1
Minutes of the
Nevada Hazard Mitigation Planning Committee
10 February 2011
The Nevada Hazard Mitigation Planning Committee (NHMPC) met from 9:30 a.m. until 3:03 p.m. on
Thursday, February 10, 2011 at the Lyon County Administrative Building, 27 South Main Street,
Yerington, 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:
Michael Anderson, Division of Water Resources
Elizabeth Ashby, Nevada Division of Emergency Management (DEM)
Mike Cyphers*, Henderson Emergency Management
Glen Daily, City of Reno, Public Works
Kim Davis*, Division of Water Resources
Rick Diebold*, City of Las Vegas, Office of Emergency Management
Mike Dondero*, NV Division of Forestry
Gary Dunn*, Carson City of Emergency Management
Dick Faber, Lyon County Engineering
Robert Fellows*, Carson City Public Works
Gary Fried, Lyon County
Terri Garside, Nevada Bureau of Mines and Geology
Stephanie Hicks, RO Anderson Engineering
Karen Johnson, Division of Emergency Management
Rob Loveberg, Lyon County
Ron Lynn*, Department of Development Services, Clark County Building Department
Jeff Page, Lyon County
Jonathan Price*, Nevada Bureau of Mines and Geology
Jim Reagan*, NV Energy
Derek Starkey, City of Fernley Public Works
Andrew Trelease*, Clark County Regional Flood Control District
Jim Walker*, Nevada Department of Transportation
Mike Workman, Lyon County Utilities
Jim Youngblood, Lyon County Utilities
* 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 explained that the NHMPC meeting was being held in
Yerington to allow the Committee members to meet the local officials and to receive insight into the
County’s hazards.
Approval of Minutes from November 18, 2010
The minutes of the 18 November 2010 were unanimously approved, with one correction. The corrected
minutes will be posted on the NHMPC Web site at www.nbmg.unr.edu/nhmpc/nhmpc.htm.
2
Lyon County Presentation
Rob Loveberg gave a presentation on the demographics, government, geography, and economy of Lyon
County. The county has approximately 2,013 square miles. The county has a population of
approximately 53,825. The largest two cities are Fernley, with a population of 18,929, and Yerington,
with a population of 3,100. Seventy-five percent of the county is public lands. Most of the population
lives north of the Carson River.
The county is governed by the Board of Commissioners and the County Manager. The county employs
350, and the median income of county residents is approximately $48,000.
Lyon County is the third most economically stressed county in the United States with a population of at
least 25,000. In December, the unemployment rate was 18.7%, but it was recently reported that it has
increased to 19.2%.
The county has seven improved airports, the Union Pacific Railroad, and Interstate 80, highways 50, 50A,
95 A, 208, and 341.
Earthquake Hazards in Lyon 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 large and potentially active faults in the area of a specific address. The map is to be
used for 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.
Due to extension, Nevada is acquiring approximately 1.3 acres of land each year. Salt Lake City and Reno
are moving apart about a centimeter a year.
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).
Jon reported that he was not able to find evidence of a magnitude 6.0 or greater earthquake occurring in
Lyon County in the historical record (the last 150 years), but there have been several large earthquakes in
adjacent areas that were felt in Lyon County.
According to the U.S. Geological Survey, the probability of a magnitude 6.0 earthquake within the next
50 years occurring near (within 31 miles or 50 kilometers) Yerington is approximately 60%. The
probability of an earthquake near Dayton is between 70-75%. The total economic loss to Yerington for a
magnitude 6 earthquake is estimated at $56 million. If the earthquake occurred near Dayton, the
estimated loss is $340 million.
3
HAZUS is an excellent tool that city managers, emergency managers, and planners should use in hazard
mitigation, planning, and emergency response and recovery exercises.
The consequences of earthquakes can be huge in Nevada, particularly if individuals are not prepared.
The best thing that can be done to prevent building damage and loss of life or injury is to be prepared to
respond; mitigate structural risks, largely through having current building codes; and mitigate
nonstructural risks.
