1
Minutes of the
Nevada Hazard Mitigation Planning Committee
11 February 2010
The Nevada Hazard Mitigation Planning Committee (NHMPC) met from 9:30 a.m. until 12:26 p.m. on
Thursday, February 11, 2010 at the County Chambers, Churchill County Administration Building,
Fallon, Nevada. These minutes and related documents are posted on the Web site for the committee
(http://www.nbmg.unr.edu/nhmpc/nhmpc.htm).
Attendees included:
Elizabeth Ashby, Nevada Division of Emergency Management (DEM), who held the proxy for Mike
Cyphers*, Henderson Emergency Management
Rick Diebold*, Las Vegas Fire Department
Mike Dondero*, NV Division of Forestry
Gary Dunn*, Carson City of Emergency Management
Steve Endacott, Fallon Emergency Management
Robert Fellows*, Carson City Public Works
Kim Groenewold*, Division of Water Resources
Brad Goetsch, Churchill County Manager
Terri Garside, Nevada Bureau of Mines and Geology, who held the proxy for Press Clewe*, Washoe
County resident
Karen Johnson, Division of Emergency Management
Eleanor Lockwood, Churchill County Floodplain Manager
Ron Lynn* Department of Development Services
Jonathan Price*, Nevada Bureau of Mines and Geology
Jim Reagan*, NV Energy
Andrew Trelease, Clark County Regional Flood Control District
Jim Walker*, Nevada Department of Transportation
* indicates a member of the Board of Directors.
Members of the Board of Directors of the Committee who were unable to attend include:
Joe Curtis*, Storey County Emergency Management
WELCOME AND INTRODUCTIONS
Jon Price chaired the meeting. Attendees introduced themselves. A quorum (a majority of the 13
members of the Board of Directors) was present. Jon welcomed Andrew Trelease to the Committee.
APPROVAL OF MINUTES FROM NOVEMBER 4TH AND 5TH, 2009
The minutes of the November 4th and 5th, 2009, meetings of the committee were unanimously approved.
Minutes of the committee are posted on the NHMPC Web site at
www.nbmg.unr.edu/nhmpc/nhmpc.htm.
Jon Price stated that the meeting will focus on Churchill County’s hazards.
CHURCHILL COUNTY PRESENTATION
Brad Goetsch gave a presentation on the demographics, government, geography, economic, and social
profile of Churchill County.
2
Churchill County has a population of approximately 27,000, with a large number of retirees and older
couples without children. The County hosts governments consisting of city, county, federal, and tribal.
The economy consists of agriculture, dairies, military, geothermal energy (7 active and additional 8 that
plan to open in the next few years), and recreation (Lahontan and Sand Mountain being the main
attractions).
All Fallon’s energy needs are met by green energy. They produce 323 megawatts of energy from
hydroelectric and geothermal, but use only 3% of what they produce.
Emergency response needs are usually due to weather and power outages. They have experienced some
flooding due to levee breaches and wildfires are a recurring threat. Other hazards of concern include
earthquakes, volcanoes (particularly Soda Lake), hazmat related to transportation and epidemics. Failure
of the sewer system is a major concern, because the sewage-treatment plant is higher in elevation than
the town of Fallon.
EARTHQUAKE HAZARD IN CHURCHILL COUNTY
Jon Price reported that earthquake faults occur throughout Nevada. The Nevada Bureau of Mines and
Geology recently released the map Quaternary Faults in Nevada (NBMG Open-File Report 09-9,
available at www.nbmg.unr.edu). The on-line version of the map is searchable, which allows for
searching all known potentially active faults in the area of a specific address. The map is to be used for
locating approximate fault locations, and should not be used as a definitive location of faults. If planning
to build in one of the zones shown on the map, it is wise to hire a geological consultant to precisely
locate faults and determine their frequency of movement. By using the information icon, and clicking on
a specific fault, the known information on the fault appears. There are also layers that show the aerial
photography and topography.
In 1852, there was a earthquake with an approximate magnitude of 7.3 that was reportedly felt as far
away as Sacramento. The area experienced a number of earthquakes larger than magnitude 6.0 in 1954,
the largest of which was a 7.1 on December 16th.
