Loss Properties: 9 DMA 2000 Hazard Mitigation Plan- Suffolk County, New York 9.10-3 DRAFT- September 2007 SECTION 9.10: TOWN OF SHELTER ISLAND NATURAL HAZARD RISK/VULNERABILITY RISK RANKING lO0-year*: $56,226,000 $62,473,000 Nor' Easter Frequent 54 500-year*: $282,644,000 - $296,992,000 Severe Winter Storms Damage estimate not available Frequent Groundwater Contamination Damage estimate not available Frequent Severe Storms Damage estimate not available Frequent Infestation No measurable impact to Frequent structures $101 Million Flood 100-year**: $2,051,000 Frequent 500-year**: $4,595,000 Coastal Erosion Damage estimate not available Frequent 42 42 39 32 27 24 lO0-year*: $56,226,000- $62,473,000 Hurricane Frequent 500-year*: $282,644,000 - $296,992,000 Shallow Ground Water Damage estimate not available Frequent Drought No measurable impact to Frequent structures Wildfire Damage estimate not available Rare 24 18 9 6 Building damage ratio estimates based on FEMA 386-2 (August 2001) Frequent=- Hazard event that occurs more frequently than once in 10 years, Occasional=Hazard event that occurs from once in 10 years to once in 100 years, Rare=Hazard event that occurs from once in 100 years to once in 1,000 years, None= Hazard event that occurs less frequently than once in 1,000 years The probability &occurrence for these events is weighted at "0" due to no exposure Esthnated building replacement value (structure and contents) dmnaged by the 100-year and 500-year hurricane-related winds and storm surge event as calculated using HAZUS-MH (custom methodology explained in Section 5.4, Volume I in the Hurricane hazard profile). Estimated building replacement value (struclure and contents) damaged by a 100-year and 500-year flood event as calculated by HAZUS-MH. CAPABILITY ASSESSMENT This section identifies the following capabilities of the local jurisdiction: · Legal and regulatory capability · Administrative and technical capability · Fiscal capability · Community classification. DMA 2000 Hazard Mitigation Plan - Suffolk County, New York 9.104 DRAFT - September 2007 SECTION 9.10: TOWN OF SHELTER ISLAND Legal and Regulator, Capabili~' 1) Building Code Town Code, Chapters 43, 45 2003 NYS Building Code- ICC/with NYS amendments 2) Zoning Ordinance Y N N y Town Code, Chapter 133, date 10- 1-05 3) Subdivision Ordinance Y N N y Town Code, Chapter 111, date 10- 01-05 Y Y N 4) Special Purpose Ordinances (floodplain management, critical or sensitive areas) 5) Growth Management N N N N 6) Floodplain ManagementJBasin N N N N Plan Y N 7) Stormwater Management Plan/ordinance Town Cod~, Chaptem 50, 53, 60, 62,63,68,82,113,117,129 Dated 9-25-98 Town Cod{~, selections in Chapter 62; Date10-1-05 8) General Plan or Y N N y Shelter Island Comprehensive Comprehensive Plan Plan; January 13, 1994 9) Capital Improvements Plan N N N N 10) Site Plan Review N N N N Requirements 11 ) Habitat Conservation Plan Y N N N Town Code, Chapters 50, 91 1-25-98 12) Economic Development Plan N N N N 13) Emergency Response Plan Y N N y Hurricane/Coastal Storm Emergency Response Plan; 2008 Near Shore Oyeday Town Code 14) Shoreline Management Plan Y N N N 133-12 dated 3/15/07 15) Post Disaster Recovery Plan N N N N 16) Post Disaster Recovery N N N N Ordinance 17) Real Estate Disclosure req. N N N N 18) Other N N N N DMA 2000 H"~'~icl ~iiJ~io~ Pith ~ Sbffoik ~0untyl Ne~ Y;;k 9.10-5 DRAFT- September 2007 SECTION 9.10: TOWN OF SHELTER ISLAND Administrative and Technical CapabiliD' 1) Planner(s) or Engineer(s) with knowledge of land development and land management practices 2) Engineer(s) or Professional(s) trained in construction practices related to buildings and/or infrastructure 3) Planners or engineers with an understanding of natural hazards 4) Floodplain Manager 5) Surveyor(s) 6) Personnel skilled or trained in "GIS" applications 7) Scientist familiar with natural hazards in Suffolk County. 8) Emergency Manager 9) Grant Walter(s) 10) Staff with expertise or training in benefit/cost analysis Not on staff (contract as needed) Not on staff (contract as needed) Not on staff (contract as needed) Town Building Inspector Not on staff (contract as needed) Police Personnel Consultants \ Local Knowledgeable specialists Chief of Police On staff DMA 2000 Hazard Mitigation Plan - Suffolk County, New York 9.10-6 DRAFT - September 2007 SECTION 9.10: TOWN OF SHELTER ISLAND Fiscal Capabili~T 1) Community development Block Grants (CDBG) 2) Capital Improvements Project Funding Y 3) Authority to Levy Taxes for specific purposes Y 4) User fees for water, sewer, gas or electric service Y O/Vest Neck Water District Only) (Heights Area) 5) Impact Fees for homebuyers or developers of new development/homes N 6) Incur debt through general obligation bonds Y 7) incur debt through special tax bonds Y 8) incur debt through private activity bonds N 9) Withhold public expenditures in hazard-prone areas Y 10) State sponsored grant programs Y 11) Other Y (Community Preservation Fund 2% Real Estate Transfer Tax) Purchase open space . Communi~ Classifications Community Rating System (CRS) Not Participating N/A Building Code Effectiveness Grading Schedule (BCEGS) 4/4 2004 Public Protection 5/9 Storm Ready Not Participating ' N/A Firewise Not Participating N/A · Higher classification applies to when subject property is located beyond 1000 feet of a creditable fire hydrant and is within 5 road miles ora recognized Fire Station. · N/A = Not applicable. - = Unavailable. The above referenced classifications can be viewed as a gauge of this community's capabilities in all phases of emergency management (preparedness, response, recovery and mitigation). These classifications are used as an underwriting parameter for determining the costs of various forms of insurance. The CRS class applies to flood insurance while the BCEGS and Public Protection classifications apply to standard property insurance. Classifications range on a scale of I to 10 with class one being the best possible classification, and class 10 representing no classification benefit. Criteria for classification credits are outlined in the following documents: · The Community Rating System Coordinators Manual · The Building Code Effectiveness Grading Schedule · The Fire Suppression Rating Schedule DMA 2000 Hazard Mitigation Plan - Suffolk County, New York 9,10-7 DRAFT- September 2007 SECTION 9,10: TOWN OF SHELTER ISLAND Proposed Hazard Mitigation Initiatives Aquifer protection - Protect the ddnking water supply by installing and maintaining storm water collection systems that will minimize fresh water and contaminates from running into the bays. Additional water added to the aquifer will ease drought restrictions and salt water intrusion, while reducing flooding on town infestation of ticks and deer - Reduce the white tailed deer herd to the recommended density. Install 4 poster feeding stations that will kill ticks, on the deer, which can carry diseases. Educate the public regarding tick born illness. Groundwater General 7,8,9,11,13,15, Long Contamination, 16 DPVV Low Fund/ term Drought, Flood PDM Infestation 1,10 PD/DPW $1.5M General Medium fund/ Medium Grant General fund/PDM Raise flood prone areas Flood, such as Ram Island /Storm Drive / Road and West Nor'Easter, water Long Neck Rd to an elevation Severe Storm, 2,5,8,11,13, DPW High abatement Term Shallow DOF that will not be inundated fund/ Groundwater by flooding events. Highway fund Costal erosion - protect General shoreline roads from destruction. Harden Iow- Hurricane, Fund/ Shod Flood, Coastal 5,8,11,13,15 DPVV $2M PDM/ lying roadways from Erosion Highway term repetitive storm surge Fund destruction. Creek Capacity enhancement- increase General the stream flow capacity fund/PDM in creeks to allow for /Storm Shod- proper flushing of the Hurricane, waters, which will Erosion Flood, Coastal 5,13, 16 SC Medium abatement water Term Long decrease the duration of fund/ DOF the flooding events, Highway while protecting the fund natural environment. Support an initiative that Hurricane, Shelter PDM / Long will identif~ viable Flood, Coastal 2,7,13 Island Town Unknown Home Term repetitive loss Erosion Owner DOF DMA 2000 Hazard Mitigation Plan - Suffolk County, New York 9.10-8 DRAFT - September 2007 SECTION 9.10: TOWN OF SHELTER ISLAND properties, initiate a plan that will mitigate those losses, by purchasing or retrofitting the property to negate Support county-wide initiatives identified in Section 6, Volume I of the Suffolk County Hazard Mitigation Plan. Consider the development of a post- disaster action plan, including a debds management plan. This to be incorporated into existing emergency Ail Hazards All objectives Shelter Island Town Council/ Existing MPC/ programs Suffolk Low and grant Short funding Term OG County where Emergency applicable manageme nt All Hazards 7, 12, 13 General Public Safety/ Fund, Suffolk Co. FEMA Long ' Emergency Medium Hazard term, Mitigation DOF manageme Grant nt Funding Consider participation in Flood, incentive-based Nor'Easter, programs such as, CRS Hurricane, and "Storm-Ready". Severe Weather Protect critical facility structures- such as the Emergency Operations Center, with a multi- jurisdictional building retrofit, by bringing the structures up to current codes, 1,2,3,7,13 General Shelter fund Island Town Low trough Long Term Council existing General Fund, FEMA All Hazards 2, 3, 13, Shelter Low Hazard Short 14,15,16 Island Town Term Mitigation Grant Funding Assess and formulate improvements for the PODS distribution areas. General Fund, FEMA All Hazards 1,2,3,4,5,7,11, Shelter Low Hazard Short 12,14,15,16 Island Town Term Mitigation Grant Notes: Short term = I to 5 years. Long Tern', 5 years or greater. OG = On going program. DOF ~ Depending on fimding. SC ~ Suffolk County. PDM = Pre-Disaster Mitigation Grant Program. DMA 2000 Hazard Mitigation Plan - Suffolk County, New York 9.10-9 DRAFT - September 2007 SECTION 9,10: TOWN OF SHELTER ISLAND PR1ORITIZATION OF MITIGATION INITIATIVES Medium No Yes High High Yes No Yes High High High Yes Yes Yes High High High Yes Yes Yes High Medium Medium Yes Yes Yes High High High Yes Yes No · High Low Yes Yes Yes 'High Medium Medium Yes Yes No Low Low Yes No No Low S1-10 High Low Yes Yes Yes High S1-11 High Low Yes Yes Yes Med Notes: H = High. L = Low. M = Medium. N = No. N/A = Not applicable. Y = Yes. Explanation of Priorities · High Priority - A project that meets multiple objectives (i.e., multiple hazards), benefits exceeds cost, has funding secured or is an on-going project and project meets eligibility requirements for the Hazard Mitigation Grant Program (HMGP) or Pre-Disaster Mitigation Grant Program (PDM) programs. High priority projects can bc completed in thc short term (1 to 5 years). · Medium Priority - A project that meets goals and objectives, benefits exceeds costs, funding has not been secured but project is grant eligible under, HMGP, PDM or other grant programs. Project can be completed in the short term, once funding is completed. Medium priority projects will become high priority projects once funding is secured. · Low Priority - Any project that will mitigate thc risk of a hazard, benefits do not exceed the costs or are difficult to quantify, funding has not been secured and project is not eligible for HMGP or PDM grant funding, and time linc for completion is considered long term (1 to 10 years). Low priority projects may be eligible other sources of grant funding from other programs. A low priority project could become a high priority project once funding is secured as long as it could be completed in the short term. Prioritization of initiatives was based on above definitions: Yes Prioritization of initiatives was based on parameters other than stated above: Not applicable. DMA 2000 Hazard Mitigation Plan - Suffolk County, New York 9.10-10 DRAFT - September 2007 SECTION 9.10: TOWN OF SHELTER ISLAND FUTURE NEEDS TO BETTER UNDERSTAND RISK/VULNERABILITY · Consider participating in a comprehensive update to the intra-jurisdictional County-wide E~nergency Management Plan. · Consider participating in a comprehensive update to the intra-jurisdictional County-wide Debris Management Plan. ADDITIONAL COMMENTS The general building stock replacement values used to estimate exposure and damages in the Risk Assessment were U.S. Census 2000 data obtained from HAZUS-MH MR-2. The Planning Committee feels these replacement costs underestimate the replacement costs for Suffolk County and therefore exposure and damage estimates are believed to be below actual. HAZARD AREA EXTENT AND LOCATION Hazard area extent and location maps have been generated for the Town of Shelter Island and illustrate the probable areas impacted within the Town. These maps are based on the best available data at the time of the preparation of this Plan, and are considered to be adequate for planning purposes. Maps have only been generated for those hazards that can be clearly identified using mapping techniques and technologies, and for which the Town of Shelter Island has significant exposure. These maps are illustrated in the hazard profiles within Section 5.4; Volume I of this Plan. DMA 2000 Hazard Mitigation Plan - Suffolk County, New York 9.10-11 DRAFT- September 2007 SECTION 9.11: TOWN OF SMITHTOWN TOWN OF SMITHTOWN This section presents thc jurisdictional annex for the Town of Smithtown. HAZARD MITIGATION PLAN POINT OF CONTACT Mr. John Valentine, Department Director Department of Public Safety, 65 Maple Ave. Smithtown, NY 11787 Phone: (631) 730-7553 E-mail: publicsafety~,tosqov.com Mr. Nicholas Kefalos, Fire Marshal Department of Public Safety 65 Maple Ave. Smithtown, NY 11787 Phone: (631) 730-7553 E-mail: publicsafety~tosqov.com TOWN PROFILE Population 117,917 (as of July 1, 2006). Location The Town of Smithtown is bordered on the north by Long Island Sound, the west by Huntington, the south by Islip and the east by Brookhaven, and lies in the western part of Suffolk County, approximately 50 miles east of New York City. The town's 55 square miles includes 30 miles of shoreline and 2,766 acres of parkland which includes 5 beaches, 2 state parks, 3 county parks, a municipally owned pool and golf course, 2 marinas, 3 boat launching ramps, and over 25 town parks. Smithtown is also host to orle of the largest industrial parks in the country, as well as, hundreds of commercial enterprises throughout its geographical boundaries. Three incorporated villages lie within Smithtown. They are the Village of the Branch, the Village of Nissequogue and the Village of Head of the Harbor. Climate Smithtown enjoys a temperate, maritime climate with an average annual low temperature of 43.2 (°F) and an average annual high temperature of 61.9 (°F). The average annual rain fall for Smithtown is approximately 46", and the annual average accumulated snowfall is 26.6". Brief History Smithtown is named after its founder, Richard Smythe. Mr. Smythe was an English subject who first settled in Southampton. After being banished from that town in 1656, possibly for religious reasons, he settled in Setauket for nine years. Then in 1663, it is believed, he purchased the land that became known as Smithtown from Lion Gardiner. Mr. Gardiner had been deeded the lands by Chief Wyandanch, Sachem of thc Long Island Montauks, after Mr. Gardiner helped the chief get back his kidnapped daughter from a party of raiding Narragansett Indians. A Royal land patent was officially issued in 1665 to Richard Srnythe. Richard Smythe built his home on the site of a Nissequogue Indian village near the intersection of River and Moriches Roads in what is today the Village of Nissequogue (the home is no longer standing). Smythe and his wife, Sarah, had nine children: Jonathan, Obadiah, Richard, Job, Daniel, Adam, Samuel, Elizabeth and Deborah. All the sons, with the exception of Obadiah who drowned in the Nissequogue River in 1680, settled near their father and raised families of their own. After Richard Smythc and his wife died, the lands comprising Smithtown were divided among their children. In 1735, thc lands were further subdivided among their grandchildren in approximate fifty acre parcels. DMA 2000 Hazard Mitigation Plan - Suffolk County, New York 9.11-1 DRAFT- September 2007 SECTION 9.11: TOWN OF SMITHTOWN Generations of these families have remained in the area populating sinitht0~vn ~iii~ l~hn3 direct descendants of Richard Smythc. Governing Body Format The Town of Smithtown is governed by a council form of government consisting of 5 elected officials, one of which is the Town Supervisor. This body will be responsible for the resolution, implementation and update of the All-Hazards Mitigation Plan. The Town provides public safety, general administrative services, parks and recreation, highway and other services to its residents. Growth/Development trends Based on the data tracked by the New York State Data Center, Smithtown has experienced a modest rate of growth. The overall population has inc?eased only 2.06% since 2000 and has averaged 0.23% per year from 1990 to 2006. Due to the numbers and nature of employers within the township, particularly in the Hauppauge Industrial Park, the "day-time" population most likely exceeds 225,000. This represents an approximate 50% increase of its resident population, which can have a significant impact on the services provided by the Town. With this rate of growth, the anticipated development trends for Smithtown are considered low to moderate. The Town's capabilities to manage and deal with future growth and development are illustrated in Capability Assessment of this annex. NATURAL HAZARD EVENT HISTORY SPECIFIC TO THE TOWN OF SMITHTOWN Tropical Storm "Belle" DR 520 August 1976 Not Available Ice Storm N/A January 1978 Not Available Hurricane Gloda DR 750 October 1985 Not Available Hurricane Bob DR 918 September 1991 $501,423.00 Nor'easter N/A December 1994 $58,876.00 Tropical Storm Floyd DR 1296 / EM 3149 September 1999 $29,742.00 Snow Storm EM 3184 February 2003 $339,829.87 Sea Ice (Smithtown Bay) N/A February 2004 Not Available Bli77ard N/A January 2005 $474,150.00 Rain Storm (15" Rain/Week) N/A October 2005 $137,990.00 Notes: N/A = Not applicable. Number of FEMA Identified Repetitive Flood Loss Properties: 17 DMA 2000 Hazard Mitigation Plan - Suffolk County, New York 9.11-2 DRAFT- September 2007 SECTION 9.11: TOWN OF SMITHTOWN NATURAL HAZARD RISK/VULNERABILITY RISK RANKING lO0-year*: $523,494,000-' $534,466,000 Nor'Easters Frequent 54 500-year*: $6,550,350,000 - $6,573,105,000 2 Severe Storms Damage estimate not available Frequent 51 Severe Winter 2 Storm Damage estimate not available Frequent 51 3 Shallow Groundwater Damage estimate not available Frequent 36 100-year*: $523,494,000- $534,466,000 3 Hurricane Occasional 36 500-year*: $6,550,350,000 - $6,573,105,000 Groundwater 4 Contamination No measurable impact to property Frequent 57 (natural) 5 Flooding 100-year**: $7,026,000 Frequent 18 500-year**: $7,999,000 6 Coastal Erosion Damage estimate not available Frequent 3 6 Infestation No measurable impact to property Rare 3 7 Wildfire Not available Occasional 0 7 Drought No measurable impact to property Occasional 0 a. Building damage ratio estimates based on FEMA 386-2 (August 2001 ) b. Frequent- Hazard event that occurs more frequently than once in 10 years, Occasional-Hazard event that occurs from once in 10 years to once in 100 years, Rare-Hazard event that occurs from once in 100 years to once in 1,000 years, None- Hazard event that occurs less frequently than once in 1,000 years c. The probability of occurrence for these events is weighted at "0" due to no exposure * Estimated building value (structure and contents) damaged by the 100-year and 500-year hurricane-related winds and storm surge as calculated by HAZUS-MH. ** Estimated building value (structure and contents) damaged by the 100-year and 500-year flood events as calculated by HAZUS-MH. CAPABILITY ASSESSMENT This section identifies the following capabilities of the local jurisdiction: · Legal and regulatory capability · Administrative and technical capability · Fiscal capability · Community classification. DMA 2000 Hazard Mitigation Plan - Suffolk County, New York 9.11-3 DRAFT- September 2007 SECTION 9.11: TOWN OF SMITHTOWN Legal and RegulatoD, CapabiliD' 1) Building Code Town BIdg Code adopted 1964 w/amendm ents - Ch 112. and NYS Codes. Zoning Code adopted 1964; with 2) Zoning Ordinance Y N N N amendments - Ch 322, Town Code 3) Subdivision Ordinance N N N N 4) Special Purpose Ordinances Headings/Sections incorporated in (floodplain management, critical y N N N the Town Zoning Code adopted or sensitive areas) 1964; with amendments. 5) Growth Management N N N N 6) Floodplain Management/Basin Plan N N N N 7) Stormwater Management Plan/ordinance N N N N 8) General Plan or Comprehensive Plan N N N N 9) Capital Improvements Plan Y N N N 10 year capital budget reviewed annually. 10) Site Plan Review Sections incorporated in the Town Requirements Y N N Y Zoning Code adopted Jan, 1966. 11) Habitat Conservation Plan N N N N 12) Economic Development Plan N N N N 13) Emergency Response Plan y N Y y Updated Annually. Maintained by Dept. of Public Safety 14) Shoreline Management Plan N N N N 15) Post Disaster Recovery Plan y N N N 16) Post Disaster Recovery Ordinance N N Outlined in Town Emergency Mgt. Plan; updated/reviewed annually. 17) Real Estate Disclosure req. N N N N 18) Other Y N N Y Fire Prevention Law LL#4-1990 DMA 2000 Hazard Mitigation Plan - Suffolk County, New York 9.11-4 DRAFT - September 2007 SECTION 9.t1: TOWN OF SMITHTOWN Administrative and Technical Capabili .ty 1) Planner(s) or Engineer(s) with knowledge of land development and land management practices 2) Engineer(s) or Professional(s) trained in construction practices related to buildings and/or infrastructure 3) Planners or engineers with an understanding of natural hazards 4) Floodplain Manager 5) Surveyor(s) 6) Personnel skilled or trained in "GIS" applications 7) Scientist familiar with natural hazards in Suffolk County. 8) Emergency Manager 9) Grant Walter(s) 10) Staff with expertise or training in benefit/cost analysis Panning Dept. and Engineering Dept. Building Dept., Engineering Dept. Engineering Department The Town Planning Department director, Frank DeRubeis, ~erves as the "Flood Hazard Permit Administrator" Engineering Dept. Engineering Dept. Department of Public Safety/Director DMA 2000 Hazard Mitigation Plan - Suffolk County, New York 9.11-5 DRAFT- September 2007 SECTION 9,11: TOWN OF SMITHTOWN Fiscal Capabili~~ 1) Community development Block Grants (CDBG) Don't know 2) Capital Improvements Project Funding Yes 3) Authority to Levy Taxes for specific purposes Yes 4) User fees for water, sewer, gas or electric service Yes: Smithtown Water District, St. James Water District 5) Impact Fees for homebuyers or developers of new Don't know development/homes 6) Incur debt through general obligation bonds Yes 7) Incur debt through special tax bonds Don't know 8) Incur debt through pdvate activity bonds Don't know 9) Withhold public expenditures in hazard-prone areas No '~0) State sponsored grant programs Don't know 11) Other FEMA sponsored grant funding. State legislative grants. Community Classifications Community Rating System (CRS) Not Participating N/A Building Code Effectiveness Grading Schedule (BCEGS) 9/9 2006 Public Protection 3 Storm Ready Not Participating N/A Firewise Not Participaiing N/A · Higher classification applies to when subject property is located beyond 1000 feet of a creditable fire hydrant and is within 5 road miles of a recognized Fire Station. · N/A = Not applicable. - = Unavailable. The hbove referenced classifications can be viewed as a gauge of this community's capabilities in all phases of emergency management (preparedness, response, recovery and mitigation). These classifications are used as an underwriting parameter for determining the costs of various forms of insurance. The CRS class applies to flood insurance while the BCEGS and Public Protection classifications apply to standard property insurance. Classifications range on a scale of 1 to 10 with class one being the best possible classification, and class 10 representing no classification benefit. Criteria for classification credits are outlined in the following documents: · The Community Rating System Coordinators Manual · The Building Code Effectiveness Grading Schedule · The Fire Suppression Rating Schedule DMA 2000 Hazard Mitigation Plan - Suffolk County, New York 9.11-6 DRAFT- September 2007 SECTION 9.11: TOWN OF SMITHTOWN Proposed Hazard Mitigation Initiatives ST-1 ST-2 ST-3 ST-4 ST-5 ST-6 ST-7 Update and enhance Smithtown's existing Emergency management Plan Continue/enhance on- going stormwater management facility maintenance program. Retrofit flood-prone roadways that are considered to be critical infrastructure Flood preventionin areas~Lake Ronkonkoma and Mills Pond Update/maintain emergency communications systems and capability town-wide. Obtain Federal, State training in benefit/cost analysis Consider non- structural flood hazard mitigation alternatives for at risk properties within the floodplain, including those that have been identified as repetitive loss, such as acquisition/relocation, or elevation depending on feasibility. The parameters for feasibility for this initiative would be: funding, benefits versus costs and willing participation of All Hazards Flood Nor'Easter, Hurricane, Severe Weather Flood, Nor'Easter, Hurricane, Severe Weather All Hazards Alt Hazards Flood, Nor'Easter, Hurricane, Severe Weather 7, 12, 13 10,13 2,13 2,7,13 7, 12, 13 1,3,7 2,7,13 Public Safety Highway Highway Smithtown Town Council Public Safety Smithtown Town Council Smithtown Town Council Low Medium High High Low Low High General Fund: Department Budget DHS program Grant General Fund: Department Budget General Fund, FEMA Hazard Mitigation Grant Funding Unknown Capital and General Fund State or Federally sponsored thru workshops or training at EMI General Fund, FEMA Hazard Mitigation Grant Funding Short- Term; On- Going Short- Term; On- Going Lqng- Term Long~ Term Short- Term Short- Term Long term, DOF DMA 2000 Hazard Mitigation Plan - Suffolk County, New York 9.11-7 DRAFT - September 2007 SECTION 9.11: TOWN OF SMITHTOWN ST-8 ST-9 ST-lO property owners. Support county-wide initiatives identified in Section 6, Volume I of the Suffolk County Hazard Mitigation Plan. Consider the development of a post -disaster action plan, including a debris management plan. This to be incorporated into existing emergency management plans. Consider participation in incentive-based programs such as, CRS and 'Storm- Ready". All Hazards All Hazards Flood, Nor'Easter, Hurricane, Severe Weather All objectives 7, 12, 13 1,2,3,7,13 Smithtown Town Council/ MPC/Suffolk County Emergency management Public Safety/ Suffolk Co. Emergency management Smithtown Town Council Low Medium Low Existing programs and grant funding where applicable General Fund, FEMA Hazard Mitigation Grant Funding General fund trough existing programs Short Term OG Long term, DOF Long Term Notes: Short term = I to 5 years. Long Term= 5 years or greater. OG = On going program. DOF = Depending on funding. ST ~ Smithtown DMA 2000 Hazard Mitigation Plan - Suffolk County, New York 9.11-8 DRAFT- September 2007 SECTION 9.11: TOWN OF SMITHTOWN PRIORITIZATION OF MITIGATION INITIATIVES Low Yes Yes Yes High Medium Yes No Yes High High Yes Yes No Medium Low Yes No No Low Medium Yes No Yes Medium Low Yes No Yes High High Yes Yes No Medium Low Yes Yes Yes High Medium Yes Yes No Medium Low Low Yes No No Low Explanation of Priorities · High Priority - A project that meets multiple objectives (i.e., multiple hazards), benefits exceeds cost, has funding secured or is an on-going project and project meets eligibility requirements for the Hazard Mitigation Grant Program (HMGP) or Pre-Disaster Mitigation Grant Program (PDM) programs. High priority projects can be completed in the short term (1 to 5 years). · Medium Priority - A project that meets goals and objectives, benefits exceeds costs, funding has not been secured but project is grant eligible under, HMGP, PDM or other grant programs. Project can be completed in the s'hort term, once funding is completed. Medium priority projects will become high priority projects once funding is secured. · Low Priority - Any project that will mitigate the risk of a hazard, benefits do not exceed the costs or are difficult to quantify, funding has not been secured and project is not eligible for HMGP or PDM grant funding, and time line for completion is considered long term (1 to 10 years). Low priority projects may be eligible other sources of grant funding from other programs. A low priority project could become a high priority project once funding is secured as long as it could be completed in the short term. Prioritization of initiatives was based on above definitions: Yes Prioritization of initiatives was based on parameters other than stated above: Not applicable. DMA 2000 Hazard Mitigation Plan - Suffolk County, New York 9.11-9 DRAFT- September 2007 SECTION 9.11: TOWN OF SMITHTOWN FUTURE NEEDS TO BETTER UNDERSTAND RISK/VULNERABILITY · Consider participating in a comprehensive update to the intra-jurisdictional County-wide Emergency Management Plan. · Consider participating in a comprehensive update to thc intra-jurisdictional County-wide Debris Management Plan. ADDITIONAL COMMENTS None at this time. HAZARD AREA EXTENT AND LOCATION Hazard area extent and location maps have been generated for the Town of Smithtown that illustrate the probable ~reas impacted within the Town. These maps are based on the best available data at the time of the preparation of this plan, and are considered to be adequate for planning purposes. Maps have only been generated for those hazards that can be clearly identified using mapping techniques and technologies, and for which the Town of Smithtown has significant exposure. These maps are illustrated in the hazard profiles within Section 5.4, Volume I of this Plan. DMA 2000 Hazard Mitigation Plan - Suffolk County, New York 9.11-10 DRAFT - September 2007 SECTION 9,12: VILLAGE OF THE BRANCH VILLAGE OF THE BRANCH This section presents the jurisdictional annex for the Village of The Branch. HAZARD MITIGATION PLAN POINT OF CONTACT Irene Kissane, Mayor Incorporated Village of The Branch Village Hall, P.O. Box 725 Smithtown, NY 11787-0725 Phone: (631) 265-3315 E-mail: villaqeofbranch~,optonline.net Phone: E-mail: VILLAGE PROFILE Population Location The Village of The Branch is located within the Town of Smithtown. Climate The Village of The Branch enjoys a moderate climate with average Iow temperatures in the 30's degrees Fahrenheit (°F) and average high temperatures in the mid 70's (°F). Precipitation averages between 3.0 to 4.5 inches per month, receiving the highest amount of precipitation in March. The humidity ranges between 55 and 80% throughout the year. Brief History There is a legend that Richard Smythe, one of the first settlers in the mid'1600's, bought the Smithtown area from the Nesquake Indians who told him that he could own as much land that he could cover riding a bull in one day. He waited for the longest day of the year, rose at sunrise and covered an area that is approximately 27 square miles today. However, there is evidence that Smithtown was acquired by Lion Gardiner, an Englishman, who was a good friend of Chief Wyandanch, a Montauk Indian. Heather Flower, Wyandanch's daughter, was kidnapped on her wedding day. Gardiner earned the Nesquake land as part of negotiations with Chief Wyandanch in the release of Heather Flower. Gardiner then handed the land over to Richard Smythe. There were more than 700 residents in the Town of Smithtown in the 1700's. History tells us that they suffered severely during the American Revolution spreading debt and hardship. During the 19th century, the commercial center became known and the Village of the Branch where the first school was constructed. The Village of the Branch was incorporated in 1927 with a population of 131 in an area of approximately one square mile comprised of large estates, open fields and cultivated areas. Today the village has almost no vacant land and is comprised of shopping centers, office buildings, residential subdivisions and historical sites. The population exceeds 1,895 people. DMA 2000 Hazard Mitigation Plan- Suffolk County, New York 9.12-1 DRAFT - September 2007 SECTION 9.12: VILLAGE OF THE BRANCH The i~sue that sparked the m0~ement to in~o~rate ~hs the desire to esta~iish a municipal water plant. A group against this plan decided to leave the jurisdiction of the Township of Smithtown by incorporating. They would thus gain control over such matters as zoning, planning, and services such as water, highway maintenance, police and fire protection. The proposition for the incorporation of the Village of The Brach, dated February 5th, 1927, was circulated. The proposition stated that the requirements for incorporation had been met, the territory did not exceed one square mile, it was situated entirely within the Town of Smithtown, it did not include any part of any other village, there was a populations of at least 50 but not more than 200 people. The petition was followed by consent to the proposed incorporations signed by owners of at least one-half of the real property value. On this document were such Smithtownites as Miller, Goetchius, Blydenburgh, Huntting, Walker, Lawrence~ Hewlett, Nicodemus, Arthur, Arnold, Turrell, White, and, of course, Smith. A public hearing on the subject was held on March 29, 1927, all of the 16 ballots were cast: 11 yes votes and 5 no VOteS. Opposition to the incorporation took many forms. Some felt that it was only a threat to prevent the municipal water plant from being pursued while others felt it was the secret ambition of the gentry who wished the incorporation to ally themselves with the already incorporated Village of Nissequogue. Others felt that incorporating villages would mark the end of the town. in 1927 proceedings were started to form incorporations of the Village of The Landing, which fell on hard times and was dissolved a few years later. After a court challenge to the incorporation process, the Village of The Branch became an incorporated village. Until this day, the village continues to work with the Town of Smithtown officials for the ben~fit of the residents. Governing Body Format In the 1920's the unpaid Mayor and two Trustees administered the needs of the village holding only four meetings a year. Today the village has a budget of $500,000, elects a Mayor, four Trustees and two Justices. An election is held every two years on the 3rd Tuesday of March. Monthly meetings address all village business. This body will assume the responsibility for the implementation and adoption of this plan. Growth/Development trends Based on the data tracked by the New York State Data Center, the Village of The Branch has experienced a modest rate of residential growth. The overall population has increased only 2.03% from 2000 to 2006 and has averaged 0.82% per year from 1990 to 2006. The Village's capabilities to manage and deal with future growth and development are illustrated in Capability Assessment of this annex. DMA 2000 Hazard Mitigation Plan - Suffolk County, New York 9.12-2 DRAFT- September 2007 SECTION 9.12: VILLAGE OF THE BRANCH NATURAL HAZARD EVENT HISTORY SPECIFIC TO THE VILLAGE OF THE BRANCH Rain Storm N/A October 2005 $4,000 Blizzard N/A January 2005 $20,000 Snow Storm EM 3184 February 2003 $18,000 Tropical Storm (Hurricane DR 1296 / September 1999 $2,000 Floyd) EM 3149 Nor'Easter N/A December 1994 $8,000 Hurricane Bob DR 918 August 1991 Minimal Notes: N/A Not applicable. Number of FEMA Identified Repetitive Flood Loss Properties: 0 DMA 2000 Hazard Mitigation Plan - Suffolk County, New York 9.12-3 DRAFT- September 2007 SECTION 9.12: VILLAGE OF THE BRANCH NATURAL HAZARD RISK/VULNERABILITY RISK RANKING I2 3 4 5 6 7 8 100-year*: $199,000 500-year*: $262,000 Flood High Hazardous matedal (fixed Medium site) Hazardous material (in Medium transit) Hurricane 100-year**: $8,797,000 500-year**: $113,620,000 High Ice Storm Damage estimate not available Medium Oil Spill High Severe Storm Damage estimate not available High Winter Storm (severe) Damage estimate not available High Building damage ratio estimates based on FEMA 386-2 (August 2001) Frequent= Hazard event that occurs more frequently than once in 10 years, Occasional=Hazard event that occurs from once in 10 years to once in 100 years, Rare=Hazard event that occurs from once in 100 years to once in 1,000 years, None= Hazard event that occurs less frequently than once in 1,000 years The probability of occurrence for these events is weighted at "0" due to no exposure Estimated building value (structure and contents) damaged by the 100-year and 500-year flood events as Calculated by HAZUS-MH. Estimated building value (structure and contents) damaged by the 100-year and 500-year hurricane-related winds and storm surge as calculated using HAZUS-MH (custom methodology explained in Section 5.4, Volume I in the Hurricane hazard profile). CAPABILITY ASSESSMENT This section identifies the following capabilities of the local jurisdiction: · Legal and regulatory capability · Administrative and technical capability · Fiscal capability · Community classification. DMA 2000 Haz~id Miiigaii~n Pian ~ $~ffolk co~niy, Ne~ York 9112-4 DRAFT- September 2007 SECTION 9.12: VILLAGE OF THE BRANCH Legal and Regulator, Capabili~' 1) Building Code Y N N Y March 13, 1973 2) Zoning Ordinance Y N N Y March 13, 1973 3) Subdivision Ordinance N N N N 4) Special Purpose Ordinances (floodplain management, critical N N N 'N or sensitive areas) 5) Growth Management N N N N 6) Floodplain Management/Basin y N N N 12/8/1987 L.L. No .5-1987 Plan 7) Stormwater Management N N N N Plan/ordinance 8) General Plan or N N N N Comprehensive Plan 9) Capital Improvements Plan N N N N 10) Site Plan Review Y N N y Part of State Mandated building Requirements code. 11) Habitat Conservation Plan N N N N 12) Economic Development Plan N N N N 13) Emergency Response Plan Y N N N 14) Shoreline Management Plan N N N N 15) Post Disaster Recovery Plan N N N N 16) Post Disaster Recovery N N N N Ordinance 17) Real Estate Disclosure req. N N N N N N Y Fire Prevention 18) Other Y DMA 2000 Hazard Mitigation Plan - Suffolk County, New York 9.12-5 DRAFT- September 2007 SECTION 9.12: VILLAGE OF THE BRANCH Administrative and Technical Capability.' 1) Planner(s) or Engineer(s) with knowledge of land development and land management practices 2) Engineer(s) or Professional(s) trained in construction practices related to buildings and/or infrastructure 3) Planners or engineers with an understanding of natural hazards 4) Floodplain Manager 5) Surveyor(s) 6) Personnel skilled or trained in "GIS" applications 7) Scientist familiar with natural hazards in Suffolk County. 8) Emergency Manager 9) Grant Walter(s) 10) Staff with expertise or training in bencffit/cost analysis Planning Dept., Engineering Dept. Building Dept., Engineering Dept., Highway Dept. Building Dept., Engineering Dept, Dept. of Environment and Waterways, Planning Dept. Engineering Dept. Mayor DMA 2000 Hazard Mitigation Plan - Suffolk County, New York 9,12-6 DRAFT - September 2007 SECTION 9.12: VILLAGE OF THE BRANCH Fiscal CapabiliD' 1) Community development Block Grants (CDBG) Yes 2) Capital Improvements Project Funding Yes 3) Authority to Levy Taxes for specific purposes 4) User fees for water, sewer, gas or electric service 5) Impact Fees for homebuyers or developers of new development/homes 6) Incur debt through general obligation bonds 7) Incur debt through special tax bonds 8) Incur debt through pdvate activity bonds 9) ~/ithhold public expenditures in hazard-prone areas 10) State sponsored grant programs 11) Other No Conduct an updated plan with the county for Millers Pond to control flooding Yes Adopt an updated Emergency response plan in conjunction with The Town of Smithtown. Yes Maintain National Incident Management System, State Emergency Management System, and Incident Yes Command System training for Village Trustee's Increase Public awareness of Hazards Yes Participate with The Town of Smithtown on their Mitigation projects because of the village's tocation within Yes the Town of Smithtown. Community Classifications Community Rating System (CRS) Not Participating N/A Building Code Effectiveness Grading Schedule (BCEGS) 3/3 2004 Public Protection 3 N/A Storm Ready Not Participating N/A Firewise Not Participating N/A · Higher classification applies to when subject property is located beyond 1000 feet of a creditable fire hydrant and is within 5 road miles of a recognized Fire Station. The above referenced classifications can be viewed as a gauge of this community's capabilities in all phases of emergency management (preparedness, response, recovery and mitigation). These classifications are used as an underwriting parameter for determining the costs of various forms of DMA 2000 Hazard Mitigation Plan - Suffolk County, New York 9.12-7 DRAFT - September 2007 SECTION 9.12: VILLAGE OF THE BRANCH insurance. The CRS class applies to flood insurance while the BCEGS and Public Protection classifications apply to standard property insurance. Classifications range on a scale of 1 to 10 with class one being the best possible classification, and class 10 representing no classification benefit. Criteria for classification credits are outlined in the following documents: · The Community Rating System Coordinators Manual · The Building Code Effectiveness Grading Schedule · The Fire Suppression Rating Schedule Proposed Hazard Mitigation Initiatives VB-1 VB-2 VB-3 VB-4 VB-5 VB-6 Establish a Capital Improvement program for the village that is based on a Capital Improvement Plan, mechanism for funding projects, and process for review and update. Partner with Suffolk County in the development of an enhanced feasibility study to determine the most feasible retrofit to Millers Pond to enhance flood control for the village. Adopt an updated Emergency response plan in conjunction with The Town of Smithtown. Maintain National Incident Management System, State Emergency Management System, and Incident Command System training for Village Trustee's Increase Public awareness of Hazards Partner with The Town of Smithtown on their Mitigation projects that impact the Village to leverage resources, and secure multiple tangible benefits for both entities. All Hazards Flood, Severe storms, Nor' Easters, Hurricane All Hazards All Hazards All Hazards Flood, Nor'Easter, Hurricane, Severe Weather, Shallow Ground water 5,15,16 3,5,7,15,16 1,3,7,13 1,3,7,13 1,3,7 7,15 Village Mayor/ Trustee's Village Mayor/ Trustee's Village Mayor/ Trustee's Village Mayor/ Trustee's Village Mayor/ Trustee's Village Mayor/ Trustee's High High Low Low Low Medium Village geneml Fund, bonds, Impactfees Village general Fdnd, bonds, Impact fees, cost-share with Suffolk County Village General fund through existing programs Village General fund through existing programs, DHS program Irant Village General fund through existing programs Village Generafund, cost-sharing with Smithtown. Possible FEMA hazard Mitigation Long- DOF Long- term, DOF Short term Short term Shod term Long term DOF DMA 2000 Hazard Mitigation Plan - Suffolk County, New York 9.12-8 DRAFT- September 2007 SECTION 9,12: VILLAGE OF THE BRANCH VB-7 VB-8 VB-9 Support county-wide initiatives identified in Section 6, Volume I of the Suffolk County Hazard Mitigation Plan. Consider the development of a post -disaster action plan, including a debris management plan. This to be incorporated into existing emergency mana~lement plans. Consider participation in incentive-based programs such as, CRS and "Storm- Ready". All Hazards All Hazards Flood, Nor'Easter, Hurricane, Severe Weather Village Council/ All MPC/Suffolk objectives County Emergency Management Public Safety/ 7, 12, 13 Suffolk Co. Emergency Management 1,2,3,7,13 Low Medium Grant Funding depending upon project eligibility, Existing programs and grant funding where applicable General Fund, FEMA Hazard Mitigation Grant Funding General fund trough existing Short - Term OG Long term, DOF Village Council Low pmgrams Long Term Notes: Short term = I to 5 years. Long Term= 5 years or greater. OG = On going program. DOF Depending on funding, ST = Smithtown DMA 2000 Hazard Mitigation Plan - Suffolk County, New York 9.12-9 DRAFT - September 2007 SECTION 9.12: VILLAGE OF THE BRANCH PRIORITIZATION OF MITIGATION INITIATIVES Low Low Yes Yes Yes High High Low Yes No Yes High High Low Yes No Yes High Low Yes Yes Yes Medium Low Low Yes No Yes Low High Low Yes Yes Yes High High Low Yes No Yes High Medium Yes Yes No Medium Low Low Yes No No Low Explanation of Priorities High Priority - A project that meets multiple objectives (i.e., multiple hazards), benefits exceeds cost, has funding secured or is an on-going project and project meets eligibility requirements for the Hazard Mitigation Gram Program (HMGP) or Pre-Disaster Mitigation Gram Program (PDM) programs. High priority projects can be completed in the short term (1 to 5 years). Medium Priority - A project that meets goals and objectives, benefits exceeds costs, funding has not been secured but project is grant eligible under, HMGP, PDM or other grant programs. Project can be completed in the short term, once funding is completed. Medium priority projects will become high priority projects once funding is secured. Low Priority - Any project that will mitigate the risk of a hazard, benefits do not exceed the costs or are difficult to quantify, funding has not been secured and project is not eligible for HMGP or PDM grant funding, and time line for completion is considered long term (1 to 10 years). Low priority projects may be eligible other sources of grant funding from other programs. A low priority project could become a high priority project once funding is secured as long as it could be completed in the short term. Prioritization of initiatives was based on above definitions: Yes Prioritization of initiatives was based on parameters other than stated above: Not applicable. DMA 2000 Hazard Mitigation Plan - Suffolk County, New York 9.12-10 DRAFT - September 2007 SECTION 9.12: VILLAGE OF THE BRANCH FUTURE NEEDS TO BETTER UNDERSTAND RISK/VULNERABILITY · Consider Participating in a comprehensive update to the lntra-jurisdictional Countywide Emergency Management Plan. · Consider Participating in a comprehensive update to the Intra-jurisdictional Countywide Debris Management Plan. ADDITIONAL COMMENTS None at this time. HAZARD AREA EXTENT AND LOCATION Hazard area extent and location maps have been generated for the Village of The Branch illustrate the probable areas impacted within the Village. These maps are based on the best available data at the time of the preparation of this Plan, and are considered to be adequate for planning purposes. Maps have only been generated for those hazards that can be clearly identified using mapping techniques and technologies, and for which the Village of The Branch has significant exposure. These maps are illustrated in the hazard profiles within Section 5.4, Volume 1 of this Plan. DMA 2000 Hazard Mitigation Plan - Suffolk County, New York 9.12-11 DRAFT- September 2007 SECTION 9.t3: VILLAGE OF NISSEQUOGUE VILLAGE OF NISSEQUOGUE The Village of Nissequogue did not prepare their jurisdictional annex in time for submission of this draft Plan to NYSEMO. DMA 2000 Hazard Mitigation Plan - Suffolk County, New York 9.13-1 DRAFT - September 2007 SECTION 9.14: VILLAGE OF HEAD OF THE HARBOR VILLAGE OF HEAD OF THE HARBOR The Village of Head of The Harbor did not prepare their jurisdictional annex in time for submission of this draft Plan to NYSEMO. DMA 2000 Hazard Mitigation Plan - Suffolk County, New York 9.14-1 DRAFT - September 2007 SECTION 9,15: TOWN OF SOUTHOLD TOWN OF SOUTHOLD This section presents the jurisdictional annex for the Town of Southold. HAZARD MITIGATION PLAN POINT OF CONTACT Ed Forrester, Director of Code Enforcement P.O. Box 1179 Southold, NY 11971 Phone: (631) 765-1939 E-mail: ed.forrester~,,town.southold~ny.us Lloyd Reisenber9, Network and Systems Administrator P.O. Box 1179 Southold, NY 11971 Phone: (631) 765-1891 · E-mail: Iloyd.reisenberq~,town.southold.ny.us TOWN PROFILE Population 21,000 year round; 50,000 seasonal Location The Town of Southold is located at the eastern extreme of Long Island, at the end of the northern peninsula known as the North Fork. It is the eastern-most township on the North Fork and is bordered to the west by the Town of Riverhead and to the south by the Town of Shelter Island. The incorporated Village of Greenport lies within the Town of Southold. The entire Town, including Fishers, Plum and Robins islands, is approximately 54 square miles in size with approximately 163 linear miles of coastline. It is long and narrow in shape, with the mainland extending 21 miles from the Riverhead town line east to Orient Point. Its greatest width is 5 miles, although generally the western portions of the mainland average 3 miles in width, while to the east of Hashamomuck Pond, the Town is never wider than 1.25 miles. Climate The Town of Southold enjoys a moderate climate with an average low temperature of 30 degrees Fahrenheit in January, with an average maximum high temperature of approximately 72 degrees Fahrenheit in July. Precipitation averages between 3.1 to 4.6 inches per month with the most precipitation occurring in the month of January. On average, snowfall is limited to November through April, with highest accumulations in January. The average wind velocity is between 8.5 and approximately 12 miles per hour. Brief History The Town of Southold, site of the oldest English settlement in New York State, has a history going back to 1638 when a group of men landed from Antigua, one of the Leeward Islands, to set up a turpentine distillery, using as a natural resource, the trees of the great pine swamp that lay west of present day Greenport. Two years later another group of settlers arrived from the New Haven colony. That year, 1640, is generally considered to mark the beginning of the Town of Southold, although town records are missing for that early period until 1651. Much of the original Town of Southold was part of the Aquebogue Purchase, acquired from the Indians in 164849. The area contained in that purchase was substantially that more fully outlined and described in Governor Andros' Patent, executed in 1676. That early town, part of the East Riding of Yorkshire (which DMA 2000 Hazard Mitigation Plan - Suffolk County, New York 9.15-1 DRAFT- September 2007 SECTION 9.15: TOWN OF SOUTHOLD h~Ja~J ~uffoik c0uniy in i68~)i stretched along thJ n0rthJ~ Shore Of Long iJJand fr~ ~ading River to Orient Point. In 1730, Shelter Island became a separate town, followed by Riverhead in 1792. Governing Body Format The Town of Southold is governed by a Town Supervisor and a Board comprised of 5 members, all are elected positions. This body will assume responsibility for the adoption and implementation of this plan. Growth/Development Trends Between 1800 and 1990, the permanent population of the Town increased by an average of 17 percent every ten years. The 1990 census population for Southold was 17,766 persons, excluding the Incorporated Village of Greenport with its population of 2,070 persons. The 2000 Census revealed a population of 18,551 persons, excluding the Incorporated Village of Greenport, a population of 2,048. This population is located in a series of discrete traditional hamlets, which include Laurel, Mattituck, Cutchogue, New Suffolk, Peconic, Southold, East Marion and Orient. There is also a small hamlet on Fishers Island. Outside of the Village of Greenport, these hamlets are the main centers of residential development and' commercial activity within the Town of Southold and form the community framework of the Town with which its residents identify. Although the average rate of growth in Southold since the 1790s has been 17 percent per decade, the Town's population has experienced wide fluctuations in growth rates - from a high of 34 percent between 1830 and 1840 to a low of minus 4 percent between 1910 and 1920. Since the 1950s, however, the rate has averaged 14.5% per decade with a high of 26% during the 1970s and a low of 3.5% during the 1980s decade. Between 1950 and 1990 the population increased 58% from 11,632 to 19,836. NATURAL HAZARD EVENT HISTORY SPECIFIC TO THE TOWN OF SOUTHOLD Tornado N/A Aug. 19, 1991 Damage assessment is not available. Tornado N/A Aug. 8, 1999 Damage assessment is not available. Coastal Erosion associated 1982 with Hurricane Cindy N/A (1 of top 3 erosion Damage assessment is not available. (also see Hurricane) events) Coastal Erosion associated with Hurricane Gloda (also see DR 750 Oct. 18, 1985 Damage assessment is not available. Hurricane) Coastal Erosion "The Perfect Oct. 30-31, 1991 Storm" (also see Flooding and N/A (1 of top 3 erosion Damage assessment is not available. Nor'Easter) events) Coastal Erosion associated with Hurricane Bob (also see DR 918 Sept. 16, 1991 Damage assessment is not available. Hurricane) Coastal Erosion (also see DR 974 Dec. 11-14, 1992 Damage assessment is not available. Nor'Easter and Coastal Storm) Coastal Erosion (also see N/A Oct. 14, 2005 Damage assessment is not avai}able. Severe Storm) Coastal Erosion (also see N/A Sept. 2, 2006 Damage assessment is not available. Severe Storm) DMA 2000 Hazard Mitigation Plan -Suffolk County, New York 9.15-2 DRAFT- September 2007 SECTION 9,15: TOWN OF SOUTHOLD Coastal Storm (also see Nor'Easter, Coastal Erosion) DR 974 Flooding also see Nor'Easter) DR 1146 Oct. 19-20, 1996 Coastal Flooding N/A Nov. 19, 1996 Flooding associated with remnants of Tropical Storm Floyd also see Hurricane) Nor'Easter "The Perfect Storm" (also see Coastal Erosion) DR 1296 / EM 3149 Sept. 1999 Damage assessment is not available. Damage assessment is not available. Damage assessment is not available. Damage assessment is not available. Oct. 30-31, 1991 Tropical Storm - Belle DR 520 Aug. 10, 1976 Damage assessment is not available. Hurricane Cindy 1982 (also see Coastal Erosion) N/A ( 1 of top 3 erosion Damage assessment is not available. events) Hurricane Gloda (also see flooding and coastal DR 750 Oct. 18, 1985 Damage assessment is not available. erosion) Hurricane Bob (also see flooding and coastal DR 918 Sept. 16, 1991 Damage assessment is not available. erosion) Tropical Storm Floyd DR 1296 / (also see flooding) EM 3149 Sept. 1999 Damage assessment is not available. Nor'Easter N/A Feb. 6-7, 1978 Damage assessment is not available. N/A DR 974 Nor'Easter (also see Coastal Storm) Dec. 11-14,1992 Damage assessment is not available. Damage assessment is not available. Nor'Easter N/A Jan. 1994 Damage assessment is not available. Nor'Easter (also see flooding) DR 1146 OcL 19-20, 1996 Damage assessment is not available. Nor'Easter N/A Mar. 5-7, 2001 Damage assessment is not available. Nor'~=aster N/A Dec. 26, 2002 Damage assessment is not available. Severe Winter Storm N/A Dec. 17, 1973 Damage assessment is not available. Severe Winter Storm N/A Jan. 19-20, 1978 Damage assessment is not available. Severe Winter Storm N/A Feb. 5, 1978 Damage assessment is not available. Severe Winter Storm N/A Apr. 6, 1982 Damage assessment is not available. Severe Winter Storm N/A Feb. 11-12 1983 Damage assessment is not available. Severe Winter Storm FEMA EM- 3107 Mar. 1993 Damage assessment is not available. Severe Winter Storm DR 1083 Jan 6-8, 1996 (second largest) Damage assessment is not available. Severe Winter Storm N/A Dec. 1996 Damage assessment is not available. Severe Winter Storm "President's Day Storm" EM 3184 Feb. 17-18, 2003 Damage assessment is not available. Severe Winter Storm N/A Dec. 6, 2003 Damage assessment is not available. DMA 2000 Hazard Mitigation Plan - Suffolk County, New York 9.15-3 DRAFT - September 2007 Severe Winter Storm Severe Winter Storm N/A N/A N/A SECTION 9.15: TOWN OF SOUTHOLD / Jan. 27-28, 2004 Damage assessment is not available. Jan. 19,2005 Damage assessment is not available. Severe Winter Storm Jan. 22-23, 2005 Damage assessment is not available. Feb. 21 - Mar. 12, Severe Winter Storm N/A 2005 (5 storms) Damage assessment is not available. Severe Winter Storm N/A Feb. 11-12, 2006 Damage assessment is not available. Lyme Disease (Endemic in Suffolk County) Between 1989, Damage assessment is not available. 1997 and 2005, Suffolk County N/A 1997- 2005 has documented 5,377 cases of Lyme disease Notes: N/A Not applicable. Number of FEMA Identified Repetitive Flood Loss Properties: 51 DMA 2000 Hazard Mitigation Plan - Suffolk County, New York 9.15-4 DRAFT- September 2007 SECTION 9.15: TOWN OF SOUTHOLD NATURAL HAZARD RISK/VULNERABILITY RISK RANKING Nor'Easters (extra-tropical cyclones, including severe winter Iow-pressure systems) Flooding (riverine, flash, coastal, and urban flooding) Severe Winter Storm (heavy snow, blizzards, ice storms) lO0-year*: $423,371,000- $670,191,000 500-year*:$1,953,304,000- $2,394,202,000 100-year**: $94,200,000 5oo-year**:$175,825,0oo Damage estimate nd available Coastal Erosion Damage estimate not available Hurricane (tropical cyclones, including tropical storms and tropical depressions) loo-year*: $423,371,000- $670,191,000 500-year*:$1,953,304,000- $2,394,202,000 Frequent 48 Frequent 45 Frequent 39 Freduent 36 Occasional 32 Severe Storms (windstorms, thunderstorms, hail, lightning and tornados) Damage estimate not available Frequent Infestation (ALB, Lyme No measurable impact to Rare Disease, WNV) structures Drought No measurable impact to Rare structures Groundwater Contamination (natural) Damage estimate not available Rare Wildfire Damage estimate not available Rare Shallow Groundwater Damage estimate not available Rare 30 12 7 6 6 0 a. Building damage ratio estimates based on FEMA 386-2 (August 200 l) b. Frequent=- Hazard event that occurs more frequently than once in 10 years, Occasional=Hazard event that occurs fi.om once in 10 years to once in 100 years, Rare=Hazard event that occurs from once in 100 years to once in 1,000 years, None= Hazard event that occurs less frequently than once in 1,000 years c. The probability of occurrence for these events is weighted a! "0" due to no exposure * Estimated building value (structure and contents) damaged by the 100-year and 500-year hurricane-related winds and storm surge as calculated using HAZUS-MH (custom methodology explained in Section 5.4, Volume 1 in the Hurricane hazard profile). ** Estimated building value (structure and contents) damaged by the 100-year and 500-year flood events as calculated by HAZUS-MH. CAPABILITY ASSESSMENT This section identifies thc following capabilities of the local jurisdiction: · Legal and regulatory capability · Administrative and technical capability · Fiscal capability · Community classification. DMA 2000 Hazard Mitigation Plan- Suffolk County, New York 9.15-5 DRAFT- September 2007 SECTION 9.15: TOWN OF SOUTHOLD Legal and Regulatory Capabili~' 1) Building Code 2) Zoning Ordinance 3) Subdivision Ordinance 4) Special Purpose Ordinances (floodplain management, critical or sensitive areas) 5) Growth Management 6) Floodplain Management/Basin Plan 7) Stormwater Management Plan/ordinance 8) General Plan or Comprehensive Plan 9) Capital Improvements Plan 10) Site Plan Review Requirements 11) Habitat Conservation Plan 12) Economic Development Plan 13) Emergency Response Plan 14) Shoreline Management Plan 15) Post Disaster Recovery Plan 16) Post Disaster Recovery Ordinance Yes N N Y Yes Yes Yes No Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes No Town Code Chapter 144, adopted. 7/17/1984, amended 12/19/2006 Town Code Chapter 280, adopted 4/9/1957, a~ended in entirety 11/23/1971, amendments added as required Town Code Chapter 240, adopted 8/24/2004. Town Code Chapters 148 adopted 8/10/1993 Town Code Chapter 148 and LWRP; 148 adopted 8/10/1993; LWRP adopted 11/30/2004 Town Code Chapter 236 adopted 3/27/2007 Master Plan Apdl 1985 Annual Budget; adopted annually Town Code Chapter 280, adopted 4/9/1957, amended in entirety 11/23/1971, amendments added as required No Yes Adopted 05/15/1995, currently being revised Yes LWRP adopted 11/30/2004 Yes Work in progress No 17) Real Estate Disclosure req. No 18) Other Yes LWRP adopted 11/30/2004 Notes: LWRP = Local Waterfront Revitalization Pro ~am DMA 2000 Hazard Mitigation Plan - Suffolk County, New York 9.15-6 DRAFT- September 2007 SECTION 9.15: TOWN OF SOUTHOLD Administrative and Technical CapabiliD, 1) Planner(s) or Engineer(s) with knowledge of land development and land management practices 2) Engineer(s) or Professional(s) trained in construction practices related to buildings and/or infrastructure 3) Planners or engineers with an understanding of natural hazards 4) Floodplain Manager 5) Surveyor(s) 6) Personnel skilled or trained in ~GIS" applications 7) Scientist familiar with natural hazards in Suffolk County. 