Jon’s PowerPoint presentation on “Earthquake Hazards in Lyon County” is available online at
www.nbmg.unr.edu/Geohazards/Earthquakes/EarthquakeResources.html#Presentations.
Flood Hazard in Lyon County
Rob Loveberg reported that Lyon County has regular flooding problems. They have recorded history of
floods occurring in 1876, 1906, and 1907. The Carson River and Walker River are the main sources of
flooding. Although they do not have the Truckee River in Lyon County, the Truckee River Canal does
pose a flooding hazard.
The Nevada State Hazard Mitigation Plan ranks the Walker River as the 3rd most vulnerable river for
flooding, with approximately $83 million in potential losses, and the Carson River at 4th, with
approximately $70 million in potential losses.
Alluvial-fan flooding is almost an annual event. They also experience potential flooding from debris
flows, breaks and failures from irrigation ditches and canals, and dam failures from upstream structures in
Mono County and Carson City.
The flood maps for the communities show that all the communities in the county have the potential for
flooding from rivers, canals, or irrigation ditches.
Development encroaching into the floodplains has caused increased flood hazards because of the
reduction of the floodplain area.
Substantial floods occurred on the Carson River in 1986, 1997, and 2006.
Flooding on the Walker River in 1997 destroyed a residence in Smith Valley, washed out State Route 208
in Wilson Canyon, and flooded a significant portion of Yerington.
The Fernley Flood of 2008 was caused by a canal breach. Five-hundred eighty-two homes were affected,
121 homes sustained minor to moderate damage, four homes sustained substantial damage, and 457
homes had no apparent damage. The flood was declared a Presidential Disaster.
Current flood-mitigation efforts in the county include:
• Preparation of a County Hazard Mitigation Plan
• Floodplain Management
• Lyon County Comprehensive Master Plan
o Land use designations
o Incentives
• Carson River Regional Floodplain Management Plan
• Carson Water Subconservancy District Physical Map Revision Project
• Ramsey Canyon Water Flood Control Study
4
2011 Unified Hazard Mitigation Grant Cycle Information
Elizabeth Ashby reported on FEMA’s Unified Hazard Mitigation Assistance (UHMA) Program.
Two programs available to Nevada communities are:
I.
HMGP – Post Disaster Mitigation; available after a presidentially declared disaster.
II.
PDMC – Pre-disaster Mitigation; nationally competitive grants for pre-disaster projects and
planning activities. PDMC project grants require a Benefit-Cost Analysis and documentation that
will support the application. Documentation is critical to a successful proposal.
Elizabeth distributed a leaflet on the “Unified Hazard Mitigation Assistance Program in Nevada” (see
attached; deadlines are included in the flier). The next deadline is June 16, 2011 when the letter of intent
to submit applications is due.
Any community that does not have a FEMA-approved Hazard Mitigation Plan by November, 2011, and
submits a project application in the 2011 application period, will have the project application held until
the Plan is approved.
Review of the National Hazard Mitigation Assistance Grant Application Process
Jon Price, Kim Davis, and John Pickett attended the National Hazard Mitigation Assistance Grant Review
Panel in January 2011. Jon distributed a list of criteria, which he compiled from his experience while
serving on the Panel.
Jon recommended that the NHMPC review future Nevada proposals based on the National Review
Panel’s process.
Kim Davis mentioned that she and Elizabeth Ashby are working on developing a training program for
future applicants. It was recommended that others who participated in the national review process attend
one of the training classes so they can relay their experiences to applicants.
Communicating Dam Safety Issues and Concerns
Michael Anderson gave an overview on the Dam Safety Program. He stated that if someone uses water
for any purpose other than in their home, a permit is required, regardless of its source. This requirement
includes capturing water from rainfall.
The Bureau of Reclamation and Army Corps of Engineers are exempt from having to obtain permits. If
the project is for a local operator or owner, permits are required before the project is turned over to the
local operator. The Bureau of Reclamation and Army Corps of Engineers are required to provide copies
of their plans for future review by the Dam Safety Program.