Immediately following a magnitude 5 earthquake, the Nevada Bureau of Mines and Geology uses
FEMA’s loss-estimation software, HAZUS, to run loss-estimation reports for the earthquake. The report
is then provided to the Division of Emergency Management to be used by them to identify areas that
may have experienced damage and may require emergency services.
Jon distributed Nevada Bureau of Mines and Geology’s Open-File Report 09-8, Estimated Losses from
Earthquakes near Nevada Communities, available at
www.nbmg.unr.edu/dox/of098/Scenarios/OpenFileReport09-8.pdf. The report contains HAZUS runs
for 38 communities in Nevada, essentially all towns with a population of at least 500. The report
contains runs for magnitudes 5, 5.5, 6, 6.5, and 7 earthquakes. The runs were compiled using a fault on
the Quaternary fault map that is closest to the center of the community. The fault depth is run at 10 km
(the average depth of earthquakes in the Great Basin). The report shows that Fallon is six times more
likely to experience a magnitude 6.0 earthquake than Wells, which actually had such an earthquake on
21 February 2008.
HAZUS is an excellent tool that city managers, emergency managers, and planners should use in hazard
mitigation and planning.
3
Jon’s PowerPoint presentation on “Earthquake Hazards in Churchill County” is available online at
www.nbmg.unr.edu/EQ/earthquakes.htm.
FLOOD HAZARD IN CHURCHILL COUNTY
Steve Endacott reported that Fallon’s water is delivered by the Carson River and diverted to Lahontan
Reservoir, where it is stored. The Carson River and diversion canal are managed by the Bureau of
Reclamation (BoR). The BoR takes the stand that the water diversion to Lahontan Reservoir is
considered an irrigation project and not a flood control project. During times of high water flow, and
potential flooding, Fallon does not control the flow of water because it is managed by the BoR.
Flooding in the town of Fallon can sometimes be avoided if Lahontan Reservoir isn’t full, or if the water
can be diverted to farmland or the Fallon Naval Air Station bombing ranges.
Eleanor Lockwood reported that Churchill County is currently using LIDAR (Light Detection and
Ranging, an optical remote sensing technology that is used to create precise topographic maps) to map
the low-lying areas of Fallon so they can potentially predict where flood waters are likely to go. The
mapping will be used in the planning of future housing developments, in an effort to prevent building in
flood-prone areas.
Steve Endacott reported that, in the event of failure of the Lahontan dam, they expect to issue a five to
seven-hour warning. They hope that the warning will provide enough time for evacuations of the areas
in danger of flooding.
NATIONAL FLOOD INSURANCE PROGRAM BASICS
Kim Groenewold discussed general aspects of flood hazards in Nevada. She reported that Nevada’s
watersheds drain internally, with the headwaters coming from bordering states; with the exception of the
Humboldt basin.
The water storage facilities are for agriculture use and not for flood water storage.
Flooding in Nevada causes a lot of damage to property and infrastructure and occasionally some loss of
life.
The National Flood Insurance Program (NFIP) is a federal program designed to provide insurance to
property owners. It is available only in NFIP-participating communities. Currently, only Esmeralda
County and Lovelock do not participate in the NFIP.
Flood insurance rates vary by flood zones delineated on Flood Insurance Rate Maps. Insurance is
mandatory for all federally-backed loans in high-risk flood hazard zones. Flood insurance covers all
losses and is not a loan. It covers damage to two or more adjacent properties from any flooding source.
The following grant programs are available:
• FMA (Flood Mitigation Assistance), Repetitive Flood Claims (RFC), and Severe Repetitive Loss
(SRL) grants are designed to reduce claims against NFIP; must address NFIP insured properties;
and mitigated properties must maintain flood insurance in perpetuity.
• Pre-Disaster Mitigation (PDM) and Hazard Mitigation Grant Program (HMGP) grants Jurisdiction must participate in NFIP if project is located in a high-hazard flood zone
2011 UNIFIED HAZARD MITIGATION GRANT CYCLE INFORMATION
4
Elizabeth Ashby reported that Nevada has received $3,655,092 in pre-disaster mitigation (PDM) funding
for the period of 2005-2009.