8) Emergency Manager 9) Grant Wdter(s) 10) Staff with expertise or training in benefit/cost analysis Planning Department Building Dept. and Town Engineer Planning Dept. Building Dept. Contractor Data Processing Contractor Committee Many Town Departments Corn pt roller/Accounting DMA 2000 Hazard Mitigation Plan - Suffolk County, New York 9.15-7 DRAFT - September 2007 SECTION 9.15: TOWN OF SOUTHOLD Fiscal Capabili~' 1) Community development Block Grants (CDBG) Yes 2) Capital Improvements Project Funding Yes 3) Authority to Levy Taxes for specific purposes Yes 4) User fees for water, sewer, gas or electric service No 5) Impact Fees for homebuyers or developers of new Yes developmentJhomes 6) incur debt through general obligation bonds Yes 7) Incur debt through special tax bonds Yes 8) Incur debt through pdvate activity bonds No 9) Withhold public expenditures in hazard-prone areas No 10) State sponsored grant programs Unknown 11) Other Unknown CommuniW Classifications Community Rating System (CRS) Not parlicipating N/A Building Code Effectiveness Grading Schedule (BCEGS) 3/3 2004 Public Protection _/_ Storm Ready Not participating N/A Firewise Not participating N/A · Higher classification applies to when subject property is located beyond 1000 feet of a creditable fire hydrant and is within 5 road miles of a recognized Fire Station. · N/A = Not applicable. The above referenced classifications can be viewed as a gauge of this community's capabilities in all phases of emergency management (preparedness, response, recovery and mitigation). These classifications are used as an underwriting parameter for determining the costs of various forms of insurance. The CRS class applies to flood insurance while the BCEGS and Public Protection classifications apply to standard property insurance. Classifications range on a scale of 1 to 10 with class one being the best possible classification, and class 10 representing no classification benefit. Criteria for classification credits are outlined in the following documents: · The Community Rating System Coordinators Manual · The Building Code Effectiveness Grading Schedule · The Fire Suppression Rating Schedule DMA 2000 Hazard Mitigation Plan - Suffolk County, New York 9.15-8 DRAFT- September 2007 Proposed Hazard Mitigation Initiatives SECTION 9.15: TOWN OF SOUTHOLD Open space acquisition within the flood plain Flooding 2,5,8,15 Retrofit the Town Flooding, Hurdcane, 2,15, 16 causeway seawalls Nor'Easter Erosion control .Coastal Erosion 5,8,16 Stabilize vulnerable Coastal bluffs Erosion 5,8,15 Consider non-structural flood hazard mitigation alternatives for at risk properties within the floodplain, including those that have been identified as repetitive loss, such as acquisition/relocation, or elevation depending on feasibility. The parameters for feasibility for this initiative would be: funding, benefits versus costs and witling participation of property owners· Construct an Emergency Operations Center TOS High TOS High TOS High TOS High FEMA hazard Mitigation Grant Funding, 2% Short Real estate Term transfer tax, OG community preservation fund FEMA hazard Mitigation Grant Funding, Long Term Bonding, NYS DOT capital DOF projects FEMA hazard Mitigation Grant Short Term Funding, DOF Bonding FEMA hazard Mitigation Grant Short Funding, Term Bonding, DOF Property Owner funding Flooding, Hurricane, Nor'Easter, Severe Storms 2,15 TOS High FEMA hazard Mitigation Grant Long Funding, SBA term, Loans,Home DOF owner funding All Hazards FEMA hazard 2,13, 14, Mitigation Grant Short 16 TOS Medium Funding, Term · DOF Bonding Retrofit identified critical evacuation routes out of Flooding, flood hazard areas for Hurricane, the probable impacts of Nor'Easter, flood, hurricane and Severe Nor'easter· Storms FEMA hazard Short 2,15, 16 DOT High Mitigation Grant Ten~ Funding DOF DRAFT - September 2007 SECTION 9.15: TOWN OF SOUTHOLD Dredge vulnerable Coastal seaways Erosion 2,15, 16 ACOE Medium Acquire property at feasible points in cdtical Flooding, watersheds to establish Hurricane, storm water Nor'Easter, detention/retention Severe facilities for stormwater Storms, management. 5,11,15,16 TOS High hazard Mitigation Long Grant Funding, Term NYS Funding DOF hazard Mitigation Grant Funding, NYS Short Funding,Bonding, Term Suffolk County, OG 2% Community Preservation Fund Support county-wide initiatives identified in Section 6, Volume I of the Suffolk County Hazard Mitigation Plan. All Hazards Town Supervisor/Board Existing Short All MPC/Suffolk programs and Low Term obj~ectives County grant funding OG Emergency where applicable Consider the development of a post - disaster action plan, including a debds management plan. This to be incorporated into existing emergency All Hazards Public Safety/ General Fund, Long Suffolk Co. FEMA Hazard 7, 12, 13 Ereergency Medium Mitigation Grant term, DOF Management Funding Flood, participation in Nor'Easter, General fund incentive-based Town Long programs such as, CRS Hurricane, 1,2,3,7,13 Supervisor/Board Low trough existing Term Severe programs and "Storm-Ready". Weather Notes: Sho. term = I to 5 years. Long Tem~= 5 years or greater. OG = On going program. DOF = Depending on funding. TOS = Town of Southold. ACOE = U.S. Army Cogs of Engineers. DOI = Department of Transportation DMA 2000 Hazard Mitigation Plan - Suffolk County, New York 9.15-10 DRAFT - September 2007 SECTION 9.t5: TOWN OF SOUTHOLD PRIORIT1ZATION OF MITIGATION INITIATIVES High High Yes Yes Yes High High High Yes Yes Yes Medium High High .Yes No No Medium SO-2 High High Yes No No Medium High High Yes Yes No Medium Medium Medium Yes Yes No Medium High High Yes Yes No Medium ' High High Yes Yes No Medium SO-3 SO-4 SO-5 SO-6 SO-7 SO-8 SO-9 High High Yes Probably not Yes High SO-10 High Low Yes Yes Yes High SO-11 Medium Medium Yes Yes No Medium SO-12 Low Low Yes No No Low Notes: H = High. L = Low. M - Medium. N = No. N/A Not applicable. Y Yes. Explanation of Priorities · High Priority - A project that meets multiple objectives (i.e., multiple hazards), benefits exceeds cost, has funding secured or is an on-going project and project meets eligibility requirements for the Hazard Mitigation Grant Program (HMGP) or Pre-Disaster Mitigation Grant Program (PDM) programs. High priority projects can be completed in the short term ( 1 to 5 years). · Medium Priority - A project that meets goals and objectives, benefits exceeds costs, funding has not been secured but project is grant eligible under, HMGP, PDM or other grant programs. Project can be completed in the short term, once funding is completed. Medium priority projects will become high priority projects once funding is secured. · Low Priority - Any project that will mitigate the risk of a hazard, benefits do not exceed the costs or are difficult to quantify, funding has not been secured and project is not eligible for HMGP or PDM grant funding, and time line for completion is considered long term (1 to 10 years). Low priority projects may be eligible other sources of grant funding from other programs. A low priority project could become a high priority project once funding is secured as long as it could be completed in the short term. Prioritization of initiatives was based on above definitions: Yes Prioritization of initiatives was based on parameters other than stated above: Not applicable. DMA 2000 Hazard Mitigation Plan - Suffolk County, New York 9.15-11 DRAFT- September 2007 SECTION 9.15: TOWN OF SOUTHOLD FUTURE NEEDS TO BETTER UNDERSTAND RISK/VULNERABILITY · Consider participating in a comprehensive update to the Intra-jurisdictional County-wide Emergency Management Plan. · Consider participating in a comprehensive update to the lntra-jurisdictional County-wide Debris Management Plan. ADDITIONAL COMMENTS None at this time. HAZARD AREA EXTENT AND LOCATION Hazard area extent and location maps have been generated for the Town of Southold and illustrate the probable areas impacted within the Town. These maps are based on the best available data at the time of the preparation of this Plan, and are considered to be adequate for planning purposes. Maps have only been generated for those hazards that can be clearly identified using mapping techniques and technologies, and for which the Town of Southold has significant exposure. These maps are illustrated in the hazard profiles within Section 5.4, Volume I of this Plan. DMA 2000 Hazard Mitigation Plan - Suffolk County, New York 9.15-12 DRAFT - September 2007 amsl ARC BIT CCE CEMP CFR CIP CRS CUGIR DEM DHS DMA 2000 DPW DR EM EMP EMS EOC EOP EPA oF FAA FD FEMA FHMP FHWA FIA FIRM FMAP GIS H HAZUS ACRONYMS Above mean sea level American Red Cross Building Information Tool Cornell Cooperative Extension Comprehensive Emergency Management Plan Code of Federal Regulations Capitol Improvement Program Community Rating System Cornell University Geospatial Data Information Repository Digital Elevation Model Department of Homeland Security Disaster Mitigation Act of 2000 Department of Public Works Disaster Declarations Emergency Management Emergency Management Plan Emergency Management Services Emergency Operation Center Emergency Operation Plan U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Fahrenheit Federal Aviation Administration Fire Department Federal Emergency Management Agency Flood Hazard Mitigation Program Federal Highway Administration Flood Insurance Administration Flood Insurance Rate Map Flood Mitigation Assistance Program Geographic Information System High Hazards U.S. DMA 2000 Hazard Mitigation Plan - Suffolk County, New York A-1 DRAFT- September 2007 ACRONYMS HAZUS-MH HAZMAT HAZNY HMGP HMP ICS IT L M Mi MGD MOA Mph MRP N N/A NA NCA NCDC NDMC NEHRP NESEC NFIP NFIRS NFPA NID NIMS NLCD NOAA · NPDP NPL NRCS NWS Hazards U.S. Multi-Hazard Hazardous Material Hazards New York Hazard Mitigation Grant Program Hazard Mitigation Plan Incident Command System Information Technology Low Million Mile Million gallons per day Memorandum of Agreement Miles per hour Mean Return Period No Not Applicable Not Available New Croton Aqueduct National Climate Data Center National Drought Mitigation Center National Earthquake Hazard Reduction Program Northeast States Emergency Consortium National Flood Insurance Program National Fire incident Reporting System National Fire Protection Association National Inventory of Dams National Incident Management System National Land Cover Dataset National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration National Performance of Dams Program National Priorities List Natural Resource Conservation Service National Weather Service DMA 2000 HaZard Mitigation Plan - Suffolk County,,New York A-2 DRAFT - September 2007 ACRONYMS NY NYC NYS NYSDEC NYSDOH NYSDOT NYSFSMA NYSEMO NYSOFPC NYS TMC OFA % %g PBS PD PDM PGA Pop PSA Q3 SBA SC SC FRES SDWIS SHELDUS SLOSH SUNY TBD TRI USACE USDA USEPA DMA 2000 Hazard Mitigation Plan - Suffolk County, New York DRAFT - September 2007 New York New York City New York State New York State Department of Environmental Conservation New York State Department of Health New York State Department of Transportation New York State Floodplain and Stormwater Managers Association New York State Emergency Management Office New York State Office of Fire Prevention and Control New York State Traffic Management Center Office of Aging Percent Percent acceleration force of gravity Public Broadcast System Police Department Pre-Disaster Mitigation Program Peak Ground Acceleration Population Public Service Announcement Quality 3 Small Business Association Suffolk County Suffolk County Fire Rescue & Emergency Services Safe Drinking Water Information System Spatial Hazard Events and Losses Database for United States Sea, Lake and Overland Surges from Hurricanes Square mile State University of New York To Be Determined Toxic Release Inventory United States Army Corps of Engineers United States Department of Agriculture United States Environmental Protection Agency ACRONYMS USDOT USFA USFWS USGS WFAS WUI WWTP Y United States Department of Transportation United States Fire Administration United States Fish and Wildlife Service United States Geological Survey Wildland Fire Assessment System WildlandFUrban Interface Wastewater Treatment Plant Yes DM~ ~000 ~l'~rd Mitig~iio~ Pi'~: S~ffoik ~0unty, New York A-.4 DRAFT - September 2007 REFERENCES AeroGraphic Corps. A History of Shinnecock Inlet Through Aerial Photos. 1988. <http://www. offshorecoastal.com/history.htm>. Aigner, Erin. "Hurricane Flooding Risk." New York Times. 2005. <http://www.nytimes.c~m/imagepages/2~5/~8/27/nyregi~n/2~5~828-~ib~w-GRAPH~C.htm~> Alewine, Ralph et. al. Groundwater Contamination. Washington DC: National Academy P, 1984. <http://books.nap.edu/openbook.php?isbn=0309034418>. American Lyme Disease Foundation. U.S. Maps and Statistics - Lyme Disease Risk. 2006. <http://www.aldf. com/usmap.shtml>. Amon, Rhoda. "Long Island History: Other Bouts with Nature." Newsday. 2006 <http',//www.newsday.com/community/guide/lihistory/ny-history-hsgglor2,0,2337956.story>. Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service. Department of Agriculture. Domestic Quarantine Notices. <http://www. access.gpo.gov/nara/cfr/waisidx_O5/7cfr301_05.html>. Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service. United States Department of Agriculture. Beetle Busters: Countdown to Eradication. 2006. <http://beetlebusters.aphis.usda.gov/strategic_ny.html>. Aquilino, Jeanne et. al. Managing Coastal Erosion. Washington DC: Nationgl Academy P, 1990. <http://books.nap.edu/openbook. php?record_id= 1446&page=26>. Bales, Jonathan. "Hurricane Floyd September 1999:' North Carolina State University. Date Unknown_. <http://www4.ncsu.edu/~nwsfo/storage/cases/19990915/> Barlow, Paul M. USGS. Ground Water in Freshwater - Saltwater Environments of the Atlantic Coast. 1 Sept. 2005. <http://pubs.usgs.gov/circ/2003/circ1262/#heading152526608>. Barlow, Paul M., and Emily C. Wild. USGS. Bibliography on the Occurance and Intrusion of Saltwater in Aquifers Along the Atlantic Coast of the United States. 2002. <http://pubs.usgs.gov/of/2002/ofrO223 5/pdfs/ofrO223 5.pdf>. Barnes, Jay. lorlda s Humcane H~story. UNC Press Onhne. 1999. <http://www. ibiblio.org/uncpress/hurricanes/fl_donna.html> Bennington, J B. Hofstra University. Groundwater: Long Island's Aquifers. <http://people. hofstra.edu/faculty/j_b_bennington/I cnotes/aquifers.html>. Bennington, J. B. "Research Into the Geology of Long Island." Department of Geoloey. 4 Apr. 2005. Hofstra University. <http://people.hofstra.edu/J_B_Bennington/research/long_island/li.html>. Blair, Cynthia. "1960: Hurricane Donna's Fury Hits Long Island". Newsday. 2007. <http://www. newsday, com/other/special/ny-iholi0903 story,0,3585054.htmlstory>. Blair, Cynthia. "1995: Fires Rage Through the Pine Barrens." West Hampton Beach Fire Department. 27 Aug. 1995. Newsday. <http//www whbfd com/1995-fires-rage-through-the-pine-barrens.php>. DMA 2000 Hazard Mitigation Plan 2 §~f[oi~ ~0uniyl N~ ~i~ R-1 DRAFT- September 2007 REFERENCES Blake, Eric S., Jerry D. Jarrell, Max Mayfield, and Edward N. Rappaport. Christopher W. Landsea. National Hurricane Center (NHC). National Oceanic & Atmospheric Administration. "The Deadliest, Costliest, and Most Intense United States Tropical Cyclones from 1851 to 2004 (and Other Frequently Requested Hurricane Facts'. Costliest U.S. Hurr!canes 1900-2004 (adjusted). <http://www. nhc.noaa.gov/pastcost2.shtml> Bleyer, Bill· "One of the Top 3 Erosion Events." Newsday. Date Unknown. <http://www. hurricanes- blizzards-nor easters.com/p er fect_storm_article_ 10.jpg> Bossack, Brian H. and James B. Eisner. "Use of GIS in Plotting Early 19th Century Hurricane Information (Part 2)." Florida S~ate University. Date Unknown. <http://gamet. acns.fsu.edu/~jelsner/HHITProject/FullText.pdf> Busciolano, Ronald. Statistical Analysis of Long-Term Hydrologic Records for Selection of Drought- Monitoring Sites on Long Island, New York. U.S. Geological Survey. Reston, Virginia. 2005. Busciolano, Ronald. Water-Table and Potentiometric-Surface Altitudes of the Upper Glacial, Magothy, and Lloyd Aquifers on Long Island, New York, in Mamh-April 2000, with a Summary of Hydrogeologic Conditions. U.S. Geological Survey. Coram, New York. 2002. Buxton, Herbert T., and Douglas A. Smolensky. "Simulation of the Effects of Development of the Ground-Water Flow System of Long Island, New York; Water-Resources Investigations Report 98- 4069." U.S. Geological Survey. I Sept. 2005. <http://pubs.usgs.gov/wri/wri984069/>. Canadian Hurricane Centre. Glossary of Hurricane Terms. 10 July 2003. <http://www. atl.ec.gc.ca/weather/hurricane/hurricanes9.html>. Canavor, Natalie. "Hauppauge Industrial Park Marks 50th Anniversary." Long Island Business News. 21 Feb. 2003. Accessed on: 10 Sept. 2007 <http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_qn4189/is_20030221 / ' ai_n10166043>. Cartwright, Richard A. USGS. Occurence of Arsenic in Ground Water of Suffolk County, New York, 1997 - 2002. 2004. <http://ny.water.usgs.gov/pubs/wri/wri034315/wrir03-4315.pdf>. Card, Jay (Town of Shelter Island). "Cable Crossing." E-mail to Alison Miskiman. 4 Apr. 2007. Card, Jay (Town of Shelter Island). "Shelter Island Water." E-mail to Alison Miskiman. July 9, 2007. Cashin Associates, P.C. Environmental Study of the Barrier and Bay Island Communties: Town of Babylon, New York. Hauppauge, New York. June 1994. Centamore, Michelle G. Suffolk Life. Suffolk County. Locals Urged to Watch for Tick-Borne Illnesses. 20 July 2006.<http://www. zwire.com/site/news.cfm?newsid= 16946325& BRD= 1776&PAG=461 &dept_id=6365&rfi=6>. Central Pine Barrens Wildfire Task Force. "Chapter 3 - Fire Environment." Central Pine Barrens Fire Management Plan. Apr. 1999. <http://www.pb.state.ny.us/fire_plan/final_plan_chapter_3.htm>. Central Pine Barrens. New York State. Core Preservation Area Estimated Parcel Status by Ownership and Land Use as of January 1, 2007. 1 Jan. 2007. <http://www.pb.state. ny.us/chart_core.pdf>. DMA 2000 Hazard Mitigation Plan - Suffolk County, New York R-2 DRAFT - September 2007 REFERENCES Central Pine Barrens. New York State. Frequently Asked Questions Regarding Wildfire and the Central Pine Barrens Wildfire Task Force. <http://www.pb.state.ny. us/wtf/faq_fire.htm>. Chittenden, Jessica A. "Commissioner: 52 Counties Declared Disaster Areas: Most Livestock Farmers in NY Now Eligible for USDA Compensation Program." New York State Department of Agriculture & Markets. 19 Nov. 2002. <http://www.agmkt.state.ny.us/AD/release.asp?ReleaseID= 1265>. Chittenden, Jessica A. "Governor: 55 Counties Eligible for Drought Assistance." New York State Department of Agriculture & Markets. 22 Nov. 2002. <http://www.agmkt.state.ny.us/AD/release.asp?ReleaselD= 1266>. Chris. Random Shots by Chris. Location, Location, Location. 23 Apr. 2007. <http://randomshotsbychris.blogspot.com/2007 04 01 archive.html>. Citizens Campaign for the Environment. Long Island Groundwater Resources. <http://www. citizenscampaign, org/special_features/lig/lig_resources.html>. Clark, Karen. Maior Hurricane Strikes New York and New England: How Large Will the Losses Be? AIR. 2005. <http://www:air-worldwide.com/_public/NewsData/000832/ AIR_Worldwide_NYC_Hurricane.pdf>. Coastlines. NOAA. Sea Grant New York: Monitorihg Change. Winter 2000. <http://www. seagrant.sunysb.edu/Pages/Coastlines/Winter00.pdf>. Colwell, R., P. Epstein, D. Gubler, M. Hall, P. Reiter, J. Shukla, W. Sprigg, E. Takafuji, and J. Trtanj. "Global Climate Change and Infectious Diseases." Emerging Infectious Diseases 4 (1998). <http://www.cdc.gov/ncidod/eid/vol4no3/colwell.htm>. Comell Cooperative Extension. Suffolk County. Integrated Pest Management for the Deer Tick. July 2003. <http://counties.cce.coruell.edu/suffolk/grownet/ticks/deertick.htm>. Crary, David. "Drought Takes Toll on East's Landscape." USA Today. 5 Aug. 1999. <http://www.usatoday.com/weather/news/1999/wdryeast.htm>. Department of Environmental Conservation. New York ~tate. Coastal Erosion. 2007. <http://www. dec.ny.gov/lands/28923.html>. Department of Health. New York State. Lyme Disease. Nov. 2006. <http://www. health, state.ny.us/diseases/communicable/lyme/fact_sheet, htm>. DOH. New York State. Mosquitoes and West Nile Virus - Fight the Bite. Mar. 2004. <http://www.health state.ny.us/nysdoh/westnile/education/2731.htm>. DOH. State of New York. Reported Cases 2005 - Communicable Disease in New York State. Oct. 2006. ' <http://www.health state.ny.us/statistics/diseases/communicable/2005/cases2.htm>. DOH. State of New York. West Nile Virus Positive Test Results 1/1/2000 - 12/31/2000. 19 June 2001. <http://www. health.state.ny.us/nysdoh/westnile/update/2OOO/today.pdf~. DMA 2000 Hazard Mitigation Plan - Suffolk County, New York R-3 DRAFT- September 2007 REFERENCES Department of Health Services. Suffolk County. Annual Report 2002. 2002. <http://www.co.suffolk.ny. us/Health%20Services/2002Annual%20Report.pdf>. Despommier, Dickson, and Janine Bloomfield. Environmental Defense. Feeling the Bite of Global Wanning. 8 Oct. 2002. <http://www.environmentaldefense.org/article.cfm?ContentlD-2339>. Division of Parasitic Diseases. Centers for Disease Control. Radon and Drinkin~ Water From Private Wells. 19 Sept. 2003. <http://www.cdc.gov/ncidod/dpddhealthywater/factsheets/radon. htm>. Division of Vector-Bourne Infectious Diseases. Centers for Disease Control. Reported Cases of Lyme Disease - United States 2005.2 Apr. 2007. <http://www.cdc.gov/ncidod/dvbid/lyme/ld_lncidence.htm>. DBVID. Centers for Disease Control. Reported Lyme Disease Cases by State. 28 Aug. 2006. <http://www.aldf. com/usmap.shtml>. DBV1D. Centers for Disease Control. West Nile Virus - History and Distribution. 6 Apr. 2004. <http://www.cdc.gov/ncidod/dvbid/westhile/background. htm>. Donnelly, Chantal et. al. U.S. Army Corps of Engineers. Coastal Overwash: Part One Overview of Process. Sept. 2004. <http://www.wes.army. mil/rsm/pubs/pdfs/rsm-tn-14.pdf>. Drought Monitor. "Experimental U.S. Drought Monitor." 3.Aug. 1999. <http://www.drought.unl.edu/dm/archive/99/drmon804.htm>. Earth Science Educational Resource Center. SUNY Stonybrook. Long Island Groundwater. Date Unknown. <http://www. eserc.stonybrook, edu/cen514/info/LI/Groundwater.pdf>. "East Farmingdale Water District." Long Island Water Conference. Date Unknown. Accessed: 6 July 2007 <http://www. liwc.org/pages/members/EastFarmingdale, htm>. Eggleston, Keith L. "Climate Impacts - the Top 9 of'99." Northeast Regional Climate Center. 23 Dec. 1999. <http://www.nrcc.comell.edu/climate/Impacts_Ann-99.html>. Eisner, James. "Historical Hurricane Information Tool." Florida State University. Date Unknown. <http://garnet.acns.fsu.edu/~jelsner/HHITProj ect/hhithome, htm> Emerging Disease Issues. State of Michigan. History and Distrobution of Lyme Disease. 2007. <http ://www. michigan.gov/emergingdiseases/0,1607, 7-186-25890-75866--,00.html>. Enloe, Jesse. NCDC. NOAA. The Northeast Snowfall Impact Scale - NESIS. 4 Sept. 2007. <http://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/oa/climate/research/snow-nesis/#rankings>. Fagin, Dan. "The Birth of Long Island." Newsday. Unknown. <http://www.newsday.com/community/guide/lihistory/ny-history-hs 101 a,0,4995000.story>. Fagin, Dan. Newsday. Washed to the Sea. 2006. <http://www.newsday.com/community/guide/lihistory/ny-history-hs 109a,0,6043584.story>. DMA 2000 Hazard Mitigation Plan - Suffolk County, New York R-4 DRAFT - September 2007 REFERENCES Farber, Brian. "Bishop Urges FEMA to Respond to Local Needs After October Storms." Congressman Tim Bishop. 30 Nov. 2005. <http://wwwc.house.gov/timbishop/r109-066.htm>. Feitner, Laura (Town of Babylon Department of Planning & Development). "Babylon Facilities Review." E-mail to Alison Miskiman et. al. 19 April 2007. Feitner, Laura (Town of Babylon Department of Planning & Development). PDF Map of NYS Ortho- photography Spring 2004. 11 September 2007. Feitner, Laura (Town of Babylon Department of Planning & Development). E-mail to Alison Miskiman re: Jones Island. 14 September 2007. Feitner, Laura and Gil Hanse (Town of Babylon). Personal Meeting. 19 Dec. 2006. Federal Emergency Management Agency. "FEMA Information Resource Library." 2007 <http://www. fema.gov/library/index.j sp>. FEMA. "Frequently Asked Questions." Federal Emergency Management Agency. 21 Aug. 2006. Department of Homeland Security. <http://www. fema.gov/plan/prevent/fhrn/fcL_term.shtm//4>. FEMA. 2007. "Multi-Hazard Identification and Risk Assessment". FEMA. New York Disaster Histo~ (1955 to 2007). 2007. <http://www.fema.gov/news/disasters_state.fema?id=34> FEMA. New York Severe Storms and Inland and Coastal Flooding. 24 Apr. 2007. <http://www.fema.gov/news/event.fema?id=7845>. FEMA. Recovery Times. 5 Dec. 1996. <http://www. fema.gov/pdf/rt/nyeng, pdf>. FEMA. "Resource Record Details: Flood Insurance Program Description." Federal Emergency Management Agency. 2002. <http://www.fema.gov/library/viewRecord.do?id=1480>. Fire Island Association. New York Coastal Parmership'S "Case" Against Agency's Failures to Deal with Beach Erosion. 2002.<http://www.fireislandassn. org/archive/nycp_case 03 11 01.htm>. Forest Service. USDA. New York Asian Longhorned Beetle Cooperative Eradication Program Quarterly Report. 28 Mar. 2005. <http://www.uvm.edu/albeetle/March2005.pdf>. Frankenberg, Dirk. Carolina Environmental Diversity Explorations. "Hurricanes on Sandy Shorelines: How Do Hurricanes Form?" 1999. <http://www.learnnc.org/lp/editions/cede_hurricanes/2> Freedman. Newsday. 2007. <http://www.newsday.com/news/local/longisland/ny- listor0415,0,5642049.story?coll=ny-hsbball-toputility>. Friedlander Jr., Blaine P. "Severe Drought Threatens Northeast's Coastal Areas and Largest Cities, Cornell Climate Center Says." Cornell News. I Mar. 2002. Northeast Regional Climate Center - Cornell University. <http://www. news.cornell.edu/releases/March02/NRCC-Drought.bpf, html>. DMA 2000 Hazard Mitigation Plan - Suffolk County, New York R-5 DRAFT- September 2007 REFERENCES Foster, Stuart A. Natural Hazards and Their Impacts on A~icultural and Urban Development in the Barren River Area. The Kentucky Department of Agriculture. Date Unknown. <http://kyclim. wku.edu/BRADD/flooding/socecon.html>. Gardner, Chris. "Weakened Ernesto drenches Mid-Atlantic, cuts power, forces evacuations." USA Today. September 2, 2006. <http://www.usatoday.com/weather/hurricane/2006-09-02- ernesto_x.htm> Governor's Coastal Erosion Task Force Final Report Volume II. September 1994. Groat, Charles. "Director Charles Groat'S Talking Points and Slide Show for the American Association for Advancement of Science (February 19, 2005)." U.S. Geological Survey. 19 Feb. 2005. (http://www.usgs.gov/aboutusgs/docs/speeches/climate_change_2_l 9_05.pdf~. Groundwater Foundation. 2007. (http://www.groundwater.org>. Group for the South Fork. Groundwater Resources & Existing Land Uses on the South Fork. 2007. <http://www. groupforthesout hfork, or g/groupaction_archives/gr oundwat er_map.pdf~. Grubb, Megan. U.S. Army Corps of Engineers. North Shore of Lon~ Island~ NY Asharokeni Storm Damage Protection and Beach Erosion Control. <http~//www. nan.usace.army.mil/project/newyork/factsh/pdf/nshoreas.pdt%. Hafil, Larry. "Long Island Fire's of 1995." Lessons From the School of Hard Knox. Nov. 1997. (http://larryhafil.com/wfar/far0002.html3. Halsey-Brooks, Larae, and Eireann Brooks. "About Suffolk County." NYGen Web. 8 Jan. 2007. (http://www. rootsweb.com/~nysuffol/>. Hayes, Michael J. "What is Drought?" National Drought Mitigation Center. 2006. (http://drought.unl.edu/whatis/indices.htmY. Hazards & Vulnerability Research Institute. University of South Carolina (USC), Department of Geology, Columbia, SC. Spatial Hazard Events and Losses Database for the United States (SHELDUS): Version 5.1.5 Feb. 2007. May 2007 (http://www. cas.sc.edu/geog/hrl/SHELDUS.htmly. Health Services. Suffolk County Government. Biostatistics. 2001. (http://www.co.suffolk. ny. us/webtemp3.cfm?dept=6&id= 1037~. Health Services. Suffolk County Government. West Nile Information: Helpful Information for Suffolk County Residents. 7 June 2005. Heim, Richard. "Climate of 2002 - August; U.S. Regional Drought Watch." National Climatic Data Center. 13 Sept. 2002. National Oceanic & Atmospheric Administration. ~http://~wf.ncdc.n~aa.g~v/~a/c~imate/research/2~2/aug/dr~ught-regi~na~-~verview.htm~. Hevesi, Alan G. (New York State Comptroller) and Kenneth B. Bleiwas (Deputy Comptroller). 2006. "Economic Trends in Suffolk County Report 7-2007." September. DMA 2000 Hazard Mitigation Plan - Suffolk County, New York R-6 DRAFT - September 2007 REFERENCES "Historical Aerial Photos." 1962 Ash Wednesday Storm. Coastal and Hydraulics Labratory. <http://chl.wes.army.mil/shore/ashwednesday.htm>. Holley. Newsday.com. 27 July 2007. <http://www.newsday.com/news/local/longisland/ny- linile0727,0,4566059,print.story?coll--ny-top-headlines>. Holzmacher, J. R. "Floodplain Management and Hazard Mitigation Plan Draft Step 4 - Hazard Mitigation Plan." Patcho~ue Village. Org. July 2005. <http://www.patchoguevillage.org/hazmit/02%20- %20Steps/Step%2004/Text%20and%20Figures.pdf>. HurricaneCity. "City Database." HurricaneCity: for Cities Threatened by Atlantic Hurricanes Since 1997. Date Unknown. <htrp://www.hurricanecity. congcities.htm#A> and <http://www.hurricanecity.com/images/1938windmap.jpg> Iroquois Online. "Iroquois Gas Transmission Pipeline: System Map." 29 June 2007 <http://www.iroquois.com/new-Intemet/igts/index.asp>. Jones, Stephen M., and Roy Fedelem. A~icultural/md Farmland Protection: the Economy of Agriculture. Suffolk County Planning Department. 1996. Kocin, Paul J., and Louis W. Uccellini. American Meterological Society. NOAA. A Snowfall Impact Scale Derived From Northeast Storm Snowfall Distributions. 14 Oct. 2003. <http://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/oa/climate/researclfsnow-nesis/kocin-uccellini.pdf>. Kmlikas, Richard K., and Edward J. Koszalka. Geologic Reconnaissance of an Extensive Clay Unit in North-Central Suffolk County, Long Island, New York. U.S. Geological Survey. Syosset, NY, 1983. Kumar, C P. National Institute of Hydrology. Management of Groundwater in Salt Water Ingress Coastal Aquifers. <http://www.angelfire.com/nh/cpkumar/publication/gwman.pdf:>. Kurtz, Brian (Long Island Chapter of The Nature Conservancy). "Additional Hazards?" E-mail to Alison Miskiman. February 15, 2007. Lambert, Peter K., and Lauretta R. Fischer. Draft Open Space Aquisition Policy Plan for Suffolk County. Suffolk County Department of Planning. Hauppauge, NY, 2004. <ht tp://www, c o.suffolk.ny.us/planning/O SAPPDRAFTwatermark. PDF>. Lenntech. Seawater Intrusions in Groundwater. 2005. Levy, Steve (Suffolk County Executive), and Joseph F. Williams (Suffolk County Department of Fire, Rescue and Emergency Services). Comprehensive All-Hazards Emergency Management Plan Suffolk County, NY (Restricted Version). Suffolk County Executive and Department of Fire, Rescue and Emergency Services. 2005. Levy, Steve. "Suffolk County Estimates Storm Damage at Over $43 Million; Levy Requests Damage Assessment from New York State and FEMA". Suffolk County Government. 27 October 2005. <http://www. co. suffolk.ny.us/pressreleases.cfm?ID= 1464&dept=22 >. Longlsland.com. "Long Island Weather." Date Unknown. Accessed on: 24 Jan. 2007 <http://www. long island.com/weather.php>. DMA 2000 Hazard Mitigation Plan - Suffolk County, New York R-7 DRAFT- September 2007 REFERENCES Long Island Convention & Visitors Bureau and Sports Comanission. "Suffolk County." 12 July 2007 <http://www.discoverlongisland.com/display_info.cfm/ID_name/suffolk_county>. Long Island Farm Bureau "Long Island's AG Industries." Long Island Farm Bureau. 5 July 2007. <http://www.lilb.com/li_ag_industries.0.html>. Long Island Geneology. Suffolk County History: 1883 - 1914.28 Aug. 2000. <http://www.rootsweb.com/~nysuffol/history4.html>. "Long Island Hurricane History." 17 Apr. 2007. <http://www.hurricanes-blizzards-noreasters.com>. Long Island Index. "2004: Land Use in Nassau and Suffolk Counties." Aug. 2004. Accessed on: 5 July 2007 <http://www.longislandindex.org/land use analysis.html>. Long Island Library. Long Island Memories Collection. Blizzard of Hempstead (Village), NY. Nov. 2006.<http://209.139.1.182/cdm4/item_viewer.php?CI SOROOT=/hpI&CISOPTR=370 &CISOBOX=I &REC=2>. "Long Island North Shore Weather and Outdoors." NorthshoreWx. 2006 <http://www. northshor ewx.com/>. Long Island Power Authority (LIPA). Population Survey 2005 Current Population Estimates for Nassau and Suffolk Counties and the Rockawa¥ Peninsula. Uniondale, NY, 2007. Long Island Regional Planning Board "Land Use in Percent, 1981 and 1989, Land Use in Percent, 2000". Long Island Regional Planning Board. "Proposed Long Island South Shore Hazard Management Program." December 1989.' Long Island Regional Planning Board. "Quantification and Analysis of Land Use for Nassau and Suffolk Counties", December 1982. Long Island Storm History. My Weather Page: Bellmore, NY. 2006. <http://www. hurricanes-blizzards- noreasters.com/currentconditions.html>. Long Island Storm History. The Northeast Blizzard of 1978. I Nov. 2006. <http://www.hurricanes- blizzards-noreasters.com/78blizzard, html>. Longwood High School. "Long Island Geology." Date Unknown. http://www.longwood/kl2/ny.us/lhs/science/teachers/bundik/lig/index.html Long Island Exchange. "Suffolk County, Long Island." <http://www. longislandexchange.com/suffolk- county.html>. Long Island Power Authority. "LIPA Forms Public/Private Partnership for Hurricane Awareness" 18 August 2004. <http://www. lipower.org/newscent er/pr/2004/august 18.hurricane. html> LIPA, "Population Survey 2005 Current Population Estimates for Nassau and Suffolk Counties and the Rockaway Peninsula", Uniondale, NY, November 2005. DMA 2000 Hazard Mitigation Plan - Suffolk County, New York R-8 DRAFT- September 2007 REFERENCES Lott, Neal. Research Customer Service Group. NCDC. The Big One! a Review of the March 12-14, 1993 "Storm of the Century" 14 May 1993. <ftp://ftp.ncdc.noaa.gov/pub/data/techrpts/tr9301/tr9301 .pdf>. Madison, and Smith. Newsday. 2007. <http://www.newsday.com/news/local/longisland/ny- listor0417,0,5773123.story?coll--ny-homepage-mezz>. Maimone, Mark. University of Mississippi. Computer Modeling and Surface Geophysics Unravel the Mystery of Salt Water Intrusion on Long Island. 2001. <http://www.olemiss.edu/sciencenet/saltnet/swiea l /Maimone.pdf>. Maine Geological Survey. State of Maine. Reading Coastal Bluffs Maps. 6 Oct. 2005. <http://www.maine.gov/doc/nrimc/mgs/mapuse/bluffs/bluff-read. htm>. Mandia, Scott A. SUNY Suffolk. Geological Impact of the 1938 Hurricane. 1992. <http://www2.sunysuffolk. edu/mandias/38hurricane/geological_impact.html>. Mandia, Scott A. SUNY Suffolk. "Introduction to Hurricanes." Date Unknown. <http://www2. sunysuffolk, edu/mandias/38hurricane/hurricane_introduction.ht ml>. Mandia, Scott A. SUNY Suffolk. "The Long Island Express - Great Hurricane of 1938." 2 Apr. 2007. State University of New York (SUNY) Suffolk. 2006 <http://www2.sunysuffolk.edu/mandias/38hurricane/>. <http://www2.sunysuffolk.edu/mandias/38hurricane/damage_caused.html> <http://www2.sunysuffolk. edu/mandias/38hurricane/storm_surge_.maps.html> Mass Transit Authority. "About the MTA Long Island Rail Road.". Date Unknown. Accessed: 21 June 2007 <http://www. mta.info/lirr/pubs/aboutlirr.htm>. Mass Transit Authority. "Long Island Bus." Mass Transit Authority. Date Unknown. Accessed: 21 June 2007 <http://www.mta.info/libus/bus_info/libinfo.htm>. McCormick, Larry R., Orrin H. Pilkey Jr., William J. Neal and Orrin H. Pilkey Sr. "Living with Long Island's South Shore." 1984. Durham, North Carolina. McFadden, Robert D. New York Times. East Coast Storm Breaks Rainfall Records, Unleashing Floods. 16 Apr. 2007.<http://www. nytimes.com/2007/04/16/nyregion/ 16 storm, html?_r=2&oref=-slogin& ore f=slogin>. McFadden, Robert D. New York Times. Second Day of Snow Pummels Region, Setting Records. 7 Dec. 2003.<http://www. nytimes.com/2003/12/07/nyregion/07SNOW.html?ei=5007&en= 111 b9f0f695813c9&ex= 1386133200&parmer=USERLAND&pagewanted=all&position>. McKay, Dawn, Rosenberg. "Long Island's Hurricane History." Date Unknown. About.com <http://longisland. about.com/cs/weather/a/hurricane_past, htm> McNoldy, Brian. Multi-Community Environmental Storm Observatory, Inc (MESO) 1998-2007. <http://www. mcwar.org/>. Miller, J. F., and R. H. Frederick. U.S. Geogolical Survey. Department of the Interior. The Precipitation DMA 2000 Hazard Mitigation Plan - Suffolk County, New York R-9 DRAFT- September 2007 REFERENCES Regime of Long Island, New York. Washington: United States Government Printing Office, 1969. Mintz, Phil. Newsday. Snowfall Totals: Winter 2003-2004. 17 Jan. 2004. <http://www.newsday.com/other/special/naturalworld/ny-nw-twstorm0118,0,629287.story?coil=ny- features-utility>. Mintz, Phil. Newsday. The Nature of a Nor'Easter. 17 Jan. 2004. 2006 <http://www.newsday.com/other/special/naturalworld/ny-nw-twstorm0118,0,629287.story?coil=ny- features-utility>. Miskus, David. "U.S. Drought Monitor April 16, 2002." Drought Monitor. 18 Apr. 2002. Climate Prediction Center, NOAA. <http://www.drought.unl.edu/dm/archive/2002/drmon0416.htm>. Moody, David W. USGS. Water Quality and Waste Management. Sources and Extent of Groundwater Contamination. Mar. 1996. <http://www.p2pays.org/ref/01/00065.htm>. Morisawa, Tunyalee. Wildland Invasive Species Program. The Nature Conservancy. Asian Longhorned Beetle. 22 June 2000. <http://tncweeds.ucdavis.edu/moredocs/anogla01 .rtl'>. MSN Encarta. "New York." Date Unknown. <http://encarta.msn.com/encyclopedia_761552683/New_York. html>. Multi-Community Environmental Storm Obervatory. Nor'Easters: Comprehension, Preparation, Survival. Oct. 2002. <http://www.mcwar.org/articles/noreasters/NorEasters. html>. Muruetagoiena, Tamam. Columbia University. Asian Longhorned Beetle - Introduced Species Summary Proiect. 24 Nov. 2004. <http://www.columbia.edu/itc/cerc/danoff- burg/invasion_bio/inv__spp_summ/Anoplophora%20glabripennis.html#Distribution>. National Agricultural Statistics Service. "Suffolk County Farm Statistics." U.S. Department of Agriculture. Date Unknown. <http://www.nass.usda.g~v/Statistics-by-State/New-Y~rk/C~unty-Pr~~les/Su~~~k.pdf>. National Climatic Data Center (NCDC). NOAA. Climate of 2002 - 2003: North America Snow Season. 6 June 2003. <http://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/oa/climate/research/snow02.html>. NCDC. NOAA. NCDC Storm Event Database (by State) 1950 Through 2007. 2007. <http://www4.ncdc.noaa.gov/cgi-win/wwcgi.dll?wwEvent-Storms>. NCDC. NOAA. North American Drought Monitor. 27 Oct. 2006. <http://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/oa/climat e/monit oring/dr ought/nadm/index.html>. NCDC. NOAA. "Perfect Storm" Damage Summary. 13 Dec. 2004. <http://www.ncdc.n~aa.g~v/~a/sate~~ite/sate~~iteseye/cyc~~nes/pfctst~rm9 ~/pfctstdam.htm~>. NCDC. NOAA. The Perfect Storm: October 1991.24 Aug. 2006. <http://www.ncdc.n~aa.g~v/~a/sate~~ite/sate~~iteseye/cyc~~nes/pfctst~rm9 ~/pfctst~rm.htm~>. DMA 2000 Hazard Mitigation Plan - Suffolk County, New York R-10 DRAFT- September 2007 REFERENCES NCDC. NOAA. The Winter of 1995-1996: a Season of Extremes. May 1996. <http://~~s.nndc.n~aa.g~v/p~~~st~re/p~sq~/~~st~re.pr~dspeci~c?pr~dnum=C~~495-PUB- A0001 #95DEC>. National Drought Mitigation Center. "Drought Monitor: State-of-the-Art Blend of Science and Subjectivity." 19 Mar. 2003. University of Nebraska - Lincoln. <http://www. drought.unl.edu/dm/archive/99/classify, htm>. National Drought Mitigation Center. University of Nebraska - Lincoln. "Drought Impact Reporter." <http://www.drought.unl.edu/dm/about.html>. National Hurricane Center. National Oceanic & Atmospheric Administration. "Storm Surge." Date Unknown. <http://www.nhc.noaa.gov/HAW2/english/storm_surge. shtml> NHC. National Oceanic & Atmospheric Administration. "Costliest U.S. Hurricanes 1900-2004 (adjusted)." 28 July 2005. <http://www. nhc.noaa.gov/pastcost2.shtml> NHC. "Return Period in Years for Category 3 Hurricane." National Weather Service. Date Unknown. <http://www.nhc. noaa.gov/HAW2/english/basics/images/cat 3_ne. gif> NHC. "Return Periods." Hurricane Preparedness. National Oceanic & Atmospheric Administration. <http://www.nhc.noaa.gov/HAW2/english/basics/return. shtml> National Interagency Fire Center. Date Unknown. <http://www. nifc.gov/> National Park Service. U.S. Department of the Interior. September 2005. "The Coastal Geomorphology of Fire Island: A Portrait of Continuity and Change (Fire Island National Seashore Science Synthesis Paper)." Technical Report NPS/NER/NRTR--2005/021 <http://www.ci.uri.edu/naccesu/FIIS_page/Psuty_etal_oceanshore_final.pdf> National Oceanic & Atmospheric Administration. Enhanced Fuiita Tornado Dama~;e Scale. 1 Feb. 2007. <http://www. spc.noaa.gov/e fscale/ef-scale.html>. NOAA. Fuiita Tornado Damage Scale. <http://www. spc.noaa.gov/faq/tornado/f-scale.html>. NOAA. Photo Archives. Storm of the Century March 13-14, 1993. <http://wint ercenter.homest ead. com/photo 1993.htmlY. · NOAA. "Special Climate Summary: Drought in the Northeast and Mid-Atlantic." 1 Sept. 1995. <http://www.cpc.ncep.noaa.gov/products/special_summaries/95_9/>. NOAA. Storm Prediction Center. The Enhanced Fuiita Scale - EF Scale. 4 June 2007. <http://www. spc.noaa.gov/efscale/>. NOAA. "The Palmer Drought Severity Index." <http://www. drought.noaa.gov/palmer.html>. National Weather Service. "Drought Indices Explanation." 15 June 2005. Climate Prediction Center. <http://www. cpc.ncep.noaa.gov/product s/analysis_monitoring/c dus/palmer_drought/wpdanot e. shtml DMA 2000 Hazard Mitigation Plan - Suffolk County, New York R-11 DRAFT- September 2007 REFERENCES NWS. "What is a Hurricane. Hurricane Awareness. 2000. <http://www.srh.noaa.gov/ctp/docs/safety/Aware/reference/terminology.html>. NWS. U.S. Department of Cotnmerce. Winter Storm - the Deceptive Killer: a Preparedness Guide. Dec. 2001. 2006 <http://www.nws.noaa.gov/om/winterstorm/winterstorms.pdf>. NWS. NOAA. Service Assessment: Blizzard of'96. Dec. 1996. <http://www.nws.noaa.gov/om/assessments/pdfs/bz-mrg.pdf>. NWS. "What is Meant by the Term Drought?" National Oceanic & Atmospheric Administration. <http://www. wrh. noaa.gov/fgz/science/drought.php?wfo=fgz>. NWS. "Hurricane Donna - September 3-12, 1960" Hydrometeorological Prediction Center. Date Unknown. <http://www. hpc.ncep.noaa.gov/tropical/rain/donna 1960.html> Nemickas, Bronius, Gail E. Mallard, and Thomas E. Reilly. USGS. Department of the Interior. Availability and Historical Development of Ground Water Resources of Long Island, New York - an Introduction. Syosset, New York, 1989. Newsday. Newsday. Com. 2007. <http://www.newsday.com>. New York Asian Longhomed Beetle Cooperhtive Eradication Program. APHIS. Asian Longhorned Beetle Quarterly Update. May 2004. <http://www. fs.fed, us/na/durham/foresthealth/alb/newsletter/O4may/04may.htm>. New York City. Office of Emergency Management. NYC Hazards: Coastal Storm Basics. 2007. <http://www. nyc.gov/html/oem/ht ml/hazards/storms_terms.shtml>. New York City Department of Parks and Recreation. City of New York. Asian Long Homed Beetle Alert. 23 Mar. 2007.<http://www.nycgovparks.org/sub~vour_park/ treesMgr eenstreets/beetle_alert/beetle_alert.html>. New York State. Economic Trends in Suffolk County. New York City Public Information Office. Office of the State Comptroller. 2006. NYS Draft Generic Environmental Impact Statement New York State Statewide Wireless Network.. Statewide Wireless Network Project Office. Office for Technology. 2004. New York State Climate Office. "The Climate of New York." Cornell University. <http://nysc.eas.comell.edu/climate_of_ny. html>. Unknown. New York State Department of Environmental Conservation. Article 34 Environmental Conservation Law - Coastal Erosion Hazard Areas (Chapter 841, Laws of 1981; Effective Date July 27, 1981) including 1985 amendments. NYSDEC. "New York State Drought Regions". 2007. Division of Water. 2007 <http://www.dec.ny.gov/lands/5014.html>. DMA 2000 Hazard Mitigation Plan - Suffolk County, New York R-12 DRAFT - September 2007 REFERENCES NYSDEC. Regulations and Enforcement, Resource Management Services. Part 505: Coastal Erosion Management (Statutory Authority: Environmental Conservation Law, 3-0301, 34-0108}. Mar. 1988.. Sept. 2007 <http://www.dec.state.ny.us/permits/6064.html>. NYSDEC. "Unified Watershed Assessment and Watershed Protection and Restoration". 1998. Accessed: 30 Aug. 2007 <http://www.dec.ny.gov/lands/34488.html>. New York State Department of Health. Wadsworth Center. Radon Maps of New York State by County and Town - Suffolk County. Feb. 2007. <http://www. wadsworth, org/radon/tables/county/suffolk.htm>. NYSDOH. West Nile Virus 2007 Update. Sept. 2007. <http://www.health.state. ny.us/nysdoh/westnile/update/update.htm>. New York State Department of State. Coastal Flooding and Erosion in the South Shore Estuary Reserve. Soutl~ Shore Estuary Reserve Council. 2000. <http://www.nyswaterfr~nts.net/Fina~-Draft-HTML/Tech-Rep~rt-HTM/F~~~ding/F~~~d-First.htm>. New York State Department of Transportation. "Region 10 at a Glance." New York State Department of Transportation. Date Unknown. Accessed: 2 July 2007 <https://www.nysd~t.g~v/p~rta~/page/p~rta~/regi~na~-~~ces/regi~n~ ~/genera~-inf~>. New York State Disaster Preparedness Commission. 2005. New York State Comprehensive Emergency Management Plan. Volume 1: New York State Standard Multi-Hazard Mitigation Plan. Approved by FEMA January 2005. New York State Emergency Management Office. "History of Declared Federal Emergencies and Disasters in New York State." 2006 <http//www. semo.state.ny.us/programs/recovery/history, cfm>. NYSEMO. "Hurricane Inundation Zones of Westchester, Suffolk, Nassau Counties, and New York City, New York." New York State Geo~'aphic Information Systems Clearinghouse. 2007. Accessed: 18 July 2007 <http//www nysgis state, ny.us/gisdata/metadata/semo. NYSLOSH html> NYSEMO. New York State Standard Multi-Hazard Mitigation Plan. January 2005. <http//www semo.state.ny.us/programs/planning/CEMP cfm> New York State Office for Technology. Draft Generic Environmental Impact Statement. Appendix A - New York State Bedrock Geology. New York State Radon Program. New York State. Radon Awareness. <http://www.nyradon. org/index.html#aware>. Newsday. com. "Community Profile: From an English Colony Nourished by Soil and Sea to Suburbia Knitted Together by Rails." 2007.<http://www. newsday.com/community/guide/lihistory/ ny-historyt own-suffolk, 0,3812177,print.story?coll=ny-lihistory-navigation> Newsday.com. "Our Natural World." Date Unknown. <http://www.newsday.com/other/special/naturalworld/>. DMA 2000 Hazard Mitigation Plan - Suffolk County, New York R-13 DRAFT- September 2007 REFERENCES Northeastern Area. USDA Forest Service. Asian Longhorned Beetle. 2007. <http://www.na.fs.fed.us/fhp/alb/general/hostlist.shtm>. Northeast Regional Climate Center. "New York Drought Periods." 2006. <http://www.nrcc.cornell.edu/drought/NY_drought_periods.html>. Northern Rockies Coordination Center. "PSA NFDRS Component Glossary." Date Unknown. <http://gacc.nifc.g~v/nrcc/predictive/fue~s-~re~danger/psa-c~mp~nent-gl~ssary.htm> North Shore Wx. Climate: North Shore and Regional Climate Statistics. 25 Mar. 2007. (http://www.northshorewx.com/ClimateStatistics.asp>. North Shore Wx. Climate: Snowfall Patterns on Long Island. (http://www.northshorewx.com/Climate.asp>. North Shore Wx. Climate: the Blizzard of January 2005.23 Jan. 2005. (http ://www.norths hor ewx.com/blizzar .d20050123 .asp>. North Shore Wx. Weather Images: Storm of January 27-28~ 2004. 28 Jan. 2004. <http://www.northshorewx.com/20040128.asp>. North Shore Wx. Weather Images: the Long Island Ice Storm of January 13-14, 1978. (http://www.northshorewx.com/19780113.asp>. Oahu Civil Defense Agency. State of Hawaii. Coastal Erosion. (http://www.mothernature- hawaii.com/flles/honolulu_planning- 16.pdf~. Ocean Beach and Fire Island. Nor'Easter History. 9 July 2002. (http://ocean- beach, com/weather_norester_history, htm>. Offshore & Coastal Technologies, Inc. - East Coast "A History of Shinnecock Inlet Through Aerial Photos." 1998. (http://www.offshorecoastal.com/history.htm> Off Shore Coastal. 24 September 1939. <http://www.offshorecoastal.com/24_september_1939.htm>. Off Shore Coastal. 30 June 1938: Pre-Inlet. (http://www.offshorecoastal.com/30~june_1938.htm>. O'Neill, Charles R. New York State. Sea Grant New York. The New York State Coastal Erosion Hazard Act. 1989. (ht~p://www.nysgextensi~n.~rg/g~habitat/epacd/pages/regulati~ns/er~si~nactpdf.pdf~. Ortiz~ Luz D. EPA. Federal Register of Environmental Documents. Intent to Prepare a Draft Environmental Impact Statement (DEIS) for a Proposed Hurricane and Storm Damage Reduction Project At the Village of Asharoken, Suffolk County~ NY. 16 Jan. 2002. (http://www. epa.gov/fedrgstr/EPA-IMPACT/2OO2/January/Day- 16/i 1147.htm>. Patchogue Village. Step 4: Assessin~ the Hazard. 23 Jan. 2006. <http://www.patch~guevi~age.~rg/hazmit/~2%2~%2~Steps/Step%2~4/Text%20and%2~Figures.pdf DMA 2000 Hazard Mitigation Plan - Suffolk County, New York R-14 DRAFT- September 2007 REFERENCES Petzolt, Curtis, and Abby Seaman. "Climate Change Effects on Insects and Pathogens." Climate Change and Agriculture: Promoting Practical and Profitable Responses. Climate Change and Northeat Agriculture. <http://www.climateandfarming. org/pdfs/FactSheets/III.2Insects. Pathogens.pdf>. Psuty, Norbert P., Michele Grace, and Jeffrey P. Pace. U.S. Department ofth~ Interior. National Park Service. The Coastal Geomorphologv of Fire Island: a Portrait of Continuity and Change Technical Report NPS/NER/NRTR--2005/021. Sept. 2005. <http://www. ci.urLedu/naccesn/FIIS_page/Psuty_etal_oceanshore_final.pdf~. Ranjan, Priyantha. Encyclopedia of Earth. Effect of Climate Change and Land Use Change on Salt Water Intrusion. 11 Apr.2007.(ttp://www.eogarth.org/article/Effect of climate_change_ and land use change_on_saltwater_intrusion3, Rather, John. "Dreading a Replay of the 1938 Hurricane." New York Times 28 Aug. 2005. <http://www.nytimes.c~m/2~~5/~8/28/riyregi~n/nyregi~nspecia~2/28~ib~~w.htm~?ex=~ 282881600&en =69414336488a2 f70&ei=5089&partner~ssyahoo&emc=rss>. Riverhead Water District. 2006 Drinking Water Quality Report. 2007. 1-4. <http://riverheadli.com/06.Drinking. Water. Quality. Report.pdf>. Rogers, William B., Yngvar W. Isachsen, Timothy D. Mock, and Richard E. Nyahay. "Overview of New York Geology." At Geophysics RPI. (http://gretchen.geo.rpi.edu/roecker/nys/nys_edu.pamphlet.html3. Ryker, Sarah. Geotimes. Mapping Arsenic in Groundwater. Nov. 2001. (http://www. agiweb.org/geotimes/nov01/feature_Asmap.html3. Saslow, Linda. New York Times. Health. Can the Winter of'96 Get Any Worse Than This? 14 Jan. 1996.<http://query. nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html?sec=health&res= 9A07EFD91039F937A25752COA960958260>. Schneider, Brian J., et al. 1987. "Hydrologic Effects of Artificial-Recharge Experiments with Reclaimed Water at East Meadow, Long Island, New York." U.S. Geological Survey. Syosset, New York. Schneider, Jon. United States Congress. Tim Bishop. Bishop Urges Federal Help for Southold Erosion. 28 July 2006. <http://wwwc.house.gov/timbishop/r 109-106.htm>. Senator Schumer, Charles E. - New York. United State Senate. Latest News: Schumer, Levy, Bellone Tour Suffolk's Storm-Devastated Gilgo Beach. 30 Apr. 2007. 2006 <http://www. senate gov/-schumer/SchumerWebsite/pressroom/record, c fm?id=273427>. Shaman, Diana. New York Times. In the Region/Long Island; Restoring a Storm-Raveged Barrier Beach Village. 5 May 1996.(http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html?res= 9803E5DCI439F936A35756COA960958260Y. Shelter Island NY Comprehensive Plan Committee. Shelter Island Comprehensive Plan. 1994. Smith. Newsday. 2007. <http://www.newsday.com/news/local/longisland/ny- lieros0418,0,5908782.story>. DMA 2000 Hazard Mitigation Plan - Suffolk County, New York R-15 DRAFT- September 2007 REFERENCES South Shore Estuary Reserve Council. New York State Department of State. Coastal Flooding and Erosion in the South Shore Estuary Reserve. Mar.2000.<http://nyswaterfronts.com/Final_ Drafi_HTML/Tec h_Repor t_HTM/Flooding/Flood_First.htm>. Spatial Hazard Events and Losses Database for the United States. South Carolina Hazards Research Lab. 5 Feb. 2007. <http://webra.cas.sc.edu/sheldus_setup/>. Spencer, Bob, and Aram Terchunian. First Coastal. The Sand Thieves of Long Island's South Shore. <http://www.firstcoastal.net/sthieves.htm>. Steere, Allen C., Jenifer Cobum, and Lisa Glickstein. "The Emergence of Lyme Disease." The Journal of Clinical Investigation 113 (2004): 1093-1101. <http://www.pubmedcentral.nih. gov/articlerender, fcgi?artid=385417.>. Stephens, Scott. "Hazards/Climate Extremes." NOAA Satellite and Information Service. 15 Nov. 2005. <http://www. ncdc.noaa.gov/oa/climate/researclf2OO5/oct/hazards.html>. Stricherz, Vince. Office of News and Information. University of Washington. Insect Population Growth Likely Accelerated by Warmer Climate. 30 Oct. 2006. <http://uwnews.washington. edu/ni/article, asp?articleID=27760>. Struck Doug. Washington Post. Climate Change Drives Disease to New Territory. 5 May 2006. <http;//www. washingtonpost.com/wpdyn/content/article/2006/ 05/04/AR2006050401931 .html>. Suffolk County. Economic Development and Workforce Housing. "lndsturial Parks". 6 Oct. 2000. Accessed on: 10 Sept. 2007 <http://www.co.suffolk. ny. us/webtemp3.cfm?dept--4&id=973>. Suffolk County Department of Health Services. Private Well Water Testing Program. "Health Services - Private Well Water Testing Program" Suffolk County Government. Feb..2006. <http://www.co.suffolk.ny.us/webtemp3.cfm?dept=6&id=997>. Accessed July 6, 2007. SCDHS. "Health Services, Bureau of Preventative Services." Suffolk County Government <http://www.co.suffolk. ny. us/webtemp3.cfm?dept=6&id=2817> Accessed August 16, 2007. . SCDHS. "Mosquito Control." Suffolk CountyGovernment<http://www.co.suffolk. ny.us/webtemp5.cfm? id=75&dept=-9#water%20management> Accessed August 16, 2007. Suffolk County Department of Planning. "2001 Existing Land Use Inventory". 2004. SCDP. "A Review of Selected Growth and Development Areas Suffolk County New York", Suffolk County New York, August 2006. SCDP. "Demographic, Economic, and Development Trends, Suffolk County, New York", Hauppauge, New York, April, 2005. SCDP. "Open Space Acquisition Policy Plan for Suffolk County". Mar. 2004. Accessed on: 6 July 2007 <http://www.co. suffolk.ny.us/planning>. SCDP. "Seasonal Planning Estimates". DMA 2000 Hazard Mitigation Plan - Suffolk County, New York R-16 DRAFT- September 2007 REFERENCES SCDP. "Suffolk County, New York." Map. Date unknown. Accessed on: 5 July 2007 <http://www.co.suffolk.ny.us/Planning/SCElevations.pdf>. SCDP. "Suffolk County, New York." Map. Date unknown. Accessed on: 6 July 2007 <http://www.afiresearch.org/PDRdatabase/su ffolk.pdf>. Suffolk County Finance & Taxation Data. "FRES Land Values." (CD-ROM). Suffolk County, New York. 2 January 2007. Suffolk County Health Assessment. Suffolk County. Oct. 2005. <http://www.co.suffolk.ny. us/Health%20Services/SuffolkCHA2005-10.pdf>. Suffolk County Government. Bureau of Preventative Services. Health Services - Bureau of Preventative Services. <http://www.co.suffolk.ny.us/webtemp3.cfm?dept=-6&id=2817>. SCG. Mosquito Control. <http://www.co.suffolk.ny. us/webtemp5 .cfm?i.d=75 & dept=--9#wat er%20management>. SCG. Office of the Aging. County Executive. Suffolk County Estimates Storm Damage At Over $43 Million; Lev,/Requests Damage Assessment From New York State and FEMA. 2006.27 Oct. 2005. <http://www. co.suffolk.ny, us/pressreleases.cfm?ID= 1464&dept=-22>. SCG: "Public Works." Date Unknown. Accessed: 21 June 2007.. <http://www. co.suffolk, ny.us/webtemp3.cfm?dept= 14&ID= 108> ~CG. "Public Works - Highway Division." Date Unknown. Accessed: 21 June 2007 <http://www. co.suffolk, ny.us/webtemp3.cfm?dept=40&id= 1223>. Suffolk County Water Authority. 2007 Annual Drinking Water Report. 1 Jan. 2007. <http://www. scwa.com/S CWA_AWQR.pdf>. SCWA. "Our Environment: Water Facts." 2002. <http://www.scwa.com/environment/waterfacts.cfm>. SCWA. "Education Center: Frequently Asked Questions." 2002. Accessed on: 12 Apr. 2007 <http://www.scwa.com/education/faq. cfm>. Suffolk County Legislature Budget Review Office. 2003. Impact of the Atlantic Ocean Beaches to the Suffolk County Economy. May 13. Suffolk County Government. "Suffolk County History." Office of County Executive. Date Unknown. <http://suffolkcountyny.gov/webtemp3.cfm?dept=- 19&id~ 158>. Suffolk County Water Authority. ArcView 3.2 SCWA Wells Generalized 2006 and SCWA Properties 2007. New York State Plane NAD 1927. State University of New York at Stony Brook. "General Soil Map." The Center for High Pressure Research. 27 April 2006. <http://www. chipr.sunysb.edu/eserc/longis/geralsoilmap.html> SUNY at Stony Brook. "Nature of Soils." The Center for High Pressure Research. 27 April 2006. <http://www.chipr.sunysb.edu/eserc/longis/soilnature. html> DMA 2000 Hazard Mitigation Plan - Suffolk County, New York R-17 DRAFT - September 2007 REFERENCES Surfrider Foundation. New York Beach Erosion. 2007. <http://www.surfrider.org/stateofihebeach/05- sr/state.asp?zone=ne&state=ny&cat=be>. Tanski, Joseph J., and Barry Pendergrass. SUNY Stonybrook. Sea Grant New York. Coastal Erosion Hazard Monitoring on the South Shore ofkong Island, New York. <http://dune.seagrant.sunysb.edu/nycoast/Monitoring%20Prograrn%20Sum.pdf>. The Disaster Center. "Hurricane Floyd Tracking Map." 1999. <http://www.disastercenter.com/hurrican/FloydTrc.htm> The Nature Conservancy. Invaders At the Gate: New York's Race Against a Hungry Beetle. 2007. <http://www.nature. org/wherewework/northamerica/states/newyork/ newsletter/art21089.html>. Tedesco, Mark. "About Long Island Sound." Save the Sound. 2 Feb. 1997. Accessed on: 6 July 2007 <http://www.savethesound.org/about-lisound.php>. ThinkQuest. "Drought." <http://library.thinkquest.org/1613 2/ht ml/droughtinfo/effects.html>. Thinkquest. Forces of Nature: TQ 2000. Snowstorms: Case Studies. <http://library. thinkquest, org/C003603/english/snowstorms/casestudies.shtml>. Todar, Kenneth. Department of Bacteriology. University of Wisconsin - Madison. Lyme Disease. <http://textbookofoacteriology.net/Lyme. html>. Tropical Prediction Center/National Hurricane Center. National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration. Metadata for "Historical North Atlantic Tropical Cyclone Tracks, 1851-2002". June 2003. <http://nationalatlas.gov/atlasttp.html> U.S. Army Corps of Engineers. Fire Island Inlet to Montauk Point: Problem Identification. <http://www.nan.usace.army. mil/fimp/problem.htm>. United States Census Bureau. "Suffolk County QuickFacts." May 2007. <http://quickfacts.census.gov/qfd/states/36/36103.html>. Accessed July 6, 2007. United States Department of Agriculture. Animal and Health Inspection Service. Strategic Eradication Plan: New York ALB Detection and Tree Removal Summary - Table 1. Mar. 2006. <http://beetlebuster s.aphis.usda.gov/strategic_ny I .html>. USDA. Forest Service. Research and Development - Forest Service and Climate Change. 5 Apr. 2007. <http://www.fs.fed. us/research/fsgc/fs-climate-change.shtml>. U.S. Department of the Interior. Water Resources Division. Fire Island National Seashore Water Resources Scoping Report. Aug. 1992. <http://www.nature.nps.gov/water/Scoping_Reports/fire_islandscreen.pdf>. United States Environmental Protection Agency. Arsenic in Drinking Water. Arsenic Rule. 13 Sept. 2006. <http://www. epa.gov/safewat er/arsenic/regulations.html>. DMA 2000 Hazard Mitigation Plan - Suffolk County, New York R-18 DRAFT- September 2007 REFERENCES USEPA. "Arsenic in Drinking Water." 14 September 2006. <http://www.epa.gov/safewater/arsenic/index.html> Accessed July 6, 2007. USEPA. EPA Map of Radon Zones. 19 Mar. 2007. <http://www.epa.gov/radon/zonemap/newyork.htm>. USEPA. Nassau-Suffolk Aquifer System. 16 July 2007. <http://www.epa.gov/region2/water/aquifer/nasssuff/nassau.htm>. USEPA. "Nassau-Suffolk Aquifer System." U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. Region 2. <http://www.epa.gov/regionO2/water/aquifer/nasssuff/nassau.htm#I29>. Accessed June 28, 2007. USEPA. New York State. Long Island Sound Habitat Restoration Initiative. Nov. 2003. <http://www.longislandsoundstudy.netYpubs/reports/habitat rest 03/hri03_barriers.pdf>. USEPA. Office of Policy, Planning and Evaluation. Climate Change and New York. Sept. 1997.<http://yosemite. epa.gov/OAR/globalwarming. nsf/UniqueKeyLookup/SHSUSBVJR6/$File/ny_impct.pdf>. USEPA. Office of Water. National List of Beaches. Mar. 2004. <http://www.epa.gov/waterscience/beaches/list/list-of-beaches.pdf>. USEPA. Privat~ Drinking Water Wells. Human Health. 22 Feb. 2006. <http://www.epa.gov/safewater/privatewells/health.html>. USEPA. "Setting Standards for Drinking Water." 2006. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency <http://www. epa.gov/safewater/standard/setting.html> Accessed July 6, 2007. USEPA. Technical Fact Sheet: Proposed Radon in Drinking Water Rule. 2007. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency <http://www.epa.gov/safewater/radon/remove/fact.html> Aqcessed July 6, 2007. United States National Agricultural Statistics Service. Department of Agriculture. "Suffolk County Farm Statistics". 2003. United States Geological Survey. Robert Moses State Park/Fire Island National Seashore. July 2003. <http://3dparks.wr.usgs.gov/nyc/parks/lec74.htm>. USGS. Arsenic in Ground-Water Resources of the United States. 8 May 2000. <http://wat er.usgs.gov/nawqa/trace/pubs/fs-063 -00/fig3 .html>. USGS. Atlantic Coastal Plain. 22 July 2003 <http://3dparks.wr.usgs.gov/nyc/coastalplain/coastalplain.htm>. USGS. Data Map: 31,350 Ground-Water Arsenic Samples Collected in 1973 - 200 I. 11 Sept. 2007. <http://wat er.usgs.gov/nawqa/trace/pubs/geo_v46n I l/fig I .htmlY. USGS. Disease Maps 2005.2 May 2006. <http:#diseasemaps.usgs.gov/2005/index.html>. USGS. Effects of West Nile Vires. Aug. 2003. <http://www. nwhc.usgs.gov/publications/fact_sheets/pdfs/EffWNV_0803 .pdf>. DMA 2000 Hazard Mitigation Plan - Suffolk County, New York R-19 DRAFT- September 2007 REFERENCES USGS. National Assessment of Coastal Vulnerability to Sea-Level Rise: Preliminary Results for the U.S. Atlantic Coast. 14 Sept. 2001. <http://pubs.usgs.gov/of/1999/of99-593/pages/ny.html>. USGS. "Natural Hazards - Hurricanes." 2007 <http://www.usgs.gov/hazards/hurricanes> USGS. "Simulation of the Effects of Development of the Ground-Water Flow System of Long Island, New York; Water-Resources Investigations Report 98-4069." <http://pubs.usgs.gov/wri/wri984069/pdf/wrir_98-4069_e.pdfS. USGS. West Nile Virus - Bird 2005.5 May 2006. (http://diseasemaps.usgs.gov/2OO5/wnv/wnv_ny_bird. html). USGS. West Nile Virus - Mosquito 2005.5 May 2006. <http://diseasemaps.usgs.gov/2005/wnv/wnv_ny_mosquito.html>. United States. American Fact Finder. 2006. U.S. Census Bureau. 5 July 2007 <htlp://www. census, gov). United States. Wildland Fire Assessment System. USDA Forest System. Fire Danger Rating. 2007. <http://www. wfas.net/c ontentjview/17/32/>. United States Senate. Senator Clinton. Senators Clinton, Schumer and Menendez Call for Federal Funding to Fight Asian Longhomed Beetle Infestation in New York. 17 Apr. 2007. <http://www.senate.gov/-clinton/news/statements/record. cfm?id=272501 >. University of Hawaii. Institute for Astronomy. "Tropical Cyclones." Date Unknown. <http://www.solar.ifa.hawaii.edu/Tropical/GifArchive/BERTHA-96.gif5 University of Vermont. Asian Longhomed Beetle. July 2006. <http://www.uvm.edu/albeetle/infestation/index.html>. UVM. Biology Department. Map Archive of Asian Longhorned Beetle Infestations. 2006. <http://www.uvm. edu/albeetle/infestation/maparchive.html>. Verbarg, Ronald. 2001 Existing Land Use Inventory. Suffolk County Department of Planning. 0 O 0 Hauppauge, NY, 2004. <http://www.co.suffolk.ny.us/planning/LISS ¥o20ALL ¥o20for Yo20CD.pdf~. Village of Saltaire. Flood Mitigation Plan. <http://www.saltaire.org/fma.htm>. Watson, Stephanie. The Weather Channel. Special Reports: Storms of the Century - March 1962 "Ash Wednesday Storm" 2006 <http://www. weather.com/newscenter/specialreports/sotc/stormg/page l .html>. Weather2000: Forecast Research. Historical Snowstorms Impacting New York City. 7 Mar. 2007. <http://www.weather2000.com/NY_Snowstorms.html>. "Weather 2000 - Historical Hurricanes Impacting New York Coast." Weather 2000 Forecast Research. 28 Aug. 2006. Energy & Commodity Trading, Insurance and Weather Derivatives Industries. <http://www. weather2000.com/index.html>. DMA 2000 Hazard Mitigation Plan - Suffolk County, New York R-20 DRAFT- September 2007 REFERENCES WhyFiles. University of Wisconsin. Coastal Erosion. 