Laws pertaining to dams were enacted in 1951. At that time, anything 10 feet or more in height in
embankment or impounding 10 or more acre-feet of water storage, required a permit. Prior to 1951, there
were no permit requirements, but water rights were required.
There are now approximately 700 dams in the State’s inventory. There are about 200-250 dams currently
in the state that are not permitted, but they are monitored.
Responsibilities of the Program include:
• Perform periodic safety inspections
5
•
•
•
•
•
•
Set safe storage levels
Order appropriate restricted levels
Review plans and specifications
Perform periodic constructions inspections
Assist dam owners in investigations with the problems with their structures
Advise dam owners on prudent remedial actions (how to best fix problems)
The threshold for gaining approval to plans and specifications was altered in 1993 because there were
numerous small structures, especially in the urban environment, where they were dealing with runoff
from subdivisions. The new specifications increase to 20 feet or greater in height, or any structure
impounding more than 20 acre-feet of potentially mobile material.
The State Engineer has the latitude to require a dam permit for a structure if it would be classified as highhazard even though it may not meet the above requirement.
Some of the issues of dam safety in Nevada include:
• types of dams
• dam owners and financial needs
• urbanization
• emergency action plans
• transfer of federal projects to local sponsors
• ownership
• dam inspections
• security
Dam types include:
• vast majority are homogeneous earthen structures
• zoned earth fill
• rock fill
• roller compacted concrete
• reverse curvature reinforced concrete
• double curvature thin-shell concrete (Wild Horse Dam)
Of the 663 active dams in the state, 153 are mining-related; 67 of which are actual tailings facilities.
Dams, like people, don’t improve with age.
Why do dams fail?
• inferior design or construction
• inferior materials
• inferior foundation/abutments
• uncontrolled seepage/leakage
• natural events – floods, earthquakes, or landslides
• mechanical equipment failure
• deterioration/lack of maintenance
• improper operation of equipment or dam
Dams have an average economic life of 50 years.
6
Dam hazard classifications, based on an evaluation of consequences of dam failure absent of flooding
conditions:
• high – loss of human life is expected in the event of failure
• significant – significant damage is expected, but no loss of human life
• low – no significant damage
The benefits of a safe dam include:
• extended life of the structure
• avoid costly repairs
• full use of available storage
• prevent failure of the dam
• peace of mind
Although not a requirement, the Nevada Division of Water Resources does regulate some dams on federal
land.
Truckee River Lawton Interceptor Flood Project Presentation
Elizabeth Ashby reported that this project was selected as one of FEMA’s showcase projects and will be
presented at FEMA’s hazard mitigation assistance summit in March.
Glen Daily highlighted the project. The project was deemed necessary after the 1997 Truckee River
flood. The flood shifted the river as much as 80 feet to the north in the Oxbow Park area. In the 2006
flood, additional land was lost.
The goal of the project was to stabilize the river bank and protect infrastructure.
The project was funded by FEMA’s Hazard Mitigation Grant Program and the Truckee River Fund.
The project came in about $150,000 over budget and FEMA approved DEM’s request for the transfer of
funds from the state’s management expenses category to cover the additional costs.
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers’ Silver Jackets Program
Kim Davis reported that there was a meeting with the U.S. Army Corp of Engineers on January 13, 2011.
The Corps wants to establish a Silver Jackets Team in every state.
The primary goals of the Silver Jackets program are to:
• Facilitate strategic life-cycle flood risk reduction;
• Create or supplement a continuous mechanism to collaboratively solve state-prioritized issues and
implement or recommend those solutions;
• Improve processes, identifying gaps and counteractive programs;
• Leverage resources and information, learn about programs and how to combine efforts;
• Improve and increase flood risk communication and present a unified interagency message; and
• Establish close relationships to facilitate integrated post-disaster recovery solutions.