Elizabeth gave a report on the status of the following funded projects (see attached):
Hazard Mitigation Grant Program (HMGP)
• HMGP1540, Waterfall Fire funding;
• HMGP 1583, S. Nevada Floods;
• HMGP 1629, N. NV Flood;
• HMGP 1738, Fernley Floods;
PDM (Pre-Disaster Mitigation) Grant Program:
• PDM 04/05, HAZUS Date Base Update;
• PDM 06, Elko Band Council Plan;
• PDM 07, awards for plans for Storey, Esmeralda, and Washoe Counties and the Henderson Sewer
project;
• PDM 08, Sky Tavern Wildfire water storage tank, Clark County Mitigation Plan Update; and
• PDM 09, Funding requests from the Carson City Fire Department, Douglas County Emergency
Management, DEM, and Washoe County Emergency Management.
• PDM 10, the application period will open in early June 2010
FEMA is working on a better, more stringent definition of “hazard mitigation.”
FEMA is also reviewing the match requirements. Currently, the grants require a 25% non-federal:75%
federal ratio. Communities are having difficulty meeting the requirements during this time of economic
hardship.
States petitioned FEMA to consider changing the frequency of state hazard mitigation plan updates from
3 to 5 years.
Elizabeth distributed a leaflet on the “Unified Hazard Mitigation Assistance Program in Nevada” (see
attached).
UPDATES TO THE STATE HAZARD MITIGATION PLAN
Jim Walker reported that the Planning Subcommittee is attempting to keep the State’s Hazard Mitigation
Plan as current as possible, in an attempt to have it ready for submission when it is up for renewal in
November.
In order for the State to receive funding from FEMA for Presidentially-declared disasters, the State must
have an approved Hazard Mitigation Plan.
In the next few months, the Subcommittee will be working on completing the Hazard Analysis Section,
then complete the Risk Assessment Section. The Plan Maintenance Section will be completed
immediately before submission to FEMA.
Currently, the update to the Plan is 35% complete.
5
Anyone is welcome to participate in the plan0updating process. For those interested in attending the
Planning Subcommittee meeting, the next meeting is April 26, 2010 at the Division of Emergency
Management in Carson City.
Jon Price gave an update on the progress on making hazard mitigation information more accessible via
the Web. With possible FEMA support, the Nevada Bureau of mines and Geology is looking into
putting wildfire hazard maps, flood insurance maps, and earthquake hazard maps up on the NHMPC
Web site.
The Nevada Bureau of Mines and Geology is working with the Nevada Public Insurance Pool to compile
a list of URM buildings.
ANNOUNCEMENTS OF FUTURE MEETINGS
Thursday, May 27, 2010, in Caliente
Thursday, August 26, 2009, in Lovelock
Tuesday, November 16, 2009, in Pahrump
Thursday, November 18, 2010, in Dayton or Yerington
PUBLIC COMMENTS
No comments received.
REVIEW OF ACTION ITEMS
No action items.
ADJOURN
The meeting adjourned at 12:26 p.m.
Respectfully submitted by Terri Garside, February 19, 2010
Nevada Hazard Mitigation Planning Committee
c/o Nevada Bureau of Mines and Geology
University of Nevada, Reno/MS 178
Reno, NV 89557-0178
775-784-4415
1 of 6
DIVISION OF EMERGENCY MANAGEMENT
FEMA-1540-DR-NV
Hazard Mitigaiton Grant Program
DISTRIBUTION
Available Funding
12-Month Lock-In
State Management Costs
5% Initiative Public Awareness
7% Planning Project
Regular Projects
Proposals
Requesting Entity
Federal Award
$
$
$
$
$
Expended
726,541.00
226,808.97
36,327.00
50,858.00
412,547.03
$
$
50,352.00 Elko Co.
413,053.03 SPWB & State Parks
Balance
Status as of:
State Parks
$
87,202.03
$
87,202.03
$
-
Closing site visit scheduled for 7 Aug 09
Elko County
$
50,352.00
$
50,352.00
$
-
CLOSED
SPWB
$
325,851.00
$
325,851.00
$
-
The request for closure is pending at FEMA Region IX.