1999. <http://whyfiles.org/091beach/index.htlnl>. Wick, Steve. "Life in the Wake of Gloria." Newsday. 2006 <http://www. newsday.corn/community/guide/ history/ny-history-hs9glor, 0,1814853.story>. Wikipedia. 1991 Halloween Nor'Easter. 2007. Wikimedia Foundation, Inc. Rockaway. 2006 <http://en w k pedia.org/wiki/1991_Halloween_Nor%27easter> Wikipedia. Enhanced Fujita Scale. 21 Aug. 2007. <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Enhanced_Fujita_Scale>. Wikipedia. NBC4 Storm Graphic. 26 Apr. 2007. <http://en.wikipedia org/wiki/Image:SnowfallBlizz96NBC4.jpg>. Wildland Fire Assessment System. USDA Forest Service. Dead Fuel Moisture. 2007. <http://www. wfas.netJc ont entJview/23/38/>. Wildland Fire Assessment System. USDA Forest Service. Haines Index. 2007. <http://www.wfas.net/content/view/19/34>. Wildland Fire Assessment System. USDA Forest Service. Keetch-Bwam Drought Index. 2007. <http://www. wfas.net/contentJview/32/49/>. Wildland Fire Assessment System. USDA Forest Service. WFAS. 2007 <http://www.wfas.net/component/option, com_frontpage/It emid, 1/)> Williams, Jim. "Hurricane City (for Cities Threatened by Atlantic Hurricanes Since 1997) 1997 - 2007." HurricaneCitv. Sept. 2007. Mar. 2007 <http://www. hurricanecity, com/>. Wright, Ben (Suffolk County Department of Public Works). Memorandum from Ben Wright to Robert Sheron (SC FRES) on 17 September 2007 re: Sewer District 3- Southwest Ocean Outfall. Zhang, Keqi, Bruce Douglas, and Stephen Leatherman. "Do Storms Cause Long-Term Beach Erosion Along the U.S. East Barrier Coast?" The Journal of Geology Volume 110, P 493-502 (2002). 2006 <http://www.journals.uchicago.edu/JG/journal/issues/v 110n4/020408/brief/020408.abstract.html>. DMA 2000 Hazard Mitigation Plan - Suffolk County, New York R-21 DRAFT- September 2007 APPENDIX A: APPLICABLE FEDERAL AND STATE REGULATIONS This appendix provides the following Federal and State Regulations related to the Hazard Mitigation Planning process. Federal Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) - Title 44 - EMERGENCY MANAGEMENT AND ASSISTANCE - Part 201-Mitigation Planning. Revised September 13, 2004. CFR Title 44 - EMERGENCY MANAGEMENT AND ASSISTANCE - Part 206 - Federal Disaster Assistance for Disasters Declared on or After November 23, 1988. April 8, 1988. State Per the New York State of Emergency Management Office: 44 CFR 201.6. DMA 2000 Hazard Mitigation Plan - Suffolk County, New York A-1 DRAFT- September 2007 PUBLIC LAW 106-390--OCT. 30, 2000 DISASTER MITIGATION ACT OF 2000 114 STAT. 1552 PUBLIC LAW 106-390--OCT. 30, 2000 Oct. 30, 2000 [H.R. 707] Disaster Mitigation Act of 2000. 42 USC 5121 note. Public Law 106-390 106th Congress An Act To amend the Robert T. Stafford Disaster Relief and Emergency Assistance Act to authorize a.pregram for predisaster mitigation, to streamline the administration of disaster relief, to control the Federal costs of disaster assistance, and for other purposes. Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE; TABLE OF CONTENTS. (a) SHORT TITLE.--This Act may be cited as the "Disaster Mitigation Act of 2000". (b) TABLE OF CONTENTS.--The table of contents of this Act is as follows: Sec. 1. Short title; table of contents. TITLE I PREDISASTER HAZARD MITIGATION Sec. 101. Findings and purpose. Sec. 102. Predisaster hazard mitigation. Sec. 103. Interagency task force. Sec. 104. Mitigation planning; minimum standards for public and private struc- tures. TITLE II--STREAMLINING AND COST REDUCTION Sec. 201. Technical amendments. Sec. 202. Management costs. Sec. 203. Public notice, comment, and consultation requirements. Sec. 204. State administration of hazard mitigation grant program. Sec. 205. Assistance to repair, restore, reconstruct, or replace damaged facilities. Sec. 206. Federal assistance to individuals and households. Sec. 207. Community disaster loans. Sec. 208. Report on State management of small disasters initiative. Sec. 209. Study regarding cost reduction. TITLE III--MISCELLANEOUS Sec. 301. Technical correction of short title. Sec. 302. Definitions. Sec. 303. Fire management assistance. Sec. 304. Disaster grant closeout procedures. Sec. 305. Public safety officer benefits for certain Federal and State employees. Sec. 306. Buy American. Sec. 307. Treatment of certain real property. Sec. 308. Study of participation by Indian tribes in emergency management. TITLE I--PREDISASTER HAZARD MITIGATION 42 USC 5133 SEC. 101. FINDINGS AND PURPOSE. note. (a) FINDINGS.~Congress finds that-- PUBLIC LAW 106-390--OCT. 30, 2000 114 STAT. 1553 (1) natural disasters, including earthquakes, tsunamis, tornadoes, hurricanes, flooding, and wildfires, pose great danger to human life and to property throughout the United States; (2) greater emphasis needs to be placed on- (A) identifying and assessing the risks to States and local governments (including Indian tribes) from natural disasters; (B) implementing adequate measures to reduce losses from natural disasters; and (C) ensuring that the critical services and facilities of communities will continue to function after a natural disaster; (3) expenditures for postdisaster assistance are increasing without commensurate reductions in the likelihood of future losses from natural disasters; (4) in the expenditure of Federal funds under the Robert T. Stafford Disaster Relief and Emergency Assistance Act (42 U.S.C. 5121 et seq.), high priority should be given to mitigation of hazards at the local level; and (5) with a unified effort of economic incentives, awareness and education, technical assistance, and demonstrated Federal support, States and local governments (including Indian tribes) will be able to- (A) form effective community-based partnerships for hazard mitigation purposes; ' (B) implement effective hazard mitigation measures that reduce the potential damage from natural disasters; (C) ensure continued functionality of critical services; (D) leverage additional non-Federal resources in meeting natural disaster resistance goals; and (E) make commitments to long-term hazard mitigation efforts to be applied to new and existing structures. (b) PURPOSE.--The purpose of this title is to establish a national disaster hazard mitigation program-- (1) to reduce the loss of life and property, human suffering, economic disruption, and disaster assistance costs resulting from natural disasters; and (2) to provide a source of predisaster hazard mitigation funding that will assist States and local governments (including Indian tribes) in implementing effective hazard mitigation measures that are designed to ensure the continued functionality of critical services and facilities after a natural disaster. SEC. 102. PREDISASTER HAZARD MITIGATION. (a) IN GENrR~.--Title II of the Robert T. Stafford Disaster Relief and Emergency Assistance Act (42 U.S.C. 5131 et seq.) is amended by adding at the end the following: "SEC. 203. PREDISASTER HAZARD MITIGATION. "(a) DEFINITION OF SMALL IMPOVERISHED COMMUNITY.--In this section, the term 'small impoverished community' means a commu- nity of 3,000 or fewer individuals that is economically disadvan- taged, as determined by the State in which the community is located and based on criteria established by the President. "(b) ESTABLISHMENT OF PROGRAM.--The President may estab- lish a program to provide technical and financial assistance to States and local governments to assist in the implementation of President. 42 USC 5133. 114 STAT. 1554 PUBLIC LAW 106~390--OCT. 30, 2000 President. predisaster hazard mitigation measures that are cost-effective and are designed to reduce injuries, loss of life, and damage and destruc- tion of property, including damage to critical services and facilities under the jurisdiction of the States or local governments. "(c) APPROVAL BY PRESIDENT.--If the President determines that a State or local government has identified natural disaster hazards in areas under its jurisdiction and has demonstrated the ability to form effective public-private natural disaster hazard mitigation partnerships, the President, using amounts in the National Predisaster Mitigation Fund established under subsection (i) (referred to in this section as the 'Fund'), may provide technical and financial assistance to the State or local government to be used in accordance with subsection (e). "(d) STATE RECOMMENDATIONS.-- "(1) IN CENERAL.-- "(A) RECOMMENDATIONS.--The Governor of each State may recommend to the President not fewer than five local governments to receive assistance under this section. "(B) DEZ~DLINE FOR SUBMISSION.--The recommenda- tions under subparagraph (A) shall be submitted to the President not later than October 1, 2001, and each October 1st thereafter or such later date in the year as the Presi- dent may establish. "(C) CRITERIA.--In making recommendations under subparagraph (A), a Governor shall consider the criteria specified in subsection (g). "(2) USE.-- "(A) IN GENERAL.--Except as provided in subparagraph (B), in providing assistance to local governments under this section, the President shall select from local govern- ments recommended by the Governors under this sub- section. "(B) EXTRAORDINARY CIRCLrMSTANCES.--In providing assistance to local governments under this section, the President may select a local government that has not been recommended by a Governor under this subsection if the President determines that extraordinary circumstances jus- tify the selection and that making the selection will further the purpose of this section. "(3) EFFECT OF FAILURE TO NOMINATE.--If a Governor of a State fails to submit recommendations under this subsection in a timely manner, the President may select, subject to the criteria specified in subsection (g), any local governments of the State to receive assistance under this section. "(e) USES OF TECHNICAL AND FINANCIAL ASSISTANCE.-- "(1) IN GENERAL.--Technical and financial assistance pro- vided under this section-- "(A) shall be used by States and local governments principally to implement predisaster hazard mitigation measures that are cost-effective and are described in pro- posals approved by the President under this section; and "(B) may be used-- "(i) to support effective public-private natural dis- aster hazard mitigation partnerships; "(ii) to improve the assessment of a community's vulnerability to natural hazards; er PUBLIC LAW 106-390---OCT. 30, 2000 114 STAT. 1555 "(iii) to establish hazard mitigation priorities, and an appropriate hazard mitigation plan, for a commu- nity. "(2) DISSEMINATION.--A State or local government may use not more than 10 percent of the financial assistance received by the State or local government under this section for a fiscal year to fund activities to disseminate information regarding cost-effective mitigation technologies. "(f) ALLOCATION OF FUNDs.--The amount of financial assistance made available to a State (including amounts made available to local governments of the State) under, this section for a fiscal year-- "(1) shall be not less than the lesser of~ "(A) $500,000; or "(B) the amount that is equal to 1.0 percent of the total funds appropriated to carry out this section for the fiscal year; "(2) shall not exceed 15 percent of the total funds described in paragraph (1)(B); and "(3) shall be subject to the criteria specified in subsection (g). "(g) CRITERIA FOR ASSISTANCE AWARDS.--In determining whether to provide technical and financial assistance to a State or local government under this section, the President shall take into account~ "(1) the extent and nature of the hazards to be mitigated; "(2) the degree of commitment of the State or local govern- ment to reduce damages from future natural disasters; "(3) the degree of commitment by the State or local govern- ment to support ongoing non-Federal support for the hazard mitigation measures to be carried out using the technical and financial assistance; "(4) the extent to which the hazard mitigation measures to be carried out using the technical and financial assistance contribute to the mitigation goals and priorities established by the State; "(5) the extent to which the technical and financial assist- ance is consistent with other assistance provided under this Act; "(6) the extent to which prioritized, cost-effective mitigation activities that produce meaningful and definable outcomes are clearly identified; "(7) if the State or local government has submitted a mitiga- tion plan under section 322, the extent to which the activities identified under paragraph (6) are consistent with the mitiga- tion plan; "(8) the opportunity to fund activities that maximize net benefits to society; "(9) the extent to which assistance will fund mitigation activities in small impoverished communities; and "(10) such other criteria as the President establishes in consultation with State and local governments. "(h) FEDERAL SHARE.-- "(1) IN GENERAL.--Financial assistance provided under this section may contribute up to 75 percent of the total cost of mitigation activities approved by the President. President. 114 STAT. 1556 PUBLIC LAW 106-390--OCT. 30, 2000 "(2) SMALL IMPOVERISHED COMMUNITIES.~Notwithstanding paragraph (1), the President may contribute up to 90 percent of the total cost of a mitigation activity carried out in a small impoverished community. "(i) NATIONAL PREDISASTER MITIGATION FUND.-- "(1) ESTA~LISHMrNT.--The President may establish in the Treasury of the United States a fund to be known as the 'National Predisaster Mitigation Fund', to be used in carrying out this section. "(2) TRANSFERS TO ruND.--There shall be deposited in the Fund-- "(A) amounts appropriated to carry out this section, Which shall remain available until expended; and "(B) sums available from gifts, bequests, or donations of services or property received by the President for the purpose of predisaster hazard mitigation. "(3) EXPENDITURES FROM FUND.--Upon request by the President, the Secretary of the Treasury shall transfer from the Fund to the President such amounts as the President determines are necessary to provide technical and financial assistance under this section. "(4) INVESTMENT OF AMOUNTS.-- "(A) IN GENEI~L.--The Secretary of the Treasury shall invest such portion of the Fund as is not, in the judgment of the Secretary of the Treasury, required to meet current withdrawals. Investments may be made only in interest- bearing obligations of the United States. "(B) ACQUISITION OF OBLIGATIONS.--For the purpose of investments under subparagraph (A), obligations may be acquired-- "(i) on original issue at the issue price; or "(ii) by purchase of outstanding obligations at the market price. "(C) SALE OF OBLIGATIONS.--Any obligation acquired by the Fund may be sold by the Secretary of the Treasury at the market price. "(D) CREDITS TO FUND.--The interest on, and the pro- ceeds from the sale or redemption of, any obligations held in the Fund shall be credited to and form a part of the Fund. "(E) TP~MXlSFERS OF AMOUNTS.-- "(i) IN GENEr~.L.--The amounts required to be transferred to the Fund under this subsection shall be transferred at least monthly from the general fund of the Treasury to the Fund on the basis of estimates made by the Secretary of the Treasury. "(ii) ADXCSTMENTs.--Proper adjustment shall be made in amounts subsequently transferred to the extent prior estimates were in excess of or less than the amounts required to be transferred. "(j) LIMITATION ON TOTAL AMOUNT OF FINANCIAL ASSISTANCE.-- The President shall not provide financial assistance under this section in an amount greater than the amount available in the Fund. "(k) MULTIHAZARD ADVISORY MAPS.-- "(1) DEFINITION OF MULTIHAZARD ADVISORY MAP.--In this subsection, the term 'multihazard advisory map' means a map PUBLIC LAW 106-390--OCT. 30, 2000 114 STAT. 1557 on which hazard data concerning each type of natural disaster is identified simultaneously for the purpose of showing areas of hazard overlap. "(2) DEVELOPMENT OF MAPS.--In consultation with States, President. local governments, and appropriate Federal agencies, the Presi- dent shall develop multihazard advisory maps for areas, in not fewer than five States, that are subject to commonly recur- ring natural hazards (including flooding, hurricanes and severe winds, and seismic events). "(3) USE OF TECHNOLOGY.--In developing multihazard advisory maps under this subsection, the President shall use, to the maximum extent practicable, the most cost-effective and efficient technology available. "(4) USE OF IvIAPS.-- "(A) ADVISORY NATURE.--The multihazard advisory maps shall be considered to be advisory and shall not require the development of any new policy by, or impose any new policy on, any government or private entity. "(B) AVAILABILITY OF MAPS.--The multihazard advisory maps shall be made available to the appropriate State and local governments for the purposes of-- "(i) informing the general public about the risks of natural hazards in the areas described in paragraph (2); "(ii) supporting the activities described in sub- section (e); and "(iii) other public uses. "(1) REPORT ON FEDERAL AND STATE ADMINISTRATION.--Not Deadline. later than 18 months after the date of the enactment of this section, the President, in consultation with State and local governments, shall submit to Congress a report evaluating efforts to implement this section and recommending a process for transferring greater authority and responsibility for administering the assistance pro- gram established under this section to capable States. "(m) TERMINATION OF AUTHORITY.--The authority provided by this section terminates December 31, 2003.". (b) CONFORMING AMENDMENT.--Title II of the Robert T. Stafford Disaster Relief and Emergency Assistance Act (42 U.S.C. 5131 et seq.) is amended by striking the title heading and inserting the following: "TITLE II--DISASTER PREPAREDNESS AND MITIGATION ASSISTANCE". SEC. 103. INTERAGENCY TASK FORCE. Title II of the Robert T. Stafford Disaster Relief and Emergency Assistance Act (42 U.S.C. 5131 et seq.) (as amended by section 102(a)) is amended by adding at the end the following: "SEC. 204. INTERAGENCY TASK FORCE. "(a) IN GEN~RAL.--The President shall establish a Federal interagency task force for the purpose of coordinating the implementation of predisaster hazard mitigation programs adminis- tered by the Federal Government. 42 USC 5134. 114 STAT. 1558 PUBLIC LAW 106-390--OCT. 30, 2000 42 USC 5165. President. "(b) CHAIRPERSON.--The Director of the Federal Emergency Management Agency shall serve as the chairperson of the task force. "(c) MEMBERSHIP.--The membership of the task force shall include representatives of-- "(1) relevant Federal agencies; "(2) State and local government organizations (including Indian tribes); and "(3) the American Red Cross.". SEC. 104. MITIGATION PLANNING; MINIMUM STANDARDS FOR PUBLIC AND pRIVATE STRUCTURES. (a) IN GENER~L.--Title III of the Robert T. Stafford Disaster Relief and Emergency Assistance Act (42 U.S.C. 5141 et seq.) is amended by adding at the end the following: "SEC. 322. MITIGATION PLANNING. "(a) REQUIREMENT OF MITIGATION PLAN.--As a condition of receipt of an increased Federal share for hazard mitigation meas- ures under subsection (e), a State, local, or tribal government shall develop and submit for approval to the President a mitigation plan that outlines processes for identifying the natural hazards, risks, and vulnerabilities of the area under the jurisdiction of the government. "(b) LOCAL A~D TRIBAL PLANS.--Each mitigation plan developed by a local or tribal government shall-- "(1) describe actions to mitigate hazards, risks, and vulnerabilities identified under the plhn; and "(2) establish a strategy to implement those actions. "(c) STATE PLANs.--The State process of development of a miti- gation plan under this section shall-- "(1) identify the natural hazards, risks, and vulnerabilities of areas in the State; "(2) support development of local mitigation plans; "(3) provide for technical assistance to local and tribal governments for mitigation planning; and "(4) identify and prioritize mitigation actions that the State will support, as resources become available. "(d) FUNDING.-- "(1) IN GENERAL.--Federal contributions under section 404 may be used to fund the development and updating of mitiga- tion plans under this section. "(2) MAXIMUM FEDERAL CONTRIBUTION.--With respect to any mitigation plan, a State, local, or tribal government may use an amount of Federal contributions under section 404 not to exceed 7 percent of the amount of such contributions avail- able to the government as of a date determined by the govern- ment. "(e) INCREASED FEDERAL SHARE FOR HAZARD MITIGATION MEAS- "(1) IN GENERAL.--If, at the time of the declaration of a major disaster, a State has in effect an approved mitigation plan under this section, the President may increase to 20 per- cent, with respect to the major disaster, the maximum percent- age specified in the last sentence of section 404(a). "(2) FACTORS FOR CONSIDEEATION.--In determining whether to increase the maximum percentage under paragraph (1), the President shall consider whether the State has established-- PUBLIC LAW 106-390---OCT. 30, 2000 114 STAT. 1559 "(A) eligibility criteria for property acquisition and other types of mitigation measures; "(B) requirements for cost effectiveness that are related to the eligibility criteria; "(C) a system of priorities that is related to the eligi- bility criteria; and "(D) a process by which an assessment of the effective- ness of a mitigation action may be carried out after the mitigation action is complete. "SEC. 323. MINIMLrM STANDARDS FOR PUBLIC AND PRIVATE STRUC- TURES. "(a) IN GENERAL.--As a condition of receipt of a disaster loan or grant under this Act-- "(1) the recipient shall carry out any repair or construction to be financed with the loan or grant in accordance with applicable standards of safety, decency, and sanitation and in conformity with applicable codes, specifications, and stand- ards; and "(2) the President may require safe land use and construc- tion practices, after adequate consultation with appropriate State and local government officials. "(b) EWDE~CE OF COMPLIANCE.--A recipient of a disaster loan or grant under this Act shall provide such evidence of compliance with this section as the President may require by regulation.". (b) LOSSES FROM STRAIGHT LIN~ WINDS.--The President shall increase the maximum percentage specified in the last sentence of section 404(a) of the Robert T. Stafford Disaster Relief and Emergency Assistance Act (42 U.S.C. 5170c(a)) from 15 percent to 20 percent with respect to any major disaster that is in the State of Minnesota and for which assistance is being provided as of the date of the enactment of this Act, except that additional assistance provided under this subsection shall not exceed $6,000,000. The mitigation measures assisted under this subsection shah be related to losses in the State of Minnesota from straight line winds. (c) CONFORMING AMENDMENTS.-- (1) Section 404(a) of the Robert T. Stafford Disaster Relief and Emergency Assistance Act (42 U.S.C. 5170c(a)) is amended- (A) in the second sentence, by striking "section 409" and inserting "section 322"; and (B) in the third sentence, by striking "The total" and inserting "Subject to section 322, the total". (2) Section 409 of the Robert T. Stafford Disaster Relief and Emergency Assistance Act (42 U.S.C. 5176) is repealed. 42 USC 5165a. President. TITLE II--STREAMLINING AND COST REDUCTION SEC. 201. TECI-INICAL AMENDMENTS. Section 311 of the Robert T. Stafford Disaster Relief and Emer- gency Assistance Act (42 U.S.C. 5154) is amended in subsections (a)(1), (b), and (c) by striking "section 803 of the Public Works and Economic Development Act of 1965" each place it appears 114 STAT. 1560 PUBLIC LAW 106-390--OCT. 30, 2000 42 usc 5165b. Regulations. Deadline. 42 USC 5165b note, 42 USC 5165c. President. and inserting "section 209(c)(2) of the Public Works and Economic Development Act of 1965 (42 U.S.C. 3149(c)(2))". SEC. 202. MANAGEMENT COSTS. (a) IN GENERAL.--Title III of the Robert T. Stafford Disaster Relief and Emergency Assistance Act (42 U.S.C. 5141 et seq.) (as amended by section 104(a)) is amended by adding at the end the following: "SEC. 324. MANAGEMENT COSTS. "(a) DEFINITION OF ~kNAGEMENT COST.--In this section, the term 'management cost' includes any indirect cost, any administra- tive expense, and any other expense not directly chargeable to a specific project under a major disaster, emergency, or disaster preparedness or mitigation activity or measure. "(b) ESTABLISH~IENT OF MANAGEMENT COST RATES.--Notwith- standing any other provision of law (including any administrative rule or guidance), the President shall by regulation establish management cost rates, for grantees and subgrantoes, that shall be used to determine contributions under this Act for management costs. "(c) REVIEw.--The President shall review the management cost rates established under subsection (b) not later than 3 years afte,r the date of establishment of the rates and periodically thereafter.'. (b) APPLICABII~ITY.-- (1) IN GENERAL.~ubject to paragraph (2), subsections (a) and (b) of section 324 of the Robert T. Stafford Disaster Relief and Emergency Assistance Act (as added by subsection (a)) shall apply to major disasters declared under that Act on or after the date of the enactment of this Act. (2) INTERIM AUTNOR1TY.--Until the date on which the Presi- dent establishes the management cost rates under section 324 of the Robert T. Stafford Disaster Relief and Emergency Assist- ance Act (as added by subsection (a)), section 406(f) of the Robert T. Stafford Disaster Relief and Emergency Assistance Act (42 U.S.C. 5172(f)) (as in effect on the day before the date of the enactment of this Act) shall be used to establish management cost rates. SEC. 203. PUBLIC NOTICE, COMMENT, AND CONSULTATION REQUIRE. Title III of the Robert T. Stafford Disaster Relief and Emer- gency Assistance Act (42 U.S.C. 5141 et seq.) (as amended by section 202(a)) is amended by adding at the end the following: "SEC. 325. PUBLIC NOTICE, COMMENT, AND CONSULTATION REQUIRE- MENTS. "(a) PUBLIC NOTICE AND COMMENT CONCERNING NEW OR MODI- FIED POLICIES.-- "(1) IN GENERAL.--The President shall provide for public notice and opportunity for comment before adopting any new or modified policy that-- "(A) governs implementation of the public assistance program administered by the Federal Emergency Manage- ment Agency under this Act; and "(B) could result in a significant reduction of assistance under the program. PUBLIC LAW106-390--OCT. 30, 2000 114 STAT. 1561 "(2) APPLICATION.--Any policy adopted under paragraph (1) shall apply only to a major disaster or emergency declared on or after the date on which the policy is adopted. "(b) CONSULTATION CONCERNING INTERIM POLICIES.- ''(1 ) IN GENERAL.--Before adopting any interim policy under the public assistance program to address specific conditions that relate to a major disaster or emergency that has been declared under this Act, the President, to the maximum extent practicable, shall solicit the views and recommendations of grantees and subgrantees with respect to the major disaster or emergency concerning the potential interim policy, if the interim policy is likely-- "(A) to result in a significant reduction of assistance to applicants for the assistance with respect to the major disaster or emergency; or "(B) to change the terms of a written agreement to which the Federal Government is a party concerning the declaration of the major disaster or emergency. "(2) No LEGAL RIGHT OF ACTION.--Nothing in this sub- section confers a legal right of action on any party. "(C) PUBLIC ACCESS.--The President shall promote public access President. to policies governing the implementation of the public assistance program.". SEC. 204. STATE ADMINISTRATION OF HAZARD MITIGATION GRANT PROGRAM. Section 404 of the Robert T. Stafford Disaster Relief and Emer- gency Assistance Act (42 U.S.C. 5170c) is amended by adding at the end the following: "(C) PROGRAM ADMINISTRATION BY STATES.-- "(1) IN GENERAL.--A State desiring to administer the hazard mitigation grant program established by this section with respect to hazard mitigation assistance in the State may submit to the President an application for the delegation of the authority to administer the program. "(2) CRITERIA.--The President, in consultation and coordination with States and local governments, shall establish criteria for the approval of applications submitted under para- graph (1). The criteria shall include, at a minimum-- "(A) the demonstrated ability of the State to manage the grant program under this section; "(B) there being in effect an approved mitigation plan under section 322; and "(C) a demonstrated commitment to mitigation activi- ties. "(3) APrROVAL.--The President shall approve an application President. submitted under paragraph (1) that meets the criteria estab- lished under paragraph (2). "(4) WITHDRAWAL or APPROVAL.--If, after approving an application of a State submitted under paragraph (1), the Presi- dent determines that the State is not administering the hazard mitigation grant program established by this section in a manner satisfactory to the President, the President shall with- draw the approval. "(5) AUDITS.--The President shall provide for periodic President. audits of the hazard mitigation grant programs administered by States under this subsection.". 114 STAT. 1562 PUBLIC LAW 106-390---OCT. 30, 2000 SEC. 205. ASSISTANCE TO REPAIR, RESTORE, RECONSTRUCT, OR REPLACE DAMAGED FACILITIES. (a) CONTRIBUTIONS.---Section 406 of the Robert T. Stafford Dis- aster Relief and Emergency Assistance Act (42 U.S.C. 5172) is amended by striking subsection (a) and inserting the following: "(a) CONTRIBUTIONS.-- "(1) IN GENERAL.--The President may make contributions-- "(A) to a State or local government for the repair, restoration, reconstruction, or replacement of a public facility damaged or destroyed by a major disaster and for associated expenses incurred by the government; and "(B) subject to paragraph (3), to a person that owns or operates a private nonprofit facility damaged or destroyed by a major disaster for the repair, restoration, reconstruction, or replacement of the facihty and for associ- ated expenses incurred by the person. "(2) ASSOCIATED EXPENSES.--For the purposes of this sec- tion, associated expenses shall include-- "(A) the costs of mobilizing and employing.the National Guard for performance of eligible work; "(B) the costs of using prison labor to perform eligible work, including wages actually paid, transportation to a worksite, and extraordinary costs of guards, food, and lodging; and "(C) base and overtime wages for the employees and extra hires of a State, local government, or person described in paragraph (1) that perform eligible work, plus fringe benefits on such wages to the extent that such benefits were being paid before the major disaster. "(3) CONDITIONS FOR ASSISTANCE TO PRIVATE NONPROFIT FACILITIES.-- "(A) IN GENERAL.--The President may make contribu- tions to a private nonprofit facility under paragraph (1)(B) only "(i) the facility provides critical services (as defined by the President) in the event of a major disaster; or "(ii) the owner or operator of the facility-- "(I) has applied for a disaster loan under sec- tion 7(b) of the Small Business Act (15 U.S.C. 636(b)); and "(II)(aa) has been determined to be ineligible for such a loan; or "(bb) has obtained such a loan in the maximum amount for which the Small Business Administra- tion determines the facility is eligible. "(B) DEFINITION OF CRITICAL SERVICES.--In this para- graph, the term 'critical services' includes power, water (including water provided by an irrigation organization or facility), sewer, wastewater treatment, communications, and emergency medical care. "(4) NOTIFICATION TO CONGRESS.--Before making any con- tribution under this section in an amount greater than $20,000,000, the President shall notify-- "(A) the Committee on Environment and Public Works of the Senate; PUBLIC LAW 106-390--OCT. 30, 2000 114 STAT. 1563 "(B) the Committee on Transportation and Infrastruc- ture of the House of Representatives; "(C) the Committee on Appropriations of the Senate; and "(D) the Committee on Appropriations of the House of Representatives.". (b) FEDERAL SHARE.--Section 406 of the Robert T. Stafford Disaster Relief and Emergency Assistance Act (42 U.S.C. 5172) is amended by striking subsection (b) and inserting the following: "(b) FEDERAL SHARE.- ''(1) MINIMUM FEDERAL SHARE.--Except as provided in para- graph (2), the Federal share of assistance under this section shall be not less than 75 percent of the eligible cost of repair, restoration, reconstruction, or replacement carried out under this section. "(2) RE~)UCEO rrDrr~ SHARE.--The President shall promulgate regulations to reduce the Federal share of assist- ance under this section to not less than 25 percent in the case of the repair, restoration, reconstruction, or replacement of any eligible public facility or private nonprofit facility fol- lowing an event associated with a major disaster-- "(A) that has been damaged, on more than one occasion within the preceding 10-year period, by the same type of event; and "(B) the owner of which h~s failed to implement appro- priate mitigation measures to address the hazard that caused the damage to the facility.". (c) LARGE IN-LIEU CONTRIBUTIONS.--Secti0n 406 of the Robert T. Stafford Disaster Relief and Emergency Assistance Act (42 U.S.C. 5172) is amended by striking subsection (c) and inserting the fol- lowing: "(c) LARGE IN-LIEU CONTRIBUTIONS.- ''(1) FOR PUBLIC FACILITIES.-- "(A) IN GENERAL.--In any case in which a State or local government determines that the public welfare would not best be served by repairing, restoring, reconstructing, or replacing any public facility owned or controlled by the State or local government, the State or local govern- ment may elect to receive, in lieu of a contribution under subsection (a)(1)(A), a contribution in an amount equal to 75 percent of the Federal share'of the Federal estimate of the cost of repairing, restoring, reconstructing, or replacing the facility and of management expenses. "(B) AREAS WITH UNSTABLE SOIL.--In any case in which a State or local government determines that the public welfare would not best be served by repairing, restoring, reconstructing, or replacing any public facility owned or controlled by the State or local government because soil instability in the disaster area makes repair, restoration, reconstruction, or replacement infeasible, the State or local government may elect to receive, in lieu of a contribution under subsection (a)(1)(A), a contribution in an amount equal to 90 percent of the Federal share of the Federal estimate of the cost of repairing, restoring, reconstructing, or replacing the facility and of management expenses. "(C) USE OF FUNDS.--Funds contributed to a State or local government under this paragraph may be used-- President. Regulations. 114 STAT. 1564 PUBLIC LAW 106-390--OCT. 30, 2000 "(i) to repair, restore, or expand other selected public facilities; "(ii) to construct new facilities; or "(iii) to fund hazard mitigation measures that the State or local government determines to be necessary to meet a need for governmental services and functions in the area affected by the major disaster. "(D) LIMIT^TIONS.--Funds made available to a State or local government under this paragraph may not be used for-- "(i) any public facility located in a regulatory floodway (as defined in section 59.1 of title 44, Code of Federal Regulations (or a successor regulation)); or "(ii) any uninsured public facility located in a spe- cial flood hazard area identified by the Director of the Federal Emergency Management Agency under the National Flood Insurance Act of 1968 (42 U.S.C. 4001 et seq.). "(2) FOR PRIVATE NONPROFIT FACILITIES.-- "(A) IN GENERAL.--In any case in which a person that owns or operates a private nonprofit facility determines that the public welfare would not best be served by repairing, restoring, reconstructing, or replacing the facility, the person may elect to receive, in lieu of a con- tribution under subsection (a)(1)(B), a contribution in an amount equal to 75 percent of the Federal share of the Federal estimate of the cost of repairing, restoring, recon- strncting, or replacing the facility and of management. expenses. "(B) UsE or rUN~s.--Funds contributed to a person under this paragraph may be used-- "(i) to repair, restore, or expand other selected private nonprofit facilities owned or operated by the person; "(ii) to construct new private nonprofit facilities to be owned or operated by the person; or "(iii) to fund hazard mitigation measures that the person determines to be necessary to meet a need for the person's services and functions in the area affected by the major disaster. "(C) LIMITATIONS.--Funds made available to a person under this paragraph may not be used for-- "(i) any private nonprofit facility located in a regu- latery fioodway (as defined in section 59.1 of title 44, Code of Federal Regulations (or a successor regula- tion)); or "(ii) any uninsured private nonprofit facility located in a special flood hazard area identified by the Director of the Federal Emergency Management Agency under the National Flood Insurance Act of 1968 (42 U.S.C. 4001 et seq.).". (d) ELIGIBLE COST.-- (1) IN GEN~RAL.--Section 406 of the Robert T. Stafford Disaster Relief and Emergency Assistance Act (42 U.S.C. 5172) is amended by striking subsection (e) and inserting the fol- lowing: "(e) ELIGIBLE COST.-- PUBLIC LAW 106-390--0CT. 30, 2000 114 STAT. 1565 "(1) DETERMINATION.-- "(A) IN GENERAL.--For the purposes of this section, the President shall estimate the eligible cost of repairing, restoring, reconstructing, or replacing a public facility or private nonprofit facility-- "(i) on the basis of the design of the facility as the facility existed immediately before the major dis- aster; and "(ii) in conformity with codes, specifications, and standards (inchiding floodplain management and hazard mitigation criteria required by the President or under the Coastal Barrier Resources Act (16 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.)) applicable at the time at which the disaster occurred. "(B) COST ESTIMATION PROCEDURES.-- "(i) IN GENERAL.--Subject to paragraph (2), the President shall use the cost estimation procedures established under paragraph (3) to determine the eligible cost under this subsection. "(ii) APPLICABILITY.--The procedures specified in this paragraph and paragraph (2) shah apply only to projects the eligible cost of which is equal to or greater than the amount specified in section 422. "(2) MODIFICATION OF ELIGIBLE COST.-- "(A) ACTUAL COST GREATER THAN CEILING PERCENTAGE OF ESTIMATED COST.--In any case in which the actual cost of repairing, restoring, reconstructing, or replacing a facility under this section is greater than the ceiling percentage established under paragraph (3) of the cost estimated under paragraph (1), the President may determine that the eligible cost includes a portion of the actual cost of the repair, restoration, reconstruction, or replacement that exceeds the cost estimated under paragraph (1). "(S) ACTUAL COST LESS THAN ESTIMATED COST.-- "(i) GREATER THAN OR EQUAL TO FLOOR PERCENT- AGE OF ESTIMATED COST.--In any case in which the actual cost of repairing, restoring, reconstructing, or replacing a facility under this section is less than 100 percent of the cost estimated under paragraph (1), but is greater than or equal to the floor percentage established under paragraph (3) of the cost estimated under paragraph (1), the State or local government or person receiving funds under this section shall use the excess funds to carry out cost-effective activities that reduce the risk of future damage, hardship, or suffering from a major disaster. "(ii) LESS THAN FLOOR PERCENTAGE OF ESTIMATED COST.--In any case in which the actual cost of repairing, restoring, reconstructing, or replacing a facility under this section is less than the floor percent- age established under paragraph (3) of the cost esti- mated under paragraph (1), the State or local govern- ment or person receiving assistance under this section shall reimburse the President in the amount of the difference. "(C) No EFFECT ON APPEALS PROCESS.--Nothing in this paragraph affects any right of appeal under section 423. 114 STAT. 1566 PUBLIC LAW 106-390--OCT. 30, 2000 President. Deadline. Deadline. 42 USC 5172 note. "(3) EXPERT PANEL.-- "(A) ESTABLISHMENT.--Not later than 18 months after the date of the enactment of this paragraph, the President, acting through the Director of the Federal Emergency Management Agency, shall establish an expert panel, which shall include representatives from the construction industry and State and local government. "(B) DUTIES.--The expert panel shall develop rec- ommendations concerning-- "(i) procedures for estimating the cost of repairing, restoring, reconstructing, or replacing a facility con- sistent with industry practices; and "(ii) the ceiling and floor percentages referred to in paragraph (2). "(C) REGULATIONS.--Taking into account the rec- ommendations of the expert panel under subparagraph (B), the President shall promulgate regulations that establish-- "(i) cost estimation procedures described in subparagraph (B)(i); and "(ii) the ceiling and floor percentages referred to in paragraph (2). "(D) REVIEW BY PRESIDENT.--Not later than 2 years after the date of promulgation of regulations under subparagraph (C) and periodically thereafter, the President shall review the cost estimation procedures and the ceiling and floor percentages established under this paragraph. "(E) REPORT TO CONGRESS.--Not later than i year after the date of promulgation of regulations under subpara- graph (C), 3 years after that date, and at the end of each 2-year period thereafter, the expert panel shall submit to Congress a report on the appropriateness of the cost estimation procedures. . "(4) SPECLkL RULE.--In any case in which the facility being repaired, restored, reconstructed, or replaced under this section was under construction on the date of the major disaster, the cost of repairing, restoring, reconstructing, or replacing the facility shall include, for the purposes of this section, only those costs that, under the contract for the construction, are the owner's responsibility and not the contractor's responsi- bility.". (2) EFFECTIVE DATE.--The amendment made by paragraph (1) takes effect on the date of the enactment of this Act and applies to funds appropriated after the date of the enactment of this Act, except that paragraph (1) of section 406(e) of the Robert T. Stafford Disaster Relief and Emergency Assistance Act (as amended by paragraph (1)) takes effect on the date on which the cost estimation procedures established under para- graph (3) of that section take effect. (e) CONFORMING AMENDMENT.~ecti0n 406 of the Robert T. Stafford Disaster Relief and Emergency Assistance Act (42 U.S.C. 5172) is amended by striking subsection (f). SEC. 206. FEDERAL ASSISTANCE TO INDIVIDUALS AND HOUSEHOLDS. (a) IN GEN~RAL.~ection 408 of the Robert T. Stafford Disaster Relief and Emergency Assistance Act (42 U.S.C. 5174) is amended to read as follows: PUBLIC LAW 106-390--OCT. 30, 2000 114 STAT. 1567 "SEC. 408. FEDERAL ASSISTANCE TO INDIVIDUALS AND HOUSEHOLDS. "(a) IN GENEP, AL.-- "(1) PROVISION OF ASSlSTANCE.--In accordance with this section, the President, in consultation with the Governor of a State, may provide financial assistance, and, if necessary, direct services, to individuals and households in the State who, as a direct result of a major disaster, have necessary expenses and serious needs in cases in which the individuals and house- holds are unable to meet such expenses or needs through other means. "(2) RELATIONSHIP TO OTHER ASSISTANCE.--Under para- graph (1), an individual or household shall not be denied assist- ance under paragraph (1), (3), or (4) of subsection (c) solely on the basis that the individual or household has not applied for or received any loan or other financial assistance from the Small Business Administration or any other Federal agency. "(b) HOUSING ASSISTANCE.-- "(1) ELIGIBILITY.--The President may provide financial or other assistance under this section to individuals and house- holds to respond to the disaster-related housing needs of individuals and households who are displaced from their predisastor primary residences or whose predisastor primary residences are rendered uninhabitable as a result of damage caused by a major disaster. "(2) DETERMINATION OF APPROPRIATE TYPES OF ASSIST- "(A) IN GENERAL.--The President shall determine appropriate types of housing assistance to be provided under this section to individuals and households described in subsection (a)(1) based on considerations of cost effective- ness, convenience to the individuals and households, and such other factors as the President may consider appro- priate. "(S) MULTIPLE TYPES OF ASSISTANCE.--One or more types of housing assistance may be made available under this section, based on the suitability and availability of the types of assistance, to meet the needs of individuals and households in the particular disaster situation. "(c) TYPES OF HOUSING ASSISTANCE.-- "(1) TEMPORARY HOUSING.-- "(A) FIN~CIAL ASSISTANCE.-- "(i) IN GENrRAL.--The President may provide financial assistance to individuals or households to rent alternate housing accommodations, existing rental units, manufactured housing, recreational vehicles, or other readily fabricated dwellings. "(ii) A~ouNT.--The amount of assistance under clause (i) shall be based on the fair market rent for the accommodation provided plus the cost of any transportation, utility hookups, or unit installation not provided directly by the President. "(B) DIRECT ASSISTANCE.-- "(i) IN GElVERAL.--The President may provide tem- porary housing units, acquired by purchase or lease, directly to individuals or households who, because of a lack of available housing resources, would be unable President. 114 STAT. 1568 PUBLIC LAW 106-390--OCT. 30, 2000 to make use of the assistance provided under subpara- graph (A). "(ii) PERIOD Or ASSISTANCE.--The President may not provide direct assistance under clause (i) with respect to a major disaster after the end of the 18- month period beginning on the date of the declaration of the major disaster by the President, except that the President may extend that period if the President determines that due to extraordinary circumstances an extension would be in the public interest. "(iii) COLLECTION OF RENTAL CHARGES. After the end of the 18-month period referred to in clause (ii), the President may charge fair market rent for each temporary housing unit pro~ided. "(2) REPAIRS.-- "(A) IN GENEI~L.--The President may provide financial assistance for-- "(i) the repair of owner-occupied private residences, utilities, and residential infrastructure (such as a pri- vate access route) damaged by a major disaster to a safe and sanitary living or functioning condition; and "(ii) eligible hazard mitigation measures that reduce the likelihood of future damage to such resi- dences, utilities, or infrastructure. "(B) RELATIONSHIP TO OTHER ASSISTANCE.~A recipient of assistance provided under this paragraph shall not be required to show that the assistance can be met through other means, except insurance proceeds. "(C) MAXIMUM AMOLrNT OF ASSISTANCE.--The amount of assistance provided to a household under this paragraph shall not exceed $5,000, as adjusted annually to reflect changes in the Consumer Price Index for All Urban Con- sumers published by the Department of Labor. "(3) REPLACEMENT.-- "(A) IN GENERAL.--The President may provide financial assistance for the replacement of owner-occupied private residences damaged by a major disaster. "(B) MAXrMUM AMOUNT OF ASSlSTANCE.--The amount of assistance provided to a household under this paragraph shall not exceed $10,000, as adjusted annually to reflect changes in the Consumer Price Index for Ali Urban Con- sumers published by the Department of Labor. "(C) APPLICABILITY OF FLOOD INSURANCE REQUIRE- MENT.--With respect to assistance provided under this paragraph, the President may not waive any provision of Federal law requiring the purchase of flood insurance as a condition of the receipt of Federal disaster assistance. "(4) PERMANENT HOUSING CONSTRUCTION.--The President may provide financial assistance or direct assistance to individ- uals or households to construct permanent housing in insular areas outside the continental United States and in other remote locations in cases in which-- "(A) no alternative housing resources are available; and PUBLIC LAW 106-390--OCT. 30, 2000 114 STAT. 1569 "(B) the types of temporary housing assistance described in paragraph (1) are unavailable, infeasible, or not cost-effective. "(d) TERMS AND CONDITIONS RELATING TO HOUSING ASSIST- "(1) SITES.-- "(A) IN GENERAL.--Any readily fabricated dwelling pro- vided under this section shall, whenever practicable, be located on a site that-- "(i) is complete with utilities; and "(ii) is provided by the State or local government, by the owner of the site, or by the occupant who was displaced by the major disaster. "(B) SITES PROVIDED BY THE PRESIDENT.--A readily fabricated dwelling may be located on a site provided by the President if the President determines that such a site would be more economical or accessible. "(2) DISPOSAL OF UNITS.-- "(A) SAL~ TO OCCU~NTS.-- "(i) IN aENERAL.--Notwithstanding any other provision of law, a temporary housing unit purchased under this section by the President for the purpose of housing disaster victims may be sold directly to the individual or household who is occupying the unit if the individual or household lacks permanent housing. "(ii) SALE PRICE.--A sale of a temporary housing unit under clause (i) shall be at a price that is fair and equitable. "(iii) DEPOSIT OF PROCEEDS.--Notwithstanding any other provision of law, the proceeds of a sale under clause (i) shall be deposited in the appropriate Disaster Relief Fund account. "(iv) HAZARD ANI) FLOOD INSURANCE.--A sale of a temporary housing unit under clause (i) shall be made on the condition that the individual or household purchasing the housing unit agrees to obtain and main- rain hazard and flood insurance on the housing unit. "(v) USE OF GSA SERVICES.--The President may use the services of the General Services Administration to accomplish a sale under clause (i). "(B) OTHER METHODS OF DISPOSAL.--If not disposed of under subparagraph (A), a temporary housing unit pur- chased under this section by the President for the purpose of housing disaster victims-- "(i) may be sold to any person; or "(ii) may be sold, transferred, donated, or otherwise made available directly to a State or other govern- mental entity or to a voluntary organization for the sole purpose of providing temporary housing to disaster victims in major disasters and emergencies if, as a condition of the sale, transfer, or donation, the State, other governmental agency, or voluntary organization agrees-- "(I) to comply with the nondiscrimination provisions of section 308; and "(II) to obtain and maintain hazard and flood insurance on the housing unit. 114 STAT. 1570 PUBLIC LAW 106-390--OCT. 30, 2000 President. "(e) FINANCL~L ASSISTANCE TO ADDRESS OTHER NEEDS.-- "(1) MEDICAL, DENTAL, AND FUNERAL EXPENSES.--The Presi- dent, in consultation with the Governor of a State, may provide financial assistance under this section to an individual or house- hold in the State who is adversely affected by a major disaster to meet disaster-related medical, dental, and funeral expenses. "(2) PERSONAL PROPERTY, TtLA_NSPORTATION, AND OTHER EXPENSES.--The President, in consultation with the Governor of a State, may provide financial assistance under this section to an individual or household described in paragraph (1) to address personal property, transportation, and other necessary expenses or serious needs resulting from the major disaster. "(f) STATE ROLr.-- "(1) FINANCIAL ASSISTANCE TO ADDRESS OTHER NEEDS.-- "(A) GRANT TO STATE.--Subject to subsection (g), a Governor may request a grant from the President to provide financial assistance to individuals and households in the State under subsection (e). "($) ADMINISTRATIVE COSTS.--A State that receives a grant under subparagraph (A) may expend not more than 5 percent of the amount of the grant for the administrative costs of providing financial assistance to individuals and households in the State under subsection (e). "(2) ACCESS TO RECORDS.--In providing assistance to individuals arid households under this section, the President shall provide for the substantial and ongoing involvement of the States in which the individuals and households are located, including by providing to the States access to the electronic records of individuals and households receiving assistance under this section in order for the States to make available any additional State and local assistance to the individuals and households. "(g) COST SHARING.-- "(1) FEDERAL SHARE.--Except as provided in paragraph (2), the Federal share of the costs eligible to be paid using assistance provided under this section shall be 100 percent. "(2) FINANCIAL ASSISTANCE TO ADDRESS OTHER NEEDS.- In the case of financial assistance provided under subsection (e)-- "(A) the Federal share shall be 75 percent; and "(B) the rwn-Federal share shall be paid from funds made available by the State. "(h) MAXIMUM AMOUNT OF ASSISTANCE.-- "(1) IN GENERAL.--No individual or household shall receive financial assistance greater than $25,000 under this section with respect to a single major disaster. "(2) ADJUSTMENT OF LIMIT.--The limit established under paragraph (1) shall be adjusted annually to reflect changes in the Consumer Price Index for All Urban Consumers pub- lished by the Department of Labor. "(i) RULES AND REGULATIONS.--The President shall prescribe rules and regulations to carry out this section, including criteria, standards, and procedures for determining eligibility for assist- ' (b) CONFORMING AMENDMENT.--Section 502(a)(6) of the Robert T. Stafford Disaster Relief and Emergency Assistance Act (42 U.S.C. 5192(a)(6)) is amended by striking "temporary housing". PUBLIC LAW 106-390--OCT. 30, 2000 114 STAT. 1571 (c) ELIMINATION OF INDMDUAL AND FAMILY GRANT PRO- GRAMS.--Section 411 of the Robert T. Stafford Disaster Relief and Emergency Assistance Act (42 U.S.C. 5178) is repealed. (d) EFFECTIVE DATE.--The amendments made by this section take effect 18 months after the date of the enactment of this Act. 42 USC 5174 note. SEC. 207. COMMUNITY DISASTER LOANS. Section 417 of the Robert T. Stafford Disaster Relief and Emer- gency Assistance Act (42 U.S.C. 5184) is amended-- (1) by striking "(a) The President" and inserting the fol- lowing: "(a) IN GENERAL.--The President"; (2) by striking "The amount" and inserting the following: "(b) AMOUNT.--The amount"; (3) by striking "Repayment" and inserting the following: "(C) REPAYMENT,- ''(1) CANCELLATION.--Repayment"; (4) by striking "(b) Any loans" and inserting the following: "(d) ErrrCT ON OTHER ASSISTANCE.--Any loans"; (5) in subsection (b) (as designated by paragraph (2))-- (A) by striking "and shall" and inserting "shall"; and (B) by inserting before the period at the end the fol- lowing: ", and shall not exceed $5,000,000"; and (6) in subsection (c) (as designated by paragraph (3)), by adding at the end the following: "(2) CONDITION ON CONTINUING ELIGIBILITY.--A local government shall not be eligible for further assistance under this section during any period in which the local government is in arrears with respect to a required repayment of a loan under this section.". SEC. 208. REPORT ON STATE MANAGEMENT OF SM~I.I. DISASTERS INI- 42 USC 5121 TIATIVE. note. Not later than 3 years after the date of the enactment of Deadline. this Act, the President shall submit to Congress a report describing the results of the State Management of Small Disasters Initiative, including- (l) identification of any administrative or financial benefits of the initiative; and (2) recommendations concerning the conditions, if any, under which States should be allowed the option to administer parts of the assistance program under section 406 of the Robert T. Stafford Disaster Relief and Emergency Assistance Act (42 U.S.C. 5172). SEC. 209. STUDY REGARDING COST REDUCTION. 42 USC 5121 note. Not later than 3 years after the date of the enactment of Deadline. this Act, the Director of the Congressional Budget Office shall complete a study estimating the reduction in Federal disaster assist- ance that has resulted and is likely to result from the enactment of this Act. 114 STAT. 1572 PUBLIC LAW106-390--OCT. 30,2000 TITLE III--MISCELLANEOUS President. SEC. 301. TECHNICAL CORRECTION OF SHORT TITLE. The first section of the Robert T. Stafford Disaster Relief and Emergency Assistance Act (42 U.S.C. 5121 note) is amended to read as follows: "SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE. "This .Act may be cited as the 'Robert T. Stafford Disaster Relief and Emergency Assistance Act'.". SEC. 302. DEFINITIONS. Section-102 of the Robert T. Stafford Disaster Relief and Emer- gency Assistance Act (42 U.S.C. 5122) is amended- (l) in each of paragraphs (3) and (4), by striking "the Northern" and all that follows through "Pacific Islands" and inserting "and the Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana Islands"; (2) by striking paragraph (6) and inserting the following: "(6) LOCAL GOVERNMENT.--The term 'local government' means-- "(A) a county, municipality, city, town, township, local public authority, school district, special district, intrastate district, council of governments (regardless of whether the council of governments is incorporated as a nonprofit cor- poration under State law), regional or interstate govern- ment entity, or agency or instrumentality of a local govern- ment; "(B) an Indian tribe or authorized tribal organization, or Alaska Native village or organization; and "(C) a rural community, unincorporated town or village, or other public entity, for which an application for assist- ance is made by a State or political subdivision of a State."; and (3) in paragraph (9), by inserting "irrigation," after "utility,". SEC, 303, FIRE MANAGEMENT ASSISTANCE. (a) IN GENERAL.~qection 420 of the Robert T. Stafford Disaster Relief and Emergency Assistance Act (42 U.S.C. 5187) is amended to read as follows: "SEC. 420. FIRE MANAGEMENT ASSISTANCE. "(a) IN GENEr~L.--The President is authorized to provide assist- ance, including grants, equipment, supplies, and personnel, to any State or local government for the mitigation, management, and control of any fire on public or private forest land or grassland that threatens such destruction as would constitute a major dis- aster. "(b) COORDINATION WITH STATE AND TRIBAL DEPARTMENTS OF FORESTRY.--In providing assistance under this section, the Presi- dent shall coordinate with State and tribal departments of forestry. "(c) ESSENTIAL ASSlSTANCE.--In providing assistance under this section, the President may use the authority provided under section 403. PUBLIC LAW 106-390--OCT. 30, 2000 114 STAT. 1573 "(d) RULES AND REGULATIONS.--The President shall prescribe such rules and regulations as are necessary to carry out this sec- tion.''. (b) ErPrCTIVE DA?E.--The amendment made by subsection (a) takes effect I year after the date of the enactment of this Act. SEC. 304. DISASTER GRANT CLOSEOUT PROCEDURES. Title VII of the Robert T. Stafford Disaster Relief and Emer- gency Assistance Act (42 U.S.C. 5101 et seq.) is amended by adding at the end the following: "SEC. 705. DISASTER GRANT CLOSEOUT PROCEDURES. "(a) STATUTE OF LIMITATIONS.-- "(1) IN CrNrRAL.--Except as provided in paragraph (2), ne administrative action to recover any payment made to a State or local government for disaster or emergency assistance under this Act shall be initiated in any forum after the date that is 3 years after the date of transmission of the final expenditure report for the disaster or emergency. "(2) FP~UD EXCEPTION. The limitation under paragraph (1) shall apply unless there is evidence of civil or criminal fraud. "(b) REBUTTAL OF PRESUMPTION OF RECORD MAINTENANCE.-- "(1) IN CrN~RAL.--In any dispute arising under this section after the date that is 3 years after the date of transmission of the final expenditure report for the disaster or emergency, there shall be a presumption that accounting records were maintained that adequately identify the source and application of funds provided for financially assisted activities. "(2) AFFIRMATIVE EVIDENCE.--The presumption described in paragraph (1) may be rebutted only on production of affirma- tive evidence that the State or local government did not main- tain documentation described in that paragraph. "(3) INABILITY TO PRODUCE DOCLrMENTATION.--The inability of the Federal, State, or local government to produce source documentation supporting expenditure reports later than 3 years after the date of transmission of the final expenditure report shall not constitute evidence to rebut the presumption described in paragraph (1). "(4) RIGHT or ^CCESS.--The period during which the Fed- eral, State, or local government has the right to access source documentation shall not be limited to th~ required 3-year reten- tion period referred to in paragraph (3), but shall last as long as the records are maintained. "(c) BINDING NATURE OF GRANT REQUIREMENTS.--A State or local government shall not be liable for reimbursement or any other penalty for any payment made under this Act if- "(1) the payment was authorized by an approved agreement specifying the costs; "(2) the costs were reasonable; and "(3) the purpose of the grant was accomplished.". SEC. 305. PUBLIC SAFETY OI~'r'iCER BENEFITS FOR CERTAIN FEDERAL AND STATE EMPLOYEES. (a) IN GENrr~L.--Section 1204 of the Omnibus Crime Control and Safe Streets Act of 1968 (42 U.S.C. 3796b) is amended by striking paragraph (7) and inserting the following: "(7) 'public safety officer' means-- President. 42 USC 5187 note. 42 USC 5205. 