Kim distributed handouts on FEMA’s Risk Map, US Army Corps of Engineers’ Flood Plain Management
Services Program, and the Silver Jackets Program. (See attached.)
Kim’s understanding is that the funding for the Silver Jackets Program will be used to fund the expenses
for the core group to meet.
7
Update on the 2013 Version of the State Hazard Mitigation Plan and Submission to FEMA
Jim Walker reported that the State Hazard Mitigation Plan was approved by FEMA as an enhanced plan.
The enhanced plan will allow for up to 20% in additional funding for mitigation efforts after a
Presidential declaration of disaster (instead of the current 15%).
The 2013 update will include climate change as a hazard to Nevada.
Current Vacancies on the NHMPC Board
Postponed to the April meeting.
Report on the Status of Grants
Karen distributed forms to be used for reporting hazard mitigation plans and reports that are not funded
by FEMA.
Karen reported on the status of the following funded projects (see attached):
Hazard Mitigation Grant Program (HMGP)
• HMGP1540, Waterfall Fire funding - Pending FEMA closure
• HMGP 1583, S. Nevada Floods - Pending FEMA closure
• HMGP 1629, N. NV Flood – mostly completed
• HMGP 1738, Fernley Floods – Lyon Co. plan in process; Dant Wash improvement pending
environmental review.
PDM (Pre-Disaster Mitigation) Grant Program
• PDM 04/05, HAZUS Date Base Update – Closed
• PDM 06, Elko Band Council Plan – Closed
• 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
• PDM 09, Funding requests from Douglas County Emergency Management are under - FEMA
NEPA Review
• PDM 10, City of Reno received a Congressional earmark, Lincoln Co. Plan Update,
Churchill/Mineral County Plan, White Pine County Plan, Nye County Plan Update are all funded
and in process; Douglas Co. - 395 Culvert Project, TRFP - Demo Edison Way and Storey - 6 Mile
Canyon are in the environmental review process.
Public Comments
No comments received.
Announcements of Future Meetings
Tuesday, April 26, 2011, and Wednesday morning, April 27, 2011, in Elko (this is a change of date and
venue from the November minutes)
Tuesday, August 23, 2011, in Henderson (depending on proposal submissions)
Thursday, August 25, 2011, in Virginia City (depending on proposal submissions)
8
Thursday, November 10, 2011, in southern Nevada
Review of Action Items
An agenda item for strategic planning for the NHMPC will be added to a future meeting.
Adjourn
The meeting adjourned at 3:03 p.m.
Respectfully submitted by Terri Garside April 5, 2011
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 8
DIVISION OF EMERGENCY MANAGEMENT
Hazard Mitigaiton Grant Program
HMGP 1540 - Waterfall Fire
Available Funding
12-Month Lock-In
State Management Costs
5% Initiative Public Awareness
7% Planning Project
Regular Projects
Requesting Entity
Proposals
Federal Award
$
$
$
$
$
Expended
Allowable
726,541.00
226,808.97
36,327.00
50,858.00
413,053.00
Allocated
$
$
$
Difference
36,327.00 Public Awareness
$
50,352.00 Elko Co.
$
271,044.00 SPWB & State Parks $
Balance
Status as of:
State Parks
$
87,202.03
$
87,202.03
$
-
The request for closure is pending at FEMA Region IX.