Public Awareness
Total
$
$
36,327.00
499,732.03
$
$
36,309.92
499,714.95
$
$
17.08
17.08
UNR
$
42,493.20
40,236.62
$
2,256.58
DEM
$
184,315.77
80,943.97
$
103,371.80
$
226,808.97
121,180.59
$
105,628.38
$
726,541.00
620,895.54
$
105,645.46
CLOSED
State Management Costs
Subtotal
Total
$
$
C:\Documents and Settings\tgarside\Local Settings\Temporary Internet Files\Content.Outlook\CV2Q67B5\Grant Report 1 Feb 2010.xls
-
1-Feb-10
2 of 6
FEMA-1583-DR-NV
Hazard Mitigation Grant Program
DISTRIBUTION
Available Funding
12-Month Lock-In
$
5% Initiative
7% Planning Project
Regular Projects
Proposals
Requesting Entity
$
$
$
Federal Award
Allowable
26,676.00
37,346.00
469,497.00
533,519.00
Allocated
$
$
$
Expended
25,851.00 State Parks
37,346.00 UNR Risk Ass.
469,497.00 SPWB
Balance
Difference
$
825.00
$
$
825.00
Status as of:
1-Feb-10
State Parks
$
25,851.00
$
25,851.00
$
-
CLOSED
SPWB
$
469,497.00
$
469,497.00
$
-
The request for closure is pending at FEMA Region IX.
UNR Risk Assessmt
Total
$
$
37,346.00
532,694.00
$
$
37,346.00
532,694.00
$
$
-
Last reimbursement in process
State Management Costs
$
825.00
795.71
$
359.18
$
533,519.00
533,489.71
$
359.18
Total
$
C:\Documents and Settings\tgarside\Local Settings\Temporary Internet Files\Content.Outlook\CV2Q67B5\Grant Report 1 Feb 2010.xls
3 of 6
FEMA-1629-DR-NV
Hazard Mitigation Grant Program
Proposal deadline:
DISTRIBUTION
23-Aug-06
$625,497.00
Allowable
5% Initiative
7% Planning Project
Regular Projects
$31,274.85
$43,784.79
$550,437.36
Proposals 5% Initiative
Requesting Entity
Federal Award
Sparks
Expended
Balance
Status as of:
1-Feb-10
$25,125.00
$22,872.00
$2,253.00 Moved to Management Costs
$45,675.00
$45,096.00
$444,017.00
$33,487.99
$410,529.01 Closed - $288,024 Transferred to Mgmt costs
$10,350.00
$127,330.00 Pending - NDOW approval of project design/NEPA review OK
Proposals Planning
State Plan Update
$579.00
Proposals Regular Projects
Washoe Co School
Reno- Lawton Interceptor
$
137,680.00
Total Requested
$
652,497.00
$
$
$
150,364.63
45,478.73
96,686.00
$
$
292,529.36
501,009.36
$
$
178,028.96
Not committed in Mgmt costs
State Management Costs
UNR - NHMPC support
UNR - Planning Sub. Support
DEM
Subtotal
Total Obligated
$
111,805.99
$
540,691.01
7,948.60
$
$
$
150,364.63
45,478.73
88,737.40
7,948.60
$
284,580.76
C:\Documents and Settings\tgarside\Local Settings\Temporary Internet Files\Content.Outlook\CV2Q67B5\Grant Report 1 Feb 2010.xls
4 of 6
Hazard Mitigation Grant Program
FEMA-1738-DR-NV
Proposal deadline:
draft DISTRIBUTION
12 MONTH LOCK IN AMOUNTS
$475,538.00
Allowable
5% Initiative
7% Planning Project
Regular Projects
$23,776.90
$33,287.66
$404,445.44
State Management
$23,253.81
$14,028.00
Proposals 5% Initiative
Requesting Entity
URM inventory - NBMG
Federal Grant
Expended
Balance
$23,776.90
$23,776.90
$33,287.66
$33,287.66
Status as of:
Award in the mail for final signatures
Proposals Planning
Lyon County Plan I
In process
Proposals Regular Projects
Lyon County Plan II
$14,028.00
$
-
$14,028.00
City of Reno Dant Wash
$409,300.00
$
-
$409,300.00
$4,854.56 Necessary reduction
SPWB Ely Camp
$418,473.00
$
-
$418,473.00
$14,027.56 Necessary reduction
$841,801.00
Total Requested
$841,801.00
$0.00
State Management Costs
$23,253.81
1,020.76
$
22,233.05