114 STAT. 1574 PUBLIC LAW 106-390--OCT. 30, 2000 42 USC 3796b note. 42 USC 5206. Deadline. "(A) an individual serving a public agency in an official capacity, with or without compensation, as a law enforce- ment officer, as a firefighter, or as a member of a rescue squad or ambulance crew; "(B) an employee of the Federal Emergency Manage- ment Agency who is performing official duties of the Agency in an area, if those official duties-- "(i) are related to a major disaster or emergency that has been, or is later, declared to exist with respect to the area under the Robert T. Stafford Disaster Relief and Emergency Assistance Act (42 U.S.C. 5121 et seq.); and "(ii) are determined by the Director of the Federal Emergency Management Agency to be hazardous duties; or "(C) an employee of a State, local, or tribal emergency management or civil defense agency who is performing official duties in cooperation with the Federal Emergency Management Agency in an area, if those official duties-- "(i) are related to a major disaster or emergency that has been, or is later, declared to exist with respect to the area under the Robert T. Stafford Disaster Relief and Emergency Assistance Act (42 U.S.C. 5121 et seq.); and "(ii) are determined by the head of the agency to be hazardous duties.". (b) EFFECTIVE DATE.--The amendment made by subsection (a) applies only to employees described in subparagraphs (B) and (C) - of section 1204(7) of the Omnibus Crime Control and Safe Streets Act of 1968 (as amended by subsection (a)) who are injured or who die in the line of duty on or after the date of the enactment of this Act. SEC. 306. BUY AMERICAN. (a) COMrLIANCr WI?H BUY AMrRICAN ACT.--No funds author- ized to be appropriated under this Act or any amendment made by this Act may be expended by an entity unless the entity, in expending the funds, complies with the Buy American Act (41 U.S.C. 10a et seq.). (b) DEBARMENT OF PERSONS CONVICTED OF FRAUDULENT USE OF "MADE IN AMERICA" LABELS.-- (1) IN GENERAL.--If the Director of the Federal Emergency Management Agency determines that a person has been con- victed of intentionally affixing a label bearing a "Made in America" inscription to any product sold in or shipped to the United States that is not made in America, the Director shall determine, not later than 90 days after determining that the person has been so convicted, whether the person should be debarred from contracting under the Robert T. Stafford Disaster Relief and Emergency Assistance Act (42 U.S.C. 5121 et seq.). (2) DEFINITION or DEBAR.--In this subsection, the term "debar" has the meaning given the term in section 2393(c) of title 10, United States Code. SEC. 307. TREATMENT OF CERTAIN REAL PROPERTY. (a) IN GENrRAL.--Notwithstanding the National Flood Insur- ance Act of 1968 (42 U.S.C. 4001 et seq.), the Flood Disaster PUBLIC LAW 106-390--OCT. 30, 2000 114 STAT. 1575 Protection Act of 1973 (42 U.S.C. 4002 et seq.), or any other provi- sion of law, or any flood risk zone identified, delineated, or estab- lished under any such law (by flood insurance rate map or other- wise), the real property described in subsection (b) shall not be considered to be, or to have been, located in any area having special flood hazards (including any floodway or floodplain). (b) REAL PROPERTY.--The real property described in this sub- section is all land and improvements on the land located in the Maple Terrace Subdivisions in the City of Sycamore, DeKalb County, Illinois, including-- (1) Maple Terrace Phase I; (2) Maple Terrace Phase II; (3) Maple Terrace Phase III Unit 1; (4) Maple Terrace Phase III Unit 2; (5) Maple Terrace Phase III Unit 3; (6) Maple Terrace Phase 1V Unit 1; (7) Maple Terrace Phase IV Unit 2; and (8) Maple Terrace Phase IV Unit 3. (c) REVISION OF FLOOD INSURANCE RATE LOT MAPs.--As soon as practicable after the date of the enactment of this Act, the Director of the Federal Emergency Management Agency shall revise the appropriate flood insurance rate lot maps of the agency to reflect the treatment under subsection (a) of the real property described in subsection (b). SEC. 308. STUDY OF PARTICIPATION BY IN-DIAN TRIBES IN EMERGENCY 42 USC 5121 MANAGEMENT. note. (a) DEFINITION OF INDIAN TRmr.--In this section, the term "Indian tribe" has the meaning given the term in section 4 of the Indian Self-Determination and Education Assistance Act (25 U.S.C. 450b). (b) STUDY.- (1) IN GENERAL.--The Director of the Federal Emergency Management Agency shall conduct a study of participation by Indian tribes in emergency management. (2) REQUIRED ELEMENTS.--The study shall- (A) survey participation by Indian tribes in training, predisaster and postdisaster mitigation, disaster prepared- ness, and disaster recovery programs at the Federal and State levels; and (B) review and assess the capacity of Indian tribes to participate in cost-shared emergency management pro- grams and to participate in the management of the pro- grams. (3) CONSULTATION.--In conducting the study, the Director shall consult with Indian tribes. (c) REPORT.--Not later than i year after the date of the enact- Deadline. merit of this Act, the Director shall submit a report on the study under subsection (b) to- (l) the Committee on Environment and Public Works of the Senate; (2) the Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure of the House of Representatives; (3) the Committee on Appropriations of the Senate; and 114 STAT. 1576 PUBLIC LAW 106-390--OCT. 30, 2000 (4) the Committee on Appropriations of the House of Rep- resentatives. Approved October 30, 2000. LEGISLATIVE HISTORY--H.R. 707 (S. 1691): HOUSE REPORTS: No. 106~i0 (Comm. on Transportation and Infrastructure). SENATE REPORTS: No. 106-295 accompanying S. 1691 (Comm. on Environment and Public Works). CONGRESSIONAL RECORD: Vol. 145 (1999): Mar. 4, considered and passed House. Vol. 146 (2000): July 19, considered and passed Senate, amended. Oct. 3, House concurred in Senate amendment with an amendment. Oct. 5, Senate concurred in House amendment with an amendment. Oct. 10, House concurred in Senate amendment. Tuesday, February 26, 2002 Part III Federal Emergency Management Agency 44 CFR Parts 201 and 206 Hazard Mitigation Planning and Hazard Mitigation Grant Program; Interim Final Rule 8844 Federal Register/Vol, 67. No. 38/Tuesday. February 26, 2002/Rules and Regulations FEDERALEMERGENCY MANAGEMENT AGENCY 44 CFR Pads 201 and 206 RIN 3067-AD22 Hazard Mitigation Planning and Hazard Mitigation Grant Program AGENCY: Federal Emergency Management Agency. ACTION: Interim final rule. SUMMARY: This rule addresses State mitigation planning, identifies new local mitigation planning reqnirements, authorizes Hazard Mitigation Grant Program (HMGP) funds for planning activities, and increases the amount of HMGP funds available to States that develop a comprehensive, enhanced mitigation plan. This rule also requires that repairs or construction funded by a disaster loan or grant must be carried out in accordance with applicable standards and says that FEMA may require safe land use and construction practices as a condition of grantees receiving disaster assistance under the Stafford Act. DATES: Effective Date: February 26, 2002. Comment Date: We will accept written comments through April 29, · 2002, ADDRESSES: Please send written comments to the Rules Docket Clerk, Office of the General Counsel, Federal Emergency Management Agency, 500 C Street, SW., room 840, Washington, DC 20472, (facsimile) 202-646~1536, or (email) rules@fema.gov. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Margaret E. Lawless, Federal Insurance and Mitigation Administration, Federal Emergency Management Agency, 500 C Street, SW., Washington, DC, 20472, 202-646-3027, (facsimile) 202-646- 3104, or (email) margaret.lawless@fema.gov, SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Introduction Throughout the preamble and the rule the terms "we", "our" and "us" refer to FEMA. Section 322 of the Robert T. Stafford Disaster Relief and Emergency Assistance Act (Stafford Act or the Act), 42 U.S.C. 5165, enacted under §104 the Disaster Mitigation Act of 2000, (DMA 2000) P.L. 106--390, provides new and revitalized approaches to mitigation planning. This section: (1) Continues the requirement for a Standard State Mitigation plan as a condition of disaster assistance; (2) provides for States to receive an increased percentage of HMGP fiends (fl'om 15 to 20 percent of the total estimated eligible Federal assistance) if, at the time of the declaration of a major disaster, they have in effect a FEMA-approved Enhanced State Mitigation Plan that meets the factors listed in this rule; (3) establisims a new requirement fbr local mitigation plans; and (4) authorizes up to 7 percent of the HMGP funds available to a State to be used for development of State, tribal, and local mitigation plans. We will give Indian tribal governments the opportunity to fulfill the requirements of § 322 either as a grantee.or a subgrantee. An Indian tribal government may choose to apply for HMGP funding directly to us and would then serve as a grantee, meeting the State level responsibilities, or it may apply through the State, meeting the- local government or subgrantee responsibilities. Section 322, in concert with other sections of the Act, provides a significant opportunity to reduce the Nation's disaster losses through mitigation planning. In addition, implementation of planned, pre- identified, cost-effective mitigation measures will streamline the disaster recovery process. The Act provides a framework for linking pre- and post- disaster mitigation planning and initiatives with public and private interests to ensure an integrated, comprehensive approach to disaster loss reduction. The language in the Act, taken as a whole, emphasizes the importance of strong State and local planning processes and comprehensive program management at the State level. The new planning criteria also support State administration of the HMGP, and contemplate a significant State commitment to mitigation activities, comprehensive State mitigation planning, and strong program management. The planning process also provides a link between State and local mitigation programs, Both State level and local plans should address strategies for incorporating post-disaster early mitigation implementation strategies and sustainable recovery actions. We also recognize that governments are involved in a range of planning activities and that mitigation plans may be linked to or reference hazardous materials and other non-natural hazard plans. Improved mitigation planning will result in a better understanding of risks and vulnerabilities, as well as to expedite implementation of measures and activities to reduce those risks, both pre- and post-disaster. Section 409 of the Stafford Act, 42 U.S.C. 5176, which ~:equired mitigation plans and the use of minimum codes and standards, was repealed by tim DMA 2000. These issues are now addressed in two separate sections of the law: mitigation planning is in section 322 of the Act, and minimum codes and standards are in section 323 of the Act. We previously implemented section 409 through 44 CFR Part 206, Subpart M. Since current law now distinguishes the planning from the codes and standards in separate sections, we will address them in different sections of the CFR. We address the new planning regulations in Part 201 to reflect the broader relevance of planning to all FEMA mitigation programs, while the minimum standards remain in Part 206, Federal Disaster Assistance, Subpart M. The regulations implementing the Hazard Mitigation Grant Program are in Part 206, Subpart N. This rule also contains changes to Subpart N, to reflect the new planning criteria identified in section 322 of the Act. The administration is considering changes to FEMA's mitigation programs in the President's Budget for FY 2003. However, States and localities still would be required to have plans in effect, which meet the minimum requirements under this rule, as a condition of receiving mitigation assistance afler November 1, 2003. Implementation Strategy. States must have an approved hazard mitigation plan in order to receive Stafford Act assistance, excluding assistance provided pursuant to emergency provisions. These regulations provide criteria for the new two-tiered State mitigation plan process: Standard State Mitigation Plans, which allow a State to receive HMGP funding based on 15 percent of the total estimated eligible Stafford Act disaster assistance, and Enhanced State Mitigation Plans, which allow a State to receive HMGP funds based on 20 percent of the total estimated eligible Stafford Act disaster assistance. Enhanced State Mitigation Plans must demonstrate that the State has developed a comprehensive mitigation program, that it effectively uses available mitigation funding, and that it is capable of managing the increased funding. All State Mitigations Plans must be reviewed, revised, and re- approved by FEMA every three years. An important requirement of the legislation is that we must approve a completed enhanced plan before a disaster declaration, in order for the State to be eligible for the increased funding. We will no longer require States to revise their mitigation plan after every disaster declaration, as under former Federal Register/Vol. 67, No. 38/Tuesday, February 26, 2002/Rules and Regulations 8845 section 409 of the Act, 42 U.S.C. 5176. We recommend, however, that States consider revising their plan ifa disaster or other circmnstances significantly afl, ct its mitigation priorities. States with existing mitigation plans, approved under former section 409, will continue to be eligible for the 15 percent HMGP funding until November 1, 2003, when all State mitigation plans must meet the requirements of these regnlations. If State plans are not revised and approved to meet the Standard State Mitigation Plan requirements by that time, they will be ineligible tbr Stafford Act assistance, excluding emergency assistance. Indian tribal govermnents may choose to apply directly to us for HMGP funding, and would therefore be responsible for having an approved State level mitigation plan, and would act as the grantee. If an Indian tribal government chooses to apply for HMGP grants through the State, they would be responsible for having an approved local level mitigation plan, and would serve a§ a subgrantee accountable to the State as grantee. This rule also establishes local planning criteria so that these jurisdictions can actively begin the hazard mitigation planning process. This requirement is to encourage the development of comprehensive mitigation plans before disaster events. Section 322 requires local governments to have an approved local mitigation plan to be eligible to receive an HMGP project grant; however, this requirement will not fully take effect until November 1, 2003. FEMA Regional Directors may grant an exception to this requirement in extenuating circumstances. Until November 1, 2003, local governments will be able to receive HMGP project grant funds'and may prepare a mitigation plan concurrently with implementation of their project grant. We anticipate that the Predisaster Mitigation program authorized by section 203 of the Act, 42 U.S.C. 5133, will also support this local mitigation planning by making funds available for the development of comprehensive local mitigation plans, Managing States that we approve under new criteria established under section 404 of the Act, 42 U.S.C. 5170c(c), as amended by section 204 of DMA 2000 will have approval authority for local mitigation plans. This provision does not apply to States that we approved under the Managing State program in effect before enactment of DMA 2000. Our goal is for State and local governments to develop comprehensive and integrated plans that are coordinated through appropriate State, local, and regional agencies, as well as non-governmental interest groups, To the extent feasible and practicable, we would also like to coosolidate the planning requirements for different FEMA mitigation programs. This will ensure that one local plan will meet the minimum requirements for all of the different FEMA mitigation programs, such as the Flood Mitigation Assistance Program (authorized by sections 553 and 554 of the National Flood Insurance Reform Act of 1994, 42 U.S.C, 4104c and 42 U.S.C. 4104d), the Community Rating System (authorized by section 541 of the National Flood Insurance Reform Act of 1994, 42 U.S.C. 4022), the Pre-Disaster Mitigation Program (authorized by section 203 of the Stafford Act), the Hazard Mitigation Grant Program (authorized by section 404 of the Stafford Act), and the mitigation activities that are based upon the provisions of section 323 and subsections 406(b) and (e) of the Stafford Act. The mitigation plans may also serve to integrate documents and plans produced under other emergency management programs. State level plans should identify overall goals and priorities, incorporating the more specific local risk assessments, when available, and including projects identified through the local planning process. Under section 322(d), up to 7 percent of the available HMGP funds may now be used for planning, and we encourage States to use these funds for local plan development, In a memorandum to FEMA Regional Directors dated December 21, 2000, we announced that this provision of section 322 was effective for disasters declared on or after October 30, 2000, the date on which the Disaster Mitigation Act of 2000 became law. Regional Directors are encouraging States to make these funds immediately available to local and Indian tribal governments, although the funds can be used for plan development and review at the State level as well. As discussed earlier in this Supplementary Information, subsection 323(a) of the Stafford Act, 42 U.S.C. 5166(a), requires as a precondition to receiving disaster assistance under the Act that State and local governments, as well as eligible private nonprofit entities, must agree to carry out repair and reconstruction activities "in accordance with applicable standards of safety, decency, and sanitation and in conformity with applicable codes, specifications, and standards." In addition, that subsection authorizes the President (FEMA, by virtue of Executive Order 12148, as amended) to "require safe land use and construction practices, after adequate consultation with appropriate State and local officials" in the course of the use of Federal disaster assistance by eligible applicants to repair and restore disaster-damaged tbcilities. At the same ftme that we implement the planning mandates of section 322 of the Stafford Act, we are also implementing the Minimum Standards for Public and Private Structures provision of section 323 of the Act. This rule appears at Subpart M of Part 206 of Title 44 of the Code of Federal Regulatioos. As mentioned earlier, the section 322 planning regulations are in Part 201, while Part 206, Subpart M includes only the minimum codes and standards regulations mandated in § 323. The rule to implement § 323 of the Act reinforces the link between pre- disaster planning, building and construction standards, and post- disaster reconstruction efforts. We encourage comments on this interim final rule, and we will make every effort to involve all ~nterested parties prior to the development of the Final Rule. Justification for Interim Final Rule In general, FEMA publishes a rule for public comment before issuing a final rule, under the Administrative Procedure Act, 5 U.S.C. 533 and 44 CFR 1.12. The Administrative Procedure Act, however, provides an exception from that general rule where the agency for good cause finds the procedures for comment ~nd response contrary to public interest. Section 322 of the Stafford Act allows States to receive increased post-disaster grant funding for projects designed to reduce future disaster losses, States will only be eligible for these increased funds if they have a FEMA-approved Enhanced State Mitigation Plan. This interim final rule provides the criteria for development and approval of these plans, as well as criteria for local mitigation plans required by this legislation, In order for State and local governments to be positioned to receive these mitigation funds as soon as possible, these regulations must be in effect. The public benefit of this rule will be to assist States and communities assess their risks and identify activities to strengthen the larger community and the built environment in order to become less susceptible to disasters. Planning serves as the vital foundation to saving lives and protecting properties, having integrated plans in place can serve to both streamline recovery efforts and lessen potential future damages. Therefore, we believe it is contrary to the public interest to delay 8846 Federal Register / Vol. 67, No. 38 / Tuesday, February 26, 2002/Rules and Regulations the benefits of this rule. In accordance with the Administrative Procedure Act, 5 U.S.C. 553(d)(3), ~a,e find that there is good cause for the interim final rule to take effect immediately upon publication in the Federal Register in order to meet the needs of States and communities by identifying criteria for mitigation plans in order to redoce risks nationwide, establish criteria for minimum (:odes and standards in post- disaster reconstruction, and to allow States to adjust their mitigation plans to receive the increase in mitigation funding. In addition, we believe that. under the circumstances, delaying the effective date of this rule until after the comment period would not further the public interest. Prior to this rulemaking, FEMA hosted a meeting where interested parties provided comments and suggestions on how we could implement these planning requirements. Participants in this meeting included representatives from the National Emergency Management Association, the Association of State Floodplain Managers, the National Governors' Association, the International Association of Emergency Managers, the National Association of Development Organizations, the American Public Works Association, the National League of Cities, the National Association of Counties, the National Conference of State Legislatures, the International City/County Management Association, and the Bureau of Indian Affairs. We took comments and suggestions provided at this meeting into account in developing this interim final rule. Therefore, we find that prior notice and comment on this rule would not further the public interest. We actively encourage and solicit comments on this interim final rule from interested parties, and we will consider them in preparing the final rule. For these reasons, we believe we have good cause to publish an interim final rule. National Environmental Policy Act 44 CFR 10.8(d)(2)(ii) excludes this rule from the preparation of an environmental assessment or environmental impact statement, where the rule relates to actions that qualify for categorical exclusion under 44 CFR 10.8(d)(2)(iii), such as the development of plans under this section, Executive Order 12866, Regulatory Planning and Review We have prepared and reviewed this rule under the provisions of E.O. 12866. Regulatory Planning and Review. Under Executive Order 12866, 58 FR 51735, October 4, 1993, a significant regulatory action is subject to OMB review aod the requirements of the Executive Order. The Execufive Order defines "significant regulatory action" as one that is likely to result in a rule that may: (1) Have an annual effect on the economy of $100 million or more or adversely affect in a material way the economy, a sector of the economy, productivity, competition, jobs, the environment, public health or safety, or State, local, or tribal governments or communities; (2) Create a serious inconsistency or otherwise interfere with an action taken or planned by another agency; (3) Materially alter the budgetary impact of entitlements, grants, user fees, or loan programs or the rights and obligations of recipients thereof; or (4) Raise novel legal or policy issues arising out of legal mandates, the President's priorities, or the principles set forth in the Executive Order. The purpose of this rule is to implement section 322 of the Stafford Act which addresses mitigation planning at the State. tribal, and local levels, identifies new local planning requirements, allows Hazard Mitigation Grant Program (HMGP) funds for planning activities, and increases the amount of HMGP funds available to · States that develop a comprehensive, enhanced mitigation plan. The rule identifies local mitigation planning requirements before approval of project grants, and requires our approval of an Enhanced State Mitigation plan as a condition for increased mitigation funding. The rule also implements section 323 of the Stafford Act, which requires that repairs or construction fimded by disaster loans or grants must comply with applicable standards and safe land use and construction practices. As such the rule itself will not have an effect on the economy of more than $100,000,000. Therefore, this rule is a significant regulatory action and is not an economically significant rule under Executive Order 12866. The Office of Management and Budget (OMB) has reviewed this rule under Executive Order 12866, Executive Order 12898, Environmental Justice Under Executive Order 12898, Federal Actions to Address Environmental Justice in Minority Populations and Low-Income Populations, 59 FR 7629, February 16, 1994, we incorporate environmental justice into our policies and programs. The Executive Order requires each Federal agency to conduct its programs, policies, and activities that substantially affect human health or the environment, in a manner that ensures that those programs, poficies, and activities do not have the effect of excluding persons from p.articipation in our programs, denying persons the benefits of our programs, or subjecting persons to discrimination because of their race, color, or national origin. No action that we can anticipate under the final rule will have a disproportionately high or adverse human health and environmental effect on any segment of the population. Section 322 focuses specifically on mitigation planning to: Identify the natural hazards, risks, and vulnerabifities of areas in States, localities, and tribal areas; support development of local mitigatien plans; provide for technical assistance to local and tribal governments for mitigation planning; and identify and prioritize mitigation actions that the State will support, as resources become available. Section 323 requires compliance with applicable codes and standards in repair and construction, and use of sate land use and construction standards. Accordingly, the requirements of Executive Order 12898 do not apply to this interim final rule. Paperwork Reduclion Act of 1995 As required by the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C, 3507(d)) and concurrent with the publication of this interim final rule, we have submitted a request for review and approval of a new collection of information, which is contained in this interim final rule. Under the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, a person may not be penalized for failing to comply with an information collection that does not display a currently valid Office of Management and Budget (OMB) control number. The request was submitted to OMB for approval under the emergency processing procedures in OMB regulation 5 CFR 1320.1. OMB has approved this collection of information for use through August 31, 2002, under OMB Number 3067-0297. We expect to follow this emergency request with a request for OMB approval to continue the use of the collection of information for a term of three years, The request will be processed under OMB's normal clearance procedures in accordance with provisions of OMB regulation 5 CFR 1320.10. To help us with the timely processing of the emergency and normal clearance submissions to OMB, we invite the general public to comment on the collection of information. This notice and request for comments complies with the provisions of the Paperwork Federal Register / Vol. 67, No. 30 / Tuesday, February 26, 2002 / Rules and Regulations 11847 Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3506(c)(2)(A1). Collection of Information Title: State/Local/Tribal Hazard Mitigation Plans under Section 322 of the Disaster Mitigation Act of 2000. Abstract: Section 322 of the Robert T. Stafford Disaster Relief and Emergency Assistant Act, as amended by Section 104 of the Disaster Mitigation Act of 2000, provides new and revitalized approaches to mitigation planning. To obtain Federal assistance, new planning provisions require that each state, local, and tribal government prepare a hazard mitigation plan to include sections that describe the planning process, an assessment of the risks, a mitigation strategy, and identification of the plan maintenance and updating process. The Act provides a framework for linking pre- and post-disaster mitigation planning and initiatives with public and private interests to ensure an integrated, comprehensive approach to disaster loss reductloo. Under Section 322 there is a two-tiered State mitigation plan process. State mitigation plans must be reviewed, revised, and submitted to us every 3 years. (1) A Standard State Mitigation Plan must be approved by us in order for States to be eligible to receive Hazard Mitigation Grant Program (HGMP) funding based on 15 percent of the total estimated eligible Federal disaster assistance. This plan demonstrates the State's goals, priorities, and commitment to reduce risks from natural hazards and serves as a guide for State and local decision makers as they commit resources to reducing the effects of natural hazards. (2) An Enhanced State Mitigation Plan must be approved by us for a State to be eligible to receive HMGP funds based on 20 percent of the total estimated eligible Federal disaster assistance. This plan mast be approved by us within the 3 years prior to the current maior disaster declaration. It must demonstrate that a State has developed a comprehensive mitigation program, is efl'ectively osing available mitigation funding, and is capable of managing the increased funding. To be eligible to receive HMGP project grants, local governments nmst develop Local Mitigation Plans that include a risk assessment and mitigation strategy to reduce potential losses and target resources. Plans must be reviewed, revised, and submitted to us for approval every 5 years. To receive HMGP project grants, tribal governments may apply as a grantee or s~ubgrantee, and will be required to meet the planning requirements of a State or local government. Estimated Totcd Annual Burden: Type of coitection/forms No. of re- Houm per re- Annual burder spondents sponse hours Update state or tribal mitigation plans (standard state mitigation plans) .................................... 18 320 5,76( State review of local plans .......................................................................................................... 500 local 8 4,00( plans States develop Enhanced State Mitigation Plans ....................................................................... 7 100 70( Local or tribal governments develop mitigation plans ................................................................. 500 local 300 150,00( plans Total burden ......................................................................................................................................................................... 160,46( Comments: We are soliciting written comnmnts to: (a) Evaluate whether the proposed data collection is necessary for the proper performance of the agency, including whether the information shall have practical utility; (b) evaluate the accuracy of the agency's estimate of the burden of the proposed collection of information; (c) obtain recommendations to enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the information to be collected; and (d) evaluate the extent to which automated, electronic, mechanical, or other technological collection techniques may further reduce the respondents' burden. FEMA will accept comments through April 29, 2002. Addressee: Interested persons should submit written comments to Muriel B. Anderson, Chief, Records Management Section, Program Services and Systems Branch, Facilities Management and Services Division, Administration and Resource Planning Directorate, Federal Enmrgency Management Agency, 500 C Street, Street, SW., Washington, DC 20472. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: You may obtain copies of the OMB paperwork clearance package by contacting Ms. Anderson at (202) 646- 2625 (voice), (202) 646-3347 (facsimile), or by e-mail at muriel.anderson@fema.gov. Executive Order 13132, Federalism Executive Order 13132, Federalism, dated August 4, 1999, sets forth principles and criteria that agencies must adhere to in formulating and implementing policies that have federalism implications, that is, regulations that have substantial direct efi~cts on the States, or on the distribution of power and responsibilities among the various levels of government. Federal agencies must closely examine the statutory authority supporting any action that would limit the policymaking discretion of the States, and to the extent practicable, must consult with State and local officials before implementing any such action. We have reviewed this rule under E.O.13132 and have concluded that the rule does not have federalism implications as defined by the Executive Order. We have determined that the rule does not significantly affect the rights, roles, and responsibilities of States, and involves no preemption of ~tate law nor does it limit State policymaking discretion. However, we have consulted with State and local officials. In order to assist us in the development of this rule, we hosted a meeting to allow interested parties an oppodunity to provide their perspectives on the legislation and options for implementation of § 322. Stakeholders who attended the meeting included representatives from the National Emergency Management Association, the Association of State Floodplain Managers, the National Governors' Association, the International Association of Emergency Managers, the National Association of Development Organizations, the American Public Works Association, the National League of Cities, the National Association of Counties, the National Conference of State Legislatures, the International City/County Management Association, and the Bureau of Indian Affairs. We received valuable input from all parties at the meeting, which we took into account in the development of this rule. Additionally, we actively encourage and solicit comments on this interim final rule from interested parties, and we will 11848 Federal Register/Vol. 67, No. 38/Tuesday, February 26, 2002/Rules and Regulations consider them in preparing the final rule. Executive Order 13175, Consultation and Coordination With Indian Tribal Governments We have reviewed this interim final rule under Executive Order 13175, which became eft~ctive on February 6, 2001. Under the Hazard Mitigation Grant Program (HMGP), Indian triba~ governments will have the option to apply tbr grants directly to us and to serve as *'grantee", carrying out "State" roles. If they choose this option, tribal governments may submit either a State- level Standard Mitigation Plan for the 15 percent HMGP funding or a State- level Enhanced Mitigation Plan for 20 percent HMGP funding. In either case, Indian tribal governments would be able to spend up to 7 percent of those funds on planning. Before developing this rule, we met with representatives from State and local governments and the Bureau of Indian Affairs, to discuss the new planning opportunities and requirements of § 322 of the Stafford Act. We received valuable input from all parties, which helped us to develop this interim final rule, In reviewing the interim final rule, we find that it does not have "tribal implications" as defined in Executive Order 13175 because it will not have a substantial direct effect on one or more Indian tribes, on the relationship between the Federal Government and Indian tribes, or on the distribution of power and responsibilities between the Federal Government and Indian tribes. Moreover, the interim final rule does not impose substantial direct compliance costs on tribal governments, nor does it preempt tribal law, impair treaty rights or limit the self-governing powers of tribal governments. Congressional Review of Agency Rulemaking We have sent this interim final rule to the Congress and to the General Accounting Office under the Congressional Review of Agency Rulemaking Act, Public Law 104-121. The rule is a not "major rule" within the meaning of that Act. It is an administrative action in support of normal day-to-day mitigation planning activities required by section 322 and compliance under section 323 of the Stafford Act, as enacted in DMA 2000. The rule will not result in a major increase in costs or prices for consumers, individual industries, Federal, State, or local government agencies, or geographic regions. It will not have "significant adverse effects" on competition, employment, investment, productivity, innovation, or on the ability of United States-based enterprises to compete with foreign- based enterprises, This final rule is subject to the information collection requirements of the Paperwork Reduction Act, and OMB has assigned Control No. 3067-0297. The rule is not an unfunded Federal mandate within the meaning of the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995, Public Law 104-4, and any enforceable duties that we impose are a condition of Federal assistance or a duty arising from participation in a voluntary Federal program. List of Subjects in 44 CFR Part 201 and Part 206 Administrative practice aud procedure, Disaster assistance, Grant programs, Mitigation planning, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements. Accordingly, Amend 44 CFR, Subchapter D--Disaster Assistance, as follows: 1. Add Part 201 to read as follows: PART 201--MITIGATION PLANNING Sec. 201.1 Purpose. 201.2 Definitions. 201.3 Responsibilities. 201.4 Standard State Mitigation Plans. 201.5 Enhanced State Mitigation Plans. 201.6 Local Mitigation Plans. Authority: Robert T. Stafford Disaster Relief and Emergency Assistance Act, 42 U.$.C. 5121-5206; Reorganization Plan No. 3 of 1978, 43 FR 41943, 3 CFR, 1978 Comp., p. 329; E.O. 12127, 44 FR 19367, 3 CFR, 1979 Comp., p. 376; E.O. 12148, 44 FR 43239, 3 CFR, 1979 Comp., p. 412; and E.O. 12673, 54 FR 12571, 3 CFR, 1989 Comp., p. 214. §201.1 Purpose. (a) The purpose of this part is to provide information on the polices and procedures for mitigation planning as required by the provisions of section 322 of the Staftbrd Act, 42 U.S.C. 5165. (b) The purpose of mitigation planning is for State, local, and Indian tribal governments to identify the natural hazards that impact them, to identify actions and activities to reduce any losses from those hazards, and to establish a coordinated process to implement the plan, taking advantage of a wide range of resources. §201.2 Definitions. Grantee means the government to which a grant is awarded, which is accountable for the use of the funds provided. The grantee is the entire legal entity even if only a particular component of the entity is designated in the grant award document, Generally, the State is the grantee. However, after a declaration, an Indian tribal government may choose to be a grantee, or may act as a subgrantee under the State. An Indian tribal government acting as grantee will assume the responsibilities of a "state", as described in this part, for the purposes of admiuistering the grant. Hazard mitigation means any sustained action taken to reduce or eliminate the long-term risk to human life and property from hazards, Hazard Mitigation Grant Program means the program authorized under section 404 of the Stafford Act, 42 U'.S.C 5170c and implemented at 44 CFR Part 206, Subpart N, which authorizes funding for certain mitigation measures identified through the evaluation of natural hazards conducted under section 322 of the Stafford Act 42 U.S.C 5165. Indian tribal government means any Federally recognized governing body of an Indian or Alaska Native tribe, band, nation, pueblo, village, or community that the Secretary of Interior acknowledges to exist as an Indian tribe under the Federally Recognized Tribe List Act of 1994, 25 U.S.C. 479a. This does not include Alaska Native corporations, the ownership, of which is vested in private individuals. Local government is any county, municipality, city, town, township, public authority, school district, special district, intrastate district, council of governments (regardless of whether the council of governments is incorporated as a nonprofit corporation under State law), regional or interstate government entity, or agency or instrumentality of a local government; any Indian tribe or authorized tribal organization, or Alaska Native village or organization; and any rural community, unincorporated town or village, or other public entity. Managing State means a State to which FEMA has delegated the authority to administer and manage the HMGP under the criteria established by FEMA pursuant to 42 U.S.C. 5170c(c). FEMA may also delegate authority to tribal governments to administer and manage the HMGP as a Managing State. Regional Director is a director of a regional office of FEMA, or his/her designated representative.. Small and impoverished commenities means a community of 3,000 or fewer individuals that is identified by the State as a rural community, and is not a remote area within the corporate boundaries of a larger city; is economically disadvantaged, by having an average per capita annual income of residents not exceeding 80 percent of national, per capita income, based on Federal Register/Vol. 67~ No. 38/TueSday, February 26~ 2002/Rules and Regulations 8849 best available data; the local nnemployment rate exceeds by one percentage point or more, the most recently reported, average yearly national unemployment rate; and any other t~ctors identified in the State Plan in which the community is located. The Staffm'd Act rei~rs to the Robert T. Stafford Disaster Relief and Emergency Assistance Act, Public Law 93-288, as amended (42 U.S.C. 5121- 52O6). State is any State of the United States, the District of Columbia, Puerto Rico, the Virgin Islands, Guam, American Samoa, and the Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana Islauds. State Hazard Mitigation Officer is the official representative of State government who is the primary point of contact with FEMA, other Federal agencies, and lad, al governments in mitigation planning and implementation of mitigation programs and activities required under the Stafford Act. Subgrantee means the government or other legal entity to which a subgrant is awarded and which is accountable to the grantee for the use of the funds provided. Subgrantees can be a State agency, local government, private non- profit organizations, or Indian tribal government. Indian tribal governments acting as a subgrantee are accountable to the State grantee. § 201.3 Responsibilities. (a) General. This section identifies the key responsibilities of FEMA, States, and local/tribal governments in carrying out section 322 of the Stafford Act, 42 U.S.C. 5165. (b) FEMA. The key responsibilities of the Regional Director are to: (1) Oversee all FEMA related pre- and post-disaster hazard mitigation programs and activities; (2) Provide technical assistance and training to State, local, and Indian tribal governments regarding the mitigation planning process; (3) Review and approve all Standard and Enhanced State Mitigation Plans; (4) Review and approve all local mitigation plans, unless that authority has been delegated to the State in accordance with § 201.6(d); (5) Conduct reviews, at least once every three years, of State mitigation activities, plans, and programs to ensure that mitigation commitments are fulfilled, and when necessary, take action, including recovery of fiLnds or denial of future funds, if mitigation commitments are not fulfilled. (c) State. The key responsibilities of the State are to coordinate all State and local activities relating to hazard evaluation and mitigation and to: (1) Prepare and submit to FEMA a Standard State Mitigation Plan following the criteria established in § 201.4 as a condition of receiving Stafford Act assistance (except emergency assistance). (2) In order to be considered for the 20 percent HMGP ftmding, prepare and submit an Enhanced State Mitigation Plan in accordance with § 201,5, which must be reviewed and updated, if necessary, every three years from the date of the approval of the previoos plan. (3) At a minimum, review and, if necessary, update the Standard State Mitigation Plan by November 1, 2003 and every three years from the date of the approval of the previous plan in order to continue program eligibility. (4) Make available the use of up to the 7 percent of HMGP funding for planning in accordance with § 206.434. (5) Provide technical assistance and training to local governments to assist them in applying for HMGP planning grants, and in developing local mitigation plans. (6) For Managing States that have been approved under the criteria established by FEMA pursuant to 42 U.S.C. 5170c(c), review and approve local mitigation plans in accordance with § 201.6(d). (d) Local governments, The key responsibilities of local governments are to: (1) Prepare and adopt a jurisdiction- wide natural hazard mitigation plan as a condition of receiving project grant funds under the HMGP, in accordance with § 201.6. (2) At a minimum, review and, if necessary, update the local mitigation plan every five years from date of plan approval to continue program eligibility. (e) Indian tribal governments. Indian tribal governments will be given the option of applying directly to us for Hazard Mitigation Grant Program funding, or they may choose to apply through the State. If they apply directly to us, they will assume the responsibilities of the State, or grantee, and if they apply through the State, they will assume the responsibilities of the local government, or subgrantee. §201.4 Standard State Mitigation Plans. (a) Plan requirement. By November 1, 2003, States must have an approved Standard State Mitigation plan meeting the requirements of this section, in order to receive assistance under the Stafford Act, although assistance authorized under disasters declared prior to November 1, 2003 will continue to be made available. In auy case, emergency assistance provided under 42 U.S.C. 5179a, 5179b, 5173, 5174, 5177, 5179, 5180, 5182, 5183, 5184, 5192 will not be aft~cted. The mitigation I~lan is the demonstration of the State's commitment to reduce risks from natural hazards and serves as a guide for State decision makers as they commit resources to reducing the effects of natural hazards. States may choose to include the requirements of the HMGP Administrative Plan in their mitigation plan. (b) Planning process. An effective planning process is essential in developing and maintaining a good plan. The mitigation planning process should include coordination with other State agencies, appropriate Federal agencies, interested groups, and be integrated to the extent possible with other ongoing State planning efforts as well as other FEMA mitigation programs and initiatives. (c) Plan content. To be effective the plan must include the following elements: (1) Description of the planning process used to develop the plan, including how it was prepared, who was involved in the process, and how at. her agencies participated. . (2) Risk assessments that provide the factual basis for activities proposed in the strategy portion of the mitigation plan. Statewlde risk assessments must characterize and analyze natural hazards and risks to provide a statewide overview. This overview will allow the State to compare potential losses throughout the State and to determine their priorities for implementing mitigation measures under the strategy, and to prioritize jurisdictions for receiving technical and financial support in developing more detailed local risk and vulnerability assessments. The risk assessment shall include the following: ti) An overview of the type m~d location of all natural hazards that can affect the State, including information on previous occurrences of hazard events, as well as the probability of fnture hazard events, using maps where appropriate; (ii) An overview and analysis of the State's vulnerability to the hazards described in this paragraph (c)(2), based on estimates provided in local risk assessments as well as the State risk assessment. The State shall describe vulnerability in terms of the jurisdictions most threatened by the identified hazards, and most vulnerable to damage and loss associated with hazard events. State owned critical or operated facilities located in the 8850 Federal Register/Vol. 67, No. 38/Tuesday, February 26, 2002/Rules and Regulations identified hazard areas shall also be addressed; (iii) An overview and analysis of potential losses to tile identified vulnerable structures, based on estimates provided in local risk assessments as well as the State risk assessment. The State shall estimate the potential dollar losses to State owned or operated buildiugs, infrastructnre, and critical tbcihfies located in the identified hazard areas, (3] A Mitigation Strategy that provides the State's blueprint for reducing the losses identified in the risk assessment. This section shall include: (i) A description of State goals to guide the selection of activities to mitigate and reduce potential l,osses, (ii) A discussion of the State s pre- and post-disaster hazard management policies, programs, and capabilities to mitigate the hazards in the area, including: an evaluation of State laws, regulations, policies, and programs related to hazard mitigation as well as to development in hazard-prone areas; a discussion of State funding capabilities for hazard mitigation projects; and a general description and analysis of the effectiveness of local mitigation policies, programs, and capabilities. (iii) An identification, evaluation, and prioritization of cost-effective, environmentally sound, and technically t;sasible mitigation actions and activities tbe State is considering and an explanation of how each activity contributes to the overall mitigation strategy. This section should be linked to local plans, where specific local actions and I~rojects are identified, (ix,] Identification of current and potential sources of Federal, State, local, or private funding to implement mitigation activities. (4) A section on the Coordination of Local Mitigation Planning that includes file tbllowing: (i) A description of the State process to support, through funding and tecbnical assistance, the development of local mitigation plans. (ii) A description of the State process and 6meframe by which the local plans will be reviewed, coordinated, and [ieked to the State Mitigation Plan. (iii) Criteria for prioritizing communities and local jurisdictions that wmdd receive planning and project grants under available funding programs, whk:h should include consideration for communities with the bighest risks, repetitive loss properties, and most intense development pressures. Further, that for non- plmming grants, a principal criterion for prioritizing grants shall be the extent to which benefits are maximized according to a cost benefit review of proposed projects and their associated costs. (5) A Plan Maintenance Process that includes: (i) An establisbed method and schedule for monitoring, evaluating, and updating the plan. (ii) A system for monitoring implementation of mitigation measures aad project closeouts. (iii) A system for reviewing progress on achieving goals as well as activities and proiects identified in the Mitigation Strategy. (6) A Plan Adoption Process, The plan must be formally adopted by the State prior to submittal to us for final review and approval. (7) Assurances. The plan must include assurances that the State will comply with all applicable Federal statutes and regulations in effect with respect to the periods for which it receives grgnt funding, in compliance with 44 CFR 13.11(c). The State will amend its plan whenever necessary to reflect changes in State or Federal laws and statutes as required in 44 CFR 13.11(d). (d) Review and updates. Plan must be reviewed and revised to reflect changes in development, progress ih statewide mitigation efforts, and changes in priorities and resubmitted for approval to the appropriate Regional Director every three years. The Regional review will be completed within 45 days after receipt from the State, whenever possible. We also encourage a State to review its plan in the post-disaster timeframe to reflect changing priorities, but it is not required. §201.5 Enhanced State Mitig~ion Plans. (a) A State with a FEMA approved Enhanced State Mitigation Plan at the time of a disaster declaration is eligible to receive increased funds under the HMGP, based on twenty percent of the total estimated eligible Stafford Act disaster assistance. The Enhanced State Mitigation Plan must demonstrate that a State has developed a comprehensive mitigation program, that the State effectively uses available mitigation funding, and that it is capable of managing the increased funding. In order for the State to be eligible for the 20 percent HMGP funding, FEMA must have approved the plan within three years prior to the disaster declaration. (b) Enhanced State Mitigation Plans must include all elements of the Standard State Mitigation Plan identified in § 201.4, as well as document the following: (1) Demonstration that the plan is integrated to the extent practicable with other State and/or regional planning initiatives (comprehensive, growth management, economic develo?ment, capital improvement, land development, and/or emergency management plans) and FEMA mitigation programs and initiatives that provide guidance to State and regional agencies. (2) Documentation of the State's project implementation capability, identifying and demonstrating the ability to implement the plan, including: (i) Established eligibility criteria tbr multi-hazard mitigation measures. (ii) A system to determine the cost effectiveness of mitigation measures, consistent with OMB Circular A-94, Guidelines and Discount Rates for Benefit-Cost Analysis of Federal 'Programs, and to rank the measures according to the State's eligibility criteria. (iii) Demonstration that the State has the capability to effectively manage the HMGP as well as other mitigation grant programs, including a record of the following: (A) Meeting HMGP and other mitigation grant application fimeframes and submitting complete, technically feasible, and eligible project applications with appropriate supporting documentatiofi; (B) Preparing and submitting accurate environmental reviews and benefit-cost analyses; (Ci Submitting complete and accurate quarterly progress and financial reports on time; and (D) Completing HMGP and other mitigation grant projects within established performance periods, including financial reconciliation. (iv) A system and strategy by which the State will conduct an assessment of the completed mitigation actions and include a record of the effectiveness (actual cost avoidance) of each mitigation action. (3) Demonstration that the State effectively uses existing mitigation programs to achieve its mitigation goals. (4) Demonstration that the State is committed to a comprehensive state mitigation program, which might include any of the following: (i) A commitment to support local mitigation planning by providing workshops and training, State planning grants, or coordinated capability development of local officials, including Emergency Management and Floodplain Management certifications. (ii) A statewide program of hazard mitigation through the development of legislative initiatives, mitigation councils, formation of public/private Federal Register/Vol. 67, No. 38/Tuesday, February 26, 2002/Rules and Regulations 8851 partuerships, and/or other executive actions that promote bazard mitigation. (iii) The State provides a portion of the non-Federal match for HMGP and/ or other mitigation projects. (iv) To the extent al[owed by State law, the State requires or encourages local governments to use a current version of a nationally applicable model building code or standard that addresses natnral hazards as a basis for design and construction of State sponsored mitigation projects, (v) A comprehensive, multi-year plan to mitigate the risks posed to existing buildings that have been identified as necessary for post-disaster response and recovery operations. (vi) A comprehensive description of how the State integrates mitigation into its post-disaster recovery operations. (c) Review and updates. (1) A State must review and revise its plan to reflect changes in development, progress in statewide mitigation efforts, and changes in priorities, and resubmit it for approval to the appropriate Regional Director every three years· The Regional review will be completed within 45 days after receipt from the State, whenever possible. (2) In order for a State to be eligible tbr the 20 percent HMGP funding, the E. nhanced State Mitigation plan must be approved by FEMA within the three years prior to the current major disaster declaration. § 201.6 Local Mitigation Plans. The local mitigation plan is the representation of the jurisdiction's commitment to reduce risks from natural hazards, serving as a guide for decision makers as they commit resources to reducing the effects of natural hazards. Local plans will also serve as the basis for the State to provide technical assistance and to prioritize project funding. (a) P]an requirement. (1) For disasters declared after November 1, 2003, a local government must have a mitigation plan approved pursuant to this section in order to receive HMGP project grants. Until November 1, 2003, local mitigation plans may be developed concurrent with the implementation of the project grant. (2) Regional Directors may grant an exception to the plan requirement in extraordinary circumstances, such as in a small and impoverished community, when justification is provided. In these cases, a plan will be completed within 12 months of the award of the project grant. If a plan is not provided within this timeframe, the project grant will be terminated, and any costs incurred after notice of grant's termination will not be and a description of the methodology reimbursed by FEMA. (3) Muhi-jurisdictional plans (e,g. watershed plans) may be accepted, as appropriate, as long as each jurisdiction has participated in the process and has officially adopted the plan. State-wide plans will not be accepted as multi- jurisdictional plans. (b) Planning process. An open public involvement process is essential to the development of an eftbctive plan. In order to develop a more comprehensive approach to reducing the effects of natural disasters, the planning process shall include: (1) An opportuni!y for the public to comment on the plan during the drafting stage and prior to plan approval; · (2) An opportunity for neighboring communities, local and regional agencies involved in hazard mitigation activities, and agencies that have the authority to regulate development, as well as businesses, academia and other private and non-profit interests to be involved in the planning process; and (3) Review and incorporation, if appropriate, of existing plans, studies, reports, and technical information. (c) Plan content. The plan shall include the following: (1) Documentation of the planning process used to develop the plan, including how it was prepared, who was involved in the process, and how the public was involved. (2) A risk assessment that provides the factual basis for activities proposed in the strategy to reduce losses f¥om identified hazards. Local risk assessments must provide sufficient information to enable the jurisdiction to identify and prioritize appropriate mitigation actions to reduce losses from identified hazards. The risk assessment shall include: (i) A description of the type, location, and extent of all natural hazards that can affect the jurisdiction. The plan shall include information on previous occurrences of hazard events and on the probability of future hazard events. (ii} A description of the jurisdiction's vulnerability to the hazards described in paragraph (cJ(2)(i) of this section. This description shall include an overall summary of each hazard and its impact on the community. The plan should describe vulnerability in terms of: (A) The types and numbers of existing and future buildings, infrastructure, and critical facilities located in the identified hazard areas; (B) An estimate of the potential dollar used to prepare the estimate; (C) Providing a general description of land uses and development trends within the community so that mitigation options can be considered in futnre land use decisions· (iii) For multi-jurisdictional plans, the risk assessment section must assess each jurisdiction's risks where they varv t¥om the risks facing the entire planning area. (3) A mitigation strategy that provides the jurisdlction's blueprint for reducing the potential losses identified in the risk assessment, based on existing authorities, policies, programs and resources, and its ability to expand on and improve these existing tools. This section shall include: (i) A description of mitigation goals to reduce or avoid long-term vulnerabifities to the identified hazards. (ii) A section that identifies and analyzes a comprehensive range of specific mitigation actions and projects being considered to reduce the.effects of each hazard, with particular emphasis on new and existing buildings and infrastructure. (iii) An action plan describing how the actions identified in paragraph (c)(2)(ii) of this section will be prioritized, implemented, and administered by the local jurisdiction. Prioritization shall include a special emphasis on the extent to which benefits are maximized according to a cost benefit review of the proposed projects and their associated costs. (iv) For multi-jurisdictional plans, there must be identifiable action items specific to the jurisdiction requesting FEMA approval or credit of the plan. (4) A plan maintenance process that includes: (i) A section describing the method and schedule of monitoring, evaluating, and updating the mitigation plan within a five-year cycle. (ii) A process by which local governments incorporate the requirements of the mitigation plan into other planning mechmfisms such as comprehensive or capital improvement plans, when appropriate· (iii) Discussion on how the community will continue public participation in the plan maintenance process, (5) Documentation that the plan has been formally adopted by the governing body of the jurisdiction requesting approval of the plan (e.g., City Council, County Commissioner, Tribal Council). For multi-jurisdictional plans, each jurisdiction requesting approval of the losses to vulnerable structures identified plan must document that it has been in paragraph (c)(2)(i)(A) of this section formally adopted. 