Elko County
$
50,352.00
$
50,352.00
$
-
CLOSED
SPWB
$
325,851.00
$
184,743.00
$
141,108.00
Public Awareness
$
36,327.00
$
36,309.92
$
17.08
$
499,732.03
$
358,606.95
$
141,125.08
UNR
$
42,493.20
$
42,492.91
$
0.29
DEM
$
184,315.77
$
99,754.10
$
84,561.67
Subtotal
$
226,808.97
$
142,247.01
$
84,561.96
Total
$
726,541.00
$
500,853.96
$
225,687.04
Subtotal
506.00
142,009.00
The request for closure is pending reimbursement of Admin
CLOSED
State Management Costs
C:\Documents and Settings\tgarside\Local Settings\Temporary Internet Files\Content.Outlook\CV2Q67B5\Grant Report 1 Feb 2011.xls
1-Feb-11
2 of 8
Hazard Mitigation Grant Program
HMGP 1583 - 2005 Flood
Available Funding
12-Month Lock-In
5% Initiative
7% Planning Project
Regular Projects
Proposals
Requesting Entity
$
$
$
$
Federal Award
Allowable
533,519.00
26,676.00
37,346.00
469,497.00
Allocated
$
$
$
Expended
Difference
25,851.00 State Parks
37,346.00 UNR Risk Ass.
328,519.00 SPWB
Balance
$
$
$
825.00 State Mgmt
140,978.00
Status as of:
1-Feb-11
Proposals 5% Initiatives
State Parks
$
25,851.00
$
25,851.00
$
-
SPWB
$
469,497.00
$
328,519.00
$
Proposal Planning
UNR Risk Assessmt
$
37,346.00
$
37,346.00
$
$
532,694.00
$
391,716.00
$
140,978.00
$
825.00
$
795.71
$
29.29
$
533,519.00
$
392,511.71
$
141,007.29
CLOSED
Proposals Regular Projects
Subtotal
State Management Costs
Total
140,978.00
-
The request for closure is pending at reimbursement of admin.
CLOSED
C:\Documents and Settings\tgarside\Local Settings\Temporary Internet Files\Content.Outlook\CV2Q67B5\Grant Report 1 Feb 2011.xls
3 of 8
Hazard Mitigation Grant Program
HMGP-1629-New Year's Flood
Available Funding
12-Month Lock-In
Allowable
$625,497.00
$31,274.85
$45,675.00
$548,547.15
5% Initiative
7% Planning Project
Regular Projects
Requesting Entity
Proposals 5% Initiative
Sparks
Federal Award
Allocated
$
$
Expended
Difference
22,872.00
45,248.00
Balance
Status as of:
1-Feb-11
$
25,125.00
$
22,872.00
$
2,253.00 Moved to Management Costs
$
45,675.00
$
45,675.00
$
$
444,017.00
$
33,487.99
$
410,529.01 Closed - $288,024 Transferred to State Mgmt. & Reno - Lawton
$
(288,024.00)
Reno- Lawton Interceptor
Subtotal
$
$
286,680.00
513,473.00
$
$
286,680.00
388,714.99
$
$
Complete
412,782.01
Management Costs
UNR - Planning Sub. Support
UNR - NHMPC
DEM
Subtotal
$
$
$
$
150,364.63
45,478.73
67,938.00
263,781.36
$
$
$
$
34,864.31
7,708.03
60,915.11
103,487.45
$
$
$
$
115,500.32
37,770.70
7,022.89
160,293.91
$
777,254.36
$
492,202.44
$
573,075.92
Proposals Planning
State Plan Update, UNR
-
Completed.