C:\Documents and Settings\tgarside\Local Settings\Temporary Internet Files\Content.Outlook\CV2Q67B5\Grant Report 1 Feb 2010.xls
1-Feb-10
In Process
5 of 6
Pre-Disaster Mitigation Grants
DIVISION OF EMERGENCY MANAGEMENT
2004-2005
Requesting Entity
UNR-BMG
$
Federal Grant
60,063.50
$
Expended
60,063.50
Balance
$
-
Status as of:
Last reimbursement in process -ready for closure
1-Feb-10
2006
Requesting Entity
Federal Grant
Elko Band Council
Expended
29,115.00
Balance
14,525.88
Status as of:
1-Feb-10
14,589.12 FEMA requested revisions to submitted plan- in process
2007
Requesting Entity
Storey County Plan
Esmeralda Co. Plan
Washoe Co. Plan
Henderson Sewer
Subtotal
Management Costs (10% of
federal funds received)
Total
$
$
$
$
Federal Grant
26,377.50
24,949.50
38,406.75
377,853.00
$
467,586.75
$
77,591.14
$
460,701.89
$
46,758.68
$
42,910.41
$
3,848.27
$
514,345.43
$
120,501.55
$
464,550.16
$
$
Federal Grant
464,081.50
56,985.42
$
$
Expended
-
$
$
$
521,066.92
$
52,106.69
$
-
$
$
573,173.61
$
Expended
17,563.68
24,725.32
35,302.14
0.00
$
$
$
$
Balance
Status as of:
26,377.50 Final editions
18,064.64 Final editions
38,406.75 Update to mitigation strategy completed; 2/3 done
377,853.00 In process
1-Feb-10
2008
Requesting Entity
Reno - Sky Tavern Wildfire
Clark Co. Mit Plan update
Subtotal
Management Costs (10% of
federal funds received)
Total
Balance
Status as of:
464,081.50 Pending approval of NEPA review at FEMA
56,985.42 Awarded
52,106.69
C:\Documents and Settings\tgarside\Local Settings\Temporary Internet Files\Content.Outlook\CV2Q67B5\Grant Report 1 Feb 2010.xls
1-Feb-10
6 of 6
2009 - Pending
Requesting Entity
Douglas County Emerg. Mgmt.
Douglas County Emerg. Mgmt.
Subtotal
Management Costs (10% of
federal funds received)
Total
$
$
Federal Grant
482,580.00
488,325.00
$
970,905.00
$
97,090.50
$
1,067,995.50
$
$
Expended
-
$
$
Balance
Status as of:
1-Feb-10
482,580.00 FEMA requested additional information prior to NEPA review
488,325.00 FEMA requested additional information prior to NEPA review
2010 - OPEN and in process
12 notices of intent
C:\Documents and Settings\tgarside\Local Settings\Temporary Internet Files\Content.Outlook\CV2Q67B5\Grant Report 1 Feb 2010.xls
State Contacts
Eligible Activities by Program
HMGP & PDM
Elizabeth Ashby
NV Division of Emergency Management (DEM)
(775) 687-0314 - [email protected]
FMA, RFC, & SRL
Kim Groenewold
NV Division of Water Resources (NDWR)
(775) 684-2884 - [email protected]
Dates & Deadlines
March 2010
Nevada UHMA Training –
locations and dates to be
announced
Early June 2010
FEMA application period
opens
Jun 10, 2010
Notice of Interest forms
due to DEM or NDWR
Jun 24, 2010
Establish eGrants access
Aug 5, 2010
Scope of Work & Benefit
Cost Analysis in eGrants
Aug 26, 2010
NHMPC meeting – Initial
review and comments
Oct 28, 2010
Full Application Package
with backup
documentation in eGrants
Nov 16, 2010
Southern Nevada
NHMPC meeting – final
review
Nov 18, 2010
Northern Nevada
NHMPC meeting – final
review and ranking
Nov 29, 2010
Final submission of
application in eGrants
Early December
2010
State submits applications
to FEMA, application
period closes
in Nevada
Hazard Mitigation
Assistance (HMA)
HMA under FEMA’s Mitigation
Directorate unifies the pre-disaster
grant programs to better support the
overall goal of reducing the loss of life
and property due to natural hazards.