8852 Federal Register/Vol. 67, No. 38/Tuesday, February 26, 2002/Rules and Regulations (d) Plan review. (1) Plans must be submitted to the State Hazard.Mitigation Officer for initial review and coordination. The State will then send the plan to the appropriate FEMA Regional OtIice tbr formal review and approval. (2) The Regional review will be completed within 45 days after receipt from the State, whenever possible. (3) Plans must be reviewed, revised if appropriate, and resubmitted for approval within five years in order to continue to be eligible for HMGP project grant funding. (4) Managing States that have been approved under the criteria established by FEMA pursuant to 42 U.S.C. 5170c(c) will be delegated approval authority tbr local mitigation plans, and the review will be based on the criteria in this part. Managing States will review the plans 'within 45 days of receipt of the plans, whenever possible, and provide a copy of the approved plans to the Regional Office. PART 206--FEDERAL DISASTER ASSISTANCE FOR DISASTERS DECLARED ON OR AFTER NOVEMBER 23, 1988 2. The authority citation for part 206 is revised to read as follows: Authority: Robert T. Stafford Disaster Relief and Emergency Assistance Act, 42 U.S.C. 5121-5206; Reorganization Plan No. 3 of 1978, 43 FR 41943, 3 CFR, 1978 Comp., p. 329; E.O. 12127, 44 FR 19367, 3 CFR, 1979 Comp., p. 376; E.O. 12148, 44 FR 43239, 3 CFR, 1979 Comp., p. 412; and E.O. 12673, 54 FR 12571, 3 CFR, 1989 Comp.. p. 214. 2a. Revise Part 2(16. Subpart M to read as follows: Subpart M--Minimum Standards 206.400 General. 206.401 Local standards. 206.402 Compliance. § 206.400 General. (a) As a condition of the receipt of any disaster assistance under the Stafford Act, the applicant shall carry out any repair or construction to be financed with the disaster assistance in accordance with applicable standards of safety, decency, and sanitation and in conformity with applicable codes, specifications and standards. lb) Applicable codes, specifications, and standards shall include any disaster resistant building code that meets the minimum requirements of the National Flood Insurance Program (NFIP) as well as being substantially equivalent to the recommended provisions of the National Earthquake Hazards Reduction Program (NEHRP). In addition, the applicant shall comply with any requirements necessary in regards to Executive Order 11988, Floodplain Managemeut, Executive Order 12699, Seismic Safety of Federal and Federally Assisted or Regulated New Building Construction, and any other applicable Executive orders. (c) In situatious where there are no locally applicable standards of safety, decency and sanitation, or where there are no applicable local codes, specifications and standards governing repair or construction activities, or where the Regional Director determines that otherwise applicable codes, specifications, and standards are inadequate, then the Regional Director may, alter consultation with appropriate State and local officials, require the use of nationally applicable codes, specifications, and standards, as well as safe land use and construction practh:es in the course of repair or construction activities. (d) The mitigation planning process that is mandated by section 322 of the Stafford Act and 44 CFR part 201 can assist State and local governments in determining where codes, specifications, and standards are inadequate, and may need to be upgraded. § 206.401 Local standards. The cost of repairing or constructing a facility in conformity with minimum codes, specifications and standards may be eligible for reimbursement under section 406 of the Stafford Act, as long as such codes, specifications and standards meet the criteria that are listed at 44 CFR 206.226(b). §206.402 Compliance. A recipient of disaster assistance under the Stafford Act must document for the Regional Director its compliance with this subpart following the completion of any repair or construction activities. Subpart N--Hazard Mitigation Grant Program 3. Revise § 206.431 to read as follows: § 206.431 Definitions. Activity means any mitigation measure, project, or action proposed to reduce risk of future damage, hardship, loss or suffering from disasters. Applicant means a State agency, local government, Indian tribal government, or eligible private nonprofit organization, submitting an application to the grantee for assistance under the HMGP. Enhanced State Mitigation Plan is the hazard mitigation plan approved under 44 CFR part 201 as a condition of receiving increased funding under the HMGP. Grant application means the request to FEMA tbr HMGP funding, as outlined in § 206.436, by a State or tribal government that will act as grantee. Grant award means total of Federal and non-Federal contributions to complete the approved scope of work. Grantee means the government to which a grant is awarded and which is accountable for the use of the thnds provided. The grantee is the entire legal entity even if only a particular component of the entity is designated in the grant award document. Generally, the State is the grantee. However, an Indian tribal government may choose to be a grantee, or it may act as a subgrantee under the State. An Indian tribal government acting as a grantee will assume the responsibilities of a "state", under this subpart, for the purposes of administering the grant. Indian tribal government means any Federally recognized governing body of an Indian or Alaska Native tribe, band, nation, pueblo, village, or community that the Secretary of Interior acknowledges to exist as an Indian tribe under the Federally Recognized Tribe List Act of 1994, 25 U.S.C. 479a, This does not include Alaska Native corporations, the ownership of which is vested in private individuals. Local Mitigation Plan is the hazard mitigation plan required of a local or Indian tribal government acting as a subgrantee as a condition of receiving a proiect subgrant under the HMGP as outlined in 44 CFR 201.6. Standard State Mitigation Plan is the hazard mitigation plan approved under 44 CFR part 201, as a condition of receiving Stafford Act assistance as outlined in § 201.4. State Administrative Plan for the Hazard Mitigation Grant Program means the plan developed by the State to describe the procedures for administration of the HMGP. Subgrant means an award of financial assistance under a grant by a grantee to an eligible subgrantee. Subgrant application means the request to the grantee for HMGP funding by the eligible subgrantee, as outlined in § 206.436. Subgrantee means the government or other legal entity to which a subgrant is awarded and which is accountable to the grantee for the use of the funds provided. Subgrantees can be a State agency, local government, private non- profit organizations, or Indian tribal government as outlined in § 206.433. Federal Register/Vol. 67, No. 38/Tuesday, February 26, 2002/Rules and Regulations 8853 Indian tribal governments acting as a subgrantee are accountable to the State grantee. 4. Revise § 206.432(b) to read as follows: §206.432 Federal grant assistance. (b) Aalounts of asaistance. The total of Federal assistance under this subpart shall not exceed either 15 or 20 percent of the total estimated Federal assistance (excluding administrative costs) provided for a major disaster under 42 U.S.C. 5170b, 5172, 5173, 5174, 5177, 5178, 5183, and 5201 as follows: (1) Fifteen (15)percent. Effective November 1, 2003, a State with an approved Standard State Mitigation Plan, which meets the requirements outlined in 44 CFR 201.4, shall be eligible for assistance under the HMGP not to exceed 15 percent of the total estimated Federal assistance described in this paragraph. Until that date, existing, approved State Mitigation Plans will be accepted. (2) Twenty (20) percent. A State with an approved Enhanced State Mitigation Plan, in effect prior to the disaster declaration, which meets the requirements outlined in 44 CFR 201.5 shall be eligible for assistance under the HMGP ~mt to exceed 20 percent of the total estimated Federal assistance described in this paragraph. (3) The estimates of Federal assistance under this paragraph (b) shall be based on the Regional Director's estimate of all eligible costs, actual grants, and appropriate mission assignments. 5. Section 206.434 is amended by redesignating paragraphs (b) through (g) as paragraphs (c) through th). respectively; adding a new paragraph when justifu:ation is provided. In these cases, a plan will be completed within 12 months of the award of the project grant, If a plan is not provided within this timeframe, the project grant will be terminated, and any casts incurred after notice of grant's termination will not be reiinbursed by FEMA, (c) Minimum project criteria. To be eligible for the Hazard Mitigation Grant Program, a project must: (1) Be in contbrmance with the State Mitigation Plan and Local Mitigation Plan approved under 44 CFR part 201; (d) Eligible activities. (1) Planning, Up to 7% of the State's HMGP grant may be used to develop State, tribal and/or local mitigation plans to meet the planning criteria outlined in 44 CFR part 201. (2) Types of projects. Projects may be of any nature that will result in protection to public or private property. Eligible projects include, but are not limited to: ti) Structural hazard control or protection projects; (ii) Construction activities that will result in protection from hazards; (iii) Retrofitting of facilities; (iv) Property acquisition or relocation, as defined in paragraph (e) of this section; tv) Development of State or local mitigation standards; (vi) Development of comprehensive mitigation programs with implementation as an essential component; (vii) Development or improvement of warning systems. 6. Revise § 206.435(a) to read as follows: § 206.435 Project identificaiton and selection criteria. (b); revising redesignated paragraphs (c) (a) Identification. It is the State's introductorv text and (c)(1); and revising responsibility to identify and select redesignate~t paragraph (d) to read as eligible hazard mitigation projects. All follows: funded projects must be consistent with §206.434 Eligibility. (b) Plnn require~nent. (1) For all disasters declared on or after November 1, 2003, local and tribal government applicants for subgrants, must have an approved local mitigation plan in accordance witb 44 CFR 201.6 prior to receipt of HMGP subgrant funding. Until November 1, 2003, local mitigation plans may be developed concurrent with the implementation of subgrants. (2) Regional Directors may grant an exception to this requirement in extraordinary circumstances, such as in a small and impoverished community the State Mitigation Plan. Hazard Mitigation projects shall be identified and prioritized through the State, Indian tribal, and local planning process. 7, Revise § 206.436 to read as follows: § 206.436 Application procedures. (a) General. This section describes the procedures to be used by the grantee in submitting an application for HMGP funding. Under the HMGP, the State or Indian tribal government is the grantee and is responsible for processing subgrants to applicants in accordance with 44 CFR part 13 and this part 206. Subgrantees are accountable to the grantee. (b) Governor's Authorized Representative. The Governor's Authorized Representative serves as tlie grant administrator tbr all funds provided under the Hazard Mitigation Grant Program. The Governor's Authorized Representative's responsibilities as they pertain to procedures outlined in this section inclnde providing technical advice and assistance to eligible subgrantees, aud ensuring that all potential applicants are aware of assistance available and submission of those documents necessary t~r grant award. (c) Hazard mitigation application. Upon identification of mitigation measures, the State (Governor's Authorized Representative) will submit its Hazard Mitigation Grant Program application to the FEMA Regional Director. The application will identify one or more mitigation measures for which funding is requested, The application must include a Standard Form (SF) 424, Application for Federal Assistance, SF 424D, Assurances for Construction Programs, if appropriate, and an narrative statement. The narrative statement will contain any pertinent project management information not included in the State's administrative plan for Hazard Mitigation. The narrative statement will also serve to identify the specific mitigation measures for which funding is requested. Information required for each mitigation measure shall include the following: (1) Name of the subgrantee, if any; . (2) State or local contact for the measure; (3) Location of the project; (4) Description of the measure; (5) Cost estimate for the measure; (6) Analysis of the measure's cost- effectiveness and substantial risk reduction, consistent with § 206.434(c); (7) Work schedule; (8) Justification for selection; (9) Alternatives considered; (10) Environmental information consistent with 44 CFR part 9, Floodplain Management and Protection of Wetlands, and 44 CFR part 10, Environmental Considerations. (d) Application submission time limit. The State's application may be amended as the State identifies and selects local project applications to be funded. The State must submit all local HMGP applications and funding requests for the purpose of identifying new projects to the Regional Director within 12 months of the date of disaster declaration. (e) Extensions. The State may request the Regional Director to extend the application time limit by 30 to 90 day 8854 Federal Register / Vol. 67. No. 38 / Tuesday, February 26, 2002 / Rules and Regulations increments, not to exceed a total of 186 days. The grantee must include a justification in its request. (f) FEMA approval. The application and supplement(s) will be submitted to the FEMA Regional Director for approval. FEMA has final approval authority ibr funding of all projects, (g) Indian tribal grantees. Indian tribal governments may submit a SF 424 directly to the Regional Director. Subpart H--Public Assistance Eligibility 8. Revise § 206.220 to read as follows: §206.220 General. This subpart provides policies and procedures for determinations of eligibility of applicants for public assistance, eligibility of work, and eligibility of costs for assistance under sections 402,403,406, 407,418~ 419, 421(d), 502, and 503 of the Stafford Act. Assistance under this subpart must also coniBrm to requirements of 44 CFR part 201, Mitigation Planning, and 44 CFR part 206, subparts C~Public Assistance Proiect Administration, I--Public Assistance Insurance Requirements, I-- Coastal Barrier Resources Act, and M-- Minimum Standards. Regulations under 44 CFR part 9~Floodplain Management and 44 CFR part 10--Environmental Considerations, also apply to this assistance. 9. Section 206.226 is amended by redesignating paragraphs (bt through (it as paragraphs (ct through (k), respectively; adding a new paragraph (bt; and revising redesignated pai'agraph (g)(5) to read as follows: §206.226 Restoration of damaged facilities. (bt Mitigation planning. In order to receive assistance under this section, as of November 1, 2003, the State must have in place a FEMA approved State Mitigation Plan in accordance with 44 CFR part 2(11. (g) * . . (5) If relocation of a facility is not feasible or cost effective, the Regional Director shall disapprove Federal funding for the original location when he/she determines in accordance with 44 CFR parts 9, 10, 201, or subpart M of this part 206, that restoration in the original location is not allowed. In such cases~ an alternative proiect may be applied for. Dated: February 19, 2002. Michael D. Brown, General Counsel. IFR Doc. 02-4321 Filed 2-25-02; 8:45 am] BILUNG COOE 6718-05-P 61512 Federal Register/Vol. 67, No. 190 / Tuesday, October 1~ 2002/Rul~/s and Regulations CFR 773.23(a)(1) thrm~gh (a)(6)'for a notice of snspension or rescission, showing that the person requesting review is entitled to administrative relief; 24. In §4.1374, revise paragraph (a) to read as follows', §4.1374 Burdens of proof. (a) DSM shall have the burden of going tbrward to present a prima facie case of the validity of the notice of proposed suspension er rescission or the notice of suspension or rescission. 25. In § 4.1376, revise the section heading and paragraph (a) to read as follows: § 4.1376 Petition for temporary relief from notice of proposed suspension or rsecise)on or notice of suspension or rescission; appeals from decisions granting or denying temporary relief. (a) Any party may file a petition for temporary relief from the notice of proposed suspension or rescission or the notice of suspension or rescission in conjunction with the filing of the request for review or atany time before an initial decision is issued by the administrative law judge. 26. Revise the heading for 43 CFR 4.1380-4.1387 to read as follows: Review of Office of Surface Mining Written Decisions Concerning Ownership or Control Challenges 27. Revise §4.1380 to read as follows: §4.1380 Scope. Sections 4.1380 through 4.1387 govern the procedures for review of a written decision issued by DSM under 30 CFR 773.28 on a challenge to a listing or finding of ownership or control. 28. In § 4.1381, revise paragraph (a) to read as follows: §4.1381 Who may file; when to file; where to file. (a) Any person who receives a written decision issued by DSM under 30 CFR 773.28 on a challenge to an ownership or control listing or finding may file a request for review with the Hearings Division, Office of Hearings and Appeals, U.S, Department of the Interior, 801 N. Quincy Street, Suite 300, Arlington, Virginia 22203 (telephone 703-235-3800) within 30 days of service of the decision. 29. Revise § 4.1390 to read as follows: §4.1390 Scope. Sections 4,1391 through 4.1394 set forth the procedures for obtaining review of an DSM determination under 30 CFR 761.16 that a person does or does not have valid existing rights. 30. In § 4.1391, revise paragraphs (a) and (b) to read as follows: § 4.1391 Who may file; where to file; when to file; filing of administrative record. (al The person who requested a determination under 30 CFR 761.16 or any person with an interest that is or may be adversely affected by a determination that a person does or does not have valid exisfing rights may file a request for review of the determination with the office of the DSM official whose determination is being reviewed and at the same time shall send a copy of the request to the Interior Board of Land Appeals, U,S. Department of the Interior, 801 N. Quincy Street, Suite 300, Arlington, VA 22203 (telephone 703-235-3750). DSM shall file the complete administrative record of the determination under review with the Board as soon as practicable. (b) DSM must provide notice of the valid existing rights determination to the person who requested that determination by certified mail, or by overnight delivery service if the person has agreed to bear the expense of this service. (11 When the determination is made independently of a decision on an application for a permit or for a permit boundary revision, a request for review shall be filed within 30 days of receipt of the determination by a person who has received a copy of it by certified mail or overnight delivery service. The request for review shall be filed within 30 days of the date of publication of the determination in a newspaper of general circulation or in the Federal Register, whichever is later, by any person who has not received a copy of it by certified mail or overnight delivery service. (2) When the determination is made in conjunction with a decision on an application for a permit or for a permit boundary revision, the request for review must be filed in accordance with §4.1362. 31. Revise § 4.1394 to reed as follows: §4.1394 Burden of proof. (a) If the person who requested the determination is seeking review, DSM shall have the burden of going forward to establish a prima facie case and the person who requested the determination shall have the ultimate burden of persuasion. (b) If any other person is seeking review, that person shall have the burden of going forward to establish a prima tbcie case and the ultimate burden of persuasion that the person who requested the determination does or does not have valid existing rights. [FR Doc. 02-24417 Filed 9-30-02; 8:45 ami BILUNG CODE 4310-79-P FEDERALEMERGENCY MANAGEMENTAGENCY 44 CFR Parts 201 and 206 RIN 3067-AD22 Hazard Mitigation Planning and Hazard Mitigation Grant Program AGENCY: Federal Emergency Management Agency. ACTION: Interim final rule. SUMMARY: This rnle extends the date by which State and local governments must develop mitigation plans as a condition of grant assistance in compliance with 44 CFR Part 201. The reg.ulations in Part 201 outline the requirements for State and local mitigation plans, which must be completed by November 1, 2003 in order to continue to receive FEMA grant assistance. This interim final rule extends that date to November 1, 2004. DATES: Effective Date: October 1, 2002. Comment Dote: We will accept written comments through December 2, 2002. ADDRESSES: Please send written comments to the Rules Docket Clerk, Office of the General Counsel, Federal Emergency Management Agency, 500 C Street, SW., room 840,Washington, DC 20472, (facsimile] 202~46-4536, or (e- mail) rules@roma.gev. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT; Terry Baker, Federal Insurance and Mitigation Administration, Federal Emergency Management Agency, 500 C Street, SW., Washington, DC, 20472, 202-646-4648, (facsimile) 202-646- 3104, or (e-mail) terry, baker~femo.gov. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Introduction Throughout the preamble and the rule the terms "we", "our" and "us" refer to FEMA. On February 26, 2002, FEMA published an interim final rule implementing Section 322 of the Robert T. Staflbrd Disaster Relief and Emergency Assistance Act (Stafford Act or the Act), 42 U.S.C. 5165, enacted under § 104 of the Disaster Mitigation Act of 2000, (DMA 2000) Pub. L. 106- 390, This identified the requirements for State and local mitigation plans necessary for FEMA assistance, The critical portion of the current interim Federal Register / Vol. 67, No. 190 / Tuesday, October 1, 2002 / Rules and Regulations 61513 final rule being published extends the date that the planning requirements take effect. The date is being modified t¥om November 1, 2003 to November 1, 2004 for all programs except the Pre-Disaster Mitigation (PDM) program. The date that local mitigation plans will be required for the PDM program as a condition of "brick and mortar" project grant funding will continue to be November 1, 2003. Our objective is to encourage the use of the PDM program to develop State and local mitigation plans that will meet the criteria for all of our mitigation programs, The initial implementation of the PDM program allows States to prioritize the thnding towards the development of mitigation plans in their most high-risk communities, positioning them to be eligible for project grant funding when it become~ available, The PDM program will benefit from the experiences in the Flood Mitigation Assistance (FMA) program, which has had a planning requirement for many years. States often prioritize FMA planning funds to a community in one year, with the implementation of the project occurring after the appropriate planning has been completed. We received many thoughtful comments on much of the rule, and we intend to address them all prior to finalizing the rule. However, the overwhelming number of comments regarding the effective date for the new planning requirements on both the State and local governments indicated to us a need to extend that date. This new interim final rule will address this issue, and clarify the planning requirement for the recently published Fire Management Assistance Grant Program final rule. Since publication of the interim final rule, it became clear to us that, in some cases, there was a need to extend the effective date of the planning requirement to allow more time for plan development. An additional year will allow State, tribal, and local governments time to identify necessary resources, establish support for the planning process, and develop meaningful mitigation plans. Legislative sessions, which in some cases may be once every two years, may be necessary to obtain funding for plan development and/or adoption of the plan prior to submittal to FEMA. Many State and local fiscal years run from July through June, and budget requests must be made months prior to the beginning of the fiscal year. This has made it difficult for many jurisdictions to begin the planning process. Our intention in extending the date is to allow for more thoughtful and comprehensive development of plans and implementation of this regulation. Nearly all of those commenting on the rule recognize the importance of planning, The generally accepted model is that good mitigation happens when good mitigation plans are the basis for the actions taken. Even though we are extending the date for meeting the planning requirements, we encourage States and localities to continue to work on getting plans developed and approved as soon as feasible, and not to wait until the deadline to begin the process. It is important to note that although there is no deadline for approval of Enhanced State Mitigation Plans in order to qualify for the 20 percent HMPG funding, it will only be available to States if the plan is approved prior to a disaster declaration, Although many comments addressed the need to extend the deadline, only a few provided specific alternative dates. We received several comments requesting a phased approach to the deadline for communities based on general risk levels or the priorities identified in a State plan. At this paint, FEMA is not considering any option for a phased approach to the timeline since we believe that it would make this requirement too difficult to administer, for both States and FEMA. We believe that the one-year extension for the HMGP will address most of the concerns regarding the efti~ctive date of the planning requirements, We have also received some questions regarding the relationship of the planning requirements of the Fire Management Assistance Grant Program to the plans developed under 44 CFR part 201. A Standard or Enhanced State Mitigation plan, which includes an evaluation of wildfire risk and mitigation, as identified in 44 CFR part 201 will meet the planning requirement of the Fire Management Assistance Grant Program. Until States develop and have either of those plans approved by FEMA. States must comply with the fire management planning requirement as stated in 44 CFR part 204 by ensuring that there is a fire component to the existing State Mitigation Plan or a separate wildfire mitigation plan. Finally, we would like to clarify that for grants awarded under any hazard mitigation program prior to October 30, 2000 for the purpose of developing or updating a hazard mitigation plan, we will not provide an increase in funding or extensions for changes in the scope of work ibr pnrposes of meeting the enhanced state plan criteria, since the enhanced plan concept did not exist prior to the Disaster Mitigation Act of 2000, enacted on that date. We encourage comments on this interim final rule, and we will make every effort to involve all interested parties, including those who commented on the original interim final planning rule, prior to the development of the Final Rule. Justification for Interim Final Rule In general, FEMA publishes a rule tbr public comment before issuing a final rule, under the Administrative Procedure Act, 5 U.S.C. 533 and 44 CFR 1.12. The Administrative Procedure Act, however, provides an exception from that general rule where the agency for good cause finds the procedures for comment and response contrary to public interest. This interim final rule extends the date that State, tribal, and local governments have to develop mitigation plans required as a condition of FEMA grant assistance. State, tribal, and local governments are currently under the assumption that plans are required by November 1, 2003, whereas this interim final rule extends that date to November 1, 2004 for the HMGP. It does not affect the date for compliance for other programs, such as the Pre-disaster Mitigation (PDM) program. In order for State, local and tribal resources tb be appropriately identified and used, it is essential that the date extension be made effective as soon as possible. We believe it is contrary to the public interest to delay the benefits of this rule. In accordance with the Administrative Procedure Act, 5 U.S.C. 553(d)[3), we find that there is good cause for the interim final rule to take effect immediately upon publication in the Federal Register in order to meet the needs of States and communities by identifying the new effective date for planning requirement under 44 CFR part 201, Therefore, we find that prior notice and comment on this rule would not further the public interest. We actively encourage and solicit comments on this interim final rule from interested parties, and we will consider them as well as those submitted on the original interim final planning rule in preparing the final rule. For these reasons, we believe we have good cause to publish an interim final rule. National Environmental Policy Act 44 CFR 10.8(d)(2)(ii) excludes this rule from the preparation of an environmental assessment or environmental impact statement, where the rule relates to actions that qualify for categorical exclusion under 44 CFR lO.8(d)(2)(iii), such as the development of plans under this section. 61514 Federal Register/Vol. 67, No. 190/Tuesday, October 1, 2002/Rules and Regulations Executive Order 12866, Regulatory Planning and Review We have prepared and reviewed this rule under the provisions of E.O. 12866, Regulatory Planning and Review. Under Executive Order 12866, 58 FR 51735, October 4, 1993, a significant regulatory action is subject to review by The Office of Management and Budget (OMB) and the requirements of the Executive Order. The Executive Order defines "significant regulatory action" as one that is likely to result in a rule that nmy: (1) Have an annual efti~ct on the economy of $100 millian or more or adversely affect in a material way the economy, a sector of the economy, productivity, competition, jobs, the environment, public health or safety, or State, local, or tribal governments or communities; (2) create a serious inconsistency or otherwise interfere with an action taken or planned by another agency; (3) materially alter the budgetary impact of entitlements, grants, user fees, or loan programs or the rights and obligations of recipients thereof; or (4) raise novel legal or policy issues arising out of legal mandates, the President's priorities, or the principles set forth in the Executive Order. The purpose of this rule is to extend the date by which State and local governments have to prepare or update their plans to meet the criteria identified in 44 CFR part 201. The original date, November 1, 2003, was determined to be difficult to meet. This interim final rule extends that date to November 1, 2004 for the post disaster Hazard Mitigation Grant Program. The date of November 1, 2003 will still apply to project grants under the Pre-disaster Mitigation program. As such, the rule itself will not have an effect on the economy of more than $100,000,000. Therefore, this rule is not a significant regulatory action and is not an economically significant rule under Execiifive Order 12866. OMB has not reviewed this rule under Executive Order 12866. Executive Order 12898, Environmental Justice Under Executive Order 12898, Federal Actions to Address Environmental Justice in Minority Populations and Low-Income Populations, 59 FR 7629, February 16, 1994, we incorporate environmental justice into our policies and programs. The Executive Order requires each Federal agency to conduct its programs, policies, and activities that substantially affect human health or the environment, in a manner that ensures that those programs, policies, and activities do not have the effect of excluding persons Ii'om participation in our programs, denying persons the benefits of our programs, or subjecting persons to discrimination because of their race, color, or national origin. No action that we can anficlpate under the final rule will have a disproportionately high or adverse human health and environmental effect on any segment of the population. This rule extends the date for development or update of State and local mitigation plans in compliance with 44 CFR part 201. Accordingly, the requirements of Executive Order 12898 do not apply to this interim finai rule. Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 As required by the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3507(d)) we submitted a request for review and approval of a new collection of information when the initial interim final rule was published on February 26, 2002. OMB approved this collection of information for use through August 31, 2002, under the emergency processing procedures in OMB regulation 5 CFR 1320.1, OMB Number 3067-0297. There have been no changes to the collection of information, and we have submitted a request for OMB approval to continue the use of the collection of information for a term of three years. The request is being processed under OMB's normal clearance procedures in accordance with provisions of OMB regulation 5 CFR 1320.11. This new interim final rule simply extends the date by which States and communities have to comply with the planning requirements, and clarifies which FEMA programs are affected by these requirements. The changes do not affect the collection of information; therefore, no change to the request for the collection of information is necessary. In summary, this interim final rule complies with the provisions of the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3506(c)(2)(A)). FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: You may obtain copies of the OMB paperwork clearance package by contacting Ms. Muriel Anderson at (202) 646-2625 (voice), (202) 646-3347 (facsimile), or by e-mail at informationcollectios@fema.gov. Executive Order 13132, Federalism Executive Order 13132, Federalism, dated August 4, 1999, sets forth principles and criteria that agencies must adhere to in formulating and implementing policies that have federalism implications, that is, regulations that have substantial direct effects on the States, or on the distribotion of power and responsibilities among the various levels of government. Federal agencies must closely examine the statutory authority supporting any action that would limit the poficymaking discretion of the States, and to the extent practicable, must consult with State and local officials before implementing any such action. We have reviewed this rule under E.O. 13132 and have concluded that the rule does not have fi~deralism implicafions as defined by the Executive Order. We have determined that the rule does not significantly affect the rights, roles, and responsibilities of States, and involves no preemption of State law nor does it limit State policymaking discretion. · We will continue to evaluate the planning requirements and will work with interested parties as we implement the planning requirements of 44 CFR part 201. In addition, we actively encourage and solicit comments on this interim final rule from interested parties, and we will consider them in preparing the final rule, Executive Order 13175, Consultation and Coordination with Indian Tribal Governments We have reviewed this interim final rule under Executive Order 13175, which became effective on February 6, 2001. In reviewing the interim final rule, we find that it does not have "tribal implications" as defined in Executive Order 13175 because it will not have a substantial direct effect on one or more Indian tribes, on the relationship between the Federal Government and Indian tribes, or on the distribution of power and responsibilities between the Federal Government and Indian tribes. Moreover, the interim final rule does not impose substantial direct compliance costs on tribal governments, nor does it preempt tribal law, impair treaty rights or limit the self-governing powers of tribal governmants. Congressional Review of Agency Rulemaking We have sent this interim final rule to the Congress and to the General Accounting Office under the Congressional Review of Agency Rulemaking Act, Public Law 104-121. The rule is a not "major rule" within the meaning of that Act. It is an administrative action to extend the time State and local governments have to prepare mitigation plans required by section 322 of the Stafford Act, as enacted in DMA 2000, Federal Register/Vol. 67, No. 190/Tuesday, October 1, 2002/Rules and Regulations 61515 The rule will not result in a major increase in costs or prices for consumers, individual industries, Federal, State, or local government agencies, or geographic regions. It will not have "significant adverse effects" on competition, employment, investment, productivity, innovation, or on the ability of United States-based enterprises to compete with foreign- based enterprises. This final rule is subject to the information collection requirements of the Paperwork Reduction Act, and OMB has assigned Control No. 3067-0297. The rule is not an unfunded Federal mandate within the meaning of the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995, Public Law 104~1, and any enforceable duties that we impose are a condition of Federal assistance or a duty arising from participation in a voluntary Federal program, List of Subjects in 44 CFR Parts 201 and Part 206 Administrative practice and procedure, Disaster assistance, Grant programs, Mitigation planning, Reporting and record keeping requirements. AccordingLy, amend 44 CFR, chapter I, as follows: PART 201--MITIGATION PLANNING 1. The authority for Part 201 continues to read as follows: Authority: Robert T. Stafford Disaster Relief and Emergency Assistance Act, 42 U.S.C. 5121-5206; Reorganization Plan No. 3 of 1978, 43 FR 41943, 3 CFR, 1978 Comp., p. 329; E.O. 12127, 44 FR 19367, 3 CFR, 1979 Comp., p. 376: E.O. 12148~ 44 FR 43239, 3 CFR, 1979 Comp., p. 412; and E.O. 12673, 54 FR 12571,3 CFR, 1989 Comp., p. 214. 2. Revise § 201.3(c)(3) to read as follows: §201.3 Responsibilities. (3) At a minimum, review and, if necessary, update the Standard State Mitigation Plan by November 1, 2004 and every three years from the date of the approval of the previous plan in order to continue program eligibility. 3, Revise § 201.4(a) to read as follows: § 201.1 Standard State Mitigation Plans. (a) Plan requirement. By November 1, 2004, States must have an approved Standard State Mitigation plan meeting the requirements of this section in order to receive assistance under the Stafford Act, although assistance authorized under disasters declared prior to November 1, 2004 will continue to be made available. Until that date, existing, FEMA approved State Mitigation Plans will be accepted. In any case, emergency assistance provided under 42 U.S,C 5170a. 5170b, 5173, 5174, 5177, 5179, 5180, 5182, 5183, 5184, 5192 will not be atf~cted. The m~tigation plan is the demonstration of the State's commitment to reduce risks from natural hazards and serves as a guide for State decision makers as they commit resources to reducing the effects of natural hazards. States may choose to include the requirements of the HMGP Administrative Plan in their mitigation plan, but must comply with the updates, amendments or revisions requirement listed under 44 CFR 206.437. 4. Revise § 201.6(a) to read as follows: § 201.6 Local Mitigation Plans. (a) Plan requirements. (1) For disasters declared after November 1, 2004, a local government must have a mitigation plan approved pursuant to this section in order to receive HMGP pro}ect grants. Until November 1_, 2004, local mitigation plans may be developed concnrrent with the implementation of the HMC? project grant. (2) By November 1, 2003, local governments must have a mitigation plan approved pursuant to this section in order to receive a project grant through the Pre-Disaster Mitigation (PDM) program, authorized under § 203 of the Robert T. Stafford Disaster Relief and Emergency Assistance Act, 42 U.S.C. 5133. PDM planning grants will continue to be made available to all local governments after this time to enable them to meet the requirements of this section. (3) Regional Directors may grant an exception to the plan requirement in extraordinary circumstances, such as in a small and impoverished community, when justification is provided, In these cases, a plan will be completed within 12 months of the award of the project grant. If a plan is not provided within this timeframe, the project grant will be terminated, and any costs incurred after notice of grant's termination will not be reimbursed by FEMA. (4) Multi-jurisdictional plans (e.g. watershed plans) may be accepted, as appropriate, as long as each jurisdiction has participated in the process and has officially adopted the plan. State-wide plans will not be accepted as multi- jurisdictional plans. PART 206.--FEDERAL DISASTER ASSISTANCE FOR DISASTERS DECLARED ON OR AFTER NOVEMBER 23, 1988 4. The anthority for Part 206 continues to read as follows: Authority: Robert T. Stafford Disaster Relief and Emergency Assistance Act, 42 U.S.C. 5121-5206; Reorganization Plan No. 3 of 1978.43 FR 41943, 3 CFR, 1978 Comp.. p. 329: E.O. 12127, 44 FR 19367.3 CFR, 1979 Comp., p. 376; E,O. 12148.44 FR 43239. 3 CFR, 1979 Comp., p. 412: and E.O. 12673, 54 FR 12571.3 CFR, 1989 Comp., p. 214. 5, Revise § 206.432(b)(1) to read as ' follows: § 206.432 Federol grant assistance. (b) * * * (1) Fifteen (15) Percent. Effective November 1, 2004, a State with an approved Standard State Mitigation Plan, which meets the requirements outlined in 44 CFR 201.4, shall be eligible for assistance under the HMGP not to exceed 15 percent of the total estimated Federal assistance described in this paragraph. Until that date, existing, FEMA approved State Mitigation Plans will be accepted. 6. Revise § 206.434(b)(1) to'read as follows: §206.434 EIgibility. (b) * * * (1) For all disasters declared on or after November 1, 2004, local and tribal government applicants for subgrants must have an approved local mitigation plan in accordance with 44 CFR 201.6 prior to receipt of HMGP subgrant funding. Until November 1, 2004, local mitigation plans may be developed concurrent with the implementation of subgrants. Dated: September 26, 2002. Joe M. Allbaugh, Director. [FR Doc. 02-24998 Filed 9-30~)2; 8:45 ami BILUNG CODE 671~-05-P FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION 47 CFR Part 73 [DA 02-2315, MB Docket No. 02-130, RM- 10438] Digital Television Broadcast Service; Des Moines, IA AGENCY: Federal Communications Commission. 61368 Federal Register/Vol. 68, No. 208/Tuesday, October 28, 2003/Rules and Regulations have federalism implications, as specified in Executive Order 13132 (64 FR 43255, Angust 10, 1999). This action also is not subject to Executive Order 13045 (62 FR 19885, April 23, 1997), because it is not economically significant. This action is not subiect to Executive Order 13211, "Actions Concerning Regulations That Significantly Aft~ct Energy Supply, Distribution, or Use" (66 FR 28355 (May 22, 2001)) because it is not a significant regulatory action under Executive Order 12866. This action does not involve technical standards; thus, the requirements of section 12(d) of the National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act of 1995 (15 U.S.C. 272 note) do not apply. This action also does not impose an information collection burden under the provisions of the Paperwor~Reduc6on Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.). The Congressional Review Act (5 U.S,C. 801 et seq.] generally provides that before a rule may take effect, the agency promulgating the rule must submit a rule report, which includes a copy of the rule, to each House of the Congress and to the Comptroller General of the United States. EPA will submit a report containing this action and other required intbrmation to the U.S, Senate, the U.S. House of Representatives, and the Comptroller General of the United States prior to publication in the Federal Register. This action is not a "maior rule" as defined by 5 U.S.C. 804(2). List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 51 Environmental protection, Administrative practice and procedure, Air pollution control, Carbon monoxide, Nitrogen dioxide, Particulate matter, Sulfur oxides, Volatile organic compounds. Dated: October 22, 2003. Marianne Lamont Ho~nko, Acting Administrator. m 40 CFR Part 51 is amended as follows: PART 51--REQUIREMENTS FOR PREPARATION, ADOPTION, AND SUBMI'I-FAL OF IMPLEMENTATION PLANS · 1. The authority citation for part 51 continues to read as follows: Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401-7671q. Subpart P~rotection of Visibility · 2. Section 51.309 is amended by revising paragraphs (b)(6) and (d)(5)(i); redesignating paragraph (d)(5)(ii) as paragraph (d)(5)(iv); and adding paragraphs (d}(5)(ii) and (d)(5)(iii) to read as follows: §51.309 Requirements related to the Grand Canyon Visibility Transport Commission. (bi * * * (6) Mobile Source Emissioo Budget means the lowest level of VOC, NOx, SO2 elemental and orgaeic carbon, and fine particles which are projected to occur in any area withio the transport region from which mobile source emissions are determined to contribute significantly to visibility impairment in any of the 16 Class I areas. (d) * * * (5) * * * (i) Statewide inventories of current annual emissions and projected future annual emissions of VOC, NOx, SO_,, elemental carbon, organic carbon, and fine particles from mobile sources for the years 2003 to 2018. The future year inventories must include projections for the year 2005, or an alternative year that is determined by the State to represent the year during which mobile source emissions will be at their lowest levels within the State. (ii) A determination whether mobile source emissions in any areas of the State contribute significantly to visibility impairment in any of the 16 Class I Areas, based on the statewide inventory of current and projected mobile source emissions, (iii) For States with areas in which mobile source emissions are found to contribute significantly to visibility impairment in any of the 16 Class I areas', (A) The establishment and documentation of a mobile source emissions budget for any such area, including provisions requiring the State to restrict the annual VOC, NOx, SO_-, elemental and organic carbon, and/or fine particle mobile source emissions to their projected lowest levels, to implement measures to achieve the budget or cap, and to demonstrate compliance with the budget. (B) Au emission tracking system providing for reporting of annual mobile source emissions from the State in the periodic implementation plan revisions required by paragraph (d)(lO) of this section. The emission tracking system must be sufficient to determine the States' contribution toward the Commission's objective of reducing emissions from mobile sources by 2005 or an alternate year that is determined by the State to represent the year during which mobile source emissions will be at their lowest levels within the State, and to ensure that mobile source emissions do not increase thereafter. [FR Doc. 03-27159 Filed 1(~27ql3; 8:45 ami BILLING CODE 65EO-50-P DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY Federal Emergency Management Agency 44 CFR Parts 201,204 and 206 RIN 1660-AA17 Hazard Mitigation Planning and Hazard Mitigation Grant Program AGENCY: Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA), Emergency Preparedness and Response Directorate, Department of Homeland Security, ACTION: Interim final rule. SUMMARY: This rule clarifies the date that local mitigation plans will be required as a condition of receiving project grant funds under the Pre- Disaster Mitigation (PDM) program. In addition, we are taking the opportunity to correct cross references in our regulations to address areas of inconsistency regarding the planning requirement in the Fire Management Assistance Grant Program and Public Assistance Eligibility that should have been addressed previously. DATES: Effective Date: October 28, 2003. Comment Date: We will accept written comments through December 29, 2003. ADDRESSES: Please send written comments to the Rules Docket Clerk, Office of the General Counsel, Federal Emergency Management Agency, 500 C Street, SW., Room 840, Washington DC 20472, (facsimile) 202-646-4536, or (email) rules@fema.gov. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Karen Helbrecht, Program Planning Branch, Mitigation Division, Federal Emergency Management Agency, 500 C Street, SW., Washington DC, 20472, 202-646-3358, (facsimile) 202-646- 4127, or (email) karen .helbrecht@dhs.gov. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: On February 26, 2002, FEMA published an interim final rule at 67 FR 8844 implementing section 322 of the Robert T, Stafford Disaster Relief and Emergency Assistance Act (Stafford Act or the Act), 42 U.S.C. 5165, enacted under section 104 of the Disaster Mitigation Act of 2000, (DMA 2000) Public Law 106-390. This identified the Federal Register/Vol. 68. No. 208/Tuesday, October 28, 2003/Rules and Regulations 61369 requirements for State, tribal, and local mitigation plans necessary for Hazard Mitigation Grant Program (HMGP) project funding. On October 1, 2(102, FEMA published a change to that rule at 67 FR 61512, extending the date that the planning reqnimments take effect. This rule stated that for disasters declared on or alter November 1, 2004, State Mitigation Plans will be required in order to receive non-emergency Stafford Act assistance, and local mitigation plans will be required in order to receive HMGP project grants. However, the date that local mitigation plans will be required for the Pre-Disaster Mitigation program as a condition of project grant funding was left at November 1, 2003. The intent was to make grants and technical assistance available in fiscal year 2003 to assist State and local governments to develop mitigation plans and implement mitigation projects during the first year of the competitive grant program. However, because the application period for the competitive PDM program will not close until October 6, 2003, the project grants will not be awarded until after November 1, 2003. The intent of this rule change is to clarify that the November 1, 2003 effective date for the planning requirement will apply only to PDM grant funds awarded under any Notice of funding opportunity issued after that date. Essentially, for PDM grant funds made available in fiscal year 2004 and beyond, local governments must have an approved mitigation plan in order to receive a project grant under the PDM program. In addition, this rule updates the planning requirement identified in 44 CFR part 204, Fire Management Assistance Grant Program as well as part 206, subpart H, Public Assistance Eligibility. The changes bring these sections into conformity with the existing planning rule, 44 CFR part 201, FEMA received many thoughtful comments, and intends to address them all prior to finalizing the rule. However, in the interest of expediting these minor clarifying and conforming changes, FEMA is issuing another interim final rule, FEMA encourages comments on this interim final rule, and will make every effort to involve all interested parties, including those who commented on the original interim final planning rules, prior to the development of the Final Rule. Administrative Procedure Act Statement. In general, FEMA publishes a rule for pnblic comment before issuing a final rule, under the Administrative Procedure Act, 5 U.S.C. 533 and 44 CFR 1.12. The Administrative Procedure Act, however, provides an exception from that general rule where the agency for good cause finds the procedures for comment and response contrary to the public interest, This interim final rule clarifies the date that local governments, as well as a tribe applying as a snb-appficant, most have a mitigation plan as a condition of receiving FEMA PDM project grant assistance. This interim final rule clarifies that the plan requirement applies only to PDM project grants awarded under any Notice of t~nding opportunity issued after November 1, 2003. The Notice of Availability of Funding (NOFA) for the fiscal year 2003 PDM program was not published until July 7, 2003, making it difficult to make gran~ awards by November 1, 2003. In order to make timely awards for the fiscal year 2003 PDM program, it is essential that the clarification of the effective date of the planning requirement be made effective as soon as possible. In addition, this rule brings the mitigation planning requirements for the Fire Management Assistance Grant Program, and FEMA's Public Assistance Program into conformity with 44 CFR part 201. FEMA believes it is contrary to the public interest to delay the benefits of this rule. In accordance with the Administrative Procedure Act, 5 U,S.C. 553(d)(3), we find good cause for the interim final rule to take effect immediately upon publication in the Federal Register in order to meet the needs of States, tribes, and communities by clarifying the effective date for planning requirements under 44 CFR part 201. Therefore, FEMA finds that prior notice and comment on this rule would not further the public interest. FEMA actively encourages, solicits, and will consider comments on this interim final rule from interested parties, as well as those submitted on the original interim final planning rule, in preparing the final rule, For these reasons, FEMA believes there is good cause to publish an interim final rule. National Environmental Policy Act 44 CFR 10.8(d)(2)(ii) excludes this rule from the preparation of an environmental assessment or environmental impact statement, where the rule relates to actions that qualify for categorical exclusion under 44 CFR 10.8(d)(2)(iii), such as the development of plans under this section. Executive Order 12866, Regulatory Planning and Review FEMA has prepared and reviewed this rule under the provisions of Executive Order 12866, Regulatory Planning and Review. Under Executive Order 12866, 58 FR 51735, Oct. 4, 1993, a significant regulatory action is subject to OMB review and the requirements of the Executive Order. The Executive Order defines "significant regulatory action" as one that is likely to result in a rule that may: (1) Have an annual effect on the economy of $100 million or more or adversely affect in a material way the economy, a sector of the economy, productivity, competition, jobs, the environment, public health or safety, or State, local, or tribal governments or communities; (2) Create a serious inconsistency or otherwise interfere with an action taken or,planned by another agency; 13) Materially alter the budgetary impact of entitlements, grants, user fees, or loan programs or the rights and obligations of recipients thereof; or (4) Raise novel legal or policy issues arising out 'of legal mandates, the President's priorities, or ~:he principles set forth in th[e] Executive [O]rder. The purpose of this rule is to clarify the date by which State, tribal, and local governments have to prepare or update their plans to meet the criteria identified in 44 CFR part 201. This interim final rule clarifies that local governments must have a mitigation plan approved in order to receive a project grant through the PDM program under any Notice of funding opportunity issued after November 1, 2003, in fiscal year 2004 and beyond. As such, the rule itself will not have an effect on the economy of more than $100,000,000~ Therefore, this rule is not a significant regulatory action and is not an economically significant rule under Executive Order 12866. The Office of Management and Budget (OMB) has reviewed this rule under Executive Order 12866. Executive Order 12898, Environmental Justice Environmental Justice is incorporated into policies and programs under Executive Order 12898, Federal Actions to Address Environmental Justice in Minority Populations and Low-Income Populations, 59 FR 7629, Feb. 16, 1994. The Executive Order requires each Federal agency to conduct its programs, policies, and activities that substantially affect human health or the environment, in a manner that ensures that those programs, policies, and activities do not have the effect of excluding persons from program participation, denying persons program benefits, or subjecting persons to discrimination because of their race, color, or national origin. 61370 Federal Register/Vok 68, No. 208/Tuesday, October 28, 2003/Rules and Regulations No action that FEMA can anticipate uuder the final rule will have a disproportionately high or adverse human health mad environmental effect on any segment of the population. This rule extends the date for development or update of State and local mitigation plans in compliance with 44 CFR part 2(11. Accordingly, the requirements of Executive Order 12898 do not apply to this interim final rule. Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 This new interim final rule simply clarifies the date by which States and communities have to comply with the planning requirements, and clarifies which FEMA programs are affected by these requirements. The changes do not affect the collection of information; therefore, no change to the request for the collection of information is necessary. In summary, this interim final rule complies with the provisions of the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S,C. 3506(c)(2)(A)). Executive Order 13132, Federalism Executive Order 13132, Federalism, dated August 4, 1999, sets forth principles and criteria to which agencies must adhere in formulating and implementing policies that have f~deralism implications, that is, regulations that have substantial direct effects on the States, or on the distribution of power and responsibilities among the various levels of government. Federal agencies must closely examine the statutory authority supporting any action that would limit the policymaking discretion of the States, and to the extent practicable, must consult with State and local officials before implementing any such action. FEMA reviewed this rule under Executive Order 13132 and concluded that the rule has no federalism implications as defined by the Executive Order. FEMA has determined that the rule does not significantly affect the rights, roles, and responsibilities of States, and involves no preemption of State law nor does it limit State policymaking discretion. FEMA will continue to evaluate the planning requirements and work with interested parties as the planning requirements of 44 CFR part 201 are implemented. In addition, we actively encourage and solicit comments on this interim final rule from interested parties, and will consider them in preparing the final rule. Executive Order 13175, Consultation and Coordination with Indian Tribal Governments FEMA has reviewed this interim fieal rule under Executive Order 13175, which became effective on February 6, 2001. In this review, no "tribal implications" as defined in Executive Order 13175 were found becauseqt will not have a substantial direct eftbct on one or more Indian tribes, on the relationship between the Federal Government and Indian tribes, or on the distribution of power and responsibilities between the Federal Government and Indian tribes. Moreover, the interim final rule does not impose substantial direct compliance costs on tribal governments, nor does it preempt tribal law, impair treaty rights or limit the self-governing powers of tribal governments. Congressional Review of Agency Rulemaking. FEMA sent this interim final rule to the Congress and to the General Accounting Office under the Congressional Review of Agency Rulemaking Act, Public Law 104-121. The rule is not a "major rule" within the meaning of that Act. It is an administrative action to extend the time State and local governments have to prepare mitigation plans required by Section 322 of the Stafford Act, as enacted in DMA 2000. The rule will not result in a major increase in costs or prices for consumers, individual industries, Federal, State, or local government agencies, or geographic regions. It will not have "significant adverse effects" on competition, employment, investment, productivity, innovation, or on the ability of United States-.based enterprises to compete with foreign- based enterprises. In compliance with section 808(2] of the Congressional Review of Agency Rulemaking Act, 5 U.S.C. 8(2), for good cause we find that notice and public procedure on this interim final rule are impracticable, unnecessary, or contrary to the public interest. In order to make timely awards for the fiscal year 2003 PDM program, it is essential that the clarification of the effective date of the planning requirement be made effective as soon as possible. Accordingly, this interim final rule is effective on October 28, 2003. List of Subjects in 44 CFR Part 201, Part 204, and Part 206 Administrative practice and procedure, Disaster assistance, Grant programs, Mitigation planning, Reporting and record keeping requirements. · Accordingly, FEMA amends 44 CFR Parts 201,204, and 206 as fl31lows: PART 201--MITIGATION PLANNING · 1. The authority citation for part 201 continees to read as follows: Authority: Robert T. Stafford Disaster Relief and Emergem:y Assistance Act. 42 U.S.C, 5121-5206; Reorganization Plan No. 3 of 1978, 43 FR 41943, 3 CFR, 1978 Co~llp,, p. 329: E.O. 12127, 44 FR 19367, 3 CFR, 1979 Comp., p. 376; E.O. 12148.44 FR 43239, 3 CFR, 1979 Comp,, p. 412; and E.O. 12673, 54 FR 12571, 3 CFR, 1989 Comp., p. 214. · 2. Section 2(11.6(a)(2) is revised to read as follows: § 201.6 Local Mitigation Plans. (a) * * * (2} Local governments must have a mitigation plan approved pursuant to this section in order to receive a proiect grant through the Pre-Disaster Mitigation (PDM) program under any Notice of funding opportunity issued after November 1, 2003. The PDM program is authorized under § 203 of the Robert T. Stafford Disaster Relief and Emergency Assistance Act, 42 U.S.C.. 5133. PDM planning grants will continue to be made available to local governments al~er this time to enable them to meet the requirements of this section. PART 204--FIRE MANAGEMENT ASSISTANCE GRANT PROGRAM · 3. The authority citation for part 204 continues to read as follows: Authority: Robert T. Stafford Disaster Relief and Emergency Assistance Act, 42 U.S.C. 5121-5206; Reorganization Plan No. 3 of 1~78, 43 FR, 41943, 3 CFR, 1978 Comp., p. 329; E.O. 12127~ 44 FR 19367, 3 CFR, 1979 Comp., p. 376; E.O. 12148, 44 FR 43239, 3 CFR, 1979 Comp., p 412: and E.O. 12573, 54 FR 12571, 2 CFR, 198§ Comp., p. 214. · 4. Revise the definition of Hazard mitigation plan in § 204.3 to read as follows: § 204.3 Definitions used throughout this Hazard mitigation plan. A plan to develop actions the State, local, or tribal government will take to reduce the risk to people and property from all hazards. The intent of hazard mitigation planning under the Fire Management Assistance Grant Program is to identify wildfire hazards and cost-effective mitigation alternatives that produce Federal Register/Vol. 68, No. 208/Tuesday, October 28, 2003/Rules and Regulations 61371 long-term benefits. We address mitigation of fire hazards as part of the State's comprehensive Mitigation Plan, described in 44 CFR part 201. · 5. Revise § 204.51(d)(2) to read as follows: § 204.51 Application and approval procedures for a fire management assistance grant. (d) * * * (2) Hazm'd Mitigation Plan. As a requirement of receiving funding under a fire management assistance grant, a State, or tribal organization, acting as Grantee, must: (il Develop a Mitigation Plan in accordance with 44 CFR part 201 that addresses wildfire risks and mitigation measures; or (ii) Incorporate wildfire mitigation into the existing Mitigation Plan developed and approved under 44 CFR part 201 that also addresses wildfire risk and contains a wildfire mitigation strategy and related mitigation initiatives. PART 206--FEDERAL DISASTER ASSISTANCE FOR DISASTERS DECLARED ON OR AFTER NOVEMBER 23, 1988. · 6, The authority citation for part 206 continues to read as follows: Aathority: Robert T. Stafford Disaster Relict and Emergency Assistance Act, 42 II.S.C. 5121-52(16; Reorganization Plan No. 3 o] 1978.43 FR 41943, 3 CFR, 1978 Comp., p. 329; E.