Proposals Regular Projects
Washoe Co School
Total
C:\Documents and Settings\tgarside\Local Settings\Temporary Internet Files\Content.Outlook\CV2Q67B5\Grant Report 1 Feb 2011.xls
4 of 8
Hazard Mitigation Grant Program
HMGP-1738 - Fernley Flood
Available Funding
12-Month Lock-In
Allowable
5% Initiative
7% Planning Project
Regular Projects
$
$
$
$
Requesting Entity
Proposals 5% Initiative
URM inventory - NBMG
$
23,776.90
Proposals Planning
Lyon County Plan I
$
33,287.66
Proposals Regular Projects
Lyon County Plan II - Outreach
SPWB
City of Reno Dant Wash
$
$
$
14,028.00
100,445.00
304,000.00
$
-
$
$
475,537.56
$
$
23,253.81
$
$
555,855.93
$
Subtotal
State Management Costs
Total
Federal Grant
Allowable
475,538.00
23,776.90
33,287.66
418,473.00
Allocated
$
$
Expended
$
7,826.00
23,776.90 State Management
33,287.66
Balance
$
31,602.90 In process
$
33,287.66 Contracting w/URS
Difference
$
23,253.81
Status as of:
-
$
$
$
14,028.00 Contracting w/URS
100,445.00 Reviewing Ely Conservation Seismic Retrofit
304,000.00 Pending NEPA & FEMA Funding
-
$
418,473.00
5,964.99
$
17,288.82
13,790.99
$
500,652.38
C:\Documents and Settings\tgarside\Local Settings\Temporary Internet Files\Content.Outlook\CV2Q67B5\Grant Report 1 Feb 2011.xls
1-Feb-11
5 of 8
DIVISION OF EMERGENCY MANAGEMENT
Pre-Disaster Mitigation Grants
2004-2005
Requesting Entity
UNR-BMG
$
Federal Grant
60,063.50
$
Expended
60,063.50
$
Balance
Expended
29,115.00
$
-
Status as of:
1-Feb-11
Status as of:
Adopted & Approved by FEMA Closed
1-Feb-11
CLOSED
2006
Requesting Entity
Elko Band Council
Federal Grant
29,115.00
Balance
-
.
2007
Requesting Entity
Storey County Plan
Esmeralda Co. Plan
Washoe Co. Plan
Henderson Sewer
Subtotal
$
$
$
$
$
Federal Grant
26,377.50
24,949.50
38,406.75
377,853.00
467,586.75
$
$
$
$
$
Expended
26,377.50
21,785.00
38,406.75
86,569.25
$
$
$
$
$
Management Cost
UNR
DEM
Subtotal
$
$
$
44,000.00
2,779.00
46,779.00
$
$
$
44,000.00
2,779.00
46,779.00
$
$
$
$
514,365.75
$
133,348.25
$
Requesting Entity
Reno - Sky Tavern Wildfire
Clark Co. Mit Plan update
Subtotal
$
$
$
Federal Grant
464,081.50
56,985.42
521,066.92
$
$
Expended
-
$
$
Management Costs (10% of
federal funds received)
$
52,106.69
$
-
$
52,106.69 Pending FEMA funding
$
573,173.61
$
-
$
52,106.69
Total
Balance
Status as of:
1-Feb-11
Closed
3,164.50 Awaiting adoption sched. 2/15/11
Awaiting adoption Reno & Sparks, submitted changes for Tribes
377,853.00 Construction Contract Awarded & Delay for parts
381,017.50
-
Completed
Completed
381,017.50
2008
Total
Balance
Status as of:
464,081.50 Awarded to Reno
56,985.42 Consulting Contract to be awarded
C:\Documents and Settings\tgarside\Local Settings\Temporary Internet Files\Content.Outlook\CV2Q67B5\Grant Report 1 Feb 2011.xls
1-Feb-11
6 of 8
Pre-Disaster Mitigation Grants
2009 - Pending Funding
Requesting Entity
Douglas County Emerg. Mgmt.
Douglas County Emerg. Mgmt.
Subtotal
Federal Grant
$
482,580.00
$
488,325.00
$
970,905.00
Management Costs (10% of
federal funds received)
$
97,090.50
$
1,067,995.50
Requesting Entity
City of Reno JES Wildland Fuel
Douglas Co. - 395 Culvert Proj.