Post-Disaster Hazard Mitigation
Grant Program (HMGP)
Repetitive Flood Claims (RFC)
Program
The Hazard Mitigation Grant Program (HMGP)
provides grants to States and local governments to
implement long-term hazard mitigation measures after a
major disaster declaration. Authorized under Section
404 of the Stafford Act and administered by FEMA,
HMGP was created to reduce the loss of life and
property due to natural disasters. The program enables
mitigation measures to be implemented during the
immediate recovery from a disaster.
The RFC grant program was created with the goal of
reducing flood damages to individual properties for
which one or more claim payments for losses have been
made under flood insurance coverage and that will
result in the greatest savings to the NFIF (National
Flood Insurance Fund) in the shortest period of time.
http://www.fema.gov/government/grant/hmgp/
Pre-Disaster Mitigation (PDM)
Program
The PDM program provides funds to States, Territories,
Federally recognized Indian Tribal governments, and
communities for hazard mitigation planning and the
implementation of mitigation projects prior to a disaster
event. The goal of the PDM Program is to reduce
overall risks to the population and structures, while also
reducing reliance on funding from actual disaster
declarations.
The RFC program is subject to the availability of
appropriation funding. RFC grants will be awarded on a
national basis without reference to State allocations,
quotas, or other formula-based allocations of funds.
The funding source for the RFC grant program is the
NFIF.
www.fema.gov/government/grant/rfc/index.shtm
Severe Repetitive Loss (SRL)
Program
The SRL program provides funding to reduce or
eliminate the long-term risk of flood damage to severe
repetitive residential structures insured under the NFIP.
The definition of severe repetitive loss as applied to this
program is a residential property that is covered under
an NFIP flood insurance policy, and:
www.fema.gov/government/grant/pdm/index.shtm
The HMA programs: Pre-Disaster Mitigation (PDM),
Flood Mitigation Assistance (FMA), Repetitive Flood
Claims (RFC), and Severe Repetitive Loss (SRL) provide
mitigation grants annually on an allocation and
competitive basis to State, Territory, Tribal, and local
entities. The new unified process achieves economies of
scale and portfolio management for Federal, State, and
local officials by aligning program requirements in a
unified HMA guidance document. The intent of this
alignment is to enhance the quality and efficiency of
grant awards.
In addition, under the unified process, eligible
subapplications submitted but not funded under a specific
grant program may also be considered for another
mitigation grant program(s).
Flood Mitigation Assistance
(FMA) Program
The FMA grant program provides funding to States,
federally recognized Indian Tribal governments, and
communities so that cost-effective measures can be
taken to reduce or eliminate the long-term risk of flood
damage to buildings, manufactured homes, and other
structures insured under the National Flood Insurance
Program (NFIP).The long-term goal of FMA is to
reduce or eliminate claims under the NFIP through
mitigation activities.
www.fema.gov/government/grant/fma/index.shtm
(a) That has at least four NFIP claim payments
(including building and contents) over $5,000 each,
and the cumulative amount of such claims
payments exceeds $20,000; or
(b) For which at least two separate claims payments
(building payments only) have been made with the
cumulative amount of the building portion of such
claims exceeding the market value of the building.
For both (a) and (b) above, at least two of the referenced
claims must have occurred within any 1-year period,
and must be greater than 10 days apart. The long-term
goal of the SRL program is to reduce or eliminate
claims under the NFIP through project activities that
will result in the greatest savings to the NFIF in the
shortest period of time.
www.fema.gov/government/grant/srl/index.shtm