£). 12127, 44 FR 19367, 3 CFR, 1979 (kmq~.. p. 376; E.O. 12148, 44 FR 43239, 3 CFR. 1970 Comp., p. 412; and E.O. 12673, 54 FR 1257~. 3 CFR. 1989 Comp., p. 214. · 7. Revise § 296,226(b) to read as follows: § 206.226 Restoration of damaged facilities. lb) Mitigation planning. In order to receive assistance under this section, as of November 1, 2004, the State must have ill plm:e a FEMA approved State Mitigation Plan in accordance with 44 CFR part 201. Dated: October 22, 2003. Michael D. Brown, and Besponse, Department of Homeland DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION Office of the Secretary 49 CFR Part 71 [Docket No. OST-2003-15858] RIN 2105-AD30 Standard Time Zone Boundary in the State of South Dakota: Relocation of Jones, Mellette, and Todd Counties AGENCY: Office of the Secretary {OST), Department of Transportation (DOT). ACTION: Final rule. SUMMARY: In response to a concurrent resolution of the South Dakota legislature, DOT is relocating the boundary between mountain time and central time in the State of South Dakota, DOT is placing all of Jones, Mellette, and Todd Counties in the central time. zone. EFFECTIVE DATE: 2 a.m. MDT Sunday, October 26, 2003, which is the changeover from daylight saving to standard time. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Joanne Petrie, Office of the Assistant General Counsel for Regulation and Enforcement, U.S. Department of Transportation, Room 10424, 400 Seventh Street, Washington, DC 20590, (202) 366-9315, or by e-mall at joonne.petrie@ost, dot.gov. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Under the Standard Time Act of 1918, as amended by the Uniform Time Act of 1966 (15 U.S.C. 260-64), the Secretary of Transportation has authority to issue regulations modifying the boundaries between time zones in the United States in order to move an area from one time zone to another. The standard in the statute for such decisions is "regard for the convenience of commerce and the existing junction points and division points of common carriers engaged in interstate or foreign commerce." Time zone boundaries are set by regulation (49 CFR part 71). Currently, under regulation, Mellette and Todd Counties, and the western portion of Jones County, are located in the mountain standard time zone. The eastern portion of Jones County is currently located in the central time zone, Request for a Change The South Dakota legislature adopted a concurrent resolution (Senate Concurrent Resolution No. 3) petitioning the Secretary of Transportation to place all of Jones, Mellette, and Todd counties into the central time zone. The resolution was adopted by the South Dakota Senate on February 3, 2003, and concurred in by the South Dakota House of Representatives on February 7, 2903. Tbe resolution noted, among other things, that the vast majority of residents of those counties observe central standard time, instead of mountain standard time, because their commercial and social ties are to communities located in the central time zone. It further stated that there would be much less confusion and that it would be much more convenient for the commerce of these counties if these counties were located in the central time zone. A copy of the resolution has been placed in the docket. Procedure for Changing a Time Zone Boundary Under DOT procedures to change a time zone boundary, the Department will generally begin a rulemaklng proceeding if the highest elected officials in the area make a primofacie case t~r the proposed change. DOT determined that the concurrent resolution of the South Dakota legislature made a prima focie case that warranted opening a proceeding to determine whether the change should be made. On August 11, 2003, DOT published a notice of proposed rulemaking (68 FR 47533) proposing to make the requested change and invited public comment. The NPRM proposed that this change go into effect during the next changeover from daylight saving time to standard time, which is on October 26, 2003. Comments Two comments were filed. One, which was filed by the South Dakota Secretary of State, supported the change. He stated that "The proposal to place all of Jones, Mellette and Todd Counties in the central time zone would eliminate confusion these counties have when elections are conducted. Eliminating this confusion will improve voter turnout in these counties. South Dakota's polling hours are from 7 a.m. to 7 p,m. legal time. These counties that are legally set in mountain time follow central time for their business hours, therefore causing confusion in the past on what time zone to use for polling hours for local, state and federal elections." The other comment objected to daylight saving time observance and suggested that all states should be in the same time zone. We did not hold a public hearing in the area because of the unusual circumstances in this case. According to the State legislature, the vast majority of people in the affected area are already 55094 Federal Register/Vol. 69, No. 176/Monday, September 13, 2004/Rules and Regulations PART 292--NATIONAL RECREATION AREAS Subpart C--Sawtooth National Recreation Area--Private Lands a 1. The authority citation for subpart C continues to read as tbllows: Authority: Se{:. 4{a), Act of Aug, 22.1972 (86 Stat. 613). · 2. Amend § 292.16 by revising paragraph (e}(2)(ii) to read as follows: §292.16 Standards. (e) * * * (2) * * * (ii) Not more than two outbuildings with each residence. Aggregate square foot area of outbuildings not to exceed 850 square feet and to be limited to one story not more than 22 feet in height. Dated: September 7, 2004. David P. Tenny, Deputy Under Secretary, Natural Resources and Environment. IFR Doc. 04-20592 Filed 9-10-04; 8:45 ami BILLING CODE 3410-11-P DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY F~deral Emergency Management Agency 44 CFR Parts 201 and 206 RIN 1660-AA17 Hazard Mitigation Planning and Hazard Mitigation Grant Program AGENCY: Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA), Emergency Preparedness and Response Directorate, Department of Homeland Security. ACTION: Interim rule. SUMMARY: This rule provides State and Indian tribal governments with a mechanism to request an extension to the date by which they must develop State Mitigation Plans as a condition of grant assistance. FEMA regulations outline the requirements for State Mitigation Plans, which must be completed by November 1, 2004 in order to receive FEMA grant assistance. This interim rule allows FEMA to grant justifiable extensions, in extraordinary circumstances, for State and Indian tribal governments of up to six months, or no later than May 1, 2005. In addition, this interim rule allows mitigation planning grants provided through the Pre-Disaster Mitigation (PDM) program to contieue to be available to State, Indian tribal, and local governments afier November 1, 2004. DATES: Effective Dote: September 13, 2004. Comment Date: We will accept written comments throogh November 12, 2004. ADDRESSES: Please send written comments to the Rules Docket Clerk. Office of the General Counsel, Federal Emergency Management Agency, 500 G Street, SW., room 840,Washington DC 20472, (facsimile) 202-646--4536, or (e- mail) FEMA-RULES@dhs.gov. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Karen Helbrecht, Risk Reduction Branch, Mitigation Division, Federal Emergency,Management Agency, 500 C Street, SW., Washington DC 20472, (phone) 202-646-3358, (facsimile) 202- 646-3104, or (e-mail) karen.helbrecht@dhs.gov. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION~ Introduction On February 26, 2002, FEMA published an interim rule at 67 FR 8844 implementing Section 322 of the Robert T. Stafford Disaster Relief and Emergency Assistance Act (Stafford Act or the Act), 42 U.S.C. 5165, enacted under Section 104 of the Disaster Mitigation Act of 2000 (DMA 2000}, Public Law 106-390. This identified the requirements for State, tribal, and local mitigation plans. On October 1, 2002, FEMA published a change to that rule at 67 FR 61512, extending the date that the planning requirements take eft~ct. The October 1, 2002 interim rule stated that by November 1, 2004, FEMA approved State Mitigation Plans were required in order to receive non- emergency Stafford Act assistance, and local mitigation plans were required in order to receive mitigation project grants. The critical portion of this interim rule provides a mechanism for Governors or Indian tribal leaders to request an extension to the date that the planning requirements take effect for State level mitigation plans. This interim rule allows extensions up to May 1, 2005 to States or Indian tribal governments who submit the necessary justification. While all States and many Indian tribal governments have been working on the required State Mitigation Plans, and many have been very successful, a fbw have encountered extraordinary difficulties in meeting the November 1, 2004 deadline. Due to the significant implications of not having an approved plan, FEMA has decided to provide an option for States and Indian tribal governments that may not be able to meet the deadline, in order to allow all States to develop effective Mitigation plans. The option allows the Goveroor or Indian tribal leader to ask FEMA for an extension. A Governor or Indian tribal leader would be required to submit a written request to FEMA for the exteosion. The written request wmdd include the justification for the extension; the reasons the plan has not been completed; the amount of additional time needed to complete the plan; and a strategy for completing the plan, FEMA would review each request, and could grant up to a six-month extension. However, the deadline would not be later than May 1, 2005. Governors or Indian tribal leaders could request this extension at any time after pubfication of this interim rule. In addition, the current rule requirement states that States, or Indian tribal governments who choose to apply directly to FEMA, must have an approved mitigation plan by November 1, 2004 to be eligible for plannihg or project grant funding under the Pre- Disaster Mitigation (PDM) program. This rule change allows PDM planning grants to continue to be available to States and Indian tribal governments who do not have a FEMA approved mitigation plan. Local governments, and Indian tribal governments acting as subgrantees, continue to be eligible for PDM planning grants under the current requirement. Mitigation planning is the foundation to saving lives, protecting · properties, and developing disaster resistant communities. The PDM program is the primary mechanism that provides grant assistance for mitigation planning, State and Indian tribal governments will be able to apply for a PDM planning grant in order to develop or update their mitigation plan which, when approved by FEMA, will maintain their eligibility for non-emergency Stafford Act assistance. Finally, this interim rule makes technical and conforming amendments to other sections of FEMA regulations affected by the provision of Part 201 Mitigation planning, and adjusts the general major disaster allocation for the Hazard Mitigation Grant Program (HMGP) from 15 percent to 7~/~ percent to be consistent with a recent statutory amendment. FEMA encourages comments on this interim role. Administrative Procedure Act Statement In general, FEMA publishes a rule for public comment before issuing a final rule, under the Administrative Procedure Act, 5 U.S.C. 533 and 44 CFR 1.12. The Administrative Procedure Act, Federal Register/Vol. 69~ No. 176/Monday, September 13, 2004/Rules and Regulations 55095 however, provides an exception from that general rule where the agency for good cause finds that the procedures for prior comment and response are impracticable, unnecessary, or contrary to public interest. This interim rule provides an option for States and Indian tribal governments to request an extension to the date by which they have to develop State Mitigation Plans required as a condition of receiving non-emergency Stafford Act grant assistance. State and indian tribal governments are currently under the assumption, consistent with the cnrrent requirements, that plans are required by November 1, 2004, whereas this interim rule provides a mechanism to extend that date up to May 1, 2005, in certain cases, It does not affect the date that local plans will be required for other programs, such as the PDM program. In order for State and Indian tribal government resources to be appropriately identified and available to complete the required plans, it is essential that the date extension be made effective as soon as possible. If the rule were delayed beyond the November 1, 2004 deadline, and a State or Indian tribal government did not have a FEMA approved mitigation plan, all entities within that State or Indian tribe would be ineligible for grants to restore · damaged public facilities, Fire Management Assistance grants, and HMGP funding. The benefits of this rule will only be realized if the rule is immediately effective and available to State and Indian tribal governments prior to the existing November 1, 2004 deadline. As a practical matter, since FEMA anticipates opening the application period for the FY2004/2005 PDM program in September, this rule is necessary to ensure that FEMA can provide timely guidance to States and Indian tribal governments of their eligibility for PDM planning thnds, so they do not miss the opportunity to . submit the necessary applications. FEMA believes that it is contrary to the public interest to delay the benefits of this rule· In accordance with the Administrative Procedure Act, 5 U.S.C. 553(d)(3), FEMA finds that there is good cause for the interim rule to take effect immediately upon publication in the Federal Register in order to meet the needs of States and communities by identifying the new effective date for planning requirement under 44 CFR Part 201. The rule also allows PDM planning grants to continue to be available to States and Indian tribal governments who do not have a FEMA approved mitigation plan. The existing deadline for States to have a FEMA approved mitigation plan is November 1, 2004, and since the next round of competition tbr PDM funding will occur after tbat deadline, it is essential that the change in the planning requirement be made effective as soon as possible. This will allow State and Indian tribal goveruments to apply and compete for planning grants during the next PDM competitive (:ycle. Tberafore, FEMA finds that prior notice and comment on this rule would not further the public interest. We actively encourage and solicit comments on this interim rule from interested parties, arid we will consider them as well as those submitted on the original inl:arim planning rule in preparing the final rule. For these reasons, FEMA believes that we have good cause to publish an interim rule. Notional Environmental Policy Act 44 CFR 10.8(d)(2)(ii) excludes this rule from the preparation of an environmental assessment or environmental impact statement, where the rule relates to actions that qualify for categorical exclusion under 44 CFR lO.8(d)(2)(iii), such as the development of plans under this section, Executive Order 12866, Regulatory Planning end Review FEMA has prepared and reviewed this rule under the provisions of Executive Order 12866, Regulatory Planning and Review. Under Executive Order 12866, 58 FR 51735, October 4, 1993, a significant regulatory action is subject to OMB review and the requirements of the Executive Order. The Executive Order defines "significant regulatory action" as one that is likely to result in a rule that may: (1) Have an annual effect on the economy of $100 million or more or adversely affect in a material way the economy, a sector of the economy, productivity, competition, jobs, the environment, public health or safety, or State, local, or tribal governments or communities; (2) Create a serious inconsistency or otherwise interfere with an action taken or planned by another agency; (3) Materia'lly alter the budgetary impact of entitlements, grants, user fees, or loan programs or the rights and obligations of recipients thereof; or (4) Raise novel legal or policy issues arising out of legal mandates, the President's priorities, or the principles set forth in the Executive Order. The purpose of this rule is to extend the date by which State and Indian tribal governments have to prepare or update their mitigatiqn plans to meet the criteria identified in 44 CFR Part 201. This interim rule provides a mechanism for States and Indian tribal governments to request an extension of tbe November 1, 2004 deadline for State Mitigation Plans, and allows State and Indian tribal governments that do not have an approved plan to compete for PDM planning funds after the deadline. As such, tbe rule itself will not have an effect on the economy of more than $100,000,000, nor otherwise constitute a significant regulatory action. The Office of Management and Budget has concluded that this rule is not significant for purposes of Executive Order 12866, Executive Order 12898, Environmental Iustice Under Executive Order 12898, Federal Actions to Address Environmental Justice in Minority Populations and Low-Income Populations, 59 FR 7629, February 16, 1994, FEMA incorporates environmental justice into our policies and programs. The Executive Order requires each Federal agency to conduct its programs, policies, and activities that substantially affect human health or the environment, in a manner that ensures that those programs, policies, and activities do not have the effect of excluding'persons from participation i¢ our programs, denying persons the benefits of our programs, or subjecting persons to discrimination because of their race, color, or national origin, No action that we can anticipate under the interim rule will have a disproportionately high or adverse human health and environmental effect on any segment of the population. This rule extends the date for development or update of State and Indian tribal mitigation plans in compliance with 44 CFR 201.4. Accordingly, the requirements of Executive Order 12898 do not apply to this interim rule. Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 This new interim rule simply provides an option to extend the elate by which States have to comply with the planning requirements, and clarifies the planning requirements for the PDM program. The changes do not affect the collection of information; therefore, no change to the request for the collection of information is necessary. In summary, this interim rule complies with the provisions of the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, 44 U.S.C. 3506(c)(2)(A). Executive Order 13132, Federalis~n Executive Order 13132, Federalism, dated August 4, 1999, sets forth principles and criteria that agencies must adhere to in formulating and 55096 Federal Register/Vol. 69, No. 176/Monday, September 13, 2004/Rules and Regulations implementing policies that have t~deralism implications, that is, regalations that have snbstantial direct effects on the States, or on the distribution of power and responsibilities among the various levels of governnmnt. Federal agencies must closely examine the statutory authority supporting any action that would limit the policymaking discretion of the States, and to the extent practicable, must consult with State and local officials before implementing any such action. We have reviewed this rule under Executive Order 13132 and have concluded that the rule does not have federalism implications as defined by the Executive Order. We have determined that the rule does not significantly affect the rights, roles, and responsibilities of States, and involves no preemption of State law nor does it limit State policymaking discretion. We will continue to evaluate the planning requirements and will work with interested parties as we implement the plm~/ning requirements of 44 CFR Part 201. In addition, we actively encourage and solicit comments on this interim rule from interested parties, and we will consider them in preparing the final rule. Executive Order 13175, Consultation and Coordination With Indian Tribal Governments FEMA has reviewed this interim rule under Executive Order 13175, which became effective on February 6, 2001. In reviewing the interim rule, we find that it does not have "tribal implications" as defined in Executive Order 13175 because it will not have a substantial direct effect on one or more Indian tribes, on the relationship between the Federal Govbmment and Indian tribes, or on the distribution of power and responsibilities between the Federal Government and Indian tribes. Moreover, the interim rule does not impose substantial direct compliance costs on Indian tribal governments, nor does it preempt tribal law, impair treaty rights nor limit the self-governing powers of Indian tribal governments. In fact, this interim rule relieves a burden on Indian tribal governments by allowing them to apply for PDM planning grants after the November 1, 2004 deadline. Congressional Review of Agency Rulemaking FEMA has sent this interim rule to the Congress and to the General Accounting Office under the Congressional Review of Agency Rulemaking Act, Public Law 104-121. This interim rule is a not "major rule" within the meaning of that Act. It is an administrative action to extend the time State and local governments have to prepare mitigation plans required by Section 322 of the Stafford Act, as enacted in DMA 2099. The interim rule will not result in a major increase in costs or prices for consumers, individual industries, Federal, State, or local government agencies, or geographic regions. It will not have "significant adverse effects" on competition, employment, investment, productivity, innovation, or on the ability of United States-based enterprises to compete with foreign- based enterprises. The rule is not an unfunded Federal mandate within the meaning of the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995, Public Law 104-4, and any enforceable duties that we impose are a condition of Federal assistance or a duty arising from participation in a voluntary Federal program. List of Subjects in 44 CFR Par~s 201 and 206 Administrative practice and procedure, Disaster assistance, Grant programs, Mitigation planning, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements. · Accordingly, FEMA amends 44 CFR, Parts 201 and 206 as follows: PART 201--MITIGATION PLANNING · 1. The authority citation for part 201 continues to read as follows: Aulhority: Robert T. Stafford Disaster Relief and Emergency Assistance Act, 42 U.S.C. 5121-5206; Reorganization Plan No. 3 of 1978, 43 FR 41943, 3 CFR, 1978 Comp., p. 329; E.O. 12127, 44 FR 19367, 3 CFR, 1979 Comp., p. 376; E.O. 12148, 44 FR 43239, 3 CFR, 1979 Comp., p. 412; and E.O. 12673, 54 FR 12571, 3 CFR, 1989 Comp., p. 214. · 2. In § 201.3 add paragraph (c)(7) to read as follows: §201.3 Responsibilities. (c) * * * (7) If necessary, submit a request from the Governor to the Director of FEMA, requesting an extension to the plan deadline in accordance with § 201.4(a)(2). · 3. Revise § 201.4(a) to read as follows: 5201.4 Standard State Mitigation Plans. (a) Plan requirement. (1) By November 1, 2004, States nrust have an approved Standard State Mitigation Plan meeting the requirements of this section in order to receive assistance under the Stafford Act, although assistance authorized under disasters declared prior to November 1, 2004 will continue to be made available. Until that date, existing, FEMA approved State Mitigation Plans will be accepted. In any case, emergency assistance provided under 42 U.S.C. 5170a, 5170b, 5173, 5174, 5177, 5179, 5180, 5182, 5183, 5184, 5192 will not be affected. Mitigation planning grants provided through the Pre-Disaster Mitigatioo (PDM) program, authorized under Section 2(13 of the Robert T. Stafford Disaster Relief and Emergency Assistance Act, 42 U.S,C. 5133, will also confinue to be available, The mitigation plan is the demonstration of the State's commitment to reduce risks from natural hazards and serves as a guide for State decision makers as they commit resources to reducing the effects of natural hazards. States may choose to include the requirements of the HMGP Administrative Plan in their mitigation plan, but must comply with the requirement for updates, amendments, or revisions listed under 44 CFR 206.437. (2) A Governor, or Indian tribal leader, may request an extension to the plan approval deadline by submitting a request in writing to the Director of FEMA, through the Regional Director. At a minimum, this must be signed by the Governor or the Indian tribal leader, and must include justification for the extension, identification of the reasons the plan has not been completed, identification of the amount of additional }ime required to complete the plan, and a strategy for finalizing the plan. The Director of FEMA will review each request and may grant a plan approval extension of up to six months. However, any extended plan approval deadline will be no later than May 1, 2005. · 4. Revise § 201.0Ia){1) to read as follows: § 201.6 Local Mitigation Plans. (1) For disasters declared on or after November 1, 2004, a local government must have a mitigation plan approved pursuant to this section in order to receive HMGP project grants. PART 206---FEDERAL DISASTER ASSISTANCE FOR DISASTERS DECLARED ON OR AFTER NOVEMBER 23, 1988 · 5. The authority citation for part 206 continues to read as follows: Authority: Robert T. Stafford Disaster Relief and Emergency Assistance Act, 42 Federal Register/Vol. 69, No. 176'/Monday, September 13~ 2004/Rules and Regulations 55097 U,S,C. 5121-5206: Ri~organization Plan No, 3 of 1978, 43 FR 41943.3 CFR, 1978 Comp., p. 329; E.O, 12127, 44 FR 19367, 3 CFR. 1979 Comp., p. :176; E.O. 12148, 44 FR 43239.3 CFR. 1979 Comp., p. 412: aad E.O. 12673.54 FR 12571, 3 CFR, 1989 Comp., p. 214. · 6. Revise § 206.226(D) to read as follows: § 206.226 Restoration of damaged facilities. (b) Mitigation planning. In order to receive assistance under this section, as of November 1, 2004 (subiect to 44 CFR 201.4(a)(2)), the State must have in place a FEMA approved State Mitigation Plan in accordance with 44 CFR part 201. · 7. In § 2~6.432, revise paragraphs (b) introductory text and (b)(1) to read as follows: § 206.432 Federal grant assistance. (b) Amounts of assistance. The total of Federal assistance under this subpart shall not exceed either 71/z or 20 percent of the total estimated Federal assistance (excluding administrative costs) provided for a major disaster under 42 U.S.C. 5170b, 5172, 5173, 5174, 5177, 5178, 5183, and 5201 as follows: (1) Seven and one-half (7V2) percent. Effective November 1, 2004, a State with an approved Standard State Mitigation Plan, which meets the requirements outlined in 44 CFR 201.4, shall be eligible for assistance under the HMGP not to exceed 7V:z percent of the total estimated Federal assistance described in this paragraph. Until that date, existing FEMA approved State Mitigation Plans will be accepted. States may request an extension to the deadline of up to six months to the Director of FEMA by providing written justification in accordance with 44 CFR 201.4(a)(2). · 8. Revise § 206.434(b)[1) to read as follows: §206.434 Eligibility. (b) * * * (1) For all disasters declared on or after November 1, 2004, local and Indian tribal government applicants for project subgrants must have an approved local mitigation plan in accordance with 44 CFR 201.6 prior to receipt of HMGP subgrant funding for projects. Until November 1, 2004, local mitigation plans may be developed concurrent with the implementation of subgrants. Michael D. Brown, FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION 47 CFR Parts 0, 1, and 54 [CC Docket No. 02-6; FCC 04-190] Schools and Libraries Universal Service Support Mechanism AGENCY: Federal Communications Commission. ACTION: Final rule. SUMMARY: In this document, the Commission adopts measures to protect against waste, fraud, and abuse in the administration of the schools and libraries universal service support mechanism (also known as the E-rate program). In particular, the Commission resolves a number of issues that have ' arisen i¥om audit activities conducted as part of ongoing oversight over the administration of the universal service fund, and we address programmatic concerns raised by our Office of Inspector General. DATES: Effective October 13, 2004 except for §§ 1.8003, 54.504(b)(2), 54.504(c)(1), 54.504(f), 54.508, and 54.516 which contain information collection requirements that are not effective until approved by the Office of Management and Budget. The FCC will publish a document in the Federal Register announcing the effective date for those sections. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Jennifer Schneider, Attorney, Wireline Competition Bureau, Telecommunications Access Policy Division, (202) 418-7400. SUPPLemENTaRY INFORMATION: This is a summary of the Commission's Fifth Report and Order, and Order in CC Docket No. 02-6 released on August 13, 2004. The full text of this document is available for public inspection during regular business hours in the FCC Reference Center, Room CY-A257, 445 Twelfth Street, SW., Washington, DC, 20554. I. Introduction 1. In this order, we adopt measures to protect against waste, fraud, and abuse in the administration of the schools and libraries universal service support mechanism (also known as the E-rate program). In particular, we resolve a number of issues that havb arisen from audit activities conducted as part of ongoing oversight over the administration of the universal service fund, and we address programmatic conceros raised by our Office of Inspector General~(OIG). First. we set tbrth a tYamework regarding what amounts should be recovered by the Universal Service Administrative Company (USAC or Administrator) and the Commission when funds have been disbursed in violation of specific statutory provisions and Commission rules. Second, we announce our policy regarding the timeframe in which USAC and the Commission will conduct audits or other investigations relating to use of E-rate funds. Third, we eliminate the current option to offset amounts disbursed in violation of the statute or a rule against other funding commitments, Fourth, we extend our red light rule previously adopted pursuant to the Debt Collection Improvement Act (DCIA) to bar beneficiaries or service providers t¥om receiving additional benefits under the schools and libraries program if they have failed to satisfy any outstanding obligation to repay monies into the fund. Fifth, we adopt a strengthened document retention requirement to enhance our ability to conduct all necessary oversight and provide a stronger enforcement tool for detecting statutory and rule violations. Sixth, we modify our current requirements regarding the timing, content and approval of technology plans, Seventh, we amend our beneficiary certification requirements to enhance our oversight and enforcement activities. Eighth, we direct USAC to submit a plan for timely audit resolution, and we delegate authority to the Chief of the Wireline Competition Bureau to resolve audit findings. Finally, we direct USAC to submit on an annual basis a list of all USAC administrative procedures to the Wireline Competition Bureau (Bureau) for review and further action, if necessary, to ensure that such procedures effectively serve our objective of preventing waste, fraud and abuse. II. Fifth Report and Order 2. Since the inception of the schools and libraries support mechanism, schools and libraries have been subiect to audits to determine compliance with the program rules and requirements. Audits are a too] for the Commission and USAC, as directed by the [CFR] ErlTLE 44] [PART 201] TITLE 44 - EMERGENCY MANAGEMENT AND ASSISTANCE [67 FR 8848, Feb. 26, 2002, as amended at 67 FR 61515, Oct. 1, 2002; 68 FR 61370, Oct. 28, 2003; 69 FR 55096, Sept. 13, 2004] Part 201 - Miti.qation Plannin.q Table of Contents: 201.1. Purpose 201.2. Definitions 201.3. Responsibilities 201.4. Standard State Mitigation Plans 201.5. Enhanced State Mitigation Plans 201.6. Local Mitigation Plans Authority: · Robert T. Stafford Disaster Relief and Emergency Assistance Act, 42 U.S.C. 5121- 5206; Reorganization Plan No. 3 of 1978, 43 FR 41943, 3 CFR, 1978 Comp., p. 329; E.O. 12127, 44 FR 19367, 3 CFR, 1979 Comp., p. 376; E.O. 12148, 44 FR 43239, 3 CFR, 1979 Comp., p. 412; and E.O. 12673, 54 FR 12571, 3 CFR, 1989 Comp., p. 214. Source: 67 FR 8848, Feb. 26, 2002, unless otherwise noted. §1. Purpose (a) The purpose of this part is to provide information on the polices and procedures for mitigation planning as required by the provisions of section 322 of the Stafford Act, 42 U.S.C. 5165. (b) The purpose of mitigation planning is for State, local, and Indian tribal governments to identify the natural hazards that impact them, to identify actions and activities to reduce any losses from those hazards, and to establish a coordinated process to implement the plan, taking advantage of a wide range of resources. §2. Definitions Grantee means the government to which a grant is awarded, which is accountable for the use of the funds provided. The grantee is the entire legal entity even if only a particular component of the entity is designated in the grant award document. Generally, the State is the grantee. However, after a declaration, an Indian tribal government may choose to be a grantee, or may act as a subgrantee under the State. An Indian tribal government acting as grantee will assume the responsibilities of a "state", as described in this part, for the purposes of administering the grant. Hazard mitigation means any sustained action taken to reduce or eliminate the long- term risk to human life and property from hazards. Hazard Mitigation Grant Program means the program authorized under section 404 of the Stafford Act, 42 U.S.C 5170c and implemented at 44 CFR Part 206, Subpart N, which authorizes funding for certain mitigation measures identified through the evaluation of natural hazards conducted under section 322 of the Stafford Act 42 U.S.C 5165. Indian tribal government means any Federally recognized governing body of an Indian or Alaska Native tribe, band, nation, pueblo, village, or community that the Secretary of Interior acknowledges to exist as an Indian tribe under the Federally Recognized Tribe List Act of 1994, 25 U.S.C. 479a. This does not include Alaska Native corporations, the ownership of which is vested in private individuals. Local government is any county, municipality, city, town, township, public authority, school district, special district, intrastate district, council of governments (regardless of whether the council of governments is incorporated as a nonprofit corporation under State law), regional or interstate government entity, or agency or instrumentality of a local government; any Indian tribe or authorized tribal organization, or Alaska Native village or organization; and any rural community, unincorporated town or village, or other public entity. Managing State means a State to which FEMA has delegated the authority to administer and manage the HMGP under the criteria established by FEMA pursuant to 42 U.S.C. 5170c(c). FEMA may also delegate authority to tribal governments to administer and manage the HMGP as a Managing State. Regional Director is a director of a regional office of FEMA, or his/her designated representative. Small and impoverished communities means a community of 3,000 or fewer individuals that is identified by the State as a rural community, and is not a remote area within the corporate boundaries of a larger city; is economically disadvantaged, by having an average per capita annual income of residents not exceeding 80 percent of nationalr per capita income, based on best available data; the local unemployment rate exceeds by one percentage point or more, the most recently reported, average yearly national unemployment rate; and any other factors identified in the State Plan in which the community is located. The Stafford Act refers to the Robert T. Stafford Disaster Relief and Emergency Assistance Act, Public Law 93-288, as amended (42 U.S.C. 5121-5206). State is any State of the United States, the District of Columbia, Puerto Rico, the Virgin Islands, Guam, American Samoa, and the Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana Islands. State Hazard Mitigation Officer is the official representative of State government who is the primary point of contact with FEMA, other Federal agencies, and local governments in mitigation planning and implementation of mitigation programs and activities required under the Stafford Act. Subgrantee means the government or other legal entity to which a subgrant is awarded and which is accountable to the grantee for the use of the funds provided. Subgrantees can be a State agency, local government, private non-profit organizations, or Indian tribal government. Indian tribal governments acting as a subgrantee are accountable to the State grantee. §3. Responsibilities (a) General. This section identifies the key responsibilities of FEMA, States, and local/tribal governments in carrying out section 322 of the Stafford Act, 42 U.S.C. 5165. (b) FEMA. The key responsibilities of the Regional Director are to: (1) Oversee all FEMA related pre- and post-disaster hazard mitigation programs and activities; (2) Provide technical assistance and training to State, local, and Indian tribal governments regarding the mitigation planning process; (3) Review and approve all Standard and Enhanced State Mitigation Plans; (4) Review and approve all local mitigation plans, unless that authority has been delegated to the State in accordance with §201.6(d); (5) Conduct reviews, at least once every three years, of State mitigation activities, plans, and programs to ensure that mitigation commitments are fulfilled, and when necessary, take action, including recovery of funds or denial of future funds, if mitigation commitments are not fulfilled. (c) State. The key responsibilities of the State are to coordinate all State and local activities relating to hazard evaluation and mitigation and to: (1) Prepare and submit to FEMA a Standard State Mitigation Plan following the criteria established in §201.4 as a condition of receiving Stafford Act assistance (except emergency assistance). (2) In order to be considered for the 20 percent HMGP funding, prepare and submit an Enhanced State Mitigation Plan in accordance with §201.5, which must be reviewed and updated, if necessary, every three years from the date of the approval of the previous plan. (3) At a minimum, review and, if necessary, update the Standard State' Mitigation Plan by November 1, 2004 and every three years from the date of the approval of the previous plan in order to continue program eligibility. (4) Make available the use of up to the 7 percent of HMGP funding for planning in accordance with §206.434. (5) Provide technical assistance and training to local governments to assist them in applying for HMGP planning grants, and in developing local mitigation plans. (6) For Managing States that have been approved under the criteria established by FEM^ pursuant to 42 U.S.C. 5170c(c), review and approve local mitigation plans in accordance with §201.6(d). (7) If necessary, submit a request from the Governor to the Director of FEMA, requesting an extension to the plan deadline in accordance with §201.4(a)(2). (d) Local governments. The key responsibilities of local governments are to: (1) Prepare and adopt a jurisdiction-wide natural hazard mitigation plan as a condition of receiving project grant funds under the HMGP, in accordance with §201.6. (2) At a minimum, review and, if necessary, update the local mitigation plan every five years from date of plan approval to continue program eligibility. (e) Indian tdbal governments. Indian tribal governments will be given the option of applying directly to us for Hazard Mitigation Grant Program funding, or they may choose to apply through the State. If they apply directly to us, they will assume the responsibilities of the State, or grantee, and if they apply through the State, they will assume the responsibilities of the local government, or subgrantee. [67 FR 8848, Feb. 26, 2002, as amended at 67 FR 61515, Oct. 1,2002; 69 FR 55096, Sept. 13, 2004] §4. Standard State MitiRation Plans (a) P/an requirement. (1) By November 1, 2004, States must have an approved Standard State Mitigation Plan meeting the requirements of this section in order to receive assistance under the Stafford Act, although assistance authorized under disasters declared prior to November 1, 2004 will continue to be made available. Until that date, existing, FEMA approved State Mitigation Plans will be accepted. In any case, emergency assistance provided under 42 U.S.C. 5170a, 5170b, 5173, 5174, 5177, 5179, 5180, 5182, 5183, 5184, 5192 will not be affected. Mitigation planning grants provided through the Pre-Disaster Mitigation (PDM) program, authorized under Section 203 of the Robert T. Stafford Disaster Relief and Emergency Assistance Act, 42 U.S.C. 5133, will also continue to be available. The mitigation plan is the demonstration of the State's commitment to reduce risks from natural hazards and serves as a guide for State decision makers as they commit resources to reducing the effects of natural hazards. States may choose to include the requirements of the HMGP Administrative Plan in their mitigation plan, but must comply with the requirement for updates, amendments, or revisions listed under 44 CFR 206.437. (2) A Governor, or Indian tribal leader, may request an extension to the plan approval deadline by submitting a request in writing to the Director of FEMA, through the Regional Director. At a minimum, this must be signed by the Governor or the Indian tribal leader, and must include justification for the extension, identification of the reasons the plan has not been completed, identification of the amount of additional time required to complete the plan, and a strategy for finalizing the plan. The Director of FEMA will review each request and may grant a plan approval extension of up to six months. However, any extended plan approval deadline will be no later than May 1,2005. (b) Planning process. An effective planning process is essential in developing and maintaining a good plan. The mitigation planning process should include coordination with other State agencies, appropriate Federal agencies, interested groups, and be integrated to the extent possible with other ongoing State planning efforts as well as other FEMA mitigation programs and initiatives. (c) Plan content. To be effective the plan must include the following elements: (1) Description of the planning process used to develop the plan, including how it was prepared, who was involved in the process, and how other agencies participated. (2) Risk assessments that provide the factual basis for activities proposed in the strategy portion of the mitigation plan. Statewide risk assessments must characterize and analyze natural hazards and risks to provide a statewide overview. This overview will allow the State to compare potential losses throughout the State and to determine their priorities for implementing mitigation measures under the strategy, and to prioritize jurisdictions for receiving technical and financial support in developing more detailed local risk and vulnerability assessments. The risk assessment shall include the following: (i) An overview of the type and location of all natural hazards that can affect the State, including information on previous occurrences of hazard events, as well as the probability of future hazard events, using maps where appropriate; (ii) An overview and analysis of the State's vulnerability to the hazards described in this paragraph (c)(2), based on estimates provided in local risk assessments as well as the State risk assessment. The State shall describe vulnerability in terms of the jurisdictions most threatened by the identified hazards, and most vulnerable to damage and loss associated with hazard events. State owned critical or operated facilities located in the identified hazard areas shall also be addressed; (iii) An overview and analysis of potential losses to the identified vulnerable structures, based on estimates provided in local risk assessments as well as the State risk assessment. The State shall estimate the potential dollar losses to State owned or operated buildings, infrastructure, and critical facilities located in the identified hazard areas. (3) A Mitigation Strategy that provides the State's blueprint for reducing the losses identified in the risk assessment. This section shall include: (i) A description of State goals to guide the selection of activities to mitigate and reduce potential losses. (ii) A discussion of the State's pre- and post-disaster hazard management policies, programs, and capabilities to mitigate the hazards in the area, including: an evaluation of State laws, regulations, policies, and programs related to hazard mitigation as well as to development in hazard-prone areas; a discussion of State funding capabilities for hazard mitigation projects; and a general description and analysis of the effectiveness of local mitigation policies, programs,, and capabilities. (iii) An identification, evaluation, and prioritization of cost-effective, environmentally sound, and technically feasible mitigation actions and activities the State is considering and an explanation of how each activity contributes to the overall mitigation strategy. This section should be linked to local plans, where specific local actions and projects are identified. (iv) Identification of current and potential sources of Federal, State, local, or private funding to implement mitigation activities. (4) A section on the Coordination of Local Mitigation Planning that includes the following: (i) A description of the State process to support, through funding and technical assistance, the development of local mitigation plans. (ii) A description of the State process and timeframe by which the local plans will be reviewed, coordinated, and linked to the State Mitigation Plan. (iii) Cdteria for prioritizing communities and local jurisdictions that would receive planning and project grants under available funding programs, which should include consideration for communities with the highest risks, repetitive loss properties, and most intense development pressures. Further, that for non-planning grants, a principal criterion for prioritizing grants shall be the extent to which benefits are maximized according to a cost benefit review of proposed projects and their associated costs. (5) A Plan Maintenance Process that includes: (i) An established method and schedule for monitoring, evaluating, and updating the plan. (ii) A system for monitoring implementation of mitigation measures and project closeouts. (iii) A system for reviewing progress on achieving goals as well as activities and projects identified in the Mitigation Strategy. (6) A Plan Adoption Process. The plan must be formally adopted by the State prior to submittal to us for final review and approval. (7) Assurances. The plan must include assurances that the State will comply with all applicable Federal statutes and regulations in effect with respect to the periods for which it receives grant funding, in compliance with 44 CFR 13.11(c). The State will amend its plan whenever necessary to reflect changes in State or Federal laws and statutes as required in 44 CFR 13.11(d). (d) Review and updates. Plan must be reviewed and revised to reflect changes in development, progress in statewide mitigation efforts, and changes in priorities and resubmitted for approval to the appropriate Regional Director every three years. The Regional review will be completed within 45 days after receipt from the State, whenever possible. We also encourage a State to review its plan in the post-disaster timeframe to reflect changing priorities, but it is not required. [67 FR 8848, Feb. 26, 2002, as amended at 67 FR 61515, Oct. 1,2002; 69 FR 55096, Sept. 13, 2004] .~5. Enhanced State Mitigation Plans (a) A State with a FEMA approved Enhanced State Mitigation Plan at the time of a disaster declaration is eligible to receive increased funds under the HMGP, based on twenty percent of the total estimated eligible Stafford Act disaster assistance. The Enhanced State Mitigation Plan must demonstrate that a State has developed a comprehensive mitigation program, that the State effectively uses available mitigation funding, and that it is capable of managing the increased funding. In order for the State to be eligible for the 20 percent HMGP funding, FEMA must have approved the plan within three years prior to the disaster declaration. (b) Enhanced State Mitigation Plans must include all elements of the Standard State Mitigation Plan identified in §201.4, as well as document the following: (1) Demonstration that the plan is integrated to the extent practicable with other State and/or regional planning initiatives (comprehensive, growth management, economic development, capital improvement, land development, and/or emergency management plans) and FEMA mitigation programs and initiatives that provide guidance to State and regional agencies. (2) Documentation of the State's project implementation capability, identifying and demonstrating the ability to implement the plan, including: (i) Established eligibility criteria for multi-hazard mitigation measures. (ii) A system to determine the cost effectiveness of mitigation measures, consistent with OMB Cimular A-94, Guidelines and Discount Rates for Benefit-Cost Analysis of Federal Programs, and to rank the measures according to the State's eligibility criteria. (iii) Demonstration that the State has the capability to effectively manage the HMGP as well as other mitigation grant programs, including a record of the following: (A) Meeting HMGP and other mitigation grant application timeframes and submitting complete, technically feasible, and eligible project applications with appropriate supporting documentation; (B) Preparing and submitting accurate environmental reviews and benefit-cost analyses; (C) Submitting complete and accurate quarterly progress and financial reports on time; and (D) Completing HMGP and other mitigation grant projects within established performance periods, including financial reconciliation. (iv) A system and strategy by which the State will conduct an assessment of the completed mitigation actions and include a record of the effectiveness (actual cost avoidance) of each mitigation action. (3) Demonstration that the State effectively uses existing mitigation programs to achieve its mitigation goals. (4) Demonstration that the State is committed to a comprehensiv~ state mitigation program, which might include any of the following: (i) A commitment to support local mitigation planning by providing workshops and training, State planning grants, or coordinated capability development of local officials, including Emergency Management and Floodplain Management certifications. (ii) A statewide program of hazard mitigation through the development of legislative initiatives, mitigation councils, formation of public/private partnerships, and/or other executive actions that promote hazard mitigation. (iii) The State provides a portion of the non-Federal match for HMGP and/or other mitigation projects. (iv) To the extent allowed by State law, the State requires or encourages local governments to use a current version of a nationally applicable model building code or standard that addresses natural hazards as a basis for design and construction of State sponsored mitigation projects. (v) A comprehensive, multi-year plan to mitigate the dsks posed to existing buildings that have been identified as necessary for post-disaster response and recovery operations. (vi) A comprehensive description of how the State integrates mitigation into its post-disaster recovery operations. (c) Review and updates. (1) A State must review and revise its plan to reflect changes in development, progress in statewide mitigation efforts, and changes in priorities, and resubmit it for approval to the appropriate Regional Director every three years. The Regional review will be completed within 45 days after receipt from the State, whenever possible. (2) In order for a State to be eligible for the 20 percent HMGP funding, the Enhanced State Mitigation plan must be approved by FEMA within the three years prior to the current major disaster declaration. §6. Local Miti.qation Plans The local mitigation plan is the representation of the jurisdiction's commitment to reduce dsks from natural hazards, serving as a guide for decision makers as they commit resources to reducing the effects of natural hazards. Local plans will also serve as the basis for the State to provide technical assistance and to prioritize project funding. (a) Plan requirements. (1) For disasters declared on or after November 1, 2004, a local government must have a mitigation plan approved pursuant to this section in order to receive HMGP project grants. (2) Local governments must have a mitigation plan approved pursuant to this section in order to receive a project grant through the Pre-Disaster Mitigation (PDM) program under any Notice of funding opportunity issued after November 1, 2003. The PDM program is authorized under {}203 of the Robert T. Stafford Disaster Relief and Emergency Assistance Act, 42 U.S.C. 5133. PDM planning grants will continue to be made available to local governments after this time to enable them to meet the requirements of this section. (3) Regional Directors may grant an exception to the plan requirement in extraordinary circumstances, such as in a small and impoverished community, when justification is provided. In these cases, a plan Will be completed within 12 months of the award of the project grant. If a plan is not provided within this timeframe, the project grant will be terminated, and any costs incurred after notice of grant's termination will not be reimbursed by FEMA. (4) Multi-jurisdictional plans ( e.g. watershed plans) may be accepted, as appropriate, as long as each jurisdiction has participated in the process and has officially adopted the plan. State-wide plans will not be accepted as multi- jurisdictional plans. (b) Planning process. An open public involvement process is essential to the development of an effective plan. In order to develop a more comprehensive approach to reducing the effects of natural disasters, the planning process shall include: (1) An opportunity for the public to comment on the plan during the drafting stage and prior to plan approval; (2) An opportunity for neighboring communities, local and regional agencies involved in hazard mitigation activities, and agencies that have the authority to regulate development, as well as businesses, academia and other private and non-profit interests to be involved in the planning process; and (3) Review and incorporation, if appropriate, of existing plans, studies, reports, and technical information. (c) Plan content. The plan shall include the following: (1) Documentation of the planning process used to develop the plan, including how it was prepared, who was involved in the process, and how the public was involved. (2) A risk assessment that provides the factual basis for activities proposed in the strategy to reduce losses from identified hazards. Local risk assessments must provide sufficient information to enable the jurisdiction to identify and prioritize appropriate mitigation actions to reduce losses from identified hazards. The risk assessment shall include: (i) A description of the type, location, and extent of all natural hazards that can affect the jurisdiction. The plan shall include information on previous occurrences of hazard events and on the probability of future hazard events. (ii) A description of the jurisdiction's vulnerability to the hazards described in paragraph (c)(2)(i) of this section. This description shall include an overall summary of each hazard and its impact on the community. The plan should describe vulnerability in terms of: (A) The types and numbers of existing and future buildings, infrastructure, and cdtical facilities located in the identified hazard areas; (B) An estimate of the potential dollar losses to vulnerable structures identified in paragraph (c)(2)(i)(A) of this section and a description of the methodology used to prepare the estimate; (C) Providing a general description of land uses and development trends within the community so that mitigation options can be considered in future land use decisions. (iii) For multi-jurisdictional plans, the risk assessment section must assess each jurisdiction's risks where they vary from the risks facing the · entire planning area. (3) A mitigation strategy that provides the jurisdiction's blueprint for reducing the potential losses identified in the risk assessment, based on existing authorities, policies, programs and resources, and its ability to expand on and improve these existing tools. This section shall include: (i) A description of mitigation goals to reduce or avoid long-term vulnerabilities to the identified hazards. (ii) A section that identifies and analyzes a comprehensive range of specific mitigation actions and projects being considered to reduce the effects of each hazard, with particular emphasis on new and existing buildings and infrastructure. (iii) An action plan describing how the actions identified in paragraph (c)(2)(ii) of this section will be prioritized, implemented, and administered by the local jurisdiction. Prioritization shall include a special emphasis on the extent to which benefits are maximized according to a cost benefit review of the proposed projects and their associated costs. (iv) For multi-jurisdictional plans, there must be identifiable action items specific to the jurisdiction requesting FEMA approval or credit of the plan. (4) A plan maintenance process that includes: (i) A section describing the method and schedule of monitoring, evaluating, and updating the mitigation plan within a five-year cycle. (ii) A process by which local governments incorporate the requirements of the mitigation plan into other planning mechanisms such as comprehensive or capital improvement plans, when appropriate. (iii) Discussion on how the community will continue public participation in the plan maintenance process. (5) Documentation that the plan has been formally adopted by the governing body of the jurisdiction requesting approval of the plan (e.g., City Council, County Commissioner, Tribal Council). For multi-jurisdictional plans, each jurisdiction requesting approval of the plan must document that it has been formally adopted. (d) Plan review. (1) Plans must be submitted to the State Hazard Mitigation Officer for initial review and coordination. The State will then send the plan to the appropriate FEM^ Regional Office for formal review and approval. (2) The Regional review will be completed within 45 days after receipt from the State, whenever possible. (3) Plans must be reviewed, revised if appropriate, and resubmitted for approval within five years in order to continue to be eligible for HMGP project grant funding. (4) Managing States that have been approved under the criteria established by FEMA pursuant to 42 U.S.C. 5170c(c) will be delegated approval authority for local mitigation plans, and the review will be based on the criteria in this part. Managing States will review the plans within 45 days of receipt of the plans, whenever possible, and provide a copy of the approved plans to the Regional Office. [67 FR 8848, Feb. 26, 2002, as amended at 67 FR 61515, Oct. 1, 2002; 68 FR 61370, Oct. 28, 2003; 69 FR 55096, Sept. 13, 2004] APPENDIX B [Note: To Insert Adoption Resolutions When They Are Passed.] DMA 2000 Ha~a~ ~i~aiion Plan i suffOlk bounty, Ne~ %rk Page B-1 DRAFT- September 2007 APPENDIX C: Suffolk County Hazard Preparedness Questionnaire Results - as of July 16, 2007 STATISTICS ON RESPONSES Total Responses: 180 Location of Respondents: 12.2% 31.7% 0.0% 7.8% 17.2% 3.3% 6.1% 13.9% 2.2% 5.6% Gender of Respondents: (177 responses) Male - 50.8 % Female - 49.2 % Age Range of Respondents: (179 responses) 8.4% 14.5% 34.1% 20.7% 22.3% Highest Level of Education: (177 responses) 0.6% 1.1% 6.8% 27.1% Length of Time Residing in Suffolk County: (177 responses) 41.8% 22.6% 1.7% 4.5% 5.1% 9.0% 79.7% Own or Rent: (176 responses) Own - 87.6 % Rent - 12.4 % DMA 2000 Hazard Mitigation Plan - Suffolk County, New York C-1 July 2007 SUMMARY OF RESPONSES Note: Not all questions were answered by each respondent; therefore, the percentage presented has been calculated based on the number of respondents that answered the specific question and not the overall number of questionnaires submitted either online or via hard-copy. Respondents were asked "In the past 10 years, which of the following types of natural hazards have you or someone in your household experienced within Suffolk County?" Respondents could choose as many hazards as they felt applied. Nor'Easters 82.8% Severe Winter Storm 67.8% Severe Storm 60.0% Ice Storm 47.2% Flooding - Street 40.6% Coastal Storm 37.8% Hurricane 36.7% Excess Temperatures 35.0% Flooding- Basement 29.4% Coastal Erosion 24.4% Flooding - Property 21.7% Drought 15.0% Ground Seepage 14.4% Wildfire 11.1% Groundwater Contamination 8.9%' Flooding - 1st Floor 6.7% Flooding - Urban 6.7% infestation 6.7% Other Peril 5.0% Tornado 2.2% Ice Jam 1.7% I Land Subsidence 1.1% Earthquake 0,6% Epidemic 0.6% Flooding - Higher 0.6% Avalanche 0.0% Expansive Soils 0,0% Landslide 0.0% Tsunami 0.0% Volcano 0.0% July 2007 . )~::~ ~ - ~ How concerned are you about the following natural hazards impacting Suffolk County.'? Respondents were asked to select their hazard concern level. The following table shows the number of responses for each hazard concern level. The Overall Ranking was calculated by multiplying the number of responses in each hazard concern level by the concern ranking factor and summarizing across.all five concern levels. Concern Rank Factor Hurricane 5 18 37 Coastal Storm 9 24 46 Nor'Easters 5 27 51 11 16 Severe Winter Storm 28 23 Groundwater 51 43 46 69 506 43 49 441 45 44 440 49 39 31 43 401 398 $on. tamination Coastal Erosion 15 41 35 40 41 395 Severe Storm 9 34 52 42 31 388 Flooding - Property 42 42 29 27 33 313 ' Flooding - Street 40 45 26 32 29 309 Flooding - Basement 47 36 21 30 33 300 Ice Storm 25 47 45 34 14 295 Epidemic 43 46 36 ' 24 17 258 Infestation 40 42 46 24 10 246 Excess. Temps, 44 54 38 21 10 233 Flooding - 1st Floor 69 41 20 17 21 216 Ground Seepage 57 39 38 15 14 216 Wildfire 52 53 32 19 10 214 Drought 56 47 48 7 6 188 Flooding - Urban 74 37 22 7 18 174 Tornado 72 55 29 4 6 149 Ice Jam 85 30 24 14 7 148 14 14 141 Flooding - Higher 102 25 'l'sunami 100 28 16 10 11 1 34 Land Subsidence 106 27 17 6 2 87 Expansive Soils 106 33 14 4 2 81 Other Pedl 95 9 8 3 10 74 Earthquake 124 29 8 1 I 52 Landslide 137 12 8 5 2 51 Avalanche 161 2 2 0 2 14 ~/olcano 156 4 1 0 1 10 DMA 2000 Hazard Mitigation Plan - Suffolk County, New York C-3 July 2007 ¢: Please rank how prepared you feel you and your household are for the probable impacts of natural events likely to occur within Suffolk County? Respondents were asked to rank their level of hazard preparedness on a scale of I to 5, 5 being the most prepared. (175 responses) O s~,~ m ~: Why do you think you are prepared for the probable impacts of natural events likely to occur within Suffolk County? Respondents were asked to check all that apply. (159 responses) The following percentage of respondents indicated the following: 52.2 % Emergency preparedness information from a government source (e.g., federal, state, or local emergency management) 73.0 % Have experienced one or more natural hazard events. 59.1% Locally provided news or other media information. 7.5 % Schools and other academic institutions. 27.7 % Attended meetings that have dealt with disaster preparedness. Q~e ~(~ # ~ 2: Respondents were asked to identify the most effective ways to disseminate information on the impacts of and how to prepare for natural disasters. They were asked to give their top three choices ' from a list of 19 selections. The number of responses for each choice is indicated in the table below for the top 16 choices: TV News 61 31 16 108 Newspaper-Newsday 18 24 17 59 Radio News 11 25 16 52 Intemet 8 14 25 47 Informational Brochures 13 14 13 40 Fire Department/EMS Agency 6 6 18 30 Public Meetings 9 9 10 28 Public Awareness Programs 5 8 8 21 TV Advertisements 10 5 5 20 Newspaper-Local/Regional 7 5 5 17 Newspaper-Suffolk Life 6 6 5 17 Public Forums-Workshops 6 6 3 15 Public Forums-Schools 0 5 6 11 Telephone Book 4 0 4 8 Public Library 3 0 3 6 Church 0 3 3 6 DMA 2000 Hazard Mitigation Plan - Suffolk County, New York C-4 July 2007 Flooding and Hazard Insurance Qc~ ~m To the best of your knowledge, is your property located in a designated floodplain? (174 responses ) Yes: 16.1% No: 54.6 % Not Sure: 29.3 % (}~c*~im~ ': 1,4 Respondents were asked if they do NOT have flood insurance, what was the primary reason? Didnotneed it/property notin floodplain I 0.0% 41.4% 10.3% Believedhomeowners insurancewould I 11.1% 1.4% 2.6% c_o.ve , in I Feltit was too expensive I 33.3% 11.4% 28.2% Felt it was notworthit I 0.0% 1.4% 2.6% Were notfarWfliar withit or(fid notknow I 0.0% 7.1% 25.6% aboutit I "Total Responses (don't have ins.) I 9 70 39 TotalNon-Responses* [ 19 25 13 * Note: It cannot be assumed that all who did not respond to this question have flood insurance. Qnesthm # 15: Respondents were asked if they have had, or are having, problems getting homeowners/renters insurance. Yes: 11.8% No: 88.2 Question # 16: Respondems were asked "If you do NOT have any special hazard riders on your homeowners/renters insurance (i.e., hurricane, tornado, sewer/basement flooding), what is the primary reason?" Of those who responded to this question, the responses were as follows: 13.3 % said they never considered it. 2.8 % said it they don't need it/not vulnerable. 12.8 % said it is too expensive. 4.4 % said they it is not worth it/deductibles are too high. 13.3 % said they are not familiar with it/don't know about it. 1.9% listed other reasons. DMA 2000 Hazard Mitigation Plan - Suffolk County, New York C-5 July 2007 Natural Hazard Mitigation Respondents were asked "Did you consider the impact a natural disaster would have on your home before you purchased/moved in to your home?" The responses were as follows: Yes: 40.6 % No: 57.2 % Of those who indicated that they believed they were located in a designated floodplain, the responses were as follows: Yes: 50.0 % No: 46.4 % , ~ ~. Was the presence of a natural hazard risk zone (i.e., flood zone, urban wild land interface) disclosed to you by a Real Estate Agent, seller, or landlord before you purchase&moved into to your home? The responses were as follows: Yes: 12.2 % No: 82.8 % Of those who indicated that they believed they were located in a designated floodplain, the responses were as follows: Yes: 17.9 % No: 78.6 % Q,es~t ~ ~<~ ~;~: Would the disclosure of this type of information' influence your decision to purchase/move into a home? The responses were as follows: Yes: 78.3 % No: 17.2 % Of those who indicated that they believed they were located in a designated floodplain, the responses were as follows: Yes: 78.6 % No: 17.9 % Qm~s~i~m # 20: Would you be willing to spend money on your current home to retrofit it from the impacts of future possible natural disasters within Suffolk County? (Examples of retrofitting are: Elevating a flood-prone home, or replacing a combustible roof covering with non-combustible roofing). The responses were as follows: Yes: 66.1% No: 23.9 % DMA 2000 Hazard Mitigation Plan - Suffolk County, New York C-6 July 2007 ? e:~ ~ ~: 2 Respondents were asked how much money they would be willing to spend to better protect their home and family from the impacts of natural disasters. The responses were as follows: 26.7 % selected $5,000 and above. 11.7 % selected $2,500 to $4,999 12.8 % selected $1,000 to $2,499 5.6 % selected $500 to $999 1.1% selected $100 to $499 1.1% selected less than $100 9.4 % selected "Nothing" 19.4 % selected "Don't Know" Ques~i<m 22: Respondents were asked to choose which incentives would motivate them to spend money to retrofit their home from the possible impacts of natural disasters. They could select more than one incentive. The response results were as follows: 60.0 % selected "Building permit fee waiver" 79.4 % selected "Insurance premium discount" 47.2 % selected "Mortgage discount" 85.6 % selected "Property tax breaks or incentive" 55.0 % selected "Low interest rate loan" 4.4 % selected "None" 0 % selected "Other" ~ 23: If your property were located in a designated "high hazard" area, or had received repetitive damages from a natural hazard event, would you consider a 'buyout" or relocation offered by a public agency? The responses were as follows: Yes: 68.3 % No: 21.1% DMA 2000 Hazard Mitigation Plan - Suffolk County, New York C-7 July 2007 APPENDIX D: MITIGATION CATALOG This appendix provides a comprehensive list of mitigation actions considered by Suffolk County and participating jurisdictions that met the goals and objectives of the Plan. DMA 2000 Hazard Mitigation Plan - Suffolk County, New York D-1 DRAFT - September 2007 Suffolk County Natural Hazards Mitigation Plan 8~8~2007 Catalogue of Risk Reduction Measures Risk is defined as being a function of the: Hazard Exposure Vulnerability, and Capability Therefore risk can be reduced through mitigation by manipulating the hazard, reducing exposure to the hazard, reducing the vulnerability and/or increasing capability. And, where mitigation is not yet possible, the risk can be reduced through preparation, response or/and recovery. The list is not meant to be exhaustive, but to inspire thought. Hazard Category Catalog of Risk Reduction 'J~-~ ~ I"Jl'llllr Manipulate Hazard Reduce Exposure Reduce Vulnerability Increase Capability Personal Scale None 2. Retrofit your home to meet current building ccde 2. Stockpile properly protection measures to be utilized once 1. Pa~cipete in volunta~ property acquisition/relocation 1. Retrofit your facilities to meet current building ccde 1. Develop a Continuity of Operations Plan (COOP) to 2. Maintain drainage facilities that service your properly. 2. Buy Flood [hsurance to provide property protection components such as plywood pending coastal storms. enclosure prohibitions, coastal zone setbacks, lower of their impacts at rite local level. Seek to coordinate all levels substantial damage thresholds, ~'~mconv~rsion deed of planning with this regard. restdctions 2. Consider open space land uses in areas of high risk 2. Elevate vulnerable properties in high risk areas impacted 2. Support/enhance code enforcement programs at the local 3. Acquire or relocate vulnerable properties in high risk 3. Adopt/emend building codes such that they will address 3. Continue to develop, enhance and implement existing technology/information as it become available. 4. Place utilities underground when and where appropriate, 4. Implement tree management programs. 4. Develop a post-disaster action plan for coastal straome Government Scale None 5. Consider Iow-density land use in high risk coastal zc~es. 5. Elevate roads that are vifal/cdtical to evacuation and Iccal 5. Promote the purchase of Fkod Insurance community operations. 6, Design or enhance existing drainage systems for higher 6. Adopt regulations [hat require the disclosure of ocean- design storms to provide increased capacity of the drainage related hazards at the time of the purchase or sale of real system, property. 7. Maintain the drainage intrastrucfare to levels that equal or 7. Implement measures that will provide or help to provide exceed their design specifications, propeKy protection measures to property owners prior to the 8. Utilize the best available technology to provide eady warning of pending coastal sfon*ns to provide ample time to implement property protection measures. 9. Educate the public on ways to protect their properly before Catalog of Risk Hazard Cate~r~ Reduction ,,r i~ltll-ii.~ll.i Measures Manipulate Hazard Reduce Exposure Reduce Vulnerabilit~ Increase Capability 1. Partidpate in voluntary property 1. Become informed on the importance of Coastal None acquisition/relocation programs sponsored by None Zone Management and ways you can support those Personal Scale federal, State or local agencies, programs and principals. 2, E~uy Flood Insurance 1. Participate in voluntary property None acquisition/relocation programs sponsored by 1. Implement maintenance of privately owned 1, Become a stakeholder in coastal zone Corporate Scale federal, Slate or local agencies, inlets that service your property, management programs at the State and Local level. 2. Buy Flood Insurance. 1. Coatinue/enhance existing practice of developing engineered beaches 1. Implement beach nourishment programs 1. Implement inlet maintenance programs. 1. Strengthen, enhance and enforce existing codes to where appropriate, deal with the impacts of coastal erosion. 2. Adopt site development regulations that 2, Dredging. 2. Stabilize vulnerable bluffs will require a site-specific erosion rate 2. Enhance erosion zone mapping based on best analysis to be done at the time of application available science and technology. for development permits within 600 feet of a 3. Prohibit hardened structures, such as 3. Impiemect public education and outreach 3. Acquire or relocate vulnerable properties in high seawalls, revetments, and large sandbags programs that stress the importance of coastal zone hsk, erosion prone areas, along the erodible shoreline, management and what the constituency can do to support it. Government Scale 4. Consider open space land uses in those areas subject to coastal erosion, especially those beach 4. Develop or enhance existing beach nourishment areas seaward of the frontal dunes, plans. 5. Adopt setback standards for new development from the shoreline or erosion protection zones, A 5. Perfonm a feasibility study to identify the best minimum of 60 feet is the recommended starting solutions within the capabilities of the focal point, government. 6. Adopt erosion protection zones that are based on the historical observed rate of erosion 6. Seek to enhance Federal and State Coordination in documented for the jurisdiction. At a minimum, this Coastal Zone Management issues by including them rate of erosion will be that established by the State as stakeholders in existing coastal zone management of New Yo~k as the minimum rate of erosion, programs at the local level. 7. Identify reliable and consistent sources of sand for beach nourishment programs. 8. Track and monitor coastal erosion data such as annual erosion rates such that it can be utilized to accurately measure the degree of risk as it pertains to each juhsdiction with exposure. Utilize tools such as GIS for incorporation into existing/on<Joing programs. 9. Promate the purchase of itood Insurance. 10. Adopt regulations that require the disclosure of ocean-related hazards at the time of the purchase or sale of real property. 11. Document erosion rates by establishing benchmarks within erosion zones no more than 1/2 mile apart and record shoreline erosion in relation to these reference marks at least every five years, Catalog of Risk Hazard Cate~or~ Reduction Measures Manipulate Hazard Reduce Exposure Reduce Vulnerability Increase Capability 12. Document erosion rates by taking new aerial photographs of your shoreline at least every 5 years. 13. Adopt regulations that require the disclosure of ocean-related hazards at the time of the purchase or sale of real proper~¥. Hazard Cat o Catalog of Risk ~are~7°r~ Reduction Measures Manipulate Hazard Reduce ExposureI~'l'~'~]eldulce Vulnerability increase Capability 1. Drought resistant landscapes · 1. Practice active water conservation techniques. Personal Scale None None 2. Reduce water system losses 3. Modify plumbing sysytems, i.e. water Corporate Scale None None 1. Drought resistant landscapes 1. Practice active water conservation 2. Reduce private water system losses 1. Ground water recharge through 1. identify and create ground water 1. Water use conflict regulations 1. Public education on drought resistance stormwater management back up sources. 2. Identify alternative water supplies for time of 2. Reduce water system losses drought. Mutual aid agreements with alternative supliers. Government Scale 3. Disthbute water saving kits 3. Develop a drought contigency plan 4. Develop cdtaha-"tdggers" for drought related actions 5. Improve accuracy of water supply forecasts 6. Modify rate stTucture to influence active water Catalog of Risk Hazard Ca o Reduction I[*~ ~7 r~ Measures Manipulate Hazard Reduce Exposure Reduce Vulnerability Increase Capability 1. Clear sk3rmwatar drains and culverts 1. Institute Iow impact development techniques on 1. Retrofit structure (elevate structure above 1. Enforce NFIP property BFE) 2.Locate outside of designated flood hazard area. 2. Elevata Utilities house above BFE 2. Buy flood insurance Personal Scale 3. Participate in voluntary property 3. Build new homes above BFE 3. Develop household mitigation plan, such as acquisition/relocation programs sponsored by retrofit savings, communication capability with federal, State or local agencies, outside, 72 hr seE-sufficiency during and after an event. 4. Floodproof existing structures. 1. Clear stormwater drains and culverts 1. Institute Iow impact development techniques on 1. Build redundancy for critical functions/ 1. increase capability by having cash reserves for property retrofit critical buildings, reconstruction 2. Institute Iow impact development techniques 2. Participate in voluntary property 2. Provide flood-proofing measures when new 2. Supporl and implement hazard disclosure for Corporate Scale on property acquisition/relocation programs sponsored by critical infrastructure must be located in the sale/re-sale of property in identified risk federal, State or local agencies, floodplains, zones. 3. Buy Flood Insurance 1. Clear stormwater drains and culverts 1. Locata/re-locata cdtical facilities outside of 1. Harden infrastructure 1. Produce better hazard maps hazard area 2. Institute Iow impact development techniques 2. Provide redundancy for critical functions and 2. Provide technical information and guidance on property 2. Acquire or relocate identified repetitive loss properties or other appropriate properties at risk infrastructure from flooding. 3, Dredging, levee construction, providing 3. Promote open space uses in identified high 3. Adopt appropriate regulatory standards such 3. Enact tools to help manage development or retention areas.., hazard areas via techniques such as: PUD's, as: cumulative substantial promote mitigation in flood hazard areas easements, setbacks, greenways, sensitive area improvement~damage, Lower substantial (incentives, information) tracks. Damage thresholds, freeboard, lower substantial damage threshold, compensatory storage, non-conversion deed restrictions 4. Consider structural solutions determined 4. Adopt land development critsria such as PUD's 4. Maintain the drainage infrastructure to ~evels 4. Incorpe~ate retrofitting/replacement of critical feasible to reduce flood risk. Density transfers, clustering that equal or exceed their design system elements in CIP specEications. The drainage infrastructure Government Scale includes both natural and main-made systems. 5. Stormwater management regulations and 5. Elevate at dsk stuctures to appropriate 5. Develop strategy to take advantage of post master planning, levels above the Base Flood Elevafion (BFE). disaster opportunities 6. Acquire vacant land or promote open space 6. Warehouse critical infrastructure components uses in developing watersheds to control increases in runoff 7. Develop and adopt a COOP 8..loin CRS program 9. Maintain existing data as well as gather new data needed to define risks and vulnerability. 10. Train emergency responders 11. Create a building and elevation inventory of structures in the floodptain Catalog of Risk Hazard Cafe o Measures Manipulate Hazard Reduce Exposure Reduce Vulnerability Increase Capability 12. Develop and implement a public information strategy 13. Charge a hazard mitigation fee on all new permits to create a hazard mitigation funding source for initiatives or grant cost share requirements. 14, Adopt regulations that require the disclosure of ocean-related hazards at the time of the purchase or sale of real property. Government Scale 15, Develop a post-disaster action plan for flood events that will address the local government operations post disaster. 16. develop a comprehensive Flood Hazard Management Plan, 17. Promote the purchase of Flood Insurance 18~ Find ways to utilize funding generated by sales tax for stormwater management, to implement proactive flood hazard mitigation. Catalog of Risk Hazard Cat~o.~ Manipulate Hazard Reduce Exposure Reduce Vulnerability Increase Capability 1. Stop the use of fertilizes that are high 1. Maintain the drainage facilities that 1. Get informed on ways you can reduce you in nitrates, service your property, own personal contribution to ground water Personal Scale None 2. Dispose of chemicals properly. 3. Take used motor oil to a recycling center. 1.Filter ground water at its source. 1. Filter stormwater at stormwater 1. Maintain drainage system. 1. Get informed on ways you can reduce you collection facilities own personal contribution to ground water 2. Active pumping and treatment of 2. Implement appropriate "best 2. Dispose of chemicals properly. Corporate Scale contaminated sources management practices" when dealing with point source and non-point source pollutants. 3. Take used motor oil to a recycling center. 1.Filter ground water at its source, 1. Filter stormwater at stormwater 1. Consider higher regulatory standards. 1. Continue/enhance on*goieg monitoring collection facilities programs to identify sources of ground water contamination. 2. Active pumping and treatment of 2. Updata/enhance stormwatar 2. Maintain drainage system. 2. Educate the public on the ground water contaminated sources collection facilities in high dsk areas contamination issue and ways they can reduce (areas with little or no existing facilities the impact. Government Scale and highly permeable soils). 3. Develop municipal water systems. 3. Seek ways to eliminate or reduce the 3. Adopt and enforce appropriate best 3. Strengthen code enforcement. 4. Continue/enhance on-going programs for the disposal of hazardous materials (STOP) 5. Identify alternate water supply sour(~es. Catalog of Risk Hazard Cate~or~ Measures Manipulate Hazard Reduce Exposure Reduce Vulnerability Increase Capability Risk Reduction ~ ~ H~za_r~ Ca~e.g°. ~ Measures Manipulate Hazard Reduce Exposun Reduce Vulnerability Increase Capability 1. insulate house 1. Trim or remove trees that could effect power lines 2. Provide redundant heat and power. 2. Promote 72 hour self-sufficiency Personal scale None None 3. Insulate structure 4. Plant appropriate trees near home and power lines 3. Be aware of inclement weather conditions, and move your I. Relocate cdtical infrastructure, such as power lines, 1. Trim or remove trees that could affect power lines undergrcund 2. Reinforce or relocate critical infrastructure such as 2. Create redundancy poweHines so that it meets performance expectations. Corporate Scale None None 3. Install tree wire 3. Develop a Continuity of Operations Plan (COOP) to address operations before, during and after coastal storm events. 4. Utilize weather radios at the work place to keep your employees 1. Harden infrastructure such a locating utilities under 1. Support programs such as "Tree Watch" that proactively ground where appropriate, manage problem areas by use of selective removal ot hazardous trees, tree replacement, etc 2. Trimming trees back from power lines 2. Establish and enforce building ccdes that require all roof~ to withstand snow loads 3. Designate snow routes and strengthen criticai road 3. Increase communication alternatives sections and bddges. 4. Adopt codes and regulations that address the issues of 4. Modify land use and environmental regulations to support parking of vehicles along roadways dudng severe weather vegetation management activities that improve reliability in utility events, corridors. 5. Develop or enhance the capacity/capability of atormwater conveyance systems. 5. Modify landscape and other ordinances to encourag~ appropdate planting near overhead power, cable, and phone lines Government None None 6. Provide backup power sources at vital critical facilities. 6. Provide weather radios to vulnerable populations 7. Enhance public awareness campaigns to address those issues of alert and warning and actions to take during severe weather events. 8. Utilize the best available technology to enhance the warning systems for all severe weather events (i.e.: tornado warning systems), 9. Coordinate severe weather warning capabilities and the dissemination of warning amongst those agencies within the planning are with the highest degree of capability. 10. Promote flood insurance. 11. Join the Community Rating System Risk Reduction Hazard Category Measures "~]?illl Manipulate Hazard Reduce Exposure Reduce Vulnerability Increase Capability 1. Clear potential fuels on property: 1. Create and maintain defensible 1. Create and maintain defensible space 1, Employ "Firewise" techniques to dry, overgrown underbrush, diseased space around structures around structures, provide water on site. safeguard your home. trees 2. Locate outside of hazard area 2, Use fire-retardant building materials 2. Identify alternative water supply points in close proximity to your home such as: swimming pools, lakes, streams, cisterns, Personal scale water storage tanks. 3, Mow regularly 3. Create defensible spaces around your 3. Support your local fire district. home. 4. Be aware of weather conditions that support/enhance the probability of wild fires. 1. Clear potential fuels on property: 1, Create and maintain defensible 1. Create and maintain defensible space 1.Supporl "Firewise" community initiatives. dry underbrush, diseased trees space around structures and around stPactures and infrastructure, infrastructure provide water on site, 2. Reduce exposure - Locate 2. Use fire-retardant building materials outside of hazard area Corporate scale 3. Provide stored water to be utilized for fire fighting with appropriate fire department connections at facilities not equipped with fire hydrants, or inadequate fire hydrant spacing. 1. Clear fuels (dry underbrush, 1. Create and maintain defensible 1. Create and maintain defensible space 1. More public outreach and education diseased trees) on land that can space around structures and around structures and infrastructure efforts including an active "Firewise" trigger and maintain wildfires infrastructure program 2. Implement"Best Management 2. Reduce exposure - Locate 2. Use fire-retardant building materials 2, Possible Weapons of Mass Destruction Practices" on public lands outside of hazard area (WMD) funds available to enhance fire capability in High Risk areas. 3. Higher regulatory standards 3. Identify fire response and alternative evacuation routes 4. Establish water main supply arid 4. Seek alternative water supplies in urban hydrants in unhyrdrantad areas, wi~dland interface areas. 5. Decrease hydrant spacing 5. Become a "Firewise" community requirements for new development in high Government risk wild fire areas. 6. Continue to suppod actions, duties and responsibilities of the Wild Fire Task Force, 7. Increase capability to fight wild fires utilizing equipment that can supeqd wild fire fighting such as: tankers, engines with "pump-and-run" capabilities, dump tanks for tanker shuttle operations. 8. Develop/implement wild fire managemedt plans. APPENDIX E: FEDERAL MITIGATION PROGRAMS, ACTIVITIES, AND INITIATIVES This appendix provides a summary of available federal programs that relate to mitigation planning and may provide possible sources of funding or technical support for mitigation initiatives. Basic and Applied Research/Development · ,3enter for Intecjration of Technical Assistance: Develops Department of Interior (DOI) -US Geological Survey ~latural Disaster and evaluates technology for (USGS), The Center for Integration of Natural Hazards nformation nformation integration and Research: :lissemination (703) 648-6059 hazinfO(~rUSqa.qov -lazard Reduction Funding for research and related National Science Foundation (NSF), Directorate for ~rogram .=ducational activities on hazards. Engineering, Division of Civil and Mechanical Systems, Hazard Reduction Program: I703) 306-1360 3ecision, Risk, and :unding for research and related NSF - Directorate for Social, Behavioral and Economic ~anagement Science .-,ducational activities on risk, .%ience, Division of Social Behavioral and Economic 3rogram )erception, communication, and Research, Decision, Risk, and Management Science ~3anagement (primarily ~rogram (DRMS): :echnological hazards) ',703) 306-1757 ~rww.nsf..qovtsbe/drms/start.htm ~ocietal Dimensions of :unding for research and related ~ISF - Directorate for Social, Behavioral and Economic Engineering, Science, and ~ucational activities on topics such Science, Division of Social, Behavioral and Economic Fechnology Program )s ethics, values, and the :{esearch, Societal Dimensions of Engineering, Science ~ssessment, communication, and Technology Program: nanagement and perception of dsk ',703) 306-1743 National Earthquake ~esearch into basic and applied ~ISF - Directorate for Geoeciences, Division of Earth Hazard Reduction ;arth and building sdences. ~ciences: Program (NEHRP) in 1703) 306-1550 Earth Sciences Technical and Planning Assistance Planning Assistance to States Technical and planning assistance for the preparation of comprehensive plans for the development, utilization, and conservation of water and related land resoumes. :)epartment of Defense (DOD) US Army Corps of --ngineers (USACE) 7,ontact the Floodplain Management Staff in the ~,ppropriate USACE Regional Office qorth Atlantic: (212) 264-7813 South Atlantic: (404) 331 d-!-!.1 3reat Lakes and :)hio River: (513) 684-6050 Mississippi Valley: (601) 634-5827 Northwestern: (503) 806-3853 Southwestern: (214-767-2613 South Pacific: (415) 977-8164 Pacific Ocean: (808) 438-8863 DMA 2000 Hazard Mitigation Plan - Suffolk County, New York E-1 DRAFT- September 2007 Disaster Mitigation Planning and Technical Assistance Watershed Surveys and Planning National Flood Insurance Program Emergency Management / Mitigation Training Technical and planning assistance grants for capacity 3uilding and mitigation project activities focusing on creating disaster resistant jobs and /~orkplaces. Surveys and planning studies for appraising water and related 'esources, and formulating alternative ptans for conservation ase and development. Grants and advisory/counseling services to assist w/planning and implementation improvement. Formula grants to States to assist communities to comply with NFIP [Ioodplain management requirements (Community Assistance Program). Training in disaster mitigation, preparedness, planning. Department of Commerce (DOC), Economic Development Administration (EDA): I800) 345-1222 EDA's Disaster Recovery Coordinator: 202) 482-6225 ¢ww.doc.qov/eda US Department of Agdcultura (USDA) - National Resources Conservation Service (NRCS)Watersheds and Wetlands Division: (202) 720-4527 Deputy Chief for Programs: (202) 690-0848 w-cczc.nrcs.usda.qov FEMA FEMA National Dam Safety Technical assistance, training, FEMA Program and grants to help improve State dam safety programs. National Earthquake Training, planning and technical FEMA; DOI-USGS Hazards Reduction assistance under grants to States USGS Program or local jurisdictions. Earthquake Program Coordinator: (703) 648-6785 Volcano Hazards Program Technical assistance: Volcano DOI-USGS hazard warnings and operation of Volcanic Hazards Program Coordinator: four volcano observatories to (703) 648-6708 monitor and assess volcano hazard 650) 329-5228 risk. :loodplain Management ~ervices Technical and planning assistance at the local, regional, or national level needed to support effective floodplain management, Watershed Protection and :lood Prevention Program --nvironmental Quality ncentives Program EQIP) Technical and financial assistance for installing works of improvement to protect, develop, and utilize land or water resources in small watersheds under 250,000 acres. Technical, educational, and limited financial assistance to encourage environmental enhancement. DOD-USACE North Atlantic: (212) 264-7813 South Atlantic: (404) 331-4441 Great Lakes and Ohio River: (513) 684-6050 Mississippi Valley: (601) 634-5827 Northwestern: (503) 808-3853 Southwestern: (214-767-2613 South Padfic: (415) 977-8164 Pacific Ocean: (808) 438-8863 USDA-NRCS Director, Watersheds and Wetlands Division: (202) 72O-3042 (202) 690-4614 www.nrcs.usda,qov USDA-NRCS ~NRCS County Offices ~IRCS EQUIP Program Manager: 202) 720-1834 vww.nrc~.usda.qov DMA 2000 Hazard Mitigation Plan - Suffolk County, New York E-2 DRAFT- September 2007 National Earthquake Hazard Reduction Program Technical and planning FEMA, DOI-USGS assistance for activities associated Earthquake Program Coordinator: with earthquake hazards mitigation. (703) 648-6785 HAZARD Identification and Mapping National Rood Insurance Flood insurance rate maps and --EMA Program: Flood Mapping flood plain management maps for all NFIP communities; National Flood Insurance Technical guidance and advice to :)OI-USGS Program: Technical coordinate FEMA's map JSGS - National Mapping Division: Mapping Advisory Council modernization efforts for the 573) 308-3802 National Flood Insurance Program. National Digital Develops topographic :)OIoUSGS Orthophoto Program quadrangles for use in mapping of JSGS - National Mapping Division: ~lood and other hazards. 573) 308-3802 Stream gauging and Flood I Monitoring Network Operation of a network of over !DOE-USGS 7,000 stream gauging stations Chief, Office of Surface Water, lhat provide data on the flood USGS: (703) 648-5303 ;haracteristics of rivers. Mapping Standards Support Expertise in mapping and digital DOI-USGS rlata standards to support the USGS - National Mapping Division: National Flood Insurance Program. (573) 308-3802 Soil Survey ~laintains soil surveys of counties USDA-NRCS ~r other areas to assist with NRCS - Deputy Chief for Soil Science and Resource ;arming, conservation, mitigation or Assessment: 'elated purposes. (202) 720-4630 Seismic mapping for U.S. ~lational Earthquake -{azards Reduction >rogram DOI-USGS USGS Earthquake Program Coordinator: (703) 648-6785 ~r~e~ Support DMA 2000 Hazard Mitigation Plan - Suffolk County, New York E-3 DRAFT - September 2007 Aquatic Ecosystem Restoration Beneficial Uses of Dredged Materials Wetlands Protection- Development Grants Clean Water Act Section 319 Grants Coastal Zone Management Program Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) State Administered Program Community Development Block Grant Entitlement Communities Program Direct support for carrying out aquatic ecosystem restoration 3rojects that will improve the quality )f the environment. Direct assistance for projects that 3rotect, restore, and create aquatic snd ecologically related habitats, ncluding wetlands, in connection Nith dredging an authorized :ederal navigation project. Grants to support the development snd enhancement of State and :dbal wetlands protection programs. Grants to States to implement 3on-point source programs, ncluding support for non-structural Natershed resource restoration ~ctivities. Grants for planning and mplementation of non-structural :oastal flood and hurricane hazard 'nitigation projects and coastal Netlands restoration. Grants to States to develop viable :ommunities (e.g., housing, a suitable living environment, ~xpanded economic opportunities) n non-entitled areas, for Iow- and *noderate.income persons. Grants to entitled cities and urban DOD-USACE Chief of Planning @ appropriate USACE Regional Office North Atlantic: (212) 264-7111 South Atlantic: (404) 331-4580 Great Lakes and Ohio River Chicago: (312) 886-5468 Cincinnati: (513) 684-3008 Mississippi Valley Division: (601) 634-7880 Northwestern Division Portland: (503) 808-3850 Omaha: (402) 697-2470 ~outhwestern Division: (214) 767-2314 outh Pacific Division: (415) 977-8171 Pacific Ocean Division: (808) 438-3850 DOD-USACE Same as above LIS Environmental Protection Agency ~EPA) EPA Wetlands Hotline: (800) 832-7828 Or EPA Headquarters, Office of Water Chief, Wetlands Strategies and State Programs: [202) 260-6045 EPA Office of Water Chief, Non-Point Source Control Branch: (202) 260-7088, 7100 Department of Commerce DOC National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration INOAA) National Ocean Service Office of Ocean and Coastal Resource Management Chief, Coastal Programs Division: 301) 713-3102 LIS Department of Housing and Urban Development [HUD) State CDBG Program Manager Or State and Small Cities Division, Office of Block Grant Assistance, HUD Headquarters: (202) 708-3587 HUD ;ounties to develop viable City and county applicants should call the Community :ommunities (e.g., decent housing, Planning and Development staff of their appropriate suitable living environment, IHUD field office. As an alternative, they may call the ~xpanded economic opportunities), IEntitlement Communities Division, Office of Block Grant 3rincipally for Iow- and moderate- ~Assietance, HUD Headquarters: ncome persons. 1(202) 708-1577, 3587 DMA 2000 Hazard Mitigation Plan - Suffolk County, New York E-4 DRAFT- September 2007 Emergency Watershed Protection Program Rural Development ~,ssistance ~- Utilities Rural Development ~,ssistance - Housing Project Impact: Building Disaster Resistant Communities Flood Mitigation Assistance Hazard Mitigation Grant Program >ublic Assistance Program Infrastructure) qational Flood Insurance >rogram -~OME Investments 3artnerships Program Provides technical and financial assistance for relief from imminent hazards in small watersheds, and lo reduce vulnerability of life and property in small watershed areas damaged by severe natural hazard events. Direct and guaranteed rural economic loans and business enterprise grants to address utilit, issues and development needs. Grants, loans, and.technical assistance in addressing rehabilitation, health and safety needs in primarily Iow-income rural areas. Declaration of major disaster necessary. Funding and technical assistance to communities and States to implement a sustained ,re-disaster mitigation program, Grants to States and communitie,~ Ior pre-disaster mitigation to help reduce or eliminate the long-term dsk of flood damage to structures insurable under the National Flood Insurance Program. Grants to States and =ommunities for implementing ~ong-term hazard mitigation measures following a major :lisaster declaration. P-rants to States and communities to repair damaged nfrastructure and public facilities, and help restore government or ~lovernment-related services. ~itigation funding is available for ~vork related to damaged :omponents of the eligible building 3r structure. Vlakes available flood insurance :o residents of communities that adopt and enforce minimum ~loodplain management 'equirements. 3rants to States, local ;Iovernment and consortia for )ermanent and transitional housing ')ncluding support for property 3cquisition and rehabilitation) for ow-income persons. JSDA - NRCS ~lational Office - (202) 690-0848 Natersheds and Wetlands Division: 202) 720-3042 JSDA-Rural Utilities Service (RUS) >rogram Support: (202) 720-1382 ~lorthern Regional Division: (202) 720-1402 --lectric Staff Division: (202) 720-1900 >ewer Supply Division: (202) 720-6436 ~USDA-Rural Housing Service (RHS) Community Programs: (202) 720-1502 Single Family Housing: (202) 720-3773 Multi Family Housing: (202) 720-5177 FEMA FEMA FEMA FEMA FEMA HUD Community Planning and Development, Grant Programs, Office of Affordable Housing, HOME Investment Partnership Programs: (202) 708-2685 (202) 708 0614 extension 4594 1-800-998-9999 DMA 2000 Hazard Mitigation Plan - Suffolk County, New York E-5 DRAFT - September 2007 :o Structural Rehabilitation ~f Damaged Flood Control /Vorks 3artners for Fish and A/ildlife to fund gaps in available assistance after disasters (including mitigation). and construction grants for non-structural alternatives to the structural rehabilitation of flood control works damaged in floods or coastal storms. $9 million FY99 Financial and technical assistance to private landowners interested in pursuing restoration projects affecting wetlands and riparian habitats. ~roject Modifications for Provides for ecosystem mprovement of the --nvironment restoration by modifying structure.~ and/or operations or water resources projects constructed by the USAGE, or restedng areas where a USAGE project contdbutec to the degradation of an area. tUD 7,ommunity Planning and Development Divisions in their 'espective HUD field offices or HUD Community ~lanning and Development: (202) 708-2605 )OD-USAGE -~mergency Management contact in respective USAGE ield office: ~orth Atlantic: (718)491-8735 ,~outh Atlantic: (404) 331-6795 .~reat Lakes and :)hio River: (513) 684--3086 vlississippi Valley: (601) 634-7304 ~orthwestern: (503) 808-3903 Southwestern: (214) 767-2425 . South Pacific: (415) 977-8054 =acificOcean: (808) 438-1673 :)epartment of Intedor (DOI) - Fish and Wildlife Service FWS) ~lational Coordinator, Ecological Services: (703) 358- .)201 list of State and Regional contacts is available from he National Coordinator upon request. :)OD-USACE .3hief of Planning @ appropriate USACE Regional Office ~lorth Atlantic: (212) 264-7111 South Atlantic: (404) 331-6270 ~reat Lakes and Ohio River Chicago: (312) 886-5468 Cincinnati: (513) 684-3008 vlississippi Valley Division: (601) 634-5762 ~lorthwestern Division Portland: (503) 808-3850 Omaha: (402) 697-2470 ~outhwestern Division: (214) 767-2310 ~outh Pacific Division: (415) 977-8171 >acific Ocean Division: (808) 438-8880 >ost-Disaster Economic Grant funding to assist with the 3epartment of Commerce (DOC) - Economic ~ecovery Grants and long-term economic recovery of :)evelopment Administration (EDA) Assistance communities, industries, and firms --DA Headquarters idversely impacted by disasters. :)isaster Recovery Coordinator: 1202) 482-6225 3ublic Housing =unding to public housing -IUD Vlodernization Reserve for igencies for modernization needs :)irector, Office of Capital Improvements: :)isasters and esulting from natural disasters 1202) 708-1640 --mergencies including elevation, flood proofing, md retrofit). ndian Housing Assistance 3roject grants and technical 3epartment of Intedor (DOI)-Bureau of Indian Affairs iHousing Improvement issistance to substantially 3rogram) ,~liminate sub-standard Indian :)ivision of Housing Assistance, Office of Tdbal Services: lousing. 1202) 208-5427 DMA 2000 Hazard Mitigation Plan - Suffolk County, New York E-6 DRAFT- September 2007 Land Protection Technical assistance for run-off retardation and soil erosion prevention to reduce hazards to life and property. USDA-NRCS Applicants should contact the National NRCS office: (202) 720-4527 North Amedcan Wetland Cost-share grants to stimulate DOI-FWS Conservation Fund public/private partnerships for the North American Waterfowl and Wetlands Office: (703) protection, restoration and 358-1784 management of wetland habitats. .and Acquisition ~.cquires or purchases DOI-FWS easements on high-quality lands Division of Realty, and waters for inclusion into the National Coordinator: National Wildlife Refuge System. (703) 358-1713 :ederal Land Transfer / =ederal Land to Parks ~rogram ~Vefiands Reserve Program Identifies, assesses, and transfers available Federal real ;)roperty for acquisition for State and local parks and recreation, such as open space. Financial and technical assistance to protect and restore ~vetlands through easements and restoration agreements. Transfers title of certain inventory Iarm properties owned by FSA to Federal and State agencies for =onservation purposes (including ~he restoration of wetlands and Iloodplain areas to reduce future Ilood potential) Transfers of Inventory Farm Properties to Federal and State Agencies for Conservation Purposes DOI-NPS General Services Administration Offices Fort Worth, TX: (817) 334-2331 Boston, MA: (617) 835-5700 Or Federal Lands to Parks Leader NPS National Office: (202) 565-1184 USDA-NRCS National Policy Coordinator NRCS Watersheds and Wefiands Division: (202) 720-3042 US Department of Agriculture (USDA) - Farm Service Agency (FCA) Farm Loan Programs National Office: (202) 720-3467, 1632 Financing and Loan Guarantees Physical Disaster Loans Disaster loans to non-farm, pdvate Small Business Administration (SBA) and Economic Injury sector owners of disaster damaged National Headquarters Disaster Loons aroperty for uninsured losses. Associate Administrator for Disaster Assistance: (202) Loans can be increased by up to 2(~ 205-6734 aercent for mitigation purposes. ,Conservation Contracts Debt reduction for delinquent and USDA-FSA 3on-delinquent borrowers in Farm Loan Programs ~=xchange for conservation FSA National Office: =ontracts placed on (202) 720-3467, 1632 ~=nvironmentally sensitive real or local FSA office 3roperty that secures FSA loans. ~,lean Water State Loans at actual or below-market EPA F~evolving Funds nterest rates to help build, repair, EPA Office of Water ~elocate, or replace wastewater State Revolving Fund Branch ~reatment plants. Branch Chief: (202) 260-7359 A list of Regional Offices is available upon request Section 108 Loan Loan guarantees to public entities HUD Guarantee Program for community and economic Community Planning and Development staff at :levelopment (including mitigation appropriate HUD field office, or the Section 108 Office in 'neasures). HUD Headquarters: (202) 708-1871 DMA 2000 Hazard Mitigation Plan - Suffolk County, New York E-7 DRAFT - September 2007 Section 504 Loans for Housing Section 502 Loan and Guaranteed Loan Prograrr Rural Development Assistance -- Utilities Farm Ownership Loans {epair loans, grants and :echnical assistance to very Iow- ncome senior homeowners living in 'ural areas to repair their homes )nd remove health and safety '~azards. =rovides loans, loan guarantees, md technical assistance to very ow and Iow-income applicants to )urchase, build, or rehabilitate a ~ome in a rural area. :)irect and guaranteed r.ural ;conomic loans and business ;nterprise grants to address utilit ssues and dev, elopment needs. )irect loans, guaranteed / nsured loans, and technical ~ssistance to farmers so that they nay develop, construct, improve, or 'epair farm homes, farms, and ~ervice buildings, and to make )ther necessary improvements. JS Department of Agriculture (USDA) - Rural Housing ~ervice (RHS) 3ontact local RHS Field C~fice, or :{HS Headquarters, ~)irector, Single Family Housing Direct Loan Division: ',202) 720-1474 LISDA-RHS ,3ontact the Local RHS Field Office, or the Director, Single Family Housing Guaranteed Loan Division, RHS: ',202) 720-1452 LISDA-Rural Utility Service (RUG) .3ontact Rural Development Field Offices, or RHS, 3eputy Administrator, Community Programs Division: ',202) 720-1490 LISDA-FSA :)irector, Farm Programs Loan Making Division, FSA: ',202) 720-1632 DMA 2000 Hazard Mitigation Plan - Suffolk County, New York E-8 DRAFT - September 2007 APPENDIX F: JURISDICTIONAL ANNEX TEMPLATE AND INSTRUCTIONS This appendix provides the jurisdictional annex and instructions provided to Suffolk County and participating jurisdictions. DMA 2000 Hazard Mitigation Plan - Suffolk County, New York F-1 DRAFT- September 2007 PARTNER VILLAGE/TOWN/COUNTY TEMPLATE Instructi°ns for completion The following are instructions for the completion of the Partner Village/Town/County annex template that will need to be completed for each partner Village, Town and the County in the Suffolk County Hazard Mitigation plan. The purpose of these instructions is to guide each Partner in the preparation of the information required for Disaster Mitigation Act (DMA) compliance. Each Partner should try to complete as much of the information as possible before attending the mandatory workshop on September 6, 2007. Technical assistance will be available to each planning partner at this workshop. Each planning partner will need to have the following to complete this template (all can be accessed on the Shared website in the General Folder): The draft Risk Assessment for Suffolk County (Hazard Profiles) The preliminary results from the Hazard Mitigation Plan Questionnaire ~/ The Catalog of Hazard Mitigation Initiatives Any questions on what is required or how to complete this document should be directed to: Jonathan Raser or Cynthia Tetra T~ Inc, 100 Enterprise Drive Rockaway, NJ 07866 973.~659-9996 e-a~il: ]onathamraser~ttemi. com or cynthia.bianeo~tte~com This template has been set up as a word document in a format that will be used in the final plan. Each Partner is asked to use this template with no other derivations or versions so that a uniform product will be completed for each partner. Please provide both a hard copy and digital copy of the completed template to Tetra Tech upon completion of the template workshop on 9/6/2007. Ifa Partner does not have "Word" capability, prepare the document in whatever format you do have and the planning team will convert it to the Word format. Instructions: Title Block: In the Title box, type in the complete official name of your Jurisdiction (i.e., Village of Bellport, Suffolk County, etc.). At this time, also change the name in the "header" box to coincide with this title. Hazard Mitigation Plan Point of Contact Please provide the name, title, mailing address, telephone number, fax number and e-mail address for the primary point of contact for your jurisdiction for the elements that pertain to your jurisdiction for this plan. This person would be that person responsible for monitoring, evaluating and updating the annex for your jurisdiction as outlined in this plan. In addition, it is required to designate an alternate point of contact. This would be the person to contact should the primary point of contact is not available, or no longer employed by the community. ...PAR TNER CITY~COUNT}' TEMPLATE INSTRUCTIONS lB.) Village/Town/County Profile[ Complete the population box. State the most current population figure for your community based on an official means of tracking (i.e., US Census). Indicate when this population was, "as of'. In this section please provide a profile of your community. Provide information specific to your community that was not provided in the risk assessment such as: ,/ Location within Suffolk County v Climate ,/ Date of Incorporation ,/ Growth Rate · / Brief history ,/ Development trends v~ Geographical area ,/ Governing body format [For example:I Location: The City of Arcata is located on California's redwood coast, approximately 760 miles north of Los Angeles and 275 miles north of San Francisco. The nearest seaport is Eureka, five miles south on Humboldt Bay. Arcata is the home of Humboldt State University and is situated between the communities of McKinleyville to the north and Blue Lake to the east. It sits at the intersection of US Highway 1 O] and State Route 299. Brief History: As the California gold rush brought goM fever to the interior mountains of northern California, the Arcata area was settled in the 1850s as a supply center for miners. As the gold rush died down, timber and fishing became the major resource based economy of the area. Arcata was incorporated in 1858 and by 1913 the Humboldt Teachers College, a predecessor to today's Humboldt State University was founded in Arcata. Recently, the presence of the college has come to shape Arcata's population into a young, liberal, and educated crowd. In 1981 Arcata developed the Arcata Marsh and Wildlife sanctuary, an innovative environmentally friendly, sewage treatment enhancement system. Its multiple uses include recreation, education, wildlife refitge along the Pacific Flyway, and wastewater treatment. Date qf Incorporation: 1858 Climate: Arcata's weather is typical of the Northern California coast, with mild http://arcatacitvhall.or~weather roads,htmlsummers and cool, wet winters. It rarely freezes in the winter and it is rarely hot in the summer. Annual average rainfall is over 40 inches, with 80% of that falling in the six-month period of November through April. The average year-round temperature is 59 degrees. Humidity averages between 72 and 87 percent. Prevailing winds are from the north, and average 5 mph. Governing body format: The City of Arcata is governed by a five-member City Council. The City consists of 6 departments: Finance, Environmental Services, Community Development, Public Works, Police and the City Manager's Office. The City has 13 Committees, Commissions and Task Forces, which report to the City Council. Growth/Development trends: Based on the data tracked by the California Department of Finance, Arcata has experienced a relatively fiat rate of growth. The overall population has increased only 3.4% since 2000 and has averaged O. 74% per year from 1990 to 2007. With this rate of growth, the anticipated development trends for Arcata are considered low to moderate, consisting of primarily residential development. The majority of recent development within the F-2 ...PARTNER CITY~COUNTY TEMPLATE INSTRUCTIONS CiO, of Arcata has been infill development. Residentially, there has been a focus on affordable housing and a push for more secondary mother-in-law units on properties. Another characteristic' of development is the adaptive use of former mill sites. California state law requires that ever), county and ciO, prepare and adopt a comprehensive long- range plan to serve as a guide for community development. The plan must consist of an integrated and internall, v consistent set of goals, policies, and implementation measures. In addition, the plan must focus on issues of the greatest concern to the communiO, and be nritten #~ a clear and concise manner. Cio~ actions, such as those relating to land use allocations, annexations, zoning, subdivision and design review, redevelopment, and capital improvements, must be consistent with such a plan The CiO, of Arcata adopted its general plan pursuant to this' state mandate in duly of 2000. Future growth and development within the Ci~. of Arcata will be managed as identified in its' general Plan. lc.) Natural Hazard Event History:I List in chronological order (most recent first) any natural hazard event that has occurred since 1970 that caused damage to your Community. Include the date of the event and the estimated dollar amount of damage it caused. Please refer to the summary of natural hazard events within Suffolk County included in the Draft Risk Assessment (Hazard Profiles). Sources of damage information could include:' · Preliminary damage estimates (PDA's) filed by your community to County and NYSEMO · Insurance claims data · Newspaper archives · Other plans/documents that deal with emergency management (i.e., safety elements, emergency response plans) Do not be afraid to make an estimate based on your interpretation of the risk assessment, and personal knowledge of past events. Rest assured that this information is not readily available at the local level, so estimations are completely acceptable. If you are making an estimate, indicate: "damages estimated at ". If you are not comfortable making an estimate, then just state that "the information is not available". ' Also under this section, indicate whether or not your community has any FEMA identified Repetitive Flood Loss properties. A repetitive Loss property is any property that has had 2 or more flood insurance claims paid in excess of $1000 in any rolling 10-year period since 1978. If you have identified RL properties, indicate the number (your technical assistance provider will be able to help you confirm this information). If you have none, indicate "none" in the box. Next, indicate the number (if any) of your Repetitive Loss structures have been mitigated. Mitigated for this exercise means, flood protection has been provided to the structure from the source of flood damage potential. Repetitive Flood Loss statistics are posted on the Shared website in the General Folder. Natural Hazard Risk/Vulnerability Risk Ranking:I Under this step, a ranking of risk will be performed as it pertains to your cormnunity. A county -wide risk ranking has been performed for the entire planning areas and is contained in the risk assessment chapter of volume 1 of the plan. However, each community will have differing degrees of risk exposure and vulnerability aside from the whole, and therefore will need to rank the degree of risk to each hazard as it pertains to them. This will allow for the appropriate selection and prioritization of initiatives that will reduce the highest levels of risk for each community. The exact same methodology that will be applied to F-3 ...PARTNER CIIT/COUND' TEMPLATE INSTRUCTIONS the county-wide risk ranking will be applied to each planning partner. This will assure consistency in the overall ranking of risk. This risk ranking exercise serves two purposes: To describe the probability of occurrence for each hazard and to describe the impact each would have on the people, property and economy of Suffolk County. Estimates of risk for Suffolk County were developed using methodologies promoted by FEMA's hazard mitigation planning guidance and generated by FEMA's HAZUS-MH risk assessment tool. This risk ranking exercise works under the following parameters: Impacts are evaluated with an emphasis on property. The primary purpose for this is that FEMA mitigation programs focus on loss reduction to improved property, critical facilities and critical infrastructure. This is not to say that FEMA is not concerned about life safety issues, because they are. However, Stafford Act mitigation programs focus on property because it is generally accepted that life safety initiatives are addressed in the preparedness and response components of FEMA and DHS Emergency Management programs. To be able to quantitatively rank risk, you must be able to generate measurable components to quantify. For improved property, this is fairly easy in that you apply an estimated damage function, to a determined value of property and you get a loss estimate. Since buildings don't voluntarily move, you can inventory buildings at risk based on their location to determine exposure. These approaches are measurable, quantifiable, and regionally consistent. The same can not be said for less tangible components such as people or economy. The reason we want to attempt to quantitatively rank risk is create a consistent platform that can be justified for all the partners in this planning effort. A more subjective approach eliminates consistency. Regional consistency is a primary objective for multi-jurisdictional planning effort. By having quantifiable results that have been generated using substantiated data, you are bett~r able to justify initiatives and their priorities. PROBAB~ITYOFOCCURRENCE The probability of occurrence of a hazard event provides an estimation of how often the event occurs. This is generally based on the past hazard events that have occurred in the area and the forecast of the event occurring in the future. This is done by assigning a probability factor, which is based on yearly values of occurrence. The numerical value assigned to each category will be used to determine the risk rating of each hazard. Table 1 lists the probability of occurrence for each hazard as it pertains to your community. This would be the occurrence of an event that caused property damage within your jurisdiction. These values were assigned No, Rare (low), Occasional (medium), and Frequent (High) occurrence: RATING FREQUENCY DEFINITION 0 None Hazard event that occurs less frequently than once in 1,000 years (>10-3/yr) / Hazard event is not likely to occur. 1 Rare Hazard event that occurs from once in 100 years to once in 1,000 years (10'2lyf to 10-3/yr). 2 Occasional Hazard event that occurs from once in 10 years to once in 100 years (lO'~/yr to 10-2/yr). F-4 ...PARTNER CITY~COUNTY TEMPLATE INSTRUCTIONS 3 Frequent Hazard event that occurs more frequently than once in 10 years (>10' ~/yr). For example: If your community has experienced 2 damaging floods in the last 5 years, the probability of occurrence is high for flooding and scores a 3 under this category. If your community has experienced damages from wildfire in an event 50 years ago, your probability of occurrence for wildfire is occasional, and scores a 2 under this category. TABLE 1. PROBABILITY OF HAZARDS Hazard Event Probability Numerical Value Coastal Erosion Drought Flooding (riverine, flash, coastal, urban flooding and elevated groundwater) Groundwater Contamination (natural) Hurricane (tropical cyclones, including tropical storms and tropical depressions) Nor'Easters (extra-tropical cyclones, including severe winter Iow-pressure systems) Severe Storms (windstorms, thunderstorms, hail, lightning and tornados) Severe Winter Storm (heavy snow, bliT. zardsl ice storms) Shallow Groundwater Wildfire Infestation (ALB, Lymes, etc.) IMPACT The impact of each hazard was divided into three categories: impacts on people, property or the economy. Tables 2, 3 and 4 summarize the identified impacts for each hazard. These categories were also assigned weighted values. Impact on people was given a weighted factor of 3, impact on property was given a · weight of 2 and impact on the economy was given a weighted factor of 1. For impact of people, the values were assigned based on the percentage of the total population of your jurisdiction that may be directly impacted by a hazard event. For the purposes of this exercise, "impacted means exposed. We are not attempting to quantify the impact for this step. If a person is exposed to a hazard because they live in a hazard zone, they will be impacted when that event occurs. The degree of F-5 ...PAR TNER CIIT/COUNTY TEMPLATE INSTRUCTIONS that impact will vary and is not measurable. Therefore, we will focus solely on exposure for this step. For this step, use the following thresholds to measure impact on people: · High = 30% or more of your developed land area is exposed to a hazard due to its extent and location. · Medium = 15% to 29% of your developed land area is exposed to a hazard due to its extent and location. · Low = 14% or less of your developed land area is exposed to a hazard due to its extent and location. For the purposes of this exercise, developed land area would be any portion of your community currently not in an open space type of use. It includes areas that are currently developed, or could be developed. For example, if30% or more of your population is exposed to a hazard, then the impact on people for that hazard is high. If 14% to 29% of your population is exposed to a hazard, then the impact is considered to be medium, and the impact is low if 14% or less of the population is exposed to the hazard. No impact would mean that there is no exposure to a hazard. For impact on property, the values represent the value of the property exposed to a hazard in comparison · to the total replacement cost value of property within your community. For this step, use the following ihresholds to measure economic impact: · High = Property exposure is 30% or more of the total Replacement Cost for your community · Medium = Property Exposure is 15% to 29% of the total replacement cost for your community. · Low = Property exposure 14% or less of the total replacement cost for your community. This component is solely looking at the replacement cost value of buildings exposed to a hazard, versus the total replacement cost of all buildings within your community. For the purpo~;es of this exercise, a building has been defined as: "an improvement to real property that has 4 walls, a roof, and a replacement cost value of $1000 or more. If the exposure value of property is between 15% and 29% of the total replacement cost value property value for your community, the impact on property is medium, and if the vulnerability is 14% or less of the total replacement cost value for your community, the impact on propgrty is low. No impact would mean that that there is no exposure to the hazard or that the impact of the hazard typically will not cause damage to property. For example, droughts do not damage buildings; therefore they have no impact on buildings. For the economic impact, the values represent the estimated loss would be from a major event of each hazard. Once again, this is a comparison with the total replacement cost for property within your community. This component is solely looking at economic impact in terms of damages to improved property. The premise here is that building stock that is damaged or destroyed impacts tourism at times and the tax base for local municipalities. Plus this component is measurable by providing a damage function to established building values. Other economic components such as loss of use, functional downtime and social economic factors are less measurable with a high degree of certainty, and therefore are not utilized in this ranking exercise. It should be noted that specific loss estimation were not generated for all hazards of concern in the risk assessment. This was due to the lack of information available to make such estimations. For those hazards where specific loss estimations have not been made, assign a low economic impact value. For this step, use the following thresholds to measure economic impact: · High = Loss estimate is 20% or more of the total Replacement Cost for your community ...PAR~ER CITY/COUN~ TEMPLATE INSTRUCTIONS · Medium = loss estimate is 10% to 19% of the total replacement cost for your cormnunity. · Low = Loss estimate is 9% or less of the total replacement cost for your community. For example, if the loss potential is 20% or more of the total replacement cost value for your community, the impact on property is high. if the loss potential between 10% and 19% of the total replacement cost value for your community, the impact on property is medium, and if the loss potential is 9% or less of the total replacement cost value for your community, the impact on property is low. No impact would mean that there is no exposure to the hazard, or that that the occurrence of the hazard would not cause measurable damages to improved property. A numerical value has been assigned for impact based on the following definitions: · High Impact (numerical value = 3) · Medium Impact (numerical value = 2 · Low Impact (Numerical value = 1) V-7 . ..P.4R TNER CITY/COUNTY TEMPL,4 TE INSTRUCTIONS TABLE 2. HAZARD IMPACT ON PEOPLE Hazard Event Impact Numerical Value Multiplied by weighted value of 3 Coastal Erosion Drought Flooding (riverine, flash, coastal, urban flooding) Groundwater Contamination (natural) Hurricane (tropical cyclones, including tropical storms and tropical depressions) Nor'Easters (extra-tropical cyclones, including severe winter Iow-prassure systems) Severe Storms (windstorms, thunderstorms, hail, lightning and. tornados) Severe Winter Storm (heavy snow, blizzards, ice storms) Shallow Groundwater Wildfire Infastation (ALB, Lymas, etc.) TABLE 3. HAZARD IMPACT ON PROPERTY Hazard Event Impact Numerical Value Multiplied by weighted value of 2 Coastal Erosion Drought Flooding (riverine, flash, coastal, urban flooding) Groundwater Contamination (natural) Hurricane (tropical cyclones, including tropical storms and tropical depressions) Nor'Easters (extra-tropical cyclones, including severe winter Iow-pressure systems) Severe Storms (windstorms, thunderstorms, hail, lightning and tornados) Severe Winter Storm (heavy snow, blizzards, ice storms) Shallow Groundwater Wildfire Infestation (ALB, Lymas, etc.) F-8 ...PARTNER CITY~COUNTY TEMPLATE INSTRUCTIONS TABLE 4. HAZARD IMPACT ON ECONOMY Multiplied by weighted Hazard Event Impact Numerical Value value of 1 Coastal Erosion Drought Flooding (riverine, flash, coastal, urban flooding) Groundwater Contamination (natural) Hurricane (tropical cyclones, including tropical storms and tropical depressions) Nor'Easters (extra-tropical cyclones, including severe winter Iow-pressure systems) Severe Storms (windstorms, thunderstorms, hal!, lightning and ternados) Severe Winter Storm (heavy snow, blizzards, ice storms) Shallow Groundwater Wildfire Infestation (ALB, Lymes, etc.) F-9 RISK RANKING The risk ranking for each hazard is determined by multiplying the assigned numerical value for probability by the sum of the weighted numerical values of impact on people; property and economy (see Table 5). The following equation shows the risk rating calculation: Risk Rating = Probability x Impact (people + property + economy) TABLE 5. RISK RATING Total= Hazard Event Probability Impact (Probability x Impact) Coastal Erosion Drought Flooding (riverine, flash, coastal, urban flooding) Groundwater Contamination (natural) Hurricane (tropical cyclones, including tropical storms and tropical depressions) Nor'Easters (extra-tropical cyclones, including severe winter Iow-pressure systems) Severe Storms (windstorms, thunderstorms, hail, lightning and tornados) Severe Winter Storm (heavy snow, blizzards, ice storms) Shallow Groundwater Wildfire Infestation (ALB, Lymes, etc.) Once table 5 has been completed above, complete the table under section D of your template. Please be advised that it is not the intent of this exercise to eliminate subjectivity based on your knowledge of the history of natural hazard events within your jurisdiction. If this risk ranking exercise generates results other that what you know based on substantiated data and documentation, you may alter this ranking based on this knowledge. If this is the case, please note this fact in the comments at the end of the template. Remember, one of the purposes of this exercise is to support your selection and prioritization of initiatives in your plan. If you identify an initiative with a high priority that mitigates the risk of a hazard you have ranked low, that project will not be competitive in the grant arena. · .. PA R TNER CITY/COUNIT TEMPLATE INSTRUCTIONS JE.) Capability AssessmentJ l.) Legal and regulatory capability Describe the legal authorities available to your community and/or enabling legislation at the state level affecting all types of planning and land management tools that can support hazard mitigation initiatives. Complete the table as indicated. Which of these regulatory tools does your community have available. If you do not have the regulatory tool as described, indicate as such. This may help you identify an initiative. For the purposes of this section, "prohibitions" and "higher jurisdictional authority" are defined as follows: Prohibitions: Are there any regulations or laws that may prohibit an initiative you have selected. Examples would be: floodway regulations, Endangered Species Act or Clean Water act regulations, etc. Higher Regulatory Authority: Are there regulations that may impact your initiative that are enforced or administered by another agency. For example; a state agency, special purpose district. Under the cotmnents section, please site the code or ordinance # and its data of adoption. 2.) Administrative and Technical Capability This section requires you to take inventory of the staff/personnel resources available to your community to help your community in hazard mitigation planning and implementation of specific mitigation actions. This information can be utilized in the preparation of the mitigation strategy for your community 3.) Financial Resources Identify what financial resources are available to your community to aid you in the implementation of possible mitigation initiatives. The Hazard Mitigation Grant Program and the Pre-disaster mitigation grant program are not listed here since it is assumed that the grant programs will be pursued since this plan is a prerequisite for these programs. "Accessible" means this is a resource that is accessible to your community, or there are limitations or prerequisites that may hinder your eligibility for this resource. 4.) Community Mitigation Related Classifications The classifications listed in table E.4 are related to your community's effectiveness in providing services that may impact your vulnerability to the natural hazards identified. If your community does not participate in a program, indicate N/A in the appropriate field. Access to the various classifications will be provided through technical assistance. F-11 ...P.4RTNER CITY/COUTVTY TEMPLATE INSTRUCTIONS IF.) Hazard Mitigation Action Plan:I Complete the table to include those initiatives your cmmnunity would like to pursue with this plan. Some important points to remember when completing this section: · / Know what is, and is not grant eligible under the Hazard Mitigation Grant Program (HMGP) and Pre-disaster Mitigation Grant Program (PDM). (See attachment "B "). It is key to remember, that listing HMGP or PDM as a potential funding source for an ineligible project will be a huge red flag once this plan goes through review. '/ Know the overall goals, objectives and guiding principles of the Suffolk County Natural Hazard Mitigation Plan. ,/ Identify projects where the benefit~ will exceed the costs. (see section G). · / Include any project that your community has committed to pursuing regardless of grant eligibility. ,/ Refer to the Mitigation Catalog for mitigation options you might want to consider that are hazard specific and consistent with the goals and objectives of the plan. A lot of detail is not needed in the description of the initiative. This will come when you apply for t~he project grant. Provide enough information to identify the project's scope and impact. However, each initiative will need to be described such that it clearly illustrates how the action will reduce the risk for the targeted hazard(s). For example: ,/ Address NFIP identified Repetitive Loss properties. Through targeted mitigation, acquire, relocate or retrofit the 5 repetitive loss structures within Anytown as funding opportunities become available. Non-structural, seismic retrofit of Arcata City Hall. Floodplain Property acquisition in Freylands subdivision. Assess and enhance the County flood warning capability by joining the NOAA "Storm Ready" program. Also, if you have projects that are not HMGP or PDM grant eligible, but do mitigate part or the entire hazard and may be eligible for other grant programs sponsored by other agencies, include them in this section. Also, a hazard specific project is not required for each hazard you have ranked in order to be eligible for an HMGP project grant after a "declared" disaster. In other words, if you have not identified an earthquake related project, and an earthquake occurs that causes damage within your community, you are not discounted from HMGP project grant eligibility. The key here is to identify at least I initiative for your highest ranked risk(s). Identify the hazard(s) the initiative will mitigate and illustrate who will be the lead in administering the project. This will most likely be your governing board. Identify funding source(s) for project. If it is a grant, include the funding source(s) for the cost share. Refer to your capability assessment to identify possible sources of funding. Indicate the time line as "short term" (1 to 5 years) or "long term" 5 years or greater. Identify by number the Suffolk County Hazard Mitigation plan objective(s) the project will meet. There is no need to list the goals since we made sure that our objectives would meet all goals through the selection process. These have been provided in the Steering Committee meeting minutes that were forwarded to you in the past. Technical assistance will be available to your community in completing this section during the technical assistance visit. F-12 ...PAR TNER CID'~COUNTY TEMPLATE INSTRUCTIONS IG.) Prioritization of Mitigation InitiativesI Complete the information in table G. The purpose of this exercise is to prioritize your initiatives in a matter such that meets the requirements of section 201.6 of 44CFR. A brief description of each category is as follows: · Initiative #: indicate the number of the initiative from Table F. · # of Objectives met: How many objectives will the initiative meet? · Benefits: Enter high, medium or low as defined below. · Costs: Enter high medium or low as defined below. If you know the estimated cost of a project because it is part of an existing/on-going program, indicate the amount. · Do benefits exceed the cost?: Enter yes or no. This is an anecdotal assessment. For example, a high benefit over a medium cost would = yes. · Is the project grant eligible? Refer to attachment A. · Can Project be funded under existing program budgets? Yes or no. in other words, is this initiative currently budgeted for? Or would it require a new budget authorization or funding from another source such as grants? · Priority: List the initiative priority as high, medium or low as defined below. Benefit/Cost Review This is not intended to be a detailed benefit/cost analysis that is required of HMGP/PDM project grants. This is a "review" to determine that the initiatives you have identified meet one of the primary objectives of the Disaster Mitigation Act. What this exercise hopes to achieve is to identify projects where the probable benefits will not exceed the probable costs of this project. When performing an anecdotal B/C review, use the following parameters to define the benefits and costs of.a proposed project as high, medium or low. Costs High: Would require an increase in revenue via an alternative source (i.e., bonds, grams, fee increases) to implement. Existing funding levels are not adequate to cover the costs of the proposed project. Medium: Could budget for under existing work-plan, but would require a reapportionment of the budget or a budget amendment, or the cost of the project would have to be spread over multiple years. Low: Possible to fund under existing budget. Project is part of, or can be part of an existing on- going program. Benefits High: Project will have an immediate impact on the reduction of risk exposure to life and property. F-13 ...PARTNER CITY/COUND' TEMPLATE INSTRUCTIONS Medium: Project will have a long-term impact on the reduction of risk exposure to life and property, or project will provide an immediate reduction in the risk exposure to property. Low: Long term benefits of the project are difficult to quantify in the short term. In using this approach, projects that result in positive benefits versus costs categorical ratios (i.e., high over high, high over medium, medium over low, etc.), will be considered cost beneficial and should be prioritized accordingly. Prioritize you projects as "high," "medium" or "low" priorities as defined below. Remember, it is not the intent of this exercise to be overly technical. It is a "review" exercise meant to provide additional information in identifying and prioritizing mitigation initiatives. Explanation of priorities High Priority: A project that meets multiple plan objectives, benefits exceeds cost, has funding secured under existing programs or authorizations, or is grant eligible, and can be completed in 1 to 5 years (i.e., short term project) once project is funded. Medium Priority: A project that meets at least 1 plan objective, benefits exceeds costs, funding has not been secured and would require a special funding authorization under existing programs, grant eligibility is questionable, and can be completed in 1 to 5 years once project is funded. Low Priority: Any project that will mitigate the risk of a hazard, benefits exceed costs, funding has not been secured, project is not grant eligible, and time line for completion is considered long term (5 to 10 years). IH.) Future needs to better understand risk/vulnerability~ In this section, identify any future studies, analyses, reports, or surveys your community needs to better understand its vulnerability to identified or currently unidentified risks. These could be needs based on federal or state agency andates such as EPA s B o-terrorism assessment requirement for Water District. Additional comments:[ Use this section to add any additional information pertinent to hazard mitigation and your klistrict not covered in this template. F-14 ...PARTNER CITY~COUNTY TEMPLATE INSIRUCTIONS Attachment ,,A, ] Hazard Mitigation Grant Program (HMGP) Pre-Disaster Mitigation Grant Program (PDM) FACT SHEET I. ~AZARDMITIGATION GRANT PROG~ ~ What is the Hazard Mitigation Grant Program? Authorized under Section 404 of the Stafford Act, the Hazard Mitigation Grant Program (HMGP) administered by the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) provides grants to States and local governments to implement long-term hazard mitigation measures after a major disaster declaration. The. purpose of the program is to reduce the loss of life and property due to natural disasters and to enable mitigation measures to be implemented during the immediate recovery from a disaster. Who is eligible to apply? Hazard Mitigation Grant Program funding is only available to applicants that reside within a Presidentially declared disaster area. Eligible applicants are · State and local governments · Indian tribes or other tribal organizations · Certain non-profit organizations What types of projects can be funded by the HMGP? HMGP funds may be used to fund projects that will reduce or eliminate the losses from future disasters. Projects must provide a long-term solution to a problem, for example, elevation of a home to reduce the risk of flood damages as opposed to buying sandbags and pumps to fight the flood. In addition, a project's potential savings must be more than the cost of implementing the project. Funds may be used to protect either public or private properly or to purchase properly that has been subjected to, or is in danger of, repetitive damage. Examples of projects include, but are not limited to: · Acquisition of real properly for willing sellers and demolition or relocation of buildings to convert the property to open space use · Retrofitting structures and facilities to minimize damages from high winds, ea~hquake, flood, wildfire, or other natural hazards · Elevation of flood prone structures · Development and initial implementation of vegetative management programs · Minor flood control projects that do not duplicate the flood prevention activities of other Federal agencies · Localized flood control projects, such as certain ring levees and floodwall systems, that are designed specifically to protect critical facilities · Post-disaster building cede related activities that support building cede officials during the reconstruction process What are the minimum project criteria? There are five issues you must consider when determining the eligibility of a proposed project. F-15 ...PA R TNER CITY~COUNTY ]'EMPLA TE INSTRUCTIONS · Does your projdct conform to your State's Hazard Mitigation Plan? · Does your project provide a beneficial impact on the disaster area? i.e. the State · Does your application meet the environmental requirements? · Does your project solve a problem independently? · Is your project cost-effective? 11. pRE-DISASTER MITIGATION GRANT PRO~ What is the Pre-Disaster Mitigation competitive grant program? The Pre-Disaster Mitigation (PDM) competitive grant program provides funds to State, Tribal, and local governments for pre-disaster mitigation planning and projects primarily addressing natural hazards. Cost- Effective pre-disaster mitigation activities reduce risk to life and property from natural hazard events before a natural disaster strikes, thus reducing overall risks to the population and structures, while also reducing reliance on funding from actual disaster declarations. Funds will be awarded on a competitive basis to successful Applicants for mitigation planning and project applications intended to make local governments more resistant to the pacts of future natural disasters. Who can apply for a PDM competitive grant? Eligible PDM competitive grant Applicants include State and Territorial emergency management agencies, or a similar office of the State, District of Columbia, U.S. Virgin Islands, Commonwealth of Puerto Rico, Guam, American Samoa, Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana Islands, and Federally-recognized Indian Tribal governments. Eligible Sub-applicants include State agencies; Federally-recognized Indian Tribal governments; and local governments (including State recognized Indian Tribal governments and Alaska native villages). Applicants can apply for PDM competitive grant funds directly to FEIMA, while Sub-applicants must apply for funds through an eligible Applicant. Private non-profit organizations are not eligible to apply for PDM but may ask the appropriate local government to submit an application for the proposed activity on their behalf.. What are eligible PDM projects? Multi-hazard mitigation projects must primarily focus on natural hazards but also may address hazards caused by non-natural forces. Funding is restricted to a maximum of $3M Federal share · per project. The following are eligible mitigation projects: Acquisition or relocation of hazard-prone property for conversion to open space in perpetuity; Structural and non-structural retrofitting of existing buildings and facilities (including designs and feasibility studies when included as part of the construction project) for wildfire, seismic, wind or flood hazards (e.g., elevation, flood proofing, storm shutters, humcane clips); Minor structural hazard control or protection projects that may include vegetation management, Stormwater management (e.g., culverts, floodgates, retention basins), or shoreline/landslide stabilization; and, Localized flood control projects, such as certain ring levees and floodwall systems, that are designed specifically to protect critical facilities and that do not constitute a section of a larger flood control system. Mitigation Project Requirements F-16 ...PARTNER CITY/COUNTY TEMPLATE INSTRUCTIONS Projects should be technically feasible (see Section XI1. Engineering Feasibility) and ready to implement. Engineering designs for projects must be included in the application to allow FEMA to assess the effectiveness and feasibility of the proposed project. The project cost estimate should complement the engineering design, including all anticipated costs. FEMA has several formats that it uses in cost estimating for projects. Additionally, other Federal agencies' approaches to project cost estimating can be used as long as the method provides for a complete and accurate estimate. FEMA can provide technical assistance on engineering documentation and cost estimation (see Section XIll. D. Engineering Feasibility}. Mitigation projects also must meet the following criteria: Be cost-effective and substantially reduce the risk of future damage, hardship, loss, or suffering resulth~g fi.om a major disaster, consistent with 44 CFR 206.434(c)(5) and related guidance, and have a Benefit-Cost Analysis that results in a benefit-cost ratio of 1.0 or greater (see Section X. Benefit-Cost Analysis). Mitigation projects with a benefit-cost ratio less than 1.0 will not be considered for the PDM competitive grant program; 2. Be in conformance with the current FEMA-approved State hazard mitigation plan; 3. Solve a problem independently or constitute a fi~nctional portion of a solution where there is assurance that the project as a whole will be completed, consistent with 44 CFR 206.434(b)(.4); 4. Be in conformance with 44 CFR Part 9, Floodplain Management and Protection of Wetlands, and 44 CFR Part 10, consistent with 44 CFR 206.434(c)(3); Not duplicate benefits available fi.om another source for the same purpose, including assistance that another Federal agency or program has the primary authority to provide (see Section VII.C. Duplication of Benefits and Programs); Be located in a community that is participating in the NFIP if they have been identified through the NFIP as having a Special Flood Hazard Area (a FHBM or FIRM has been issued). In addition, the community must not be on probation, suspended or withdrawn fi.om the NFlP; and, 7. Meet the requirements of Federal, State, and local laws. What are examples of Ineligible PDM Projects? The following mitigation projects are not eligible for the PDM program: Major flood control projects such as dikes, levees, floodwalls, seawalls, groins, jetties, dams, waterway channelization, beach nourishment or re-nourishment; Warning systems; Engineering designs that are not integral to a proposed project; Feasibility studies that are not integral to a proposed project; Drainage studies that are not integral to a proposed project; Generators that are not integral to a proposed project; Phased or partial projects; Flood studies or flood mapping; and, Response and communication equipment. F-17 APPENDIX G: GLOSSARY This resource defines terms that are used in or support the risk assessment document. These definitions were based on terms defined in documents included in the reference section, with modifications as appropriate to address the SC-specific definitions and requirements. 100-year flood - A flood that has a l-percent chance of being equaled or exceeded in any given year. This flood event is also referred to as the base flood. The term "100-year flood" can be misleading; it is not the flood that will occur once every 100 years. Rather, it is the flood elevation that has a 1- percent chance of being equaled or exceeded each year. Therefore, the 100-year flood could occur more than once in a relatively short period of time. The 100-year flood, which is the standard used by most federal and state agencies, is used by the National Floodlnsurance Program (NFIP) as the standard for floodplain management to determine the need for flood insurance. 500-year flood - A flood that has a 0.2opercent chance of being equaled or exceeded in any one year. Aggregate Data - Data gathered together across an area or region (for example, census tract or census block data). Annualized Loss - The estimated long-term value of losses from potential future hazard occurrences of a particular type in any given single year in a specified geographic area. In other words, the average annual loss that is likely to be incurred each year based on frequency of occurrence and loss estimates. Note that the loss in any given year can be substantially higher or lower than the estimated annualized loss. Annualized Loss Ratio - Represents the annualized loss estimate as a fraction of the r~placement value · of the local building inventory. This ratio is calculated using the following formula: Annualized Loss Ratio = Annualized Losses / Exposure at Risk. The annualized loss ratio gauges the relationship between average annualized loss and building value at risk. This ratio can be used as a measure of relative risk between hazards as well as across different geographic units Areal Locations of Hazardous Atmospheres (ALOHA) - A computer program that uses information provide by the user, along with physical property data from its chemical library, to predict how a hazardous gas cloud might disperse in the atmosphere after an accidental chemical release. ALOHA can predict rates of chemical release from broken gas pipes, leaking tanks, and evaporating puddles. ALOHA can model the dispersion of both neutrally buoyant and heavier-than-air gases. Asset - Any man-made or natural feature that has value, including but not limited to people, buildings, infrastructure (such as bridges, roads, and sewer and water systems), and lifelines (such as electricity and · communication resources or environmental, cultural, or recreational features like parks, dunes, wetlands, or landmarks). At-Risk - Exposure values that include the entire building inventory value in census blocks that lie within or border the inundation areas or any area potentially exposed to a hazard based on location. Base Flood - Flood that has a 1-percent probability of being equaled or exceeded in any given year. It is also known as the 100-year flood. Base Flood Elevation (BFE) - Elevation of the base flood in relation to a specified datum, such as the National Geodetic Vertical Datum of 1929. The BFE is used as the standard for the National Flood Insurance Program. DMA 2000 Hazard Mitigation Plan - Suffolk County, New York G-1 DRAFT - September 2007 Benefit - Net project outcomes, usually defined in monetary terms. Benefits may include direct and indirect effects. For the purposes of conducting a benefit-cost analysis of proposed mitigation measures, benefits are limited to specific, measurable, risk reduction' factors, including a reduction in expected property losses (building, content, and function) and protection of human life. Benefit-cost analysis (BCA) - Benefit-cost analysis is a systematic, quantitative method of comparing the projected benefits to projected costs of a project, or policy. It is used as a measure of cost effectiveness. Building - A structure that is walled and roofed, principally aboveground and permanently fixed to a site. The term includes a manufactured home on a permanent foundation on which the wheels and axles carry no weight. Building Codes - Regulations that set forth standards and requirements for construction, maintenance, operation, occupancy, use, or appearance of buildings, premises, and dwelling units. Building codes can include standards for structures to withstand natural disasters. Capability Assessment - An assessment that provides a description and analysis of a community or state's current capacity to address the threats associated with hazards. The capability assessment attempts to identify and evaluate existing policies, regulations, programs, and practices that positively or negatively affect the community or state's vulnerability to hazards or specific threats. Community Rating System (CRS) - CRS is a program that provides incentives for National Flood Insurance Program communities to complete activities that reduce flood hazard risk. When the community completes specific activities, the insurance premiums of these policyholders in communities are reduced. Comprehensive Plan - A document, also known as a "general plan", covering the entire geographic area of a community and expressing community goals and objectives. The plan lays out the vision, policies, and strategies for the future of the community, including all of the physical elements that will determine the community's future development. This plan can discuss the community's desired physical development, desired rate and quantity of growth, community character, transportation services, location of growth, and siting of public facilities and transportation. In most states, the comprehensive plan has no authority in and of itself, but serves as a guide for community decision-making. Critical Facility - Facilities that are critical to the health and welfare of the population and that are especially important following a hazard. CritiCal facilities include essential facilities, transportation systems, lifeline utility systems, high-potential loss facilities, and hazardous material facilities. As defined for the Village of Briarcliff Manor risk assessment, this category includes police stations, fire and/or EMS stations, major medical care facilities and emergency communications. Dam Failure - A partial or complete breach in a dam, which impacts its integrity. Dam failures occur for a number of reasons such as flash flooding, inadequate size of spillways, mechanical failure of valves and other equipment, rodent activities in earthen dams, freezing and thawing cycles, earthquakes, and intentional destruction. Debris - The scattered remains of assets broken or destroyed during the occurrence of a hazard. Debris caused by a wind or water hazard event can cause additional damage to other assets. Digital Elevation Model (DEM) - U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) Digital Elevation Model (DEM) data files that are digital representations of cartographic information in a raster form. DEMs include a sampled DMA 2000 Hazard Mitigation Plan - Suffolk County, New York G-2 DRAFT - September 2007 array of elevations for a number of ground positions at regularly spaced intervals. These digital cartographic/geographic data files are produced by USGS as part of the National Mapping Program. Displacement Time - After a hazard occurs, the average time (in days) that a building's occupants must operate from a te~nporary location while repairs are made to the original building due to damages resulting from the hazard. Disaster Mitigation Act of 2000 (DMA 2000) - Law that requires and rewards local and state pre- disaster planning, promotes sustainability as a strategy for disaster resistance, and is intended to integrate state and local planning with the aim of strengthening state-wide mitigation planning. Drought - A period of time without substantial rainfall that persists from one year to the next. Droughts can affect large areas and can impact areas that range from a few counties to several states. Along with decreasing water supplies for human consumption and use, droughts can kill crops, livestock, grazing land, edible plants, and even in severe cases, trees. Duration,- The length of time a hazard occurs. Earthquake - A sudden motion or trembling that is caused by a release of strain accumulated within or along the edge of earth's tectonic plates. Erosion - Wearing away of the land surface by detachment and movement of soil and rock fragments, during a flood or storm or over a period of years, through the action of wind, water, or other geologic processes. Erosion Hazard Area - Area anticipated to be lost to shoreline retreat over a given period of time. The projected inland extent of the area is measured by multiplying the average annual long-term recession rate by the number of years desired. Essential Facility - A facility that is important to ensure a full recovery of a community or state following the occurrence of a hazard. These facilities can include: government facilities, major employers, banks, schools, and certain commercial establishments (such as grocery stores, hardware stores, and gas stations). For the Village of Briarcliff Manor risk assessment, this category was defined to include schools, colleges, shelters, adult living and adult care facilities, medical facilities and health clinics, hospitals. Exposure - The number and dollar value of assets that are considered to be at risk during the occurrence of a specific hazard. Extent - The size of an area affected by a hazard or the occurrence of a hazard. Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) - Independent agency (now part of the Department of Homeland Security) created in 1978 to provide a single point of accountability for all federal activities related to disaster mitigation and emergency preparedness, response, and recovery. Fire Potential Index (FPI) - Developed by USGS and the U.S. Forest Service (USFS) to assess and map the potential for a fire hazard over broad, defined areas. Based on such geographic information, national policy makers and "on-the-ground" fire managers established priorities for prevention activities in the defined areas to reduce the risk of managed and wildfire ignition and spread. This index helps to shorten the time between fire ignition and initial attack by enabling fire managers to pre-allocate, target, and stage suppression forces to high-fire risk areas. DMA 2000 Hazard Mitigation Plan - Sulfolk County, New York G-3 DRAFT - September 2007 Flash Flood - A flood occurring With little or no warning where water levels rise at an extremely fast rate. Flood - A general and temporary condition of partial or complete inundation of normally dry land areas resulting from ( 1 ) the overflow of inland or tidal waters, (2) the unusual and rapid accumulation or runoff of surface waters from any source, or (3) mudflows or the sudden collapse of shoreline land. Flood Depth - Height of the flood water surface above the ground surface. Flood Elevation - Height of the water surface above an established datum (for example, the National Geodetic Vertical Datum of 1929, North American Vertical Datum of 1988, or mean sea level). Flood Hazard Area - Area shown to be inundated by a flood of a given magnitude on a map. Flood Information Tool (FIT) - Hazard U.S. Multi-Hazard (HAZUS-MH)- related tool designed to process and convert locally available flood information to data that can be.used by the HAZUS-MH Flood Module. The FIT is a system of instructions, tutorials and geographic information system (GIS) analysis scripts. When provided with user-supplied inputs (such as ground elevations, flood elevations, and floodplain boundary information), the FIT calculates flood depth and elevation for river and coastal flood hazards. Flood Insurance Rate Map (FIRM) - Map of a community, prepared by the FEMA that shows both the special flood hazard areas and the risk premium zones applicable to the community. Flood Insurance Study (FIS) - A study that provides an examination, evaluation, and determination of flood hazards and, if appropriate, corresponding water surface elevations in a community or commgnities. Flood Mitigation Assistance (FMA) Program - A program created as a part of the National Flood Insurance Report Act of 1994. FMA provides funding to assist communities and states in implementing actions that reduce or eliminate the long-term risk of flood damage to buildings, manufactured homes, and other NFIP insurance structures, with a focus on repetitive loss properties. Floodplain - Any land area, including a watercourse, susceptible to partial or complete inundation by water from any source. Flood Polygon - A geographic information system vector file outlining the area exposed to the flood hazard. HAZUS-MH generates this polygon at the end of the flood computations in order to analyze the inventory at risk. Frequency - A measure of how often events of a particular magnitude are expected to occur. Frequency describes how often a hazard of a specific magnitude, duration, and/or extent typically occurs, on average. Statistically, a hazard with a 100-year recurrence interval is expected to occur once every 100 years on average, and would have a 1-percent chance of happening in any given year. The reliability of this information varies depending on the kind of hazard being considered. Fujita Scale of Tornado Intensity - Rates tornadoes with numeric values from FO to F5 based on tornado wind speed and damage sustained. An FO (wind speed less than 73 mph) indicates minimal damage such as broken tree limbs or signs, while an F5 (wind speeds of 261 to 318 mpg) indicated severe damage sustained. DMA 2000 Hazard Mitigation Plan - Suffolk County, New York G-4 DRAFT - September 2007 Goals - General guidelines that explain what you want to achieve. They are usually broad policy-type statements, long term in nature, and represent global visions. Geographic Information Systems (GIS) - A computer software application that relates data regarding physical and other features on the earth to a database to be used for mapping and analysis. GIS Shape Files A type of GIS vector file developed by ESRI for their ArcView software. This type of file contains a table and a graphic. The records in the table are linked to corresponding objects in the graphic. Hailstorm - Storm associated with spherical balls of ice. Hail is a product of thunderstorms or intense showers. It is generally white and translucent, consisting of liquid or snow particles encased with layers of ice. Hail is formed within thc higher, reaches of a well-developed thunderstorm. When hailstones become too heavy to be caught in an updraft back into the clouds of the thunderstorm (hailstones can be caught in numerous updrafts adding a coating of ice to the original frozen droplet of rain each time), they fall as hail and a hailstorm ensues. }lazard - A source of potential danger or an adverse condition that can cause harm to people or cause property damage. For this risk assessment, priority hazards were identified and selected for the pilot project effort. A natural hazard is a hazard that occurs naturally (such as flood, wind, and earthquake). A man-made hazard is one that is caused by humans (for example, a terrorist act or a hazardous material spill). Hazards are of concern if they have the potential to harm people or property. }lazards of lnterest- A comprehensive listing of hazards that may affect an area. Hazards of Concern - Those hazards that have been analytically determined to pose significant risk in an area, and thus the focus of the particular mitigation plan for that area (a subset of the Hazards of Interest). Hazard Identification - The process of identifying hazards that threaten an area. Hazardous Material Facilities - Facilities housing industrial and hazardous materials, such as corrosives, explosives, flammable materials, radioactive materials, and toxins. Hazard Mitigation - Sustained actions taken to reduce or eliminate the long-term risk and effects that can result from the occurrence ora specific hazard. For example, building a retaining wall can protect an area from flooding. Hazard Mitigation Grant Program (HMGP) - Authorized under Section 404 of the Robert T. Stafford Disaster Relief and Emergency Assistance Act, HMGP is administered by FEMA and provides grants to states, tribes, and local governments to implement hazard mitigation actions after a major disaster declaration. The purpose of the program is to reduce the loss of life and property due to disasters and to enable mitigation activities to be implemented as a community recovers from a disaster. Hazard Mitigation Plan - A collaborative document in which hazards affecting the community are identified, vulnerability to hazards assessed, and consensus reached on how to minimize or eliminate the effects of these hazards. Hazard Profile - A description of the physical characteristics of a hazard, including a determination of various descriptors including magnitude, duration, frequency, probability, and extent. In most cases, a community can most easily use these descriptors when they are recorded and displayed as maps. DMA 2000 Hazard Mitigation Plan - Suffolk County, New York G-5 DRAFT - September 2007 Hazard Risk Gauge The graphic icon used during the initial planning process to convey the relative risk of a given hazard in the study area. The scale ranges from green indicating relatively low or no risk to red indicating severe risk. Hazard Analysis New York (HAZNY) - Developed by the American Red Cross and the New York State Emergency Management Office (NYSEMO) on October 2, 2003. It is an automated interactive spreadsheet that asks specific questions on potential hazards in a community and records and evaluates the responses to these questions. Hazards U.S. (HAZUS) - A GIS-based nationally standardized earthquake loss estimation tool developed by FEMA. HAZUS was replaced by HAZUS-MH (see below) in 2003. Hazards U.S. - Multi-Hazard OtAZUS-MH) - A GIS-based nationally standardized earthquake, flood, and wind loss estimation tool developed by FEMA. The purpose of this pilot project is to demonstrate and implement the use of HAZUS-MH to support risk assessments HAZUS-MH Risk Assessment Methodology - This analysis uses the HAZUS-MH modules (earthquake, wind--hurricane and flood) to analyze potential damages and losses. For this pilot project risk assessment, the flood and hurricane hazards were evaluated using this methodology. HAZUS-MH-Driven Risk Assessment Methodology - This analysis involves using inventory data in HAZUS-MH combined with knowledge such as (l) information about potentially exposed areas, (2) expected impacts, and (3) data regarding likelihood of occurrence for hazards. For this risk assessment, a HAZUS-Driven Risk Assessment Methodology could not be used to estimate losses associated with any hazards because of a lack of adequate data. However, the methodology was used, based on more limited data to estimate exposure for the dam failure, urban fire, fuel pipeline breach, and HazMat release hazards. High Potential Loss Facilities - Facilities that would have a high loss associated with them, such as nuclear power plants, dams, and military installations. Hurricane - An intense tropical cyclone, formed in the atmosphere over warm ocean areas, in which wind speeds reach 74 miles-per-hour or more and blow in a large spiral around a relatively calm center or "eye." Hurricanes develop over the North Atlantic Ocean, northeast Pacific Ocean, or the South Pacific Ocean (east of 160°E longitude). Hurricane circulation is counter-clockwise in the Northern Hemisphere . and clockwise in the Southern Hemisphere. Hydraulics - That branch of science, or of engineering, which addresses fluids (especially, water) in motiou, its action in rivers and canals, the works and machinery for conducting or raising it, its use as a prime mover, and other fluid-related areas. Hydrology - The science of dealing with the waters of the earth (for example, a flood discharge estimate is developed through conduct of a hydrologic study). Infrastructure - The public services of a community that have a direct impact on the quality of life. Infrastructure includes communication technology such as phone lines or Internet access, vital services such as public water supplies and sewer treatment facilities, transportation system (such as airports, heliports; highways, bridges, tunnels, roadbeds, overpasses, railways, bridges, rail yards, depots; and waterways, canals, locks, seaports, ferries, harbors, dry docks, piers and regional dams). Intensity - A measure of the effects of a hazard occurring at a particular place. DMA 2000 Hazard Mitigation Plan - Suffolk County, New York G-6 DRAFT - September 2007 Inventory - The assets identified in a s~udy region. It includes assets that can be lost when a disaster occurs and co~mnunity resources are at risk. Assets include people, buildings, transportation, and other valued cmmnunity resources. Landslide - Downward movement of a slope and materials under the force of gravity. Level I Analysis - A HAZUS-MH analysis that yields a rough estimate or preliminary analysis based on the nationwide default database included in HAZUS-MH. A Level 1 analysis is a great way to begin the risk assessment process and prioritize high-risk communities without collecting or using local data. Level 2 Analysis - A HAZUS-MH analysis that requires the input of additional or refined data and hazard maps that will produce more accurate risk and loss estimates. Assistance from local emergency management personnel, city planners, GIS professionals, and others may be necessary for this level of analysis. Level 3 Analysis - A HAZUS-MH analysis that yields the most accurate estimate of loss and typically requires the involvement of technical experts such as structural and geotechnical engineers who can modify loss parameters based on the specific conditions of a community. This level analysis will allow users to supply their own techniques to study special conditions such as dam breaks and tsunamis. Engineering and other expertise is needed at this level. Lifelines - Critical facilities that include utility systems (Potable water, wastewater, oil, natural gas, electric power facilities and communication systems) and transportation systems (airways, bridges, roads, tunnels and waterways). Loss Estimation - The process of assigning hazard-related damage and loss estimates to inventory, ififrastructure, lifelines, and population data. HAZUS-MH can estimate the economic and social loss f6r specific hazard occurrences. Loss estimation is essential to decision making at all levels of government and provides a basis for developing mitigation plans and policies. It also supports planning for emergency preparedness, response, and recovery. Lowest Floor - Under the NFIP, the lowest floor of the lowest enclosed area (including basement) of a structure. For the HAZUS-MH flood model, this information can be used to assist in assessing the damage to buildings. Magnitude - A measure of the strength of a hazard occurrence. The magnitude (also referred to as severity) of a given hazard occurrence is usually determined using technical measures specific to the hazard. For example, ranges of wind speeds are used to categorize tornados. Major Disaster Declarations - Post-disaster status requested by a state's governor wheh local and state resources are not sufficient to meet disaster needs. It is based on the damage assessment, and an agreement to commit state funds and resources to the long-term recovery. The event must be clearly more than the state or local government can handle alone. Mean Return Period (MRP) - The average period of time, in years, between occurrences of a particular hazard {equal to the inverse of the annual frequency of exceedance). Mitigation Actions - Specific actions that help you achieve your goals and objectives. Mitigation Goals - General guidelines that explain what you want to achieve. They are usually broad policy-type statements, long term, and represent global visions. DMA 2000 Ha~rd ~iiig'~iion Pia~: ~,,ff3i~ bo ,i¢ N~ Y3;~ G:7 DRAFT - September 2007 Mitigation Objectives - Strategies or implementation steps to attain the identified goals. Unlike goals, objectives are specific and measurable. Mitigation Plan - A plan that documents the process used for a systematic evaluation of the nature and extent of vulnerability to the effects of natural hazards typically present in a state or colmnunity. The plan includes a description of actions to minimize future vulnerability to hazards. This plan should be developed with local experts and significant cmmnunity involvement. National Flood Insurance Program (NF1P) - Federal program created by Congress in 1968 that makes flood insurance available in communities that enact minimum floodplain management regulations in 44 Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) §60.3. National Weather Service (N3VS) - Organization that prepares and issues flood, severe weather, and coastal storm warnings and can provide technical assistance to Federal and state entities in preparing weather and flood warning plans. Objectives - Objectives define strategies or implementation steps 'to attain the identified goals. Unlike goals, objectives are specific and measurable. Occupancy Classes - Categories of buildings used by HAZUS-MH (for example, commercial, residential, industrial, government, and "other"). Ordinance - A term for a law or regulation adopted by local government. Outflow - Associated with coastal hazards and follows water inundation creating ~trong currents that rip at structures and pound them with debris, and erode beaches and coastal structures. Parametric Model - A model relating to or including the evaluation of parameters. For example, HAZUS-MH uses parametric models that address different parameters for hazards such as earthquake, flood and wind (hurricane). F°r example, parameters considered for the earthquake hazard include soil type, peak ground acceleration, building construction type and other parameters. Pilot Project - In this case, a project sponsored by FEMA to support the implementation of studies conducted in coordination with communities. The project focuses on demonstrating the value and benefits of using HAZUS-MH for the risk assessment portion of all-hazard mitigation plans required by the Disaster Mitigation Act of 2000. The projects demonstrate the value of using HAZUS-MH to evaluate, and analyze natural hazards that a number of state and local communities might address in their planning process. The pilot projects demonstrate that HAZUS-MH can provide defensible cost and loss estimates using the engineering and scientific risk calculations included in the software. Planimetric - Maps that indicate only man-made features like buildings. Planning - The act or process of making or carrying out plans; the establishment of goals, policies and procedures for a social or economic unit. · Post-disaster mitigation - Mitigation actions taken after a disaster has occurred, usually during recovery and reconstruction. Presidential Disaster Declaration - A post-disaster status that puts into motion long-term federal recovery programs, some of which are matched by state programs, and designed to help disaster victims, businesses, and public entities in the areas of human services, public assistance (infrastructure support), DMA 2000 Hazard Mitigation Plan - Suffolk County, New York G-8 DRAFT - September 2007 and hazard mitigation. If declared, funding comes from the President's Disaster Relief Fund and disaster aid programs of other participating federal agencies. Preparedness - Actions that strengthen the capability of government, citizens, and communities to respond to disasters. Priority Hazards - Hazards considered most likely to impact a community based on frequency, severity, or other factors such as public perception. These are identified using available data and local knowledge. Provided Data - The databases included in the HAZUS-MH software that allow users to run a preliminary analysis without collecting or using local data. Probability - A statistical measure of the likelihood that a hazard event will occur. Public education and outreach programs - Any campaign to make the public more aware of hazard mitigation and mitigation programs, including hazard information centers, mailings, public meetings, etc. Q3 Flood Zone Data - FEMA flood data that delineate the 100o and 500-year flood boundaries. The Q3 Flood Data are digital representations of certain features of FEMA's Flood Insurance Rate Map (FIRM) product, intended for use with desktop mapping and GIS technology. Recovery - The actions taken by an individual or community after a catastrophic event to restore order and lifelines in the community. Regulation - Most states have granted local jurisdictions broad regulatory powers to enable the enactment and enforcement of ordinances that deal with public health, safety, and welfare. These include building codes, building inspections, zoning, floodplain and subdivision ordinances, and growth management initiatives. Recurrence Interval - The average time between the occurrences of hazardous events of similar size in a given location. This interval is based on the probability that the given event will be equaled or exceeded in any given year. Repetitive Loss Property - A property that is currently insured for which two or more National Flood Insurance Program losses (occurring more than ten days apart) of at least $1,000 each have been paid within any 1 O-year period since 1978. Replacement Value - The cost of rebuilding a structure. This cost is usually expressed in terms of cost per square foot and reflects the present-day cost of labor and materials to construct a building of a particular size, type and quality. Resolutions - Expressions of a governing body's opinion, will, or intention that can be executive or administrative in nature. Most planning documents must undergo a council resolution, which must be supported in an official vote by a majority of representatives to be adopted. Other methods of making a statement or announcement about a particular issue or topic include proclamations or declarations. Resources - Resources include the people, materials, technologies, money, etc., required to implement strategies or processes. The costs of these resources are often included in a budget. Risk - The estimated impact that a hazard would have on people, services, facilities, and structures in a community; the likelihood of a hazard occurring and resulting in an adverse condition that causes injury DMA 2000 Hazard Mitigation Plan - Sulfolk County, New York G-9 DRAFT - September 2007 or damage. Risk is often expressed in relative terms such as a high, moderate or low likelihood of sustaining damage above a particular threshold due to occurrence of a specific type of hazard. Risk also can be expressed in terms of potential monetary losses associated with the intensity of the hazard. Risk Assessment - A methodology used to assess potential exposure and estimated losses associated with priority hazards. The risk assessment process includes four steps: (1) identifying hazards, (2) profiling hazards, (3) conducting an inventory of assets, and (4) estimating losses. This pilot project report documents this process for selected hazards addressed as part of the pilot project. Risk Factors - Characteristics of a hazard that contribute to the severity of potential losses in the study area. Riverine - Of or produced by a river (for example, a riverine flood is one that is caused by a river overflowing its banks). Scale - A proportion used in determining a dimensional relationship; the ratio of the distance between two. points on a map and the actual distance between the two points on the earth's surface. Scour - Removal of soil or fill material by the flow of floodwaters. This term is frequently used to describe storm-induced, localized, conical erosion around pilings and other foundation supports where the obstruction of flow increases turbulence. Special Facility - A facility of special importance to a particular community. For the Village of Briarcliff Manor risk assessment, this category includes [TBD]. Special Flood Hazard Area (SFHA) - An area within a floodplain having a 1-percent or greater chanc~ of flood occurrence in any given year (that is, the 100-year or base flood zone); represented on FIRMS as darkly shaded areas with zone designations that include the letter "A" or "V." Stafford Act - The Robert T. Stafford Disaster Relief and Emergency Assistance Act, Public Law (PL) 100-107 was signed into law on November 23, 1988. This law amended the Disaster Relief Act of 1974, PL 93-288. The Stafford Act is the statutory authority for most Federal disaster response activities, especially as they pertain to FEMA and its programs. Stakeholder - Stakeholders are individuals or groups, including businesses, private organizations, and citizens, that will be affected in any way by an action or policy. State Hazard Mitigation Officer (SHMO) - The representative of state government who is the primary point of contact with FEMA, other state and Federal agencies, and local units of government in the planning and implementation of pre- and post-disaster mitigation activities. Structure - Something constructed (for example, a residential or commercial building). Study Area - The geographic unit for which data are collected and analyzed. A study area can be any combination of states, counties, cities, census tracts, or census blocks. The study area definition depends on the purpose of the loss study and in many cases will follow political boundaries or jurisdictions such as city limits. Substantial Damage - Damage of any origin sustained by a structure in a SFHA, for which the cost of restoring the structure to its pre-hazard event condition would equal or exceed 50 percent of its pre-hazard event market value. DMA 2000 Hazard Mitigation Plan - Suffolk County, New York G-10 DRAFT - September 2007 Topographic - Map that shows natural features and indicate the physical shape of the land using contour lines based on land elevation. These maps also can include man-made features (such as buildings and roads). Tornado - A violently rotating column of air extending from a thunderstorm to the ground. Transportation Systems - One of the lifeline system categories. This category includes: airways (airports, heliports, highways), bridges, tunnels, roadbeds, overpasses, transfer centers; railways (tracks, tunnels, bridges, rail yards, depots), and waterways (canals, locks, seaports, ferries, harbors, dry docks, piers). Utility Systems - One of the lifeline systems categories. This category includes potable water, wastewater, oil, natural gas, electric power facilities and communication systems. Vulnerability - Description of how expoged or susceptible an asset is to damage. This value depends on an asset's construction, contents, and the economic value of its functions. Like indirect damages, the vulnerability of one element of the community is often related to the 'vulnerability of another. For example, many businesses depend on uninterrupted electrical power. If an electric substation is flooded, it will affect not only the substation itself, but a number of businesses as well. Often, indirect affects can be much more widespread and damaging than direct affects. Vulnerability Assessment - Evaluation of the extent of injury and damage that may result from a hazard event of a given intensity in a given area. The vulnerability assessment should address impacts of hazard occurrences on the existing and furore built environment. Watershed - Area of land that drains down gradient (from areas of higher land to areas ~f lower land) to · the lowest point; a common drainage basin. The water moves through a network of drainage pathways, both underground and on the surface. Generally, these pathways converge into streams and rivers, which become progressively larger as the water moves downstream, eventually reaching an estuary, lake, or ocean. Wildfire - An uncontrolled fire spreading through vegetative fuels, exposing and possibly consuming structures. Windstorm - A storm characterized by high wind velocities. Zone - A geographical area shown on a National FIRM that reflects the severity or type of flooding in the area. Zoning Ordinance - Designation of allowable land use and intensities for a local jurisdiction. Zoning ordinances consist of two components: a zoning text and a zoning map. DMA 2000 Hazard Mitigation Plan - Suffolk County, New York G-11 DRAFT - September 2007