TRFP - Demo Edison Way
Lincoln Co. Plan Update
Churchill/Mineral County Plan
White Pine County Plan
Nye County Plan Update
Storey - 6 Mile Canyon
Subtotal
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
Federal Grant
500,000.00
1,350,000.00
834,597.00
30,799.00
52,500.00
41,250.00
39,001.50
1,239,711.04
4,087,858.54
Management Costs funded
Management Costs pending
$
$
14,006.26
336,450.97
$
4,424,309.51
Total
Expended
$
$
-
$
$
$
$
$
-
Balance
Status as of:
482,580.00 FEMA NEPA Review started
488,325.00 FEMA NEPA Review started
970,905.00
1-Feb-11
97,090.50 Pending FEMA Funding
$
1,067,995.50
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
Balance
500,000.00
1,350,000.00
834,597.00
30,799.00
52,500.00
41,250.00
39,001.50
1,239,711.04
4,087,858.54
$
$
14,006.26
336,450.97
$
336,450.97
2010 - Pending Funding
Total
Expended
$
$
-
-
Status as of:
1-Feb-11
Status as of:
1-Feb-11
Pending FEMA Funding
Pending FEMA Funding
Pending FEMA Funding
Funded
Funded, In Process
Funded
Funded
Pending FEMA Funding
Special Projects
Requesting Entity
My Plan Nevada, UNR
Portfolio Mgmt.
Federal Grant
$
100,000.00
unknown
Expended
Balance
Funded & Started
C:\Documents and Settings\tgarside\Local Settings\Temporary Internet Files\Content.Outlook\CV2Q67B5\Grant Report 1 Feb 2011.xls
7 of 8
PDM Grant $ / Year
PDM & HMGP Grant $/Year
4500000
4500000
4000000
4000000
3500000
3500000
3000000
3000000
2500000
HMGP
2000000
PDM
2500000
2000000
1500000
1500000
1000000
1000000
500000
500000
0
0
2001
2003
2005
2007
NV Hazard Mitigation Grant $
by Hazard Category
7%
1%
2%
26%
9%
2001
2009
6%
49%
Hazard Type
2003
Flood
Wildfire
Public Awareness
Earthquake
$
513,262.00
Flood
$
3,924,418.25
Wildfire
$
2,047,127.29
Public Awareness
$
36,310.00
Total Projects
$
6,521,117.54
Planning
$
Planning
Management Planning
Management
Total
2007
2009
2011
FEMA Funding
566,991.42 Local Planning
Management Plannin $
Earthquake
2005
$
$
178,750.93 State Plan/NHMPC
717,365.08 $499,654.42 pending
7,984,224.97
Management
Management Costs
C:\Documents and Settings\tgarside\Local Settings\Temporary Internet Files\Content.Outlook\CV2Q67B5\Grant Report 1 Feb 2011.xls
8 of 8
Source
HMGP 1540
HMGP 1583
HMGP 1629
HMGP 1738
PDM 2005
PDM 2006
PDM 2007
PDM 2008 (pending)
PDM 2009 (pending)
PDM 2010
PDM 2010 (pending)
PDM 2011 (pending)
Balance
$
$
$
$
Pending
84,561.67
29.29
7,022.89
17,288.82
0
0
$
$
$
$
$
52,106.69 May go down $10K with cost underrun of Sky Tavern
97,090.50
14,006.26
122,908.93
$
336,450.97
$
485,648.16
C:\Documents and Settings\tgarside\Local Settings\Temporary Internet Files\Content.Outlook\CV2Q67B5\Grant Report 1 Feb 2011.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 2011
Nevada UHMA Training –
locations and dates to be
announced
Early June 2011
FEMA application period opens
Jun 16, 2011
Notice of Interest forms due to
DEM or NDWR
Jun 30, 2011
Establish eGrants access
Aug 11, 2011
Scope of Work & Benefit Cost
Analysis in eGrants
Aug 25, 2011
Northern Nevada NHMPC
meeting – Presentations to
NHMPC
Aug 26, 2011
Southern Nevada NHMPC
meeting – Presentations to
NHMPC
Oct 26, 2011
Full Application Package with
backup documentation in
eGrants
Nov 10, 2011
Southern Nevada NHMPC
meeting – final review &
ranking
Nov 17, 2011
Final submission of application
in eGrants
Early December
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 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 sub
applications submitted but not funded under a specific
grant program may also be considered for another
mitigation grant program(s).
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.
www.fema.gov/government/grant/pdm/index.shtm
